Zabrieskie Point
Michelangelo
Antonioni is a familiar director with a number of entries on the List. To begin
with I did not comprehend his movies and found them obscure and bleak, but
gradually I got to appreciate them for the underlying message and the
artfulness with which it was communicated. The peak was the British movie “Blowup”
where both the aesthetics and the point to the movie were distilled to a high
intensity.
After this
achievement Antonioni set out to repeat his success in Hollywood… and tanked.
“Zabrieskie
Point”, his only American movie”, was rejected by both audience and critics and
failed to earn back even a fraction of its $7 million expenses.
I watched “Zabrieskie
Point” with some apprehension, knowing this was a movie that failed, and I can
see why it failed. “Zabrieskie Point” breaks with a number of tropes, stylistically
it is confusing and an unprepared audience would be left very confused. This
was touted as a movie for the young generation, but taking your date to the cinema,
expecting a popcorn flick, you would have been left very disappointed.
Fortunately,
I have already watched a few of Antonioni’s movies.
We follow
two characters, Mark (Mark Frechette) and Daria (Daria Halprin). Mark is (maybe)
in university campus among, but not really taking part in, the protests going
on there. He does not seem to care about their political agenda, but he likes
the people well enough. He is there, with a gun, on the day a policeman is shot
to death, though it was not Mark that shot him. The police and the media however
are quick to pin him on the murder and so he flees, first on a bus and then he
steals a plane and flies into the desert.
Daria is
loosely attached to a real estate developing company as a part time secretary.
Her boss seems to want to get into her pants, but when we meet her, she is
driving through the desert in an old car looking for… something while driving
in the general direction of Phoenix and her boss’ mansion.
Mark and
Daria meet in the desert, have hot sex, paint the plane in funny colors and
then part ways. Mark is taking the plane back to the airport to hand it back
and is shot by trigger happy policemen while Daria, shocked to hear of Mark’s
death in the radio decide to abandon the mansion and dream of blowing up the
place.
The whole
thing lasts about 2 hours.
This is not
a movie that explains anything. We do not know much about the characters. We do
not know why Mark decides to take a plane or why Daria is cruising around in
the desert and those are just the highlights of things we do not know. The clue
here is found in the older Antonioni movies. The reason things are not explained
is that there is no explanation. Mark does not need a reason to fly into the
desert, he just does it. Daria has no specific target. They live, they are,
there is no grand plan and objective. They are however fenced in by society,
consumerism, politics, authorities. All of these need reasons, plans,
objectives, guilt and punishment, and there is no room to simply be. What Mark
and Daria are doing is simply taking a vacation from all this before it catches
up with them. A vacation filled with the surrealism that a trip away from
reality entails (sex among hundreds of other young people in the desert,
returning from this without a spec of dust in the hair).
This should
hit home in the counterculture movement and appeal to the sense of revolution
in 1970, but instead it missed the mark. Like Eisenstein before him Antonioni
overestimated the capacity of the audience to see the points in his art and
instead he bored them to death.
I do get
this movie (I think) and it is a beautiful movie, but I also agree, it is
really, really boring.
Zabriskie
Point looks like an interesting site. As a geologist I admit I was getting
quite distracted by the gypsum formations there. Definitely a place I should
visit.
It is a flawed film but I did enjoy it not just for the visual aspects of it but also its soundtrack. I wasn't bored by it at all though I can understand why people wouldn't like it. I think I do agree with you on Antonioni on overestimating the audience when it came to the film and why it bombed both critically and commercially.
ReplyDeleteTo call it flawed is, I think, a bit of an understatement. Antonioni went on his own trip, apparently trusting his own judgement and here it misfired. It is beautiful though and the cinematography is actually enough to watch this movie.
DeleteI hate virtually everything about this film. My review of it was...non-standard.
ReplyDeleteHa ha, yes, I read your review just before hitting the sack last night and it did make me laugh. It reminded me of the review I did for Ad Astra last year. It may not look that way, but I do actually agree with most of your points. Certainly, that Antonioni did not understand the American counterculture he was supposed to make a movie about.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete