martes, 25 de octubre de 2011

Thirst The Priest Vampire

Review By Kwenton Bellette
Sang-hyeon, a priest who is questioning his faith, volunteers to help in the search for a vaccine for deadly virus by being injected himself. Almost dying, he suddenly makes a miraculous recovery. As he recovers he develops characteristics of vampirism and as he develops a relationship with a young girl he starts to embrace the pleasures of the flesh..
Thirst showcases modern horror by utilizing religious hypocrisy, the internal struggle and misguided revenge. The latter being Park Chan-wook’s specialty considering his prior work, in particular the vengeance trilogy.
The movie begins as Priest Sang-hyeon (Song Kang-ho) enters a patient’s room in a hospital. He is an extremely complicated character full in doubt and brimming with dark thoughts, but still maintains a sensible and professional demeanor. The shadows of leaves are framed in the background on the door as the patient fits into a coma after he talks about how he fed some hungry children with sponge cake. It is an auspicious and ominous beginning and this same story is later used by Sang-hyeon to justify his sin when he drinks from this man.
Sang-hyeon’s demeanor suggests that he questions his beliefs as he acts rather cynical for a man of faith. His blind and disabled ‘Father’ does nothing to quell his indecisions and Sang-hyeon’s helplessness and martyrdom become clear as he gives a heavily masochistic prayer after he dooms himself when he becomes exposed to a virus. He has made his claims of sacrifice to his god who may or may not be listening to him.
Sang-hyeon undergoes a transformation during the trial and becomes known as the “bandaged saint” covered in lesions he has technically survived the virus trials; the only one in five hundred to do so but there is a most grievous catch. Sang-hyeon has however only physically changed; his grey ethical and moral sense remains the same. The bandaged saint returns to Korea, admired by religious fanatics, but life has not changed for him, through his work at the hospital he is harassed by an old family friend Lady Ra (Kim Hae-Sook) who is from his hometown Busan. From this Sang-hyeon blesses her son Kang-Woo (Shin Ha-kyun) and becomes exposed to sin. Kang-woo’s wife can be seen in the foreground, the camera particularly attentive of her as she rolls her eyes while he suffers behind her. She is Tae-Ju (Kim Ok-bin) and is humiliated and leads a miserable life as a nurse for Kang-woo. After Sang-hyeon’s prayer, Kang-woo is unexplainably cured but remains a hypochondriac much to Tae-ju’s chagrin.
Sang-hyeon lives in agony due to his vampirism. He experiences a hyper-sensitive montage where everyone and everything is felt by him and he punishes himself if only to distract from his burning desires to drink, to taste the forbidden fruit as it were. Sang-hyeon becomes almost animalistic in his heightened senses and becomes enticed by Tae-ju.
The pacing of the film has already obscured by this point. Time begins to lose some significance and the night comes more rapidly as Sang-hyeon reels out of control trying to tame his insatiable thirst. The middle of the film is a confusing array of a relationship that sparks, revenge and desperation and is sometimes confusing as the plot feels slightly disjointed.
Tae-ju is clearly the other main element of Thirst; she is the catalyst that drives Sang-hyeon to eventually, after much horrifying trial and error, do the right thing, given his circumstance. Sang-hyeon is initially smitten by her, one scene shows him removing his shoes and placing her in them in an act of love and spontaneity, when he catches her sprinting barefoot.
She brings Sang-hyeon’s sin full-circle and makes him lose all aspects of priesthood as he and Tae-ju make love in the dress store that Lady Ra owns, directly below the home that she lives in. It is an awkward scene and Sang-hyeon tries to fight his urges, but remains mostly placid. “I’m not a shy person” Tae-Ju says to him, but this is part of her manipulation and cruel intentions, to lose control and forget about her awful life. Their partnership is very erotic as both lose control; the image of her sucking his thumb and he in tandem kissing her feet, while still in his priest attire is a searing one and the chemistry between both actors is a complicated concoction.
Sang-hyeon however continues to have a confused sense of what is right; he leaves the priesthood, seemingly to be with Tae-Ju but mostly out of guilt. His ‘father’ completely understands, broken and at wits end he even lets Sang-hyeon drink from him which leads to his own desperation and obsession. Sang-hyeon taints everyone around him; unintentionally everyone is changing for the worse except himself and Tae-ju who was unkind and damaged to begin with.
The power play shifts dramatically to Tae-ju who exploits Sang-hyeon and his misplaced love for her. She guides him to commit the most heinous act for a normal person let alone a priest, and their relationship changes drastically as both feel an overwhelming sense of guilt that is portrayed uniquely on the screen as the personification of their culpability literally interrupts their lewd love making. Why both see and feel this disturbing manifestation is not really explained but is still bizarre and interesting. Sang-hyeon lets his passion and emotions overwhelm him, and through the madness changes Tae-ju forever.
Kim Ok-bin won the award for best female actress in Cannes for this performance and it is easy to see why as her transformation from damaged slave wife to dominating psychopath is an intense and fascinating one. There are elements, albeit subtle ones, that suggests she has not changed. She uses a pair of pliers to kill and these are the same implement she used on her sleeping husband Kang-woo, as she pretended to stab his mouth repeatedly. This vicious ecstasy is the ultimate abuse of power and is also ultimately immature comparable to the restraint Sang-hyeon has shown.
Tae-ju takes full advantage of her position to be in power of the household while Sang-hyeon desperately tries to control her and there are scenes that depicts their abode as a literal house of horrors. Tae-ju’s unforgivable crimes become a turning point for Sang-hyeon and are fully understood at the films climax where he finally takes responsibility for his actions.
Besides the questionable pacing, Thirst has strong characters that propel the film. Sang-hyeon is driven to do the right thing and tries to take the morally obligated path, but is constantly interrupted by his state and internal monologue. Even before becoming infected Sang-hyeon seems to make all the wrong decisions. His personality never actually changes and he is a unique and complicated character because of this. Tae-ju on the other hand has the thirst for power and vengeance and her character only becomes uninhibited, vengeful and powerful as an enabler to help her fulfill her dark wishes. Thirst then, is not just a film about vampires. Thirst is a testament to the evils of mortals and the horrors that they inflict, the consequences of their actions and the redemption, if any, that they must endure in the face of revenge, love and madness.

Shaun Of The Dead The Zombie Comedy




Reviewed By Stuart Wood

Edgar Wright and Simon Pegg will probably come as complete unknowns to the US audience, but they already achieved success in the UK with a short lived sitcom which has achieved a cult status amongst the 18 – 34 student group. While I never really got into the slightly surreal humour of that show, it’s give me great pleasure to announce that with Shaun Of The Dead, they have managed one of the most difficult tasks in filmmaking: A comedy horror that is at the same time, gruesome, touching, and just down right hilariously funny.

Shaun (Simon Pegg) is a textbook Men Behaving Badly bloke. He is a twenty-nine year old sales clerk in an electrical store who still lives with his old college buddies; Ed (Nick Frost) the crude unemployed slob and Pete (Peter Serafinowicz) the uptight businessman. He tests the patience of his girlfriend Liz (Kate Ashfield) by failing to commit to their relationship fully and angers his creepy stepfather (a wonderfully weird Bill Nighy cameo) by failing to do anything to improve his lot in life.

So out of touch with the world is Shaun that despite visiting the local convenience store, spending the day at work, getting dumped by his girlfriend after one too many let downs and going out and getting completely blind drunk he, through a staggering display of bad timing and mindless daydreaming, fails to notice as the world around him rapidly collapses into a zombie ridden apocalypse in time honored tradition. When he and buddy Ed belatedly realize the predicament they are in, it is up to Shaun to try and rescue his friends and family from undead hell and prove himself worthy of the woman that he loves.

What separates Shaun of the Dead from the likes of Scary Movie and makes it twice as effective is the fact that it never resorts to cheap parody. These are people who genuinely have a love for the genre that George Romero and Lucio Fulchi created back in the 70s (look out for the blink-and-miss Fulchi’s Restaurant and Landis Supermarket references) and manage to poke fun at the absurdity of it all while still telling a story that is involving, surprisingly gory, at times very emotional and all things considered, far more realistic (or perhaps that should be easier to relate to) than Ving Rhames and that chick from Go running around touting serious firepower like badasses.

Simon Pegg gives us the best kind of character we can all root for in Shaun; the likeable loser. The guy who’s stuck in a rut but doesn’t seem to realize it enough to do anything about it; The guy who when finally given an opportunity to prove himself finds that nothing ever goes quite to plan.

The world Shaun finds himself in is trademark Romero; a bunch of disparate survivors dodging hoarding zombies, looking for a place, any place, to survive in the hope that they can simply ride the horror out. This is brilliantly played on throughout the movie. At one point as our group stalks back alleys looking for refuge they encounter another group, made up of almost exactly the same make up of character types. While the joke may be a fairly obvious one, the way it is handled is far better than anything the Wayans or Zuckers might have done.

As mentioned Pegg and Wright have created a world that revels in the absurdity of the zombie mythology and its clichés while never taking cheap shots at its source material. The average British guy doesn’t have an SP12 shotgun in his tool shed, so when attacked by killer zombies he makes do with the only things available – a spade… a cricket bat… his 80s vinyl collection! And when our unlikely hero finally does get his hands on a gun, he doesn’t suddenly become a badass crack shot like Hollywood’s ranks of supposed “everyman” heroes. The dispatching of zombies is more often a happy accident than a genuine strike. The undead are portrayed in their trademark brain-dead shuffler form rather than the super-steroid “zombies” of the Dawn of the Dead remake or 28 Days Later (which doesn’t escape a ribbing either with a subtle gag near the end of the movie) making for easy comedy foil in small numbers but still a formidable force en masse.

It’s hard to describe what it is about the humor in Shaun Of The Dead that makes it work, it’s cheeky rather than sarcastic, always winking at the audience. Still that doesn’t really do it justice. Visual gags and sly witty dialogue work together with the cast’s comic chemistry. Genuine British news and TV presenters revel in cameos as themselves as they bring the world news of spreading chaos (or not in some cases). Much of the humor can be rooted in very British aspects of daily life and pop culture, so I’m not sure how much of that would translate to US audiences. But enough of it is generic to let those few instances slide when considering the movie overall.

It’s not all laugh a minute though. A couple of the effects would make Savini proud and that is something even I did not expect from such a low key movie let alone a “comedy”. Be warned if you take a particularly squeamish date along. But for me, I can safely say that I enjoyed Shaun of the Dead more than I did the recent US remake of Dawn of the Dead. Sure the remake was OK, but it never really added anything new. It was just another well put together horror movie. Shaun… offers a respectful nod to its originators while putting a smile on the face of the audience. And hey, George Romero likes it.

domingo, 16 de octubre de 2011

TWO-LANE BLACKTOP "You can NEVER go fast enough."









Ten (sixteen, actually) Reasons I Love
Two-Lane Blacktop
By Richard Linklater01 Because it’s the purest American road movie ever.

02 Because it’s like a drive-in movie directed by a French new wave director.

03 Because the only thing that can get between a boy and his car obsession is a girl, and Laurie Bird perfectly messes up the oneness between the Driver, the Mechanic, and their car.

04 Because Dennis Wilson gives the greatest performance ever . . . by a drummer.

05 Because James Taylor seems like a refugee from a Robert Bresson movie, and has the chiseled looks of Artaud from Dreyer’s The Passion of Joan of Arc.

06 Because there was once a god who walked the earth named Warren Oates.

07 Because there’s a continuing controversy over who is the actual lead in this movie. There are different camps. Some say it’s the ’55 Chevy, some say it’s the GTO. But I’m Goat man, I have a GTO—’68.

08 Because it has the most purely cinematic ending in film history.

09 Because it’s like a western. The guys are like old-time gunfighters, ready to outdraw the quickest gun in town. And they don’t talk about the old flames they’ve had, but rather old cars they’ve had.

10 Because Warren Oates has a different cashmere sweater for every occasion. And of course the wet bar in the trunk.

11 Because unlike other films of the era, with the designer alienation of the drug culture and the war protesters, this movie is about the alienation of everybody else, like Robert Frank’s The Americans come alive.

12 Because Warren Oates, as GTO, orders a hamburger and an Alka-Seltzer and says things like “Everything is going too fast and not fast enough.”

13 Because it’s both the last film of the sixties—even though it came out in ’71—and also the first film of the seventies. You know, that great era of “How the hell did they ever get that film made at a studio?/Hollywood would never do that today” type of films.

14 Because engines have never sounded better in a movie.

15 Because these two young men on their trip to nowhere don’t really know how to talk. The Driver doesn’t really converse when he’s behind the wheel, and the Mechanic doesn’t really talk when he’s working on the car. So this is primarily a visual, atmospheric experience. To watch this movie correctly is to become absorbed into it.

16 And, above all else, because Two-Lane Blacktop goes all the way with its idea. And that’s a rare thing in this world: a completely honest movie.

Filmmaker Richard Linklater originally presented this tribute at the 2000 South by Southwest in Austin, TX, as an introduction to a special screening of Two-Lane Blacktop, part of a retrospective of Hellman's work that Linklater helped coordinate.




Review by Michael Jacobson

Two-Lane Blacktop could be considered the Easy Rider of the 70s, but with a few marked differences. Whereas the classic biker film by Dennis Hopper captured and reflected a certain spirit of freedom and rebellion inherent in its decade, Monte Hellman’s road race film treats its subjects as almost alien, lost souls. The characters have miles and miles of open road to call their home, yet the movie doesn’t sing an ode to freedom. These people are trapped and isolated, and don’t really seem to understand it.

For starters, none of the characters in the film even have names. They are simply known as the driver (Taylor), the mechanic (Wilson), the girl (Bird) and the GTO (Oates). The driver and the mechanic travel in a souped up 55 Chevy. When they speak to one another, it’s entirely the language of automobiles. They make their money scoping out races. They have no past. They have no future.

The movie seems to have settled instinctively on the one interesting chapter in their lives, and it involves two other lonely, detached individuals. The first is the girl, who simply climbs into the back of their car while the pair are having breakfast. They get back in the car without saying a word to her. Likewise, she doesn’t speak. They drive off as though fated to be together. Finally, somewhere along the road, she asks, “Where are we headed?” “East,” the mechanic replies. “Cool,” she agrees. “I’ve never been east.”

The other character is the GTO, so named because he drives a slick new Pontiac GTO. The two cars encounter one another many times along the road, each driver wondering if the other is making a challenge. Like the driver and mechanic, the GTO has no real past or future. He picks up a few hitchhikers along the way, and spins a different life story to each one. One of his passengers falls asleep, and the GTO repeats the story he’d been telling the fellow verbatim.

Eventually, the characters meet up, and the race is on. The GTO picks Washington D.C. as the finish line. Why so far, we wonder? Couldn’t a simple drag race down a deserted road accomplish the same results? But when you have nowhere to go and nothing to do, you find something to occupy your time.

The race proceeds in ways that are both fascinating, and sometimes a little humorous. Even though their respective cars are on the line, they still find time to meet up and share a drink or snack from the back of their cars. Which sort of lends to the film’s theme about being trapped rather than being free. These characters’ world is not the endless stretch of highway, but their cars. Nothing changes for either of them no matter where they go. Their microcosm of existence simply goes along with them.

Note even how the blossoming but ultimately failing romance between the driver and the girl play out. Their most tender scene involves the driver trying to teach the girl how to use the stick shift (an obvious innuendo). Her failure to get it right, or his failure to show her properly, is quite symbolic. Later in the film, when it’s clear she’s going to take off, his bumbling attempt at some kind of proposal is simply that he wants her to go with him to Columbus, where he can get some good auto parts cheap. It’s as sad as it is funny.

And the GTO complains about his passengers: “Just one fantasy after another”, he calls them. Whose fantasy? His or theirs? An interesting question considering how he manages a different life story each time around. He sadly remarks to the girl at one point, “If I don’t get grounded soon, I’m gonna go into orbit.” But grounding for any of these characters is not to be. At the end of the picture, he picks up a couple of young soldiers, and begins to tell the tale about how he used his older Chevy in a race to beat a couple of young punks driving a GTO. Considering the three men are riding in that GTO, the soldiers are as bewildered as we are.

By chance or by fate, both cars have a separate encounter with death along their journey. The driver and mechanic, while playing a little road rage game with another driver, come across a lethal accident in the middle of a road. A man lies dead. The driver of an overturned truck, obviously shaken, describes the dead man as having played the same kind of game the two leads were just engaged in. Meanwhile, the GTO picks up an old woman and her granddaughter, who are going to the cemetery where the younger girl’s parents have just been laid to rest. “A city car,” the old woman says quietly. “It was a city car that killed them.”

The film’s final shot is somewhat famous. The driver, engaged in yet another quick race to make some cash, sits behind the wheel. We begin to notice that the images are slowing down. The soundtrack reduces itself to silence. The signal is given, the cars take off. We watch from the rear seat, looking at the back of the driver’s head and the open road ahead. The film gets slower and slower, until it freezes and burns in the projector. Who won the big race? We don’t know. What does this ending signify? The driver’s death? Possibly…or maybe just the suggestion that these characters are living in a kind of death as it is. They were told earlier on that they can’t live that kind of life forever. Yet they don’t seem to have anything else.

Monte Hellman, another one of Roger Corman’s protégés, created a symbolic and entrancing road movie with Two-Lane Blacktop. His mastery as a director shows in the way he cultivates his images and relies on them more than the dialogue to convey his story and expose his characters. I’ve already mentioned comparisons to Easy Rider and my opinion that this movie represents the imprisonment of that lifestyle rather than the freedom of it. This comes across through Hellman’s filming. Hopper moved his camera in and out and around his bikes effortlessly. There was a sense of unlimited space and complete lack of rules. Hellman’s characters take a similar journey across America, but we always see the world from the point of view of inside the car. When we’re outside the car, we’re looking in at them. It doesn’t even matter what the outside world is. Their world is encased in glass and steel, and anything outside of it barely exists.

Hellman claims he cast James Taylor for the role of the driver after seeing his picture on a billboard. Taylor’s music career was just beginning to take off, but he agreed to test for and appear in this picture. I admit, I chuckled when I saw his name on the box, but I have to admit, he was right for the role. He plays the driver with a quiet kind of intensity, and maintains a believable sense of being lost when it comes to communicating outside the world of the automobile. Equally good is the late Dennis Wilson, who was most famous for being the Beach Boys’ drummer, but strikes a good casual note as the man who’s so in tune with the car that he makes statements like, “It’s not breathing right.”

Warren Oates, however, is a true standout as the GTO. He brings all the right notes to this character, from the loneliness to the silly smugness. This could have easily been just another caricature in a road movie, but he manages to bring out the humor and the sadness, and find just the right amount of truth in a character that, as he puts it, is so ungrounded.


EXISTENTIAL CRITICISM AND THE MOVIE 'VANISHING POINT'





by GEOFF WARD

THERE is, of course, no reason why Colin Wilson’s existential criticism should not be applied to performance texts, such as those of cinema and theatre, taken as sub-divisions of literature, as well as to written ones, despite the fact that unlike a novel or a poem, they are not the products of a single author’s mind but the creations of a large number of individuals, from directors, writers and actors through a whole range of technicians and other contributors.

I doubt if existential criticism has been applied to a movie before, but Richard Sarafian’s Vanishing Point (1971), because of its notable existential temper, lends itself rewardingly to an application - and an illumination - of Wilson’s approach.

Vanishing Point tells the story of Kowalski, a car delivery driver who, high on benzedrine, and at the wheel of a supercharged Dodge Challenger, leads police on a chase across four western US states. He’s made a bet that he can make the trip from Denver to San Francisco in 15 hours. Catching Kowalski turns into a massive police operation that attracts the gaze of the national media. Through a series of flashbacks, it is revealed that Kowalski is a Vietnam war veteran with a Medal of Honor for bravery, but that his girlfriend drowned, and that his subsequent careers as a twice-promoted police officer, a motorcycle speedway rider and a stock car driver all ended in failure. After that, he was reduced to being a demolition derby driver and even an “auto clown”. The movie ends with Kowalski’s death as he appears to deliberately ram a roadblock. (See the excellent website devoted to the film at Kowalski’s Home Page - www.geocities.com/1970ufo).

On one level, the film can be seen as a straightforward thriller (with plenty of exciting stunts and a fine contemporary music soundtrack), but on a deeper level as depicting the existential odyssey of the protagonist, whose ultimate gesture of defiance is typical of the Romantic outsider - a gesture which few indeed would be prepared to give, but one against which there can be no recourse. It is reminiscent of the Poet in Thomas Gray’s The Bard who hurls himself into the abyss after cursing the royal line of Edward I. Kowalski is an anti-hero, a misfit, a solitary, defiant in the true Romantic sense that he is prepared to die rather than give in to the establishment. A laconic loner, he rejects the “norms” of both culture and counter-culture.

As an example of popular cinema, although having gained “cult” status over the years, Vanishing Point presents itself as particularly accessible to the existential critic - working to tenets set out in A Checklist for the Existential Critic (see Views menu) - whose first consideration is to know exactly what a book, poem or movie is saying; being “true to life”, artistically satisfying technically, or telling a story convincingly are secondary matters. Vanishing Point is also a good example of how Romanticism remains unique among artistic forces in that it retains perennial vigour and youthfulness, as well as audience appeal.

But most importantly, Vanishing Point examines how profound loss of meaning leads to a radical questioning of existence, and in so doing emphasises the corollary that profound perception of meaning, as in the “peak experience”, validates existence, and anticipates the evolutionary direction. The movie shows what happens when the natural peak experience - achieved by Kowalski in motor racing - is lost, and an attempt is made to recapture the feeling artificially through the use of drugs and fast driving on the highway: both kinds of “speed”.

It is speed that gives Kowalski a sense of release from a world he seems to see as largely meaningless, and in the latter part of the film, the blind DJ Supersoul announces that his radio station is to be renamed “KOWalski”, “in honor of the last American hero, to whom speed means freedom of the soul”. Supersoul, incidentally, seems able to tap into those latent powers of the mind that Wilson describes as “intuition raised to a higher level” - Wilson’s own definition of Faculty X - in his (Supersoul’s) apparent telepathic contact with Kowalski on at least two occasions. Ultimately, of course, Kowalski’s release is shatteringly final. Samuel Taylor Coleridge, his peak experiences having forsaken him, turned to opium in greater compensatory quantities. The tragedy at the heart of Vanishing Point is that, similarly, Kowalski is unable to regain that naturally optimistic state which can lead to the peak experience.

Wilson, in The Books in my Life, during a discussion of what he describes as the “bird’s-eye view” of existence, as opposed to the normal “worm’s-eye view”, says that in the former state it is as if “our minds cease to plod along on the level of material reality, and seem to soar up into the air. The result is an odd sense of becoming what we really are”. Describing how he thinks Wordsworth and Van Gogh achieved this state, he then adds, suitably for this essay: “A racing driver probably achieves it driving at 100mph.”

At the moment in Vanishing Point when the media seize on Kowalski’s story, there comes a telling exchange between a television reporter and Sandy, the man in charge at Argo’s Car Delivery, for whom Kowalski works:

TV reporter: But as a professional driver, he never really made the grade, did he? Sandy: Well, you know why? He never really wanted to. So far as I’m concerned, he was number one then, and he’s number one now. (My italics).

That Kowalski “never really wanted” to make the grade seems particularly significant. It implies a certain element of defeatism, reminding us of Wilson’s concept of “the age of defeat”, set out in his book of that title which is part of his Outsider cycle. Indeed, Wilson’s original introduction to The Age of Defeat is entitled The Vanishing Hero, and in the introduction to the 2001 edition, after mentioning Shelley, Goethe and Hoffman, Wilson says: “. . . all these romantics were overwhelmed with a sense of the authenticity of their ‘bird’s-eye views’, even when they had to admit defeat in translating them back into terms of everyday life. This was the cause of that romantic despair that led to so many premature deaths.” And: “The vanishing hero is not simply an intellectual or literary problem. For better or worse, it is one of the consequences of this Western society . . .”

Heroism, in its purest definition, says Wilson, is an appetite for freedom, a desire to live more intensely. Kowalski possesses both these traits. But the realisation of heroism “depends upon the liveliness of the potential hero’s imagination, upon how far he can understand his own latent needs, and devise an outlet for them”. And Kowalski seems to be one of those romantics who cannot translate his “bird’s-eye views” back into everyday life - hence his penchant for fast driving on the public highway and his use of amphetamines.

As a fictional character, Kowalski at first glance may seem to represent Wilson’s “vanishing hero”, reflecting the negative and defeatist world in which his creators live. It is tempting even to see in the title Vanishing Point the eventual and complete cultural exit of the “vanishing hero” after a long process of literary attrition. But in actuality, in his own way, Kowalski rebels against the unheroic premise, the “hypothesis of insignificance”, by setting his individuality against the system, whether it be the prevailing culture, or the counter-culture, of the time. It is supremely ironic that, ultimately, he decides to pay for this stance with his life.

But as Wilson points out, the authors of 19th and 20th century literature had no qualms about loading the dice against their heroes and heroines. In a sense, the character of Kowalski is related to this literary “tradition”, yet his moral perception indicates that he is in no way merely defeatist, but that, true to romantic type, he is unwilling to play by the established rules, to perform what (any) society expects of him. For example, he stands out against police corruption, to his own personal cost; he checks to ensure that drivers he outruns are not injured in various road accidents, risking capture as he does so; he takes only the amount of “bennies” he needs, despite being offered more; he resists the offer of casual sex from the girl on the motorcycle.

The questioning of existence which pervades the theme of Vanishing Point is symbolised during an aerial shot in which we see Kowalski’s car tracks create a giant “X” in the desert sand of Death Valley. Primarily, “X” indicates the Unknown. It is the ultimate “sliding signifier”, equating anything with nothing, and it is under the shadow of “X” that Kowalski moves, all the way from “point zero” to “vanishing point”. The narrative of the movie is all about crossings - X-ings - literally, as Kowalski crosses the central reservation, the railroad line, the state lines, No Name Creek; figuratively, as he “crosses the line” between what the authorities/establishment will and will not tolerate, especially as he “crosses” the police, appropriately driving a Dodge Challenger, dodging the cops and challenging the system. Kowalski also crosses the line between optimism of the past and pessimism of the present, and ultimately, the point of no return at Cisco, where he becomes resigned to his doom, his own personal “vanishing point”.

All this is underpinned by an ironic sub-text, comprising some 40 captions including road and other signs, ads, graffiti and newspaper headlines, which runs throughout the movie. A telling contrast of focalisation is created between this sub-text and the main narrative which is shifted, in a balance of opposites, towards placing emphasis on terms not normally given precedence in Western culture, destabilising or subverting the traditional hierarchy, thus: law-breaking over law-enforcement; defiance over compliance; non-conformity over conformity; speed over caution. Much of the sub-text attempts to weight the balance the other way in a contrapuntal sequence which continually warns of the precariousness and danger of what Kowalski is doing. For example, the road sign “Stop” appears prominently no less than ten times; “End speed zone” suggests an anti-drugs message as well as giving a wry commentary on a police chase. Ironical comment is a key function of the sub-text; for example, a police roadblock is shown clustered around a sign saying “Welcome to California”.

Yet the sub-text also indicates the synchronic values which Kowalski appears to be rejecting in American society by force of his own individuality, repressive aspects of society which the Romantic seeks to shake off , eg, “Coca Cola”, “Mobil” (big business, materialism), police insignia (the establishment, authority), “Jesus Saves” (religion, dogma), “Love” (the counter-culture). The juxtaposition of these static images against those of the fast-moving action demands the active interpretative engagement of the viewer who is called upon to make the imaginative connections. Meanwhile, Kowalski himself seems to evade the signifying system. Argo’s Car Delivery alludes to the myth of Jason and the Argonauts, the crew of the ship Argo who sailed in search of the Golden Fleece, and who had various adventures along the way, and obstacles to overcome, just as Kowalski does. But if the Dodge is Kowalski’s Argo, en route (via the “Drug Center”) to the Golden State, he finds no equivalent of the Golden Fleece, only X-the-Unknown, and oblivion, beyond his crossing point between life and death.

The movie’s title is, of course, crucial, and functions on a number of different levels simultaneously:

1. The point where the sides of a highway converge at the horizon through the action of perspective - the point towards which Kowalski is always and inevitably heading; where the sightlines converge, itself an illusion.

2. The point at which Kowalski ceases to be a person and becomes a symbol - hero or villain, depending upon viewpoint - created by the DJ Supersoul.

3. The “vanishing point” of any stable or ultimate meaning.

4. The point at which Kowalski “deconstructs” himself in a deliberate act of self-immolation - the suicide crash; the point at which he vanishes from the world. At the beginning of the movie, in a kind of “flash-forward”, after we see Kowalski drive out of the symbolic “graveyard” of rusting hulks of old vehicles and head back towards Cisco on the Sunday morning, the Challenger and a black Chrysler pass each other on a stretch of road; the scene freezes and the Dodge disappears. This may represent Kowalski’s point of no return, his own last ride and “vanishing point”. As the action then proceeds analeptically from the Friday night, Kowalski is shown delivering the black car in Denver.

So, then, how does Vanishing Point score with Wilson’s existential critic? The answer is, I think, quite highly. The movie does attempt to get beyond the values and limits of the “natural standpoint”, and to investigate the question of existence itself - what human existence is for - through the character of Kowalski whose actions, past and present, seek an intensity or fullness of experience, but which are acutely contrasted with the content of the sub-text, representing the restrictive forces operating against him. In this way, one may assert that the film is successful in revealing existence as potentiality.

At the same time, however, it raises the spectre of what Thomas Hardy called the “Immanent Will” (what today, less grandly, we would call “Murphy’s Law”), that impersonal and unconscious purpose which works itself out through history and is indifferent to the welfare of humanity in its thwarting of aspiration, revealing the disparity between the possible (the desired) and the actual (what the Immanent Will wills) - bringing in the inevitable element of pessimism, or defeatism, one of the “consequences of Western society”, which Wilsonian criticism detects as endemic in the literature of the 19th and 20th centuries. That an evolutionary expansion of consciousness should be able to “inform” the Immanent Will, so to speak, and thereby gradually overthrow the defeatist attitude, the “fallacy of insignificance”, is implicit in Wilson’s philosophy of the new existentialism.

At the end of the movie, the chorus of the gospel-influenced Kim Carnes song Nobody knows is repeated several times as the camera tracks away from the crash site to a panorama of desert and sky. It seems to be saying that it takes death to make us see the actual potential of life, of existence - as does the Dr Johnson quotation to which Wilson is fond of referring: “When a man knows he is to be hanged in a fortnight it concentrates his mind wonderfully.” But we always slip back into everyday consciousness (which Wilson, in a famous phrase, maintains is a liar) and let the “robot” take over so many aspects of our lives, drawing a veil over that potential.

Kowalski, who decides that he will not return to the “robotic” life, takes an escape route which his pursuers cannot follow and, in the words of Nobody knows, his “soul goes free”, suggesting a kind of metaphysical victory over the world. This, of course, cannot be valorised in existential terms, but it is nevertheless the impression created by combining the film’s concluding images with this particular song. As a whole, however, the movie depicts graphically how the realisation of human potential, and the validation of human purpose, are frustrated not only by the very institutions which we create, but also by the very way we think, as the American psychologist George Pransky, much lauded by Wilson, has pointed out. One could say that Kowalski sacrifices himself in order to bring this powerfully to our attention.

* Regrettably, the 1997 made-for-TV remake of Vanishing Point is devoid of existential quality and the context of “outsiderism”. Displaying the lamentably inevitable 1990s political correctness, this version has Kowalski’s long-distance delivery of a vintage Dodge Challenger (identical to the one in the original film) go haywire when his expectant wife is suddenly hospitalised in danger of losing their unborn child. Mistakenly vilified, a desperate Kowalski eludes the FBI and police of four states as he races to cover 1,200 miles separating him from his family.