Post by StevePulaski on Jan 15, 2012 0:22:21 GMT -5
They ride, therefore they live.
Rating: ★★½
"Captain America" (Fonda) and Billy (Hopper) are two freewheeling hippies, cruising the long, endless roads of America in hopes to make it to the New Orleans Mardi Gras party. The plot is so simple, yet so efficient. Many films with simple plots go far. Take for example my favorite film of all time, Clerks. It's a character driven film that is made possible because of the personalities of the people we are acquainted with. So this should've been an instant sign that this film was full of life and unexpected instances.
So where does Easy Rider go wrong? It's not a horrible film, but it has some serious flaws that need to be addressed. Not growing up in the fifties, sixties, or seventies, I think the relatable qualities have warn threadbare in modern times. My generation isn't all about peace, love, happiness, and relaxation, man. That is why I believe I didn't fully enjoy Easy Rider like I should've. I can see how this defined some people's lives, and perhaps gave society a better understanding on the hippie culture. Ultimately, over fourty years later, the film just doesn't hold up.
To begin with, the plot is very vacant. It's slim, slender, inconsistent, and hokey. If had not been for the music, I might have lost complete interest in the events unfolding on screen. The first couple of sequences where Captain America and Billy are riding on their choppers throughout the countryside with famed rock songs on in the background are unique and inventive. The style becomes monotonous when that becomes the central focus. Same thing goes with the lack of dialog. The film is vacant in the sense where there are very few scenes that humanize these characters. Most of the time, they are silent and empty, waiting to be expanded.
Don't you hate when films do that? They introduce characters that seem like they can achieve greatness, but they choose to keep them flat and monotone? Easy Rider almost seems deliberately trying to keep these characters subtle and remote of any personalities.
Still, the performances, when showcased, are fantastic. Peter Fonda and Dennis Hopper, who served as director and co-writer, are very well used and pack in unexpectedly impressive acting skills. Even Jack Nicholson is pitch-perfect, never striking a wrong note, as soon as he appears on the screen. Not to mention, the cinematography is enriching and glides the film along nicely.
So to appreciate Easy Rider now, as part of a generation, you need to look at the things that previously went unnoticed or unnoted. The content is very minimal, like established before, the storyline is very slim and barely sustainable, and the character development is almost non-existent.
Part of me believes the vague character development was on purpose. Maybe to give teenage rebels of the time a person they can perfectly put themselves into without complications. A caricature that can be made into a full character after you put yourself in the shoes of him. I wouldn't doubt that was one of the goals. From the different editing style in the beginning to the overall non-linear layout of the film, it seems Easy Rider dared to be different from the beginning.
Alas, it doesn't work too well. It's deeper than other motorcycle movies I've seen of the same time period, but in 2012, it speaks to a generation that doesn't have ears to hear it anymore. My review is a compromise, leaning towards the positive side. I'm giving it two and a half stars. Maybe if I was a child of the fifties and attended Easy Rider on opening weekend I would've given it more.
Starring: Peter Fonda, Dennis Hopper, and Jack Nicholson. Directed by: Dennis Hopper.