Greaser's Palace (1972) YIFY - Download Movie TORRENT

Movie Review: Sometimes in film a scene which is weird, horrifying or disturbing is carried to such an extreme that it transcends being grotesque and becomes beautiful. Jodorowsky's "Santa Sangre," Fellini's "Satyricon," and all of Lynch's films have moments like these. Unfortunately, "Greaser's Palace," though it tries really hard, never quite goes from ugly duckling to swan. Weird, horrifying and disturbing (and sometimes hilarious) it is indeed, but the pieces in the puzzle never quite come together. I must say this, though, Robert Downey has made one hell of a riveting film. I couldn't turn away from my TV screen for an instant. The movie seems to be a rather loosely told version fo the passion of Christ, set in the wild west. There is a Christ figure (who arrives on earth rather anachronistically via a parachute wearing a pimp suit), some disciples (about 17 of them), a miracle or three (some walking on water, some raising of the dead, a little healing, a little stigmata, etc.), and the obligatory being nailed to a crucifix. However, I don't recall the rest of the plot being in the Bible. I'm not going to try and describe it, except to say that the Christ figure is a singer-dancer-actor going to Jerusalem, to get an audition with the great agent Morris. Indeed, in one scene he puts on a little song and dance routine for his disciples, but they aren't impressed with his performance until he starts screaming and bleeding from the holes that appear in his hands, at which point they applaud. The image of Christ as showman, rather than a shaman, is quite provocative, and the audience that is only satisfied when their savior is in pain seems to be a glimpse into human nature not often afforded the viewer of this film, which is filled with cartoony violence, stilted dialogue, and unnatural posturing. The fact that this hint of truth about what we really want out of entertainment (in an age when we pay $29.95 to watch the Ultimate Fighting Championship on Pay-Per-View, who wouldn't enjoy a little screaming and stigmata?) comes in the midst of all these people doing their best to act inhuman, or at least unhuman, may indicate that there is more to this film than meets the eye. But is the movie good? I'm not certain about how good or bad it is, but I know that I was mesmerized by it. There were so many disturbing, fantastic, and humorous things...A few that come to mind are: --Herve Villechaize as the diminutive gay man who has "Jesus" over for dinner and flirts with him. --Herve's "wife," a bearded man in drag who angrily squeezes the Messiah's testicles after he refuses to sleep with the couple. --The woman who keeps getting shot throughout the film by an unknown assailant. --Mr. Greaser's intense orgasm and/or bowel movement which causes his palace to explode (I didn't understand either...). --Lamey Homo's description of the afterlife, "I was swimming in a rainbow with naked babies, and I turned into a beautiful smile," which he repeats three times during the film (he keeps getting killed and brought back to life). --The Holy Ghost. --The Native American who gets his lower back problem fixed when the Messiah turns out to be not only the son of God, but also a fairly good chiropractor. --The savage beating of a transvestite nun by Lamey Homo and the monk. --Etc. Throughout the film I was continually trying to determine whether I was watching the work of a genius or a just a load of crap. I'm still not sure, but I know one thing; this movie is fascinating, and though it never really becomes more than the sum of its parts, they certainly are interesting parts. "Greaser's Palace," is weird, funny, disturbing, gross, ugly, and strange, and I wholeheartedly recommend it. I guarantee you won't forget this film.

I discovered Robert Downey Sr. fairly recently, given that, in all modesty, I consider myself rather well versed in cinema. I don't know what I expected, but certainly it wasn't what I got. Without question, this is the appeal of Robert Downey's work: its absolute unpredictability, its complete absurdity. He is not a genius of the cinema, but he's clever as can be, he's unrelenting in his satire, and he's highly original.This quality — originality, uniqueness; call it what you like — means a great deal to me. I've seen so much cinema, from the late 1800s to the present, from America to Japan and everything in between, that I very rarely stumble across something that is a truly novel viewing experience. The three amateur films that began his career as a filmmaker — "Babo 73", "Chafed Elbows", and "No More Excuses" — were the first experiences I had with Downey, and I was pretty instantly enamored with him. The films aren't masterpieces. In fact, they're far from it. They're filled with flaws and shortcomings, but also with moments of fantastic off-the-wall humor and scathing satire. More than anything, they're almost completely unique. I was reminded very slightly of a few of Godard's films with the Dziga Vertov Group from the early '70s, like "Wind From the East" and "Vladimir and Rosa", and a bit more of Scorsese's early short films, but otherwise I can't really recall any films that came to mind as being similar to these remarkable bundles of absurdist energy.I next saw "Putney Swope", Downey's first professional film, if I'm not mistaken. It was very similar to its predecessors, only much more polished and professionally executed. Two films later, in 1972, Downey came out with "Greaser's Palace".The first thing I noted about this film was the change to color. Aside from that, however, the cinematography is very similar to "Putney Swope", utilizing a realist style with hand-held camera-work and so forth. Downey's basic sense of humor is present, but on the whole, "Greaser's Palace" is a very different film from the other four Downey films I've seen. It's much more toned down, and the general mood of the film diverges significantly from what we're used to. Downey deviates somewhat from his usual absurdist farce and buffoonery (although he definitely doesn't dispense with it entirely), replacing it instead with something more quiet and understated, by comparison to his other films, that is. For the first time in any of his films that I've seen, there are moments in "Greaser's Palace" that actually appear to be intended to be taken seriously, at least to some extent. The final shot of the film is absolutely stunning, both beautiful and disturbing on a visceral level. It's truly a very strange film, and while it doesn't all together work, it has its moments. "Greaser's Palace" is an allegorical film, a parable of the life of Christ. Downey clearly doesn't subscribe to any specific political beliefs or ideologies, and has said so himself. These aren't left-wing films with a social message; they're just raw satire for its own sake. When all is said and done, the primary function of Downey's films is to be enjoyed. It's comedy for comedy's sake. If, however, there was ever a Robert Downey film that felt like it was intended to mean something, this is that film. Religious satire has always been present in Downey's films, but until now it had always been overwhelmed by the much more dominant political satire in his films. In "Greaser's Palace", though, the religious satire is the core of the film. The allegory is extremely thinly veiled, comically so, and Downey pulls no punches.For instance, I recall three figures standing together in a field near the end of the film. One is a younger man who refers to the older man next to him as his father. The third figure is a man covered in a white sheet, with two holes cut out where the eyes might be. These three not-so-mysterious figures are, of course, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. This is Downey's idea of humor. Whether it's funny or not will depend very much on the viewer. While the symbolism and metaphor are far from brilliant, I've found that there is more than enough humor to be found in his irreverence alone. His blatant lack of respect for religion and politics, I believe, has worked to wonderful comedic effect in his films.I thought "Greaser's Palace" was a mess for the bulk of the viewing, and it probably is the worst of the five films I've seen by Downey — certainly the most flawed — but in its own way it may also be the most interesting. The usual frenetic pace of Downey's comedy is melted into something closer to deadpan humor at times, and by the end of the film I must say that I was vaguely interested. I haven't made a great deal of effort to interpret the symbolism and the allegory, and the specifics of what exactly Downey was trying to say, because ultimately I feel like I'd be left with what I already know: Downey never really tries to say much of anything. He simply makes fun of everything. And here he takes great pleasure in ridiculing religion on every imaginable level. Is "Greaser's Palace" a good film? I don't think so. But it's interesting, at least in part, and while I think it fails on the whole, I won't say that I wasn't engaged by it for certain moments, particularly towards the end of the film. I found that it had much more impact on me than I could logically or rationally account for. Give it a shot, and see what you think. A film this original and unique earns some respect on those merits alone.RATING: 5.67 out of 10 stars

Greaser's Palace

1972

Action / Comedy / Western

Greaser's Palace

1972

Action / Comedy / Western

Plot summary

Director

Top cast

Tech specs

Movie Reviews

Genius or Madness? You make the call!

A sometimes interesting, sometimes entertaining, and always messy film from Robert Downey

1 Comments