Here's a little background information about the film's director, John Waters. In the late 1960s and 1970s, he was cult film director with a small but devoted following. The earliest of these films were exceptionally perverse but oddly charming (such as the almost impossible to watch PINK FLAMINGOS--which features the eating of feces, among other revolting things). A bit later, his films were a bit less offensive, though they still had a bizarre home-made quality to them. These are the films I love the most, such as FEMALE TROUBLE and POLYESTER, which are still offensive but manage to be a bit more palatable to the average viewer AND still feature the John Waters touches, such as horrible over-acting and a cast of lovable weirdos (such as Divine and Edith Massey--the only woman uglier than the cross-dressing Divine). Then, in the mid-80s onward, Waters actually made quite a few relatively "normal" films that were quite mainstream--culminating in his most mainstream film, HAIRSPRAY.
Now, with PECKER, it seems that Waters is trying to combine his earliest style of films with the newer commercially attractive films. The film features material that is at times much more offensive than what you'd recently seen in CRY BABY, SERIAL MOM and HAIRSPRAY--and it would have resulting in this film receiving an X rating had it been made in the 70s or 80s--a close up "beaver shot" like you see repeatedly in PECKER was highly reminiscent of the early style. However, at the same time, the production values are very high and the story amazingly conventional despite the language and crotch shots. As a result, the film left me pretty cold. Plus, this is NOT a film I could let my kids watch--though I did have no problem with my oldest watching POLYESTER.
As for the plot, it's obviously intended as a form of autobiography by Waters. While he had become more mainstream by 1998, the film's message is be true to your tacky and garish roots and the evils of being discovered by "the right people". Perhaps the extremes in the film was his attempt to regain this original flavor, though without Divine, Edith Massey AND high production values, the effort comes up very short. I guess Waters never can truly go back!
By the way, this film once again featured a small role for Patty Hearst and for her age, she was quite "hot". Way to go Ms. Hearst!
Now, with PECKER, it seems that Waters is trying to combine his earliest style of films with the newer commercially attractive films. The film features material that is at times much more offensive than what you'd recently seen in CRY BABY, SERIAL MOM and HAIRSPRAY--and it would have resulting in this film receiving an X rating had it been made in the 70s or 80s--a close up "beaver shot" like you see repeatedly in PECKER was highly reminiscent of the early style. However, at the same time, the production values are very high and the story amazingly conventional despite the language and crotch shots. As a result, the film left me pretty cold. Plus, this is NOT a film I could let my kids watch--though I did have no problem with my oldest watching POLYESTER.
As for the plot, it's obviously intended as a form of autobiography by Waters. While he had become more mainstream by 1998, the film's message is be true to your tacky and garish roots and the evils of being discovered by "the right people". Perhaps the extremes in the film was his attempt to regain this original flavor, though without Divine, Edith Massey AND high production values, the effort comes up very short. I guess Waters never can truly go back!
By the way, this film once again featured a small role for Patty Hearst and for her age, she was quite "hot". Way to go Ms. Hearst!