544-550 America Lost and Found: The BBS Story (Easy Rider, Five Easy Pieces, The Last Picture Show, etc.)

[aox]

Why do you say there is no hope?

But I agree.. the only film that I would love to have on my shelf is The Last Picture Show. The rest are simply curiosities to me that I don't care to own. I would buy The Last Picture Show on Day 1.

[colinr0380]

It had actually been screened a few times before Colin. The first British TV screening I'm aware of was a Channel 4 showing in the mid-eighties. It has also featured on an early-nineties Moviedrome pairing with Rumble Fish.

Oops, my mistake!

[zedz]

I'm an Easy Rider hater, and I've only seen it in 35mm, so it can't be that. Quite apart from the cultural annoyances (you get enough middle-aged accountants and stockbrokers waxing rhapsodic about what a fantastic film it is and you'll soon enough get an allergic reaction too), it's just really dumb and obvious and badly made.

The most interesting stylistic 'innovations' (like the New Orleans interlude) are just brain-dead co-options of much better experimental work of the era, and much of the film in between is blandly shot and staged. But its worst crime is that killer combo of pretension and stupidity. Time and again, really banal 'insights' are either spewed forth as deep and meaningful dialogue (cut to fellow hippies nodding sagely) or performed for our benefit in italicised montage. The motorcycle is like the modern horse, man. See the motorcycle. See the horse. The man is fixing the motorcycle's tyre. The other man is fixing the horse's shoe. The tyre is like the horseshoe, man! It's crazy! Motorcycle. Horse. Glowing sunlight. Meaningful glances. It's like, the motorcycle is a horse! So these guys are like, cowboys! Or jockeys. Cavalry? Oh no , man, bummer. Don't you know there's a war on?

Now, a bad film is just a bad film, and that isn't exactly a crime, but the annoyance factor with Easy Rider is compounded because of its cultural prominence. It's sort of embarrassing that this is the flagship film for an interesting period of American filmmaking. It's a bit like my reaction to Metropolis as the flagship silent film for so many people. They check out these films, get their ignorant prejudices about their eras (and the general dumbness / lack of sophistication of earlier cinema) confirmed, and never bother to go back to find the good stuff. (Sort of related: I also think the soundtrack is for the most part a pretty boring and irritating snapshot of the era, and that too has been calcified into a kind of canon).

This little soapbox also affords me the opportunity to shill for The Hired Hand yet again. With all the past, present and future directors with a finger in Easy Rider's hash brownie, who would have thought that the great American director in the mix would be Peter Fonda? I think this is the great 70s western and maybe the greatest American film of the decade, and if you want to get the taste of some of the lesser films in this box out of your mouth, I can't think of a better place to start.

[oldsheperd]

To add to Zedz horse and motorcycle post: "So the killer flees on horseback with the girl, the cop's after them on a motorcycle and it's like a battle between motors and horses, like technology vs. horse."

I never had an acid trip like the one in easy rider. I did have a mushroom trip like the one in easy rider. Easy Rider needs to be more accurate.

Easy Rider also adds to the mythos that the hippie movement was some big mega it's all about freedom movement when it was really about getting stoned and laid.
I found the movie just plain boring because the film is waaay outdated. There's no investment there for someone who has no primary experience with the sixties and for those who lived through the sixties and love it, that's just nostalgia. The film has aged very badly.

Whenever I think of Easy Rider I think of the scene between Albert Brooks and the Cop in Lost in America where Julie Haggerty talks the cop out of a ticket because both the cop and Albert Brooks love Easy Rider and it's idea of freedom. You've got a police officer(the archetype of law and order) and Albert Brooks' character, an upper class advertising executive, talking about Easy Rider through their narrow funnel of what freedom is to them.
Ugh

[aox]

When ever some 50 year old doctor/lawyer/finance guy tries to explain to me the virtues of Easy Rider, I simply ask them if they have seen Two-Lane Blacktop.

[oldsheperd]

I've always felt that Two Lane Blacktop was the antithesis of Easy Rider.

[aox]

when it was really about getting stoned and laid.

I agree with every single point you and Zedz have made about how terrible this film is; however, I must take issue with this overly reductionist statement. It couldn't be more offensive to those that fought (and ultimately those who paid with their lives) for Civil Rights and to end the Vietnam War during this time. Did the movement attract freeloading 'fashion' hippies who who rode the figurative wave of change for the pursuit of carnal pleasure? Sure. But to make such a blanket undermining statement is completely egregious and unfair.

Furthermore, I am not even sure how much value your observation contains since the majority of left-leaning movements in history have incorporated, and can be perceived as inseparable, from ideas of individual self-expression, inebriation, and sex...starting with France in 1789.

[knives]

I love this film too much to be of much use in a debate on the merits of its basic composition, but I will say that you are bar-none the most unpredictable person to compare my tastes with on this board, mfunk!

Maybe I'm just thick, I don't know, but I honestly don't see what Zedz is talking about. What's so wrong about a relatively mainstream Hollywood product not being as experimental as it's inspirations? I really can't defend it right as it's mostly just going to be me saying you're missing the point and that's no argument. Every comment so far just seems to be a face value judgment or a comment on what a bunch of severely stupid hippies have turned the film into. The way I see it the treats it's subjects much the same way as a Mike Judge cartoon. While everyone, especially Fonda, gets sympathy everything's just their fault. They're hiding like babies under this pretentious face. The troubles of life, minor and large, is simply too hard for these babies and so they hide away for protection. That famous line from Nicholson about, 'them hating your freedom,' or some shit like that is completely ironic.

I'm not saying the film is without it's severe romanticizing, but it's not just that. I guess the analogous situation might be Written on the Wind. There's harsh satire there, but Hopper and Fonda cover it up with so much love and more important to remember pity for their subjects that this glorified sheen does take over. That's a huge mistake on their part I'll admit, but it allows it to stand separate from it's brothers like the aforementioned Two-Lane. Just look at the hippie commune which is as frightening as the cannibals in Texas Chain Saw Massacre. These are the bandwagon beatniks AOX speaks of. They're reptiles and even more than with the rednecks I think the movie saves it's venom for them. Is this what all of the protests and work has been for? For a new chic sort of leftist red neck to take over. Better off dead.[/whine]

[oldsheperd]

when it was really about getting stoned and laid.

I agree with every single point you and Zedz have made about how terrible this film is; however, I must take issue with this overly reductionist statement. It couldn't be more offensive to those that fought (and ultimately those who paid with their lives) for Civil Rights and to end the Vietnam War during this time. Did the movement attract freeloading 'fashion' hippies who who rode the figurative wave of change for the pursuit of carnal pleasure? Sure. But to make such a blanket undermining statement is completely egregious and unfair.

Furthermore, I am not even sure how much value your observation contains since the majority of left-leaning movements in history have incorporated, and can be perceived as inseparable, from ideas of individual self-expression, inebriation, and sex...starting with France in 1789.

My remark was more in jest than seriousness. I don't know if you meant to do this or if it's just the way I read it but I feel you're equating the hippie movement exclusivley with those who fought for civil rights and to end the Vietnam War. The hippies wee a relatively few bunch akin to the same population size of those who identify themselves as Tea Partiers today. JFK, RFK, MLK et. al. weren't hippies. I'm indicting the hippie movement itself not the larger domain of left leaning movements: The Black Panthers, those students who were willing to take an active stand across college campuses against injustice, etc. I don't lump those in with the hippies whose mantra was to drop out. The whole idea that hippies and the movements of the sixties are synonymous is some type of hog wash that has been promoted by the media ever since.

I'm all for individual self-expression etc. etc. But the hippie movement eventually was crushed under the weight of it's own excesses, see: Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, Gimme Shelter.

[aox]

It gets tiresome to constantly ask everyone to define their terms, but consequently, it also can lead to a lot of assumption. Thanks for clearing that up, I completely understand your point within those perimeters. My apologies.

[oldsheperd]

Not a problem. Civil discussions are great. Now lets all get stoned and listen to some Grateful Dead.

[Tom Hagen]

Not a problem. Civil discussions are great. Now lets all get stoned and listen to some Animal Collective.

Fixed.

[domino harvey]

Don't invite Unchill AZN bro, tho

[aox]

I love both AC and the Dead equally.... which will be cooler to ride with on this board?

[domino harvey]

RE: A Safe Place

I can fully understand why someone might not like Easy Rider (though, personally, I love it). But I can't begin to see what people see in A Safe Place. At least you have to give Easy Rider credit for giving you a first-hand glimpse of an acid trip so you get that whacked-out segment at the end. A Safe Place forces you to stand on the outside and watch someone else have an acid trip. It's just some vapid, wide-eyed bimbo tripping out and muttering about "water is heaver than ice" and "I used to fly" and all this other nonsense. She literally does nothing the whole time and I found it unbearable to watch. Orson Welles is a lifesaver, but only because he seems to full recognize how awful the film is and hams it up as such.

You know, at least Easy Rider says something about the people it depicts, questioning the purity of their message, the spiritual success of their journey. What does A Safe Place say about anything?

Well, I wouldn't say Weld's character does nothing. She's definitely exhibiting the juvenile self-involved contrariness of a certain subsection of wealthy young women (and I may or may not have had first-hand experience with a girl much like this). Which is fine to a point, but there's not so much nothing for her to do as there is nothing done with her. Without a stable framework, a character like this is interesting for about two minutes. And Jaglom's film is so juvenile in its self-imposed crypticism that the answer to your final question is A Safe Place says a lot more about the maturity of the filmmaker than the film. The poor abused editing bay must have been begging for someone to remake Rope after this. It also doesn't help that there's glimpses of a more interesting film here in the two strange scenes with the girl who describes at length her decision to embrace degradation on a walk home in a bad area-- why are we following someone self-destructive in a fairly banal way when we could be watching a movie about this much more intriguing self-abuse? Coupled with the guy who admits he'd off himself if his cat ever died, there's something more interesting there than Shot of Child --> Tuesday Weld in Outfit #3 --> Orson Welles straining his eyes --> Circular pan of Jack Nicholson eating a sandwich on a roof --> Tuesday Weld in Outfit #5 --> &c

[zedz]

I honestly don't see what Zedz is talking about. What's so wrong about a relatively mainstream Hollywood product not being as experimental as it's inspirations?

Nothing whatsoever. It's a noble tradition.

The problem in Easy Rider's case is:
a) it hogs the credit for being wildly experimental, part of its general suffocatingly self-congratulatory air and something which the filmmakers have always gleefully played up;
b) the experimental borrowings are poorly executed;
c) they're at the service of banal, pretentious ideas;
d) they're completely superficial, either numbingly obvious in their significance (e.g. the horse stuff) or simply there to give a surface sheen of stylistic radicalism - see also any number of latter day appropriations from experimental cinema by music video directors and ad agencies.

[knives]

The problem in Easy Rider's case is:
a) it hogs the credit for being wildly experimental, part of its general suffocatingly self-congratulatory air and something which the filmmakers have always gleefully played up;

The rest of the stuff would just lead to a boring argument on my part, but on this one I have to disagree in a sense. Yes people at large give these stylistic flourishes more credit than they deserve and Hopper loved to play the showman with this, but how is that any different than Citizen Kane for example? I don't think the film itself has the self-congratulatory air that you speak of, but rather a large part of it's fan base does and that image is only expanded upon by Hopper's self-promotion. Easy Rider seems to hate itself too much to suggest in the moment that it is doing anything. Going back to CK, is it right to hold that movie to the comments made about it? The obvious answer is no, so why do the same to Easy Rider?

[zedz]

but how is that any different than Citizen Kane for example?

See b), c) and d) above.

And e), Citizen Kane was original in its experimentation in several key areas (e.g. soundtrack).

And ultimately the test is whether or not the film stands and falls on its own merits, not how 'original' it is, or where it found its inspiration, or how the filmmaker performed in an interview or at any random industry bash. And it's silly to defend or attack one film on the grounds of what somebody does or doesn't think about a completely unrelated one.

[oldsheperd]

There's really no need to overanalyze Easy Rider based on it's merits of experimentation, pretension or otherwise imo. I believe the easiest answer as to why Easy Rider is considered junk by some is that the film is incredibly outdated in it's philosophies. It's truly a relic of the sixties and just doesn't transcend outside of the later parts of that decade. While stuff like Jimi Hendrix, The Beatles, various writers and movies from the sixties do transcend the decade for more universal appeal, Easy Rider is a product of it's time and remains a novelty; a piece of history that remains for some of those who grew up in that era to wax nostalgic.

The film should basically be relegated to the scrap heap of irrelevency. There is nothing in the film that has any universal appeal. It's very specific to sixites ideas about civil rights, freedom, peace and love. And I agree with Zedz those ideas come across as extremely pretentious and superficial. It touches on these points but has no desire to explore them.

[knives]

And ultimately the test is whether or not the film stands and falls on its own merits, not how 'original' it is, or where it found its inspiration, or how the filmmaker performed in an interview or at any random industry bash. And it's silly to defend or attack one film on the grounds of what somebody does or doesn't think about a completely unrelated one.

That's actually what I've been trying to say. For me the film does stand up on it's own merits, the first time I ever saw it I had never heard of the film before and went in just to see the talent, and the reason I'm ignoring b) c) and d) is that I honestly don't see them and therefore don't know how to defend against it, hence me quoting Domino earlier. Most of the comments against it in this thread has been against what it's perceived as or who it's fans are rather than the film itself which is why I've been arguing the way I have. Outside of your a)you haven't really been arguing that, but most in this thread has.

[zedz]

(shakes hands with knives and goes back to Lisandro Alonso box set)

[colinr0380]

d) they're completely superficial, either numbingly obvious in their significance (e.g. the horse stuff) or simply there to give a surface sheen of stylistic radicalism - see also any number of latter day appropriations from experimental cinema by music video directors and ad agencies.

This advert immediately came to mind!

[Lemmy Caution]

I see that this set totals 6 discs on BR and 9 regular DVDs.
Does anybody know the breakdown for the 9 discs?
I was specifically wondering if The King of Marvin Gardens was one or two discs.
But was also wondering which were two disc affairs and which single discers.

I found the extras on King of MG to be fairly repetitive, with Bob Rafelson telling some of the same anecdotes 2 or 3 times. As for the film, I often liked the concept of a scene better than the execution. When Dern and Nicholson have a chat beneath the boardwalk, the words Dern spoke sounded exactly like something you'd hear Jack say in other movies, both in content and rhythm. I started suspecting that the actors had swapped roles, and this feeling dogged me throughout much of the rest of the film. I kept switching the actors in my mind during or after a scene. Don't know if that means they successful in their roles, I was mildly bored with the film, or the legend of Jack was just too powerful. But it was really too easy to envision the brothers being swapped. Rafelson does mention that they intentionally had Jack play against type and gave him the role you wouldn't expect. I just wish it was more interesting. It's a little tricky, since he is the central character, but really an observer/narrator of his brother's story -- Great Gatsby-style.

[tenia]

I see that this set totals 6 discs on BR and 9 regular DVDs.
Does anybody know the breakdown for the 9 discs?
I was specifically wondering if The King of Marvin Gardens was one or two discs.
But was also wondering which were two disc affairs and which single discers.

Easy Rider & The Last Picture Show are on 2 discs.

[Fortisquince]

Started in with the set late last night and this morning. I've got to say that the video interview with Jack for "Drive, He Said" is extremely entertaining. Very funny. I forget how much charisma the man has.