Fear and Loathing in La Mancha?
Written by redfox during a terrible thunder in Tallinn on May 24th and on a more calm afternoon of May 30th.
I hesitated before starting to write this story, because this movie has so many interesting aspects it is hard to concentrate on just one or a few of them. And even if I choose, like, the background story, or the timeline, I´d end up quoting half the script and retelling you practically every moment - which is not a good thing for the ones that have not seen this. (may I remind you that Johnny has often been quoted not to let his children see F&L before they are 21...if even then...). I personally watched this for the first time at the age of 17, thats when it came out, and I found it very amusing, hardly noticing anything as something to go by in my own life. so you are O.K. to watch this if you are at least 15.
First of all, I want to make a couple of things clear.
One: despite being a drug hater in real life and in most cases strongly against drug use in movies, I can´t help but to say I enjoy this movie, probably the most of any Johnny Depp movies for its visual brilliance, unforgettable acting and and for the Momentum lived by the characters - the whole picture of That Time, That Place, Those People...ether in the back trunk...
Two: For obvious reasons I have nothing to compare the vivid and expressive visual interpretation of the effects and side effects of drug (ab)use in the movie. So I hope readers more aqcuainted with the matter excuse my ignorance and incompetence in some aspects.... Nevertheless, I want to emphasize this movie is not, based on my personal instinct and direct affirmation of the filmmakers mentioned on several websites, meant as drug propaganda, and neither was Hunter S. Thompson´s book. I see this movie more as such a perfect visualisation of the drug experience that even if there is little accuracy (due to the material provided by HST-s book being extremely personal and subjective), I prefer that to actually experiencing drugs myself. Terrys fairytale and surrealism-affected depiction is full of crooked and humain humor, criticism as "gonzoist" as Hunter ever was. This movie, when watched without preassumptions, is all you need to get an EXPERIENCE.
So, back to the point of this review. What the f*** is the point then?
As lightning strikes behind my window, all the possible storylines are one big blur in my mind. I count "Eeny, meeny, miny mo..." and end up with "Character profiles".
Well, ok, lets do character profiles for now. Raoul Duke and Dr. Gonzo ( who, may I remind you, is not a doctor, but Duke´s attourney). Well he is a doctor too if you ...khmmm....if you carry in mind him constantly reminding Duke to carry on with the...eee....yes. Duke and Gonzo...two characters....why do I see 4 behind that cloud? Who the heck are the other two? Waving to me though the arrows of lightning ...uuh, scary. what are these goddamn animals?
Get on with your stuff, dont pay attention. Pretend it is not happening, you´ll be fine. No I cant go forward ! who are they? what are they doing in my review? And as my fingers drum on the keyboard, I recognize the chracters trying to pull my attention away from Duke and Gonzo. Why it is...Don Quijote, and... Sancho...Sancho Pancha. What are the characters from Terry´s next project doing here? (another strike of lightning)
When I think about it, they seem to be in exactly the right place - indeed, doesn´t that mescaline-soaked collective of two remind you of the famous couple from world literature? They are also a journey, the cause of which is a mystery to everyone else, and even more so, occasionally, to Duke and Gonzo themselves. They are in the search of " everything true and riht, the american dream, the main nerve", just as Don Quijote was in search of ideals long vanished from his reality. They get into adventures driven by a sort of madness, a dreamlike state, an above-time-and-place experience. They are moving in a surreal time and place - not in the sence of their adventures and experiences being false or unbelievable, but rather being above all other reality for the characters. Their experience is triggered by real events, like Quijotes fight with giants is triggered by him seeing the windmills - you can draw a definate parallel with the reptile experience. (speaking of reptiles, that rain cloud looks just like ....a T-rex.) Of course, because of their dream- like state, the course of events is not always logical, it is expanded, distorted and fragmented. sweet ignorance. ignoring the clock. the calendar. the finish line. everything.mostly the time that keeps running normally for other(journalist)s, but Dr and Duke escape into their personal time-space. Just like Don Quijote ignores the time has moved on and knight ethics is history....everything true and right....But though their vision, both Don and Duke eternalize the Here and Now. We can live the moment as they wanted it to be and experience what they experienced. The paradox is, if we do not experience something, it doesnt exist for us. So what if the experience is crazy, insane, absurd, surreal - and yet, since we DO experience it, does it really exist? Well, according to this logic it has to - and this is a motif often seen in Terry Gilliams movies. The two stories I am comparing are also sort of a time leap (would that explain why I keep seeing flashes of Scott Bacula from Quantum Leap, Time Bandits, Star Gate and The Time Machine, every time I see the beginning of F&L with the car rushing though the desert , like it appeared from nowhere? ). Time travel is one of Terry´s favourite subject and this one´s a picture of an era.... a very vivid one, but sort of unreal. (The Matrix is nothing on the side of this....there are no clocks....no clocks in casinos.....)
Reality cuts in at some point, ( would you please close the window, rain is not a good thing for a radio to be poored over with) the Fear....Don Quijote gives in to people suggesting he is not the noble knight in search of his Dulcinea. Instead of being armed with armour and a sword though, Duke is armed with "two bags of grass, .....a pint of raw ether etc". but that´s just a tiny detail. It is as good as a sword, when you are in Las Vegas. So, you see, there are similarities. Well, of course Raoul Duke is also based on Hunter S. Thompsons own experience, too. Even his own nickname - the gonzo knight - suggests a connection with the famous Kurva Kuju Rüütel (The Sad Knight, Don Quijote´s synonym in estonian). And that the famous car used in the movie, the first one we see the gonzo knights drive, is borrowed from Hunter himself....the knights own horse(power).
So whether Terry really did bring the parallel of Don Quijote into the characters of this film? If so then why? and did his actual Don Quijote project fail for maybe the exact same reason - he had actually shaped his vision of it in Fear and Loathing, channeled it there sort of speak? I am not entirely sure....still, F&L makes a lot more sense if you do use the parallel of Don Quijote. What we see in the film is only a fragmented stew of emotions, events and situations. There had to be something to bind those fragments. ( The sky is breaking apart, the sky is breaking apart! This is the point where power went off and I was working on very low battery of the workplace laptop). Terry´s film is not just based on the book, but the storyline he put down himself - on paper, but more in his mind. And we know he is fond of history, fairy tale and absurdity, human nature, humor, visualisation of mind conditions rather than the plain reality.....
This wasn´t exactly the plain "Character profiles", was it? Sorry ´bout that, the thunder distracted me alot. Imagine if I had watched the movie during this thunder, the script alone got my poor imagination flying too far. There is just too much in it to be told in just a short article. and too much that you just have to see for yourself. Thats it, or you´ll get an overdose of F&L....
By Redfox.
Summary
To this day, Redfox claims not to be the user of drugs or alcohol.