The Surfer (2025)

As with any other workaholic auteur (Roger Corman, Steven Soderbergh, Quentin Dupieux, etc.), being a Nicolas Cage fan is a numbers game.  He simply makes too many movies for them all to be great—or even watchable—but it’s easy to find moments of greatness in each of them, and occasionally he’ll surprise you with a gem. It’s been a slow trickle of those gems among the typical flood of Cagian schlock so far this decade. At the end of the 2010s, the one-two punch of Mandy & Color Out of Space signaled a professional & artistic comeback that hasn’t really come together since. Instead, Cage has spent the 2020s putting his name & face on the exact middling trash you’d expect him in (The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent, Willy’s Wonderland, Prisoners of the Ghostland, Arcadian, Renfield, DTV actioners too dull to watch or name) and only occasionally landing in a project that’s actually worthy of his presence: Pig, Dream Scenario, Longlegs and, now, the beach-bum thriller The Surfer. An official Cannes selection helmed by an up-and-coming director of note (Vivarium‘s Lorcan Finnegan), The Surfer commands just enough art-cinema prestige to earn the intensely, consistently committed screen presence of our greatest living movie star. As with all of Cage’s greatest hits, he takes all of the glory for himself through that intensity, while his director-of-note sits quietly in the passenger seat and watches him work. However fallible, he is both actor & auteur, the total package.

The titular surfer (Cage, naturally) is a workaholic yuppie who drives himself mad trying to prove his manliness to a beachful of muscly, Australian bullies. He arrives in a linen suit and a shiny new Lexus, hours away from buying back the million-dollar beachside home his family owned back when his father was still alive and he was still happy. His stubborn mission to surf his childhood beach once again is abruptly cut short by a small cult of Bay Boys who police the area’s unofficial “LOCALS ONLY” policy, shouting “Don’t live here, don’t surf here!” in his face until he retreats in cowardice, humiliated in front of his teenage son. The gang of bullies is led by an Andrew Tate-type manliness guru (Julian McMahon), who’s transformed the beach into a Church of Toxic Masculinity, mirroring the yuppie surfer’s own status-obsessed relationship with the property. Unwilling to back down, the ostensibly wealthy surfer becomes a beach bum to reestablish his locality, going mad with heat exhaustion in the public parking lot while the guru takes everything he’s earned away from him: his board, his car, his food, his water, his house and, inevitably, his son. From there, the surfer must choose from the same diverging paths as the conflicted protagonists of Kitty Green’s The Royal Hotel: either join in the old-fashioned Aussie masculinity or burn it all down. Disastrously, his indecision on which path to take leads him to do nothing, and the stasis starts to make the audience as crazed as our desperately dehydrated antihero.

For his part, director Lorcan Finnegan dresses up The Surfer as a vintage Ozploitation throwback, complete with crash zooms, wildlife B-roll, heatwave distortions, and dreamily laidback, chimes-heavy surf rock. As the Aussie sun wears the surfer down, however, that 70s Ozploitation aesthetic is gradually taken over by a distinct resemblance to Frank Perry’s The Swimmer; Cage retraces Burt Lancaster’s surreal heat-stroke journey into his own macho psyche, hating everything he sees. Finnegan cedes control of the project entirely to Cage, at times shooting him through a fisheye lens as he maniacally harasses all visitors to his parking lot prison and at times lingering on close-ups where his face fills the entire frame. Whereas Finnegan’s debut put the broad practice of Parenthood on trial in an intensely artificial environment, The Surfer interrogates Fatherhood in particular, with Cage acting as an avatar for Patriarchal Failure. Things get unexpectedly philosophical as the Bay Boys gang chants, “Suffer! Surfer! Suffer! Surfer!” while Cage whines in agony, seemingly unable to escape his concrete limbo under Exterminating Angel-style supernatural force. At first, that stasis feels like an excessive indulgence in exposition & foreshadowing, but the longer the audience rots there, the more memory, premonition, and hallucination mix until they’re indistinguishable and all that’s left is the surfer’s pathetic ego. If you need an actor to perform that kind of total psychological breakdown, Cage is obviously your guy. You just need to go in knowing that once cast, he claims authorship through sheer charismatic force.

-Brandon Ledet 

The Royal Hotel (2023)

I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised that the barebones, few-frills thriller The Royal Hotel is my favorite film of the year so far, given that I bought in early on director Kitty Green (Casting JonBenet) & actor Julia Garner (Electrick Children) back when stock prices were low.  Still, it clicked with me as both collaborators’ finest work to date, following their much more muted workplace chiller The Assistant in 2020.  The Royal Hotel explodes The Assistant‘s post-#MeToo themes of misogynist microaggressions & mundane labor exploitations into a much more immediate, visceral chokehold thriller – channeling 1990s psych thrillers like Dead Calm instead of the low-hum, methodical terror of Jeanne Dielman.  If it were even slightly dumber or trashier, it could pull off a sensationalist title like You In Danger, Girl: The Movie or The Male Gaze: A Horror Story, while The Assistant was much more careful to not be boxed in by expectations of genre.  It’s wildly entertaining as a result, while never losing sight of the political target in its crosshairs (a tactic also adopted by this year’s fellow sun-drenched indie drama How to Blow Up a Pipeline).

Garner costars besides Jessica Henwick as a pair of American tourists who find themselves flat broke while backpacking in Australia.  In an act of financial desperation (or, depending on the character, an act of self-immolation), the 20-somethings take a government-assigned temp job working as barmaids in the Australian Outback, serving beers to the roughneck workers of a remote mining town.  From there, the plot plays out like a slightly more grounded version of Alex Garland’s Men, with each of the blackout drunk brutes on the other side of the bar attempting slightly different angles on manufacturing sexual consent from the “fresh meat” working the register, whether with charm or with the threat of violence.  Like in Men, the customers are all essentially the same threat disguised in slightly different presentations, except this time they swarm their victims like George Romero zombie hordes, overwhelming the humble little pub in waves of drunken chaos.  The women are constantly told to smile & “take a joke” while struggling to interpret the thin line between flirting and bullying, like the difference between an Australian calling you “a cunt” vs. an Australian calling you “a sour cunt.”  Meanwhile, every social signal from every direction is telling them to get so drunk they don’t care what happens to them, since they’re powerless to stop it anyway – whether as self-protection or as willful self-destruction, depending on who’s drinking.

The premise of two outsider tourists being shipped off to an isolated mining-town bar specifically to serve as eye-candy for the sexually frustrated workers sounds like a screenplay contrivance looking to justify a metaphor, but Green & co-writer Oscar Redding were inspired to write The Royal Hotel by real life events, relying on the 2016 documentary Hotel Coolgardie as shockingly direct source material.  The young tourists profiled in Hotel Coolgardie may be Finnish instead of American, but their stories are followed closely in The Royal Hotel to the point of exact images & phrases of dialogue being photocopied in direct adaptation.  Hotel Coolgardie is just as horrifying as Green’s movie, except it’s shot & presented more like a TLC reality show than a psychological thriller, which almost makes the women’s story more unnerving.  In either case, the premise makes for wickedly effective Service Industry Horror that’s deeply relatable to anyone who’s ever worked a chaotic front-of-house job with rowdy, drunken customers, the same way The Assistant is relatable to anyone who’s ever worked a soul-draining office job for an evil corporate overlord (speaking as someone who’s done both).  They’re not just single-use metaphors about the horrors of “male attention” (a phrase used in both the doc and the narrative feature), since the generalized exploitations of modern labor and the women’s personal levels of desire to survive the ordeal complicate the central theme at every turn.

The Royal Hotel is a great film about misogyny, labor, social pressure, and alcoholic stupor.  And that’s not even getting into the racist power imbalance between the mostly white miners and the Indigenous workers who make up most of the service class (give or take a couple misplaced tourists).  Its Australian-set psych thriller credentials are cemented both by the appearances of a majestic kangaroo and the appearance of a menacing Hugo Weaving, near unrecognizable behind thick layers of sunburn and beard hairs.  It feels more immediate than nostalgic, though, distinctly a movie of its time.  Conceptually, it’s presented as Kitty Green’s simplest, most widely accessible work to date, but the nuances beyond its surface tensions & metaphors get remarkably complex the second you start to scratch at them – which is exactly what makes it her best.

-Brandon Ledet

Episode #63 of The Swampflix Podcast: ABBA Does Australia & The Dressmaker (2016)

Welcome to Episode #63 of The Swampflix Podcast! For our sixty-third episode, Brandon & Britnee investigate Australia’s unrivaled, unexplainable love for the Swedish pop group ABBA, discussing three films that reflect that national obsession. Brandon also makes Britnee watch the Australian revenge tale The Dressmaker (2016) for the first time. Enjoy!

You can stay up to date with our podcast through SoundCloud, iTunes, Stitcher, TuneIn, or by following the links on this page.

– Brandon Ledet & Britnee Lombas

Australia Had Its Own Class of 1999 (1989) in Future Schlock (1984)

EPSON MFP image

Five years before our November Movie of the Month, Class of 1999, was released in America, Future Schlock, a similarly-minded low-budget dystopian fantasy film, was released in Australia. Class of 1999 is far superior to Future Schlock in terms of quality & cultural shelf-life, but its all too easy to see echoes of the near-future class politics of 1999 in its Australian new wave punk predecessor. Both films only managed to recoup half of their respective budgets in their lackluster theater runs, but there’s no denying that Class of 1999‘s $5 million price tag afforded it a generous head start that Future Schlock‘s comparatively minuscule $½ million couldn’t compete with. That may account for a lot of Class of 1999‘s staying power in terms of cult classic potential, but there’s plenty of fascinating, shabby ideas at play in Future Schlock that make for an interesting watch, however flawed, especially when you’re coming fresh from Class of 1999‘s similarly-oriented dystopian charms.

Class of 1999 predicts a ten-years-down-the-line cyberfuture in which unruly Reagan-era youth have become such a menace that entire sectors of Seattle have been ceded to them in order to protect the law-abiding adults that live in surrounding suburban areas. Future Schlock looks slightly further into the future, say 15 years, warning of The Middle Class Revolt of 1990 that leaves Melbourne legally segregated by oppressively rigid class lines. Similarly inspired by the fallout of Reaganomics, Future Schlock forecasts a period of class stasis after the revolt in which upward mobility has been eliminated & suburban mediocrity is mandatory by law. Much like the walled-in, teen-run free fire zones of Class of 1999, Melbourne’s working class community is imprisoned in an inner-city ghetto where police beatings are not only routine, but officially encouraged and the ruling middle class suburbanites visit to gawk, as if entertained by animals in a zoo. As bleak as all that sounds, there’s actually a great deal of irreverent comedy that overpowers any of the film’s doomsaying politics, the same as it does in the much superior Class of 1999.

Part of what feels so off about Future Schlock‘s quality as a finished product is that its central narrative is decidedly loose. Class of 1999 tells a clear story about rival teen gangs, The Razorheads & The Blackhearts, banding together to destroy their murderous teacherbots (or “tactical education units”) in order to prevent their impending mutual demise. Future Schlock is more of a chaotic collection of comedic sketches meant to flesh out the film’s central, high-concept premise, held together as a single story only by a documentary-style narration track. In the worst of the film’s segments a pair of violent police officers track down infamous, ghetto-imprisoned bandits with the aliases Cisco Kid & Sancho Panza. The cops are belittled for being fruitcakes & pansies in an unwelcome reminder of just how ultra-macho & backwards the 1980s could be, apparently even in the era’s punk rock cinema. Slightly better are segments that follow Cisco Kid & Sancho Panza’s true selves, Sarah & Bear, a pair of new wave punk performance artists who perform songs with lyrics like “Everybody, fuck ’em. Fuck ’em, everyone,” nightly in a ghetto cabaret. As their bandit alter-egos, Sarah & Bear go undercover to freak out the milquetoast suburban normals, but they’re honestly much more interesting when they’re performing synth pop songs of protest to drunken, ghetto revelers as the crowd cheers loudly, performs public cunnilingus, and just generally establishes that their sloppy punk ways are more far more enticing than the dull tidiness of middle class suburbia.

The problem is that we don’t see nearly enough of that middle class mediocrity to draw a proper distinction between that world & the punk ghetto alternative. Much like with Class of 1999, a lot of Future Schlock‘s best moments happen in the classroom, where the film establishes how its laws of mandatory conformity, detailed in “The Standard Set of Middle Class Guidelines” are passed down to the brainwashed youth. Of course, the youth in Future Schlock are much more docile & subdued than the machine gun-wielding teens in Class of 1999, but the way their education system is set up to break their spirits & dull their personalities is very similar in tactic. Honestly, I just wish there was more of that perspective of what a mandatory milquetoast society would be like. There wasn’t much insight into how the suburban areas outside of Class of 1999‘s teen-run free fire zones would operate on a daily basis, but I assumed they hadn’t changed too much since the youngster takeover, so that wasn’t too big of a deal. In Future Schlock, on the other hand, a lot of time wasted on the peculiarities of Sarah & Bear’s sexual habits & homophobic humor aimed at the ghetto’s abusive cops could’ve been pointed at exploring what suburban Melbourne would look like in this particular, dystopian future after The Middle Class Revolt of 1990.

Ultimately, it doesn’t make too much sense at this point to complain about how much better Future Schlock could’ve been with a bigger budget & some thematic tweaking. The film is more or less inconsequential in its current, forgotten state, of interest only for fleeting moments of absurd brilliance & for its context in terms of how it relates to Class of 1999, which I will vehemently contend deserves more traction as a cult classic than it gets. In the spirit of celebrating Future Schlock‘s highlights instead of mulling over its obvious flaws, I’m going to conclude this piece with a transcription one of the film’s best moments: a revised Australian national anthem, updated for the nightmarish suburban middle class state detailed in the film’s opening classroom scene. Along with Sarah & Bear’s aforementioned “Fuck ’em” anthem, it’s a moment that shines as a standalone piece of high art, one that almost justifies the rest of the film’s wasted potential:

“Australia’s sons, let us rejoice, for we are middle class. We’ve golden soil and sun tan oil. Our home is girt by grass. Our land is drowned in swimming pools. The barbie’s over there. The Carlton Light and cask of white are in the frigidaire. A pie and sauce, a winning horse. T.V. and easy chair. Australia’s homes are brick veneer. We own a Betamax. We’ve Commodores and sliding doors. We cheat a bit on tax. A microwave and Magimix. A dishwasher as well. We’re good at golf. Three cheers for Rolf! We’re in the R.S.L. At Christmas time we choose our gifts from Myers and K-Tel. Of course, we all like Chinese food and own a caravan. Electrolux and flying ducks. A non-stick frying pan. K-Mart’s our fashion saving place. The shopping mall’s our shrine. Our homes are clean. We drink Ben Ean while watching channel 9. I’m sure the neighbours would approve. Their taste’s the same as mine.”

Beautiful stuff. Brings a tear to my suburban eye.

For more on November’s Movie of the Month, 1989’s Class of 1999, check out our Swampchat discussion of the film & our look at the diminished returns depths of its shoddy sequel.

-Brandon Ledet