Tattoo (1981)

Good movie but grossly overrated

Fantastic!

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

Karl Kinsky is an army veteran who returns home, becoming a tattoo artist specializing in Eastern designs. He's a quiet and solemn individual, who had somewhat a bumpy upbringing with a father who looks down upon him and still does because of his profession. He is hired to create temporary tattoos for some models, but he slowly becomes obsessed with one of them Maddy. He begins a relationship with her, for it only to implode due his prudish believes and constant harassment. But he takes matters into his own hands when he kidnaps her and decides he wants to leave his mark on her."Tattoo" is a fascinating early eighties psychological slow-burner with an outstanding lead showing by Bruce Dern. It can be said, in his career Dern has been lumped in villainous / unlikable roles, but here it's a perfectly disturbed pitch of subtle and mannered shades. Across from him is the beautiful and headstrong Maud Adams, as the leering affection that Dern's character longs for. The script paints Kinksy as someone who knows what he wants, but wants it to be pure which leads to misconception and Dern's performance nails his character's insecure nature, as cracks start appearing showing an unsettling side. That being, the film progression is not unique, but quite routine and sombre. I think it works better in the opening stages setting up the characters, then so during the captive moments of the story. This is when it kind of stalls, but still visually it ends on an effective note. You'll know where it heads, but it's the acting, gritty urban locations (which also paint a desolate and lonely facade) and vivid tattoo artwork designs (and their meanings) on show that evaluate the formulaic plot. Bob Brooks' measured direction is efficient and busy, but its Dern's show. Also there's capable support by Rikke Borge, Leonard Frey and John Getz.

I watched this both as part of my ongoing Luis Bunuel retrospective (it was written by his daughter-in-law Joyce) and in tribute (comprising what are possibly his two oddest films) to star Bruce Dern's recent – belated but well-deserved - induction into the "Hollywood Walk Of Fame".The film under review is a maligned one: often described as "sleazy melodrama", plotwise it is quite similar to the superior Oscar-nominated THE COLLECTOR (1965; a theatrical rendition of which, coincidentally, has just been staged locally) but, while kidnapping as an extension of butterfly-collecting makes sense, it doesn't follow naturally from tattoo-painting! Dern has often played wackos on the screen, but this rare leading role was certainly his most extreme example: he believes in what he does as if it were a religion and, after falling for model Maud Adams, tries to convert her to his way of thinking; his obsession with her leads him to ignore an attractive young employee of the modeling agency who, on the other hand, seems to be quietly infatuated with him.However, the protagonist's overt prudishness – which, frankly, is laughable – alienates the model soon enough (even putting down an annoying acquaintance of hers in a restaurant with the classic tough-guy retort, "When I don't like someone, I don't hurt them, I kill them!"); eventually, the artist decides to take matters into his own hands: retreating to his old beachside house with the (unwilling) girl in tow, whom Dern keeps sedated until he is able to complete his ultimate achievement in body-painting. As often happens with this type of film, the victim ends up succumbing to her captor's wiles – in a genuinely weird scene as the undulating bodies are completely covered in Japanese art – before regaining her senses and breaking free definitively from his hold.In conclusion, Bob Brooks' former career as a TV commercial director is evidenced by the plot's over-reliance on chintzy modeling sessions; it is ironic, then, that the film works best during its first half!

"Tattoo" drew my attention purely by chance. I was reading up on some movies with similar plot involving psychotic love and abduction, and "Tattoo" just happened to be among them. I didn't know what to expect, but I was willing to check it out. Kind of a nice surprise, really, this movie is no deep character study, it's not terrifying, nor violent or brutal, it's just pretty good. Bruce Dern is a very good choice when it comes to roles of deeply disturbed characters, and he can do a good job showing all the layers that mentally unstable can be coated with. The anger, sympathy, obsession and violence are all within him, and Maude Adams is just along for the ride.Two of them are fully compatible on screen and the movie is done by the numbers, the plot steadily flows and the story unfolds to the end, which I didn't think was right, at first, I expected something else, but the mixture of emotions within Maude Adams, should have produced the combination of love and hate that ended the movie. Worth seeing.

As a psychopathic tattoo artist, Bruce Dern has to work extra hard here, because the script is very sketchy as far as his motivations and background are concerned, but he is up to the task - he has some very creepy moments (like his first outburst at a dinner table). As his "object of desire", however, Maud Adams is fatally miscast: the way she plays the model in the first half of the movie, you just can't understand why anyone would become infatuated with her. This strange film might be worth a look if you can find it, but don't expect too much. (**)