Nomads (1986) Atlantic/Horror RT: 92 minutes Rated R (language, violence, brief nudity, suggested sex) Director: John McTiernan Screenplay: John McTiernan Music: Bill Conti Cinematography: Stephen Ramsey Release date: March 7, 1986 (US) Cast: Lesley-Anne Down, Pierce Brosnan, Anna Maria Monticelli, Adam Ant, Mary Woronov, Hector Mercado, Josie Cotton, Frank Doubleday, Jeannie Elias, Nina Foch, J.J. Saunders, Alan Autry, Frances Bay. Box Office: $2.3M (US)
Rating: *
A “nomad” is defined on Dictionary.com as follows: “A member of a people or tribe that has no permanent abode but moves about from place to place”. See how easy it is to explain what the word means? If only it was that easy to tell you what the movie Nomads is about. I literally just finished watching it. I went directly from my living room sofa to my workspace to write it up. My head is still spinning and not in a good way. It’s the kind of head-spin that comes with trying to piece together the messy plot of a movie where you’re not sure what the hell’s going on most of the time. This lack of understanding inevitably leads to not caring about the plot or characters. The only thing you care about with a movie like Nomads is this: “How much longer before it’s over?” I asked this repeatedly during the movie’s second half.
Explaining the plot of Nomads presents a real challenge. How can I clearly describe something that doesn’t make sense to begin with? I’ll do my best; don’t say I didn’t warn you. A deranged patient (Brosnan, Remington Steele) is brought into the ER of a Los Angeles hospital where he’s treated by Dr. Eileen Flax (Down, Rough Cut), a recent East Coast transplant. He keeps screaming the same thing, but nobody understands it because he’s speaking French. He attacks Dr. Flax and dies immediately afterwards. Somehow, he managed to transfer his memories to her by biting her in the neck. As a result, she starts reliving the last few days of his life.
The patient’s name is Jean-Charles Pommier, an anthropologist who specializes in nomadic cultures. He and his wife Niki (Monticelli) just moved into a new house with a violent history (people were killed there). They notice a leather-clad gang in a van hanging around outside. Pommier decides to follow them after they paint graffiti on his garage door. They’re a mysterious bunch, always on the move. He snaps several pictures but lo and behold, none of them appear on film. He arrives at the conclusion that they are Innuat. According to Eskimo legend, the Innuat are nomads who spread evil wherever they go. I’m sorry but isn’t L.A. already the Sodom and Gomorrah of the West Coast?
ANYWAY, Dr. Flax sees all of this through her late patient’s eyes….. sometimes, that is. Sometimes we see him from the outside which means what? Is Flax supposed to be an omnipresent being of some sort? The movie never bothers to explain. Nomads keeps switching back and forth which is very confusing for the audience. It’s not the only confusing thing about going on either. At one point, Pommier finds himself in an old rundown convent talking to a nun (Bay, Blue Velvet) who might or might not be a ghost. There used to be other nuns until something happened. What, I don’t know. Again, the movie refuses to explain itself. This happens again and again and again.
Nomads is the debut feature of John McTiernan who would go on to direct Predator, Die Hard, The Hunt for Red October and Die Hard with a Vengeance. I would say it’s his worst movie if not for the terrible Rollerball remake in 2002. That one is absolutely unwatchable. Nomads, on the other hand, is slightly watchable which is better than not at all, right? It has style. Since we’re talking about a mid-80s movie, this means it plays like an MTV video at times. It’s also thick with atmosphere. It has a few eerie scenes. If nothing else, it’s a slick-looking production. Aesthetically speaking, Nomads is just fine. It’s nice to look at. It’s the narrative I have issues with.
Let me be crystal clear on one point. The story Nomads tries to tell isn’t a bad one. The problem lies with the presentation. In short, the screenplay is a convoluted mess. It also moves at too slow a pace. I know McTiernan is attempting to build suspense, but since it’s never clear what’s going on from scene to scene, it just drags.
On the upside, Bill Conti’s score, which includes guitar work by hard rocker Ted Nugent, is decent. The acting isn’t half-bad either, I guess. It isn’t good either. There’s zero character development beyond Flax being divorced and Pommier slowly losing his mind. It doesn’t really matter though since the characters behave like idiots most of the time. Why does Flax think it’s a good idea to shine a flashlight in the eyes of a crazed patient in restraints? Where did she get her medical degree, Ding Dong School? Why on earth does Pommier think it’s a good idea to follow a group of dangerous types who could easily kill him? In any event, it’s a rather inauspicious movie debut for Brosnan who would find greater success playing James Bond in four movies. Down does little more than act freaked out about inheriting her patient’s memories.
What’s the one thing that makes for a good horror movie? It’s an easy question with an obvious answer. A good horror movie is scary. Nomads isn’t the least bit scary. It has a few eerie moments, but no real jump-scares. Even the final scene fails to shock. This movie is boring! A boring horror movie is as bad as an unfunny comedy in that it seems to go on for an eternity before it’s finally over. I didn’t see this one at the movies; it came and went pretty fast. I rented it on video later that year. The nicest thing I can say is that it was a free rental. It hasn’t improved with age either. It’s still an incomprehensible bore. It’s a good story idea in search of a coherent screenplay and experienced director. I actually wouldn’t mind seeing Nomads be remade as long as it’s made better.
