Blow Out (1981) A soundman accidentally records the evidence that proves a car “accident” was murder, and consequently finds himself in danger. John Travolta, Nancy Allen, and John Lithgow. Directed by Brian De Palma. 7:05 PM EST. IFC.
This has a lot in common with 1970s era paranoid political thrillers than 1980s movies. This is also back when De Palma was making great movies. Some try to spin this as Reagan-era critique, but seeing as the movie was released shortly after his inauguration in 1981 this is more properly seen as 1970′s political critique. In any case… a very under-appreciated film (and yes it’s not as good as Cat On A Hot Tin Roof on TCM later that day) from both De Palma and Travolta. Well worth a viewing if you like political intrigue, regular guy caught in extraordinary circumstances and De Palma’s Hitchcock obsession.
(ed. Posted a little earlier than planned, but I’m in class all night.)
Print
Digg
StumbleUpon
del.icio.us
Facebook
Yahoo! Buzz
Twitter
Google Bookmarks
Google Buzz
LinkedIn
MSN Reporter
MySpace
Orkut
Ping.fm
Reddit
RSS
Slashdot
Technorati
Tumblr
Webnews.de
Filmed in Philadelphia, with De Palma’s attempts to use iconic local backdrops serving as yet another of Brian’s many hattips to that “overrated” director Hitchcock. It was big news when De Palma brought his crew to town. I remember the little sign that was supposed to indicate Travolta’s crummy little film company remained in the second story window on Market Street for many, many years afterwards.
The climactic chase and final scene are pretty darn powerful.
I was pretty disappointed with this one. It starts out with some bizarre gratuitous nudity, and ends in typical bleak “the U.S. Gov’t is the true villain” 70s thriller mode. Like all of DePalma’s films, it’s a pointless and depressing Hitchcock ripoff. Its one saving grace is Travolta’s performance, which is by far the best of his career.
Jimmy, I agree that Travolta is really good in this.
The “the US Gov’t is the true villain” theme continues with us to this day; the only difference is that it can be found not only in the political thrillers, but in romcoms and kid movies too. Oh well.
The thing about those 70′s thrillers that I look back on now is how unbearably depressing and bleak their endings were. They all seemed to wind up like Winston Smith at the end of 1984.
Hey, not to be a smarty pants but you forgot to note that “Blow Out” is a re-telling of Antonioni’s “Blowup”. Both use the interesting plot device of ‘capturing’ evidence of murder, the Travolta version is audio tape and the other version is film.
It’s worth a look if only for the novelty of seeing Travolta before he got too weird. Antonioni’s version is worth seeing because it’s so very dated. It was made in Swinging London era 1966 with Carnaby Street style.
I was going to mention Antonioni’s movie. It was also spoofed in Mel Blanc’s, High Anxiety. The only movie I liked of De Palma’s was The Untouchables, where even in that he can’t help but rip off the baby cart on the stairs scene from Eisenstein’s Battleship Potemkin.
I recall the spoof in High Anxiety but as those things go I didn’t realize the reference until I saw Blowup. Then I remembered the scene with Ron Carey and the proverbial light bulb went off over the ol’ noggin.
“rip off”? Come on Matt. Let’s not hate so much we say foolish things. The Odessa steps is widely quoted as are other iconic scenes from classic silent-era films, art, literature, etc. That’s like saying the Coen Brothers ripped off Homer or Mel BROOKS (;-) ) ripped off Antonioni or James Whale or a million and one other quotes or homages or whatever.
Not rip-off, Matt. “Homage.”
“Lesser artists borrow, great artists steal,” said Igor Stravinsky.
To attempt to film virtually the same scene, especially an iconic landmark in film history, as it was first filmed is ripping it off. De Palma isn’t original enough for a true homage. Homages are done with originality like in Brooks’s spoofs of Hitchcock and Whale, or an original spoof/take like the Coen Brothers’ O Brother Where Art Thou, on The Odyssey. Or, the homage can be like what Tarantino does and takes the essence of the genres and filmmakers he admires and puts the elements together without aping actual scene for scene. Scorcese movies are always homages to great filmmakers he was influenced by, though most people don’t recognize it because it’s not blatant. Woody Allen can pay homage to Fellini without recreating a scene verbatim. There’s a difference between a rip off and an homage, but the former can always be excused as the latter when the artist is called out on it. The main difference is in the intent. If the whole feel and theme of the film is inspired by the artist(s) whom the filmmaker is influenced by, then it’s an homage. Copying a scene from another film that is irrelevant to the feel and theme of the rest of the new film, to me is just ripping it off because it’s more about the contemporary director’s ego and less about paying homage to the original.
Floyd, I’ve gotta side with Matt on this finer point of homage vs. rip off. Matt, you’re right…sorry, Floyd. I’ve never thought of what he’s saying in those terms but he’s just so right about it that now it seems obvious.
I can’t believe the word “homage” has appeared this many times on a blog that has my name attached to it! Sacre bleu!
It’s not irrelevant to the feel of the film. There are no jack-booted faceless remorseless Cossacks marching down the steps. The only real copy is the baby carriage and that was about 30 seconds of a much larger scene — iconic nonetheless. De Palma has Andy Garcia slide in and takeout the bad guy. The whole movie was stylized. A quote of a 30 second slice of film which everyone knows (if they know film anyway is not a rip-off. here you go Threedonians — you be the judge:
vs.
I guess as an artist I see the difference between rip off and homage as not being as subtle as the layman.
Good catch,CW….De Palma always was a copy cat hack,aside from “Carrie”,which really was a great movie
I hated this movie. Aside from the political paranoia, the ending is just perverse, imho.
Did you drag this one out in honor of Ted Kennedy? I didn’t go see it because it was so obviously an attempt to assemble a conspiracy theory to excuse Ted for killing his secret date. I just have no patience for lying conspiracy theories, no matter how supposedly brilliant; I didn’t go see “JFK” either. “The Parallax View” was my first and last experience of this subgenre.
I enjoy films for what they are… Not what they purport to be.
Off the topic,Floyd,but “Chemical” Ali was hanged in Baghdad yesterday…go to Kurdistan and mention the name Bush!
I wouldn’t say this film tries to excuse Ted Kennedy– rather, it looks with deep sadness at the whole seedy affair. Jack is pressured early on by the powers that be to forget what he saw/heard, because of the shame it will bring to the politician’s family, but he doesn’t feel right about that.
Regarding the ending, De Palma has said he was inspired to make this film when he realized that footage from one of his favorite films, LAWRENCE OF ARABIA, was being used as stock footage in some circumstances. He was amazed that something David Lean had worked so hard on was now being pillaged for this and that. Thus, at the end, Jack devolves back to hack work, taking his own blood-and-tears “masterpiece” and using the scream for COED FRENZY.
Another work that inspired BLOW OUT was THE CONVERSATION.
Welcome to Threedonia Geoff!
Pernell Roberts, RIP:
http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20100126/BREAKING/100129793?Title=Pernell-Roberts-of-TV-s-Bonanza-dies-
R.I.P. I particularly remember an episode of Bonanza, while Roberts was still doing it, where he was supposed to be temporarily paralyzed from the waist down. There was a scene where he had to struggle out of his chair, and he had trouble pulling himself up, and my brothers and I sat there asking, “How come he’s having trouble with his arms? It’s his legs that are paralyzed.”
Some time later I read an article in a magazine where they happened to describe the shooting of that scene. It was satisfying to read that Roberts himself had complained to the director–”My legs are paralyzed! There’s nothing wrong with my arms!” But the director had told him just to do it that way. No wonder he quit.