PDA

View Full Version : Word In Stone: Review of Thelma and Louise


tstone
04-26-2008, 10:33 AM
The ouvre of Ridley Scott is a story in ecclecticism. He likes to dabble in a whole range of stuff. Science fiction, fantasy, war, mysteries, etc, he seems to have done it all, with varying degrees of success. But no matter the merit of the story he tells, he always does it with style and skill, especially in the visual department. And with far more heart and soul then your empty technocrats like Brett Ratner and Peter Hyams.

Thelma and Louise is the story of two women in modest circumstances. They decide to get out and hit the road, to get away from it for a bit. Thelma (Geena Davis) is a goofy, ditzy, passive housewife married to a lout of a husband. Louise (Susan Sarandon) is a single woman working as a waitress who seems to have a head on her shoulders, but is quite scarred by some sort of trauma which happened sometime in her past. Well, the two head out, Thelma deciding to just ditch her houseloute instead of asking him permission. They stop at a roadside bar and Thelma begins to party a bit, and picks the wrong guy to party with. He gets way too aggressive and looks like he intends to rape Thelma. Louise intervenes before completion of the deed. The man gets quite rude and belligerent. Louise shoots him. Thus begins a series of tragedies which takes the film to it's fateful conclusion.

There are two ways I came up to view this story. Thelma, at one point in the last third of the film, reveals the world looks different to her, after everything they've been through and during their circumstances on the lam. After their lives of limitation and expectation, they've thrown off the shackles of domesticity and civilization. And seemingly, have achieved a sort of enlightenment as they race for Mexico with the hopes of completely reinventing themselves. It seems that they have at least partially trancended their circumstances. But perhaps in such a way, that they expended too much fuel in achieving their metaphysical escape velocity, fall short of the mark, and end up plummeting right back to consensual reality.

The other view I though is that they are playing their roles all along, as are their tormentors and pursuers. In their domestic lives beforehand, and their attempts at rebellion upon the after, they are acting and reacting specifically against things put against them, rather than making a clean break. So are all the male characters, who, unfortunately, with the exceptions of Harvey Keitel's police officer and Brad Pitt's charming robber, are pitifuly thinly written. Especially that truck driver, who is the biggest grunting drooler of a sexist neanderthal I've ever seen. And that's saying something. I've been to the HLBB.



Again, beautifully shot, well acted, but too thinly written to be truly satisfying. It's still pretty good for what it is, and should engender discussion.

Bill_the_Pony
04-26-2008, 04:30 PM
Before going in, I somewhat expected an amped up version of Faster, Pussycat! Kill! KILL!, but got this instead. Even so, I was of course taken by the Ridley-izing of the movie, the sight and sound, how everything was turned up to 11. Still one of my favorite soundtrack/scores, but the generic version of America that is depicted somewhat ruffles me. They're appaerently driving from around Arkansas and their flight takes them through Oklahoma, then New Mexico in their escape to Mexico, in order to avoid Texas.

Well, a HUGE portion of the movie was shot up in California's Central Valley, and the occasional plam tree in the background (or window reflection) betrays that (also having travelled through that rural wasteland countless times, I just KNOW) and the New Mexico scenes are clearly filmed in Utah, near Moab....in Arches National Park, and Canyonlands, to be more specific... both locations being nowhere near their journey, and resembling nothing like what they would be actually travelling through. I know, I'm nitpicking, and besides, driving through the actual locations would be as exciting as watching paint dry. SO, quibbling aside, I can suspend disbelief to an extent, in Ridley's mythicizing of America and the roles we are expected to settle into.

Louise's comment, though, says it all:


"You get what you settle for".

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/sl-517.jpg


I still love the movie, though. But yeah, it paints really bleak images of the American way of life. (anyone want to go to Mexico with me?)

tstone
04-27-2008, 01:42 AM
You get what you settle for was one of the poignant points of the film. If you have a fucked up life, it's because you allow it.

That was some deep truth there.