Drive and the Art of Pop Noir

  

Well first lets talk about the fact that I have never heard of Nicolas Winding Refn before in my life. The whole time I was watching Drive I was trying to figure out from the way in which it was shot, whose signature directing style this was but I could never pinpoint any one director. When I Googled the movie I felt sure someone familiar would pop up but this is the first I’ve ever heard of the Danish director. I look forward to seeing what else he can do because if “Drive” is any hint of what’s to come, he’s destined for big things. 

Shot in L.A. in a style owing much to film noir style “Drive” announced itself with a dark and emotional type of cool. It's particular brand of sexiness, and graphic violence along with moments of intense vulnerability never loses continuity. It is at the focal point of this film which is framed with great regard and homage by driving and cars. It is played expertly by everyone, not to say the least by it’s star Ryan Gosling who is just mesmerizing as a nameless character known only as “The Kid”, in how much he can get across the screen by appearing to do so little. The thing I was struck by immediately was the way his eyes can so from an unquestionably dead and defensive coldness to an exposed rawness that evokes both fear and protectiveness on equally convincing levels. The juxtaposition of romantic love and violence in one unforgettable elevator scene was produced at an operatic level. In every shot, in just about every frame of the film, there was a detail that contributed to the building of the story. Nothing was wasted.

The storytelling use of light alone in this movie was done to near perfection. There is a clearly intended although not heavy-handed use of lighting on Gosling in particular from windows and lamps. It is the kind of light that sets up romantic and introspective notions of the "Hero" when in fact there is much about the character still in question well after the story’s end not to say the least of which is his name. It is film with moments of deceptively deep silence with understated and contemplative segues which are pushed and deepened with well composed musical scoring, spare, economical dialogue and explosive but strategic bursts of unsettling violence and rage. 

Albert Brooks who has always been a favorite actor of mine gave an incredible performance as my favorite kind of villain: the kind you almost understand cannot go against his nature. He prides himself on speaking in realistic terms and you might almost believe him except that his bottom-line: power, is immovable. There is nothing he will not do in its name.  I feel that Brooks’ dramatic talent has been passed over so many times by the Academy perhaps because he got his start as a comic actor but for me, it has always been his own unique dramatic information of his characters that makes his comedic performances unforgettable. He has been and is an actor of high caliber.  Veteran actors, Ron Perlman and Bryan Cranston were equally amazing in holding this story to all its promise of suspense, violence betrayal and humanity. I’ve never been a fan of Carey Mulligan but she was fine as the love interest to the driver and mother to the son of her jailed husband also played exceptionally well by Oscar Issac.

The score of the movie was yet another character. The hypnotic, synth based tracks by Kavinsky & Lovefoxxx and College as well as the wonderfully paced score by Cliff Martinez places your imagination somewhere in the mid to late 80s between “Pretty in Pink” and “The Breakfast Club” but this is no John Hughes flick. Drive never makes any overtly clear dedication to nostalgia. In fact there a bit of a perverse irony in watching a movie like this to the sentimental and idyllic sounds of 80’s inspired pop music which I feel may have been intentional. While I feel that Drive is deeply sentimental, it is also unflinchingly dark, drawing you ever closer to some decidedly disturbing element that you never quite understand before setting you adrift again.

I Watched The Watchmen

Just saw “The Watchmen” which I think was great by the way and noticed in a few of the preceding film previews the following categories: Gangster Violence and Pervasive Language. I couldn't imagine for the life of me what these categories meant. What happened to just plain old Violence or Swearing? I mean are there people who are not offended by all violence in particular and need to know exactly what kind of violence they will be viewing? MPAA is such a fucking crock of shit organization. I don’t even know where to begin. They really bug me. Maybe these categories have been around for a while and I just haven’t noticed them. If that’s the case then I apologize for my lateness it expressing how ridiculous I think it is.

As for the Watchmen, I will try to be simple in my review. I never did finish the graphic novel but I did read enough of it to see that that the movie followed it almost to the letter and I am really proud of that. I have to admit that while reading it I was hyper aware of the total lack of any Watchmen of color but what can you expect from characters who outwardly admit to having virtually Nazi like mentalities? I find that the movie dodged these issues way more overtly than the novel did. The novel, I am told, included a larger narrative of one of the only characters of color in the story, the shrink who sees Rorschach as a patient. But naturally that story was completely omitted from the movie. That pisses me off but rather than go on a tangent I will stick to what I really loved about the movie. Mostly that I felt it did not compromise (until the end of course) the novel’s sense of ironic darkness and pervasive global doom for easy, fluffy resolutions. Again I did not finish the novel and understand as an avid reader that a book, graphic novel or more traditional literature has a life of it’s own which cannot be replicated cinematically at least not often.

What you get from books, the ability to imagine, re-imagine and live within a story is almost always compromised when adapted for the screen. The part of your brain used to simulate actions, feeling, emotions and intellectual and emotional struggle is given over to what a director and cinematographer install for the viewer. The studio replaces your imagination with their own vision, which is fine, as long you still have your own imagination in tact. That takes a daily exercising of your own imagination though. I fear new generations may not be encouraged to do this very often if at all. But more on that later.

Let talk about Dr. Manhattan’s penis. No really, I’m gonna go there and say that I am really proud at how well they pulled that off. I mean I watched the movie in my favorite theater in Chelsea, Manhattan’s great gay Mecca and not one oooh or awe whenever the blue phallus was exposed. Dr. Manhattan was that well rounded, that classy, and with a character so grounded in intellect and logic that he drew virtually no attention to his dick when he was naked which was about 80% of the movie. Was that Billy Cruddup's actual penis? One may never know. Maybe it's entirely CGI. Technology has come so far. No pun intended. Okay lemme get off the dick.

The opening credits alone were amazing, disturbing and beautiful. The fact that they opened with Bob Dylan’s “The Times They Are a Changing” didn’t hurt at all. I was delighted to hear, Simon & Garfunkel, Jimi Hendrix and Leonard Cohen as well although the use of “Hallelujah” during the obligatory sex scene was the least subtle segue of all the musical score use throughout the movie. Listening to “Unforgettable” sung by Nat King Cole while watching “The Comedian” get his ass handed to him was in a word, unforgettable. I will save the rest for those who wish to see the movie themselves. The moral and political discussions were satisfyingly handled although I don’t wish to discuss at length here what I feel might have been glossed over, simplified or omitted entirely.

It is unfortunate that we have come to accept the usual pattern in movies over the years that require exceptional scripts to wrap themselves up in the last thirty or so minutes like some 80’s episode of a “Murder She Wrote” mystery and “The Watchmen” is no exception to that. But I think there is more to “The Watchmen” to see than can be gathered in one viewing. And I will say this, and I haven’t it about a movie in a long time: I can’t wait to watch it again and again. The writing, the cinematography and the performance were compelling and held me really tightly. It was poetically brutal. That’s hard to pull off.