Okay, so the idea is to achieve emptiness so that we may be actually
informed by what it is we see. To train an eye for details that doesn't
react or classify or evaluate but instead grasps effortlessly the
totality of what a film means to us. In this process, naturally we have
to discard our preconceptions and routine streams of thought; who made
the film, is it art-house, does it belong in a list of masterpieces.
A bunch of those here; a remake of a well known French film, the
presence of Richard Gere (usually signifying fluff), the very idea of a
film that never made much sense to begin with. Who needs a Breathless
remake, much less the Hollywood version? But we got it, so what about
it? The Godard film was about young people coming to discover for the
first time the struggle with important things, about love and meaning
dealt with in the pretentious, silly, superficial ways of youth. What
tied the struggle together was a boyhood fantasy about movies. We had a
protagonist acting out an imaginary gangster part and the reality of
the film arranged around him as a movie plot in which to act the part.
It was about the safe distance provided by the fictional as conflated
into the emotional distance between two people.
Now watch how the remake transcribes this. Richard Gere is the Michel
Poiccard character but instead of Bogart he is a Clark Gable. A movie
hunk 'exhuding studly scent' as another reviewer aptly puts it.
Recklessly oblivious to anything but the present moment and what it has
to offer, he is the very dream of movies. A doofus at first sight but
who instinctively seems to have grasped the essence of life by the
balls. As much a target of ridicule as admiration. We see him empathize
with utmost seriousness with Silver Surfer comics! Something akin to a
destiny for him.
But we're not inside him, we're siding with the French girl who's come
to LA to study architecture. The girl who plans, thinks, wants the
buildings she will create to last. The perfectly logical human being
who (along with us) is swept away by the irresistible allure of an
existence without bounds, centered in the 'now' and radiating outwards.
Valerie Kapriskie is a perfect match here, an Ali McGraw to Steve
McQueen; she's great because she can't act to hide what seems a genuine
infatuation with Gere's adolescent antics (mixed with genuine
We travel with them through a fetish dream of LA. Cars are fire-engine
red Thunderbirds, summer dresses and even telephones pink. I've been
going this month through a phase of cinematic vacation in Los Angeles,
and this one has the best sense of place of anything I've seen yet. The
dark joint with the jukebox, the empty streets blowing with hot summer
But it's more than a ride of pure, exhilarating movie pleasure, there's
something to talk about here.
It's peppered throughout, but centered in a scene by a pool. The girl
wants to know what is behind the man's face, what kind of nothingness.
He blurts something about love, no doubt cribbed from some magazine. A
little later an aging architect, who no doubt has been where she is and
has come to understand the world, tells her that nothing that is built
And the best part, taken from the pages of a Silver Surfer comic. I
won't go into details, but it says something about us, the sentient
beings narrating our story, removed from our heart yet discovering it
in every reflection. It makes for perfect Zen.
So we have this hip-swivelling, rock'n'roll Zorba the Greek, who is
empty inside in the best sense possible, so that he is filled with
everything. Like only a blank sheet of paper can be clearly written on.
And he's on the run for a fateful mistake of shooting a cop. How the
scene is edited is important; we see a windshield shatter, then Gere
looking with astonishment at the pistol in his hand. Elements crucially
missing from the edit (the action itself) reveal the emotional state;
how many mistakes can we look back on and be perplexed how we let them
There's more to it. There's a marvellous love scene in a movie theater
playing Gun Crazy (which the film is reversed from). The two lovers
roll around as behind them loom huge footage of the fictional couple in
Gun Crazy discussing what pertains to the two lovers.
And before the climax, we ride all the way up to a property overlooking
the LA nightscape. Errol Flynn's as we find out, again movieland.
It is better than the Godard film, miles better. It's as much about the
old tropes of sex and violence as that film, except it's filled with
actual heart. It is about kitsch elevated into noble gesture, about
reality dismantled into fiction and the opposite. Novice film buffs
discovering a sense of importance with Tarkovsky and Malick will find
little in this simple film to appreciate; but those who've done their
rounds and are looking for specific things may be strangely fulfilled