Change Your Image
Dave-506
Reviews
Taxi Driver (1976)
Travis Bickle- Psychopath or Vigilante?
A Psychological Perspective of Taxi Driver (1976)
With Scorcese directing, with such titles as Mean Streets (1973) and Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore (1974); it was not entirely unusual for the character to be any less than perfect than expected by the conscientious likes of Hollywood. Scripted by Paul Schrader, Taxi Driver gave Robert De Niro a chance to show the world his consummate acting abilities as Travis Bickle, a Vietnam veteran turned psychotic vigilante. The film generated controversy on its release for the topic of extreme violence centering on the character Iris (Jodie Foster), who happened to be a twelve-year-old prostitute was needless to say a topic found disturbing to those used to typical Hollywood principles. Scorsese knew he had only a small but dedicated following, so he was prepared to take certain risks making his films only on a relatively small budget. The rebellious pairing of Schrader and Scorsese allowed a film and character to be extraordinarily less rounded than the Hollywood counterpart made the same year, Avildsen's essentially bigoted and racist, but paradoxically enjoyable Rocky. Hollywood isn't interested in the narrative; it's more fascinated with the concept of hero. However, Travis is humiliated about his job and therefore himself and so therefore possesses less heroic qualities than the character played by Stallone. Travis has an imaginary and delusional occupation in where he works' for the government: in his depressed monologue he reads a letter to his parents: `I would tell you my address but the secretive nature of my work forbids it.' This particular sequence where we hear Travis telling a white lie is the very point in the film where he knew he had to make a `stand against the scum' on the streets. His parents would think he was someone of importance in society rather than the continuing image of a son that perpetuates in a sub culture which society despises. But we can actually see the true Travis Bickle driving around the hostile environment through the attributed hallucinatory misc-en-scene. We witness this filmic confliction as we see him and his cab in shallow focus (therefore in great detail) and the rest of society is simply blurred in a colourful but disorientating array. The audience sees red, green and amber lights emerge and quickly disappear though they were splashes of a passing of Travis's (hazy) memory. Every passenger is the same to him the only difference to his routine is the changing of traffic lights. It is suggested that he is pointing the blame of society's ills on what Travis calls the `Whores, Fairies, Junkies and Queens' of the New York street culture he has to dutifully serve. Travis later adds that, `Someday, I hope that they'll all be washed away. Perhaps he feels like Noah in Genesis here because sinners, miscreants and people of diseased reputations have become too much for him to tolerate and he feels that it would be God's justice that they should all be swept away by a great flood? Travis later again mentions at home in his diary monologue, `I am God's only man' so therefore he is His servant. An important key in understanding his anxieties is within the conversation with Wizard (John Boyle) when he wisely said: `The job becomes the man / you become the job.' Therefore Travis would feel inadvertently raped at regular intervals when he had to clean the blood and come off the back. The next scene we see a purchase of an arsenal of weaponry, shaking off the old Travis (Noah) and suddenly acquires a deadly vendetta against all those that sicken him. So that the world was free of less evil and it would be a safer place for people like Iris, but personally it is likely he had scarred his mind after the terrible conflict in Vietnam. In the reason why he wanted a job as a taxi driver, Travis reluctantly says to his future boss: `I can't sleep nights'; insomnia and regular nightmares are the very key to an unhealthy mind. So Travis decides not to sleep but his job inadvertently causes his hatred of society, and becomes sicker still as the days pass by until he vents his rage and crumbles within in the process.
À bout de souffle (1960)
Godard's
The French directors at this time do not due complete dependence on appearance primal but the narrative has more meaning, psychologically speaking. An ending of a French New Wave film is not typical Hollywood: the closing of the picture would be completely unexpected like Michel's tongue in cheek' demise. Therefore in simple terms: Hollywood is a nursery tale for adults, a traditional narrative structure is essential, as is the notion of hero and villain. Whereas French New Wave investigates humanity and the circumstances of life, it is high art, quite different to the popular culture of America of the time. Godard uses real time as we see Michel walking calmly down a flight of stairs leading to an underpass. The audience watch him blend in with the environment and the camera pans right to patiently wait upon the Arc d'Triomphe for roughly four or five seconds. Before the audience starts wondering about Michel's whereabouts, the camera pans right again to complete about ninety degrees to witness Michels's miraculous arrival on the other side of the road. This amazing piece of camerawork is genuinely astonishing because it demonstrated his perfect choreographic skills down to the split second. Interestingly Truffaut while directing 400 Blows (a reflection on his earlier years) showed a personal touch, which is sad and endearing. A scene at the climax of the film shows him reaching the sea and as he helplessly turns to look at camera, and as the camera closes in on his distraught face we realise he has no where to go, his environment becoming his eternal trap...
L'âge d'or (1930)
Why would a father kill his son to prevent awkwardness?
A representation of the effect on individuality within the paralysed surreal society of Bunuel's L'age D'or. (1930)
It was Bunuel and Dali's utter disdain of the Church that actually led the film to be banned for 49 years (released again in 1979). The absurd sacrament that proclaimed that, no matter how much in love a couple are, sex before marriage must always be forbidden. A small riot broke out on its initial release in 1930, due to the surreal scenes such as the anti-Catholic messages that a slide show projected. The Vatican is viewed from an aerial shot with the less than subtle message: `The ancient city of Rome / Mistress to Pagan Times.' The representation alone of Jesus as a murderous impostor in the last 25 minutes would have provoked extreme rage. The upper class culture was depicted as a race of people too sexually inhibited and frightened by their peers to explore Bunuel's revolutionary ideas: that in order to have your own mind you have to free yourself of the church and it's tightening grip. Bunuel's religious pessimism was caused by a strict regime of daily worship and a rigorous religious education in school. It forced him to have a unique perspective on religion where he probably conjured negative surrealist ideas and thoughts from his surreal' days at school and the product is this very cinematic and authentic masterpiece. It is through this film where he becomes the teacher of his own beliefs, instead of being the educated, a medium that no longer required the audience to be told what to believe but to make up their own minds on their own accord as opposed to Catholicism. The Man and The Woman (Gaston Modot and Lya Lys as they are known) symbolises Bunuel's radical sacrilegious' thinking and are his model couple. Contrasting the original Man and Woman, (Adam and Eve) to his carefully chosen archetypes, we have a greater knowledge about the director's surrealist tendencies and his interest in not the images but ideas they signify. When released it appeared to lack morals and the sexual innuendo and nature of the film was a topic of heated debate in 1930. We see the couple for the first time as they attempt to make love rolling around in the mud. This spontaneity was caused by the rare opportunity of having sex while the crowd (representing society) had its back turned. The public were too fascinated with a humorous commemoration of four holy men who humorously perished in the most meaningless fashion. The cultural variation of the crowd is significant however when compared to religion because their formation on screen represents the hierarchy in life. At the foreground we see the upper-classes with their bow ties, top hats and jewellery, the middle class are like the previous but without the aesthetics, and the working class are in the rather unsatisfactory background as in reality. The poor and unimportant' have a less than adequate view from to what they've come to witness, and the rich take their perspective for granted. Perhaps a representation of the Church prefers an alliance with the rich (rather than the lower classes) by the inclusion of the priests at the forefront? The crowd is ignorant to the couple but is alerted by a few people at the back, the working class children (too small and insignificant deemed fit to share in the glory' of this religious event). Young faces brighten up but sensing the displeasure from the upper classes and the pity of their own parents, the image changes from a look of glee to that of the irate bourgeois culture that Bunuel and Dali despise so much. Through the direction and the cinematography, old age and the upper classes are represented in The Man's dream as corrupted and poisoned, because they are simply jealous that the lovers had the sheer freedom to act in such a way (a group of archetypal actors and actresses theatrically shake their fists towards the couple). They are summarily separated and The Man is taken away by the police. This scene is extremely amusing because Bunuel and Dali (both co writers) are implying that society would imprison The Man for the most innocent of crimes: to be free and in love. The couple have to surpass the very obstacles that Bunuel faced in making the film: the church, society and even his or their own psychological problems. In a dream the goal is almost always impossible to reach due to the cruel pitfalls of society and thus life. There is one scene where a surreal sequence (a dream) shows how The Man unconsciously deals with the dawning realisation that society and religion are completely against him. It is his attempt to make love and express his general freedom where he feels unfairly paralysed from doing so. In the same moment we view the archetypal father figure shooting his son over a small offence in the garden. The camera is positioned to follow the father on his impending arrival towards home, he is walking on the dirt as the typical doting son senses his arrival and greets him. The father is smartly dressed wearing black with a rifle slung over his shoulder. The son is archetypal also in the scruffiness of his hair and clothes and his brazen and bold countenance. In this one scene, we establish that the boy represents how The Man feels about himself, he considers himself to be free, confident and blissfully content, it is his mind that perceives these images. The father figure however represents society that although seemingly friendly and assuring at first will severely punish the boy if he commits a sin. We have no idea that the rifle the father is carrying has significance, but it is an image of potential danger. The boy seeks comfort from his parent and on his father's knee he is hugged and kissed as the two are composed entirely central to shot. The Man's guilty conscience conjures a representation of natural harmony not between only father and son but equally between society and The Man. Society is metaphorically welcoming for The Man because it can offer nurture in times of angst. To have the desire to make love is distinctly personal, not sinful but natural in every respect. He feels trapped because in order to have sex with the one he loves, he must oppose the dominant ideologies in his life, his parents, the upper class society he belongs to and ultimately religion. The boy is conscious of the rifle (accusatory ammunition) but never once suspects it will be used on him because having a young perspective on life, he naturally feels slightly naïve but confident enough to challenge society's out dated values. We then see the father reciting something of importance to his son'; society is saying to The Man if you must behave in a particular way, get married otherwise you will face damnation in this life and the next! He probably feels like a child because a symbolic parent is teaching him what he already knows but has actually chosen from his own free will to ignore what has been advised by his guilty conscience (that originates from religion). The boy (embodying The Man's feelings towards this patronisation) laughs at him, and hits an object from his father's hand to the floor. He runs off smiles, waves to camera and seeks refuge in the long grass in the garden. His father stares at the cherished item (the object of religious teaching - The Man's and the father's morals and values). He is angered to such an extent he instantly shoots the rifle not just once but twice into the poor boy's body.