A look at the tragic years of the life of pornstar John Holmes in the early 1980s and his involvement and the events surrounding the Wonderland murders of July 1st 1981

---

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #31275 in DVD
• Released on: 2004-02-10
• Rating: R (Restricted)
• Aspect ratio: 1.85:1
• Formats: Anamorphic, Color, DVD, Subtitled, Widescreen, NTSC
• Original language: English
• Subtitled in: English, Spanish
• Number of discs: 1
• Running time: 104 minutes

Amazon.com
The dark underside of Boogie Nights is tracked in Wonderland, a sleaze-filled look at the notorious "Wonderland Murders" of 1981. The movie attempts to explain how the legendarily endowed porn actor John C. Holmes was involved in the killings, while deliberately suggesting the difficulty of knowing the truth of a murky case. The police procedural aspects turn out to be less intriguing than the weirdly hapless domestic life of Holmes (Val Kilmer at his most dazed), who despite his promiscuity continues to rely on his starchy, clean-cut wife (an unflattering role for Lisa Kudrow, but the most interesting character in the picture). Well-known actors--notably a near-unrecognizable Dylan McDermott--slouch through the story, which rather distracts from the aggressively realistic approach. In the end, the unclean aura makes one yearn for the stylized ingenuity of Boogie Nights, or at least a reason to be watching this story this way. --Robert Horton

From The New Yorker
This is not the story of John Holmes, the pasha of porno, who bestrode the world of the skin flick with an ease and authority that made life pretty interesting for anybody lying underneath. Instead, it is the story of what Holmes did next-his greasy twilight, in the early nineteen-eighties, when his demeanor and daily routine became no more savory than that of any other cokehead. He was mixed up in a multiple murder, the savagery of which is pressed upon us, and the moral consequence of which appears to be "Stick to blue movies and stay off drugs." Why the director, James Cox, should expect us to leap on this sorry saga with enthusiasm is a mystery, and, as if worried by the grind of his narrative, he tries to chop and chivvy it into a state of high excitement. Holmes is played by Val Kilmer, so thoroughly spaced out that he could slip without noticing into another movie, or, for that matter, another galaxy. -Anthony Lane
Copyright © 2006 The New Yorker

---

Customer Reviews

Johnny Wadd
This film gives you two points of view of the Wonderland murders. One from Dylan McDermott and one from Val Kilmer (as John Holmes). I think the sheer brutality of these murders are enough to captivate, but the film basically goes nowhere. You don't learn anything about Holmes other than the fact that's he's a major drug addict. The film has nothing to do with porn or sex. It's a true crime movie that just never really gets off the ground. The second disc is a documentary on Holmes himself. That is the better disc. It gives you an in-depth look at the life of a guy with a practical-joke sized piece of anatomy. This documentary is far more interesting than the film Wonderland.

There is a 25 minute crime scene police video included as well. It is as graphic as graphic gets. The bodies are still there as the police carefully document the bloody scene. I assume it's there for shock value. Don't let your kids anywhere near this.

Val Kilmer is back to doing what he does best...acting!
In the film, WONDERLAND, Val Kilmer comes back to doing what he does best...acting! Yes, after several flops and what the hell were you thinking roles (AT FIRST SIGHT, RED PLANET, HARD CASH a.k.a RUN FOR THE MONEY), Kilmer returns as infamous porn star John Holmes.

WONDERLAND chronicles Holmes after his `fame' in the porn industry and his `supposed' involvement in the murder of four drug dealers (including Josh Lucas, Natasha Gregson Wagner, Tim Blake Nelson, and Janeane Garofolo) who were brutally murdered in a house on Wonderland Ave. in Los Angeles in the summer of 1981.

Much like BASIC did earlier in the year, WONDERLAND tells its story in a RASHOMON like fashion, showing two different interpretations of the same events. One story is that of John Holmes, while the other is that of career criminal David Lind's(Dylan McDermont), leaving the audience wondering who they should believe. You see, neither one is a reliable source. Actually, both characters are very unlikable. For that matter, there isn't a likeable character in WONDERLAND, which will make some people find the experience uncomfortable and others, like me, fascinated by the sheer stupidity of the characters and the way in which the director and the screenwriter have pieced together their `tattle tale' stories.

That's one of my favorite aspects of the film. The stories. I loved the fact that the film tells the story from several different points of view. It actually made me feel like a detective as I watched the film. Who's lying? Who's telling the truth? Who's guilty? Who's innocent? Is anyone innocent? These are all question's that police detectives are more than likely faced with every day and it was fun to see how these stories come about What did happen out in WONDERLAND? Did porn king John Holmes actually participate in the murders? AS the film sort of does (even though I think it's clear where the film itself stands), I'll let you make your own decisions.

One thing I will say is that Val Kilmer, Lisa Kudrow, and Dylan McDermont, yes Dylan McDermont (he's almost unrecognizable), are absolutely wonderful in this film! Their performances are worth the price of admission alone. The bottom line is that after WONDERLAND is over, you may feel the need to take a shower to wash off all of the slime its grimy characters have just drug you through, but, while you're watching the film, it's a hell of a journey through the human psyche and the violence of mankind.

B

Indispensable package for Wonderland aficionados
I felt that this movie was unfairly bashed by newspaper critics. I got the impression that none dared venture anything positive once a consensus had been established.

I was so curious about this affair after reading the Rolling Stone article years ago that I saw this movie when it was first released in theaters; I wanted to see if it corroborated the article. So did it? That's the movie: two different versions of the heist are presented --John Holmes' and David Lind's. It's one thing to hear a story, but something else to see it enacted. John Holmes' version was amusing to see enacted because it made his lies obvious; some things could not have happened as he told them (ridiculous) and the audience laughed on those. Toward the end is a chilling Roman holiday of a murder scene that I believe, all things considered, is as close to the truth as we will come. For example, I believe it was Deverell who answered the door, and I am convinced that Holmes was there and probably coerced into participating in order to implicate him and thus prevent him from turning against Eddie again by testifying.

This two-disc set also includes omitted scenes, a Crime TV segment, and telling interviews with Sharon Holmes, Dawn Schiller, and people who knew Holmes from "the industry." There are photos taken of the victims when they were alive which I found very interesting, just to see what they looked like. The LAPD crime scene video was not as hard to take as I had expected, mostly due to the then-poor quality of video tape (it has come a long way since 1981 and this will jog your memory); three of the four just look like they're sleeping except that their hair is caked with blood. There are also interviews with some of the actors. I didn't know who Josh Lucas was before seeing this; his performance was outstanding.