Dennis Hopper réalisateur (et acteur)
*
*
*
Le pour ...et le contre
This used to be a helluva good country. I can't understand what's gone wrong with it.
Author: Andy (film-critic) from Bookseller of the Blue Ridge
25 September 2004
I was utterly surprised by this film. I was expecting nothing more than some short scenes of our now-infamous actors smoking marijuana followed by trippy Willy Wonka scenes . Oddly, this did occur, but this film was much more than that. This film should be shown in every American History class in the United States. It not only showed the beauty of the country of which we reside, but it also spoke about the people that reside in it. You know the old saying, 'Guns don't kill people, people kill people', well after watching this film, it is a very true statement. We are afraid of what is different.
We are a culture that is afraid of change, yet seek it so badly. We are a society of hypocrites, androids, and ignorants. We thrive on the fact that we are the best country in the world, yet somebody shows any disassociation of routine, we are the first to question and get angry. I would dare say that we have moved so far from the 60s that I cannot see why our parents do not cry everyday. Their generations was a free-spirited, mind challenging culture that explored all possibilities no matter the cost. The experience was all they needed as a reward. Now, we are more concerned about money and the family-plan that we sometimes place ourselves on the backburner to life.
Wake, eat, and pay the bills. What a sad daily structure that we have. When was the last time you considered the possibility of just jumping on your bike and riding until you hit water? Probably not for a long time … why? It is called 'bills' and 'responsibilities'. These are the choices that we chose to make, and for anyone to say that they cannot do it, I would have to challenge. You CAN do anything, it is whether you chose to do it is another question. I wonder what it will be like in another 30 years. Where will we be, and will the idea of individualism be lost? I can't wait to see …
Outside of the deeply rooted themes of this film, I felt that Hopper (who also directed) knew exactly what he was doing behind the camera. He kept the talking short, the music loud and symbolic, and allowed the background to do the explaining. I loved the fact that we really knew nothing about Fonda or Hopper's characters. It allowed us to relate to them. You could easily add your story into their characters and have the life that you lead and wish to escape. Hopper was able to transform this film from a drug movie to a film about humanity. Fonda, who also helped write the film with Hopper, did a superb job of adding Nicholson's character into the mix.
Nicholson represented us, the American public and our love of liquor, football, and lies. I viewed Nicholson as the average American. He drank too much, was the product of a wealthy upbringing, but did not know much about the world. He was sheltered. He never smoked weed (in fact didn't even know what it was when presented to him), never left the state line, and never lived life. He constantly used the expression, 'I have always wanted to …'. How many times do you hear this a day from either a family member or a co-worker? If you always wanted to do it, why haven't you?
So, here we have Hanson, dreaming a dream but never following through, who is traveling with two guys that live the ultimate life and live by their own rules. They are complete opposites, but Hanson's words seemed to remain in my mind for a long time. He reminded me of one of my wife's students today that spoke about freedom. He knew exactly what it was, but never practiced it. Hopper and Fonda were walking (driving most of the time) representations of the word 'freedom'. It is tragic what happens to Harmon, because he (unfortunately) experienced the negative side of freedom … hatred and fear of the unknown.
There was one scene that just jumped out at me. It occurs in the diner before the incident later that night where our travelers experience hatred in the country they admire so much. They go from peace and love to fear and hate. It is as if they witnessed night and day. It was frightening to hear the words coming from people in that restaurant. It was not only scary to wonder what was going to happen to our narrators, but mainly that people were speaking that way to fellow citizens. I know that it still occurs today, and it is surprising to me. We bomb a country because they do not follow the same principles that we do, but we need to start asking ourselves this question … do we need another United States?
Grade: ***** out of *****
Author: mrsastor from United States
1 July 2005
This one gets my vote for the most over-rated "classic" movie of all time. I'd rather take a whipping than sit through this again.Although the storytelling goes to some length to make it appear that everybody but the lead characters (i.e. the squares and the establishment) are somehow stupid and beneath contempt and impossible to understand, it is in fact the story's heroes that are unrepentant sods. The movie drags like a lead anchor, that monkey business about dropping acid in the cemetery was an exercise in pointless ugliness, and while I was certainly "with it" in 1969, I didn't get this hateful movie then and I don't get it now.
Perhaps I can best illustrate the value I place on this film by telling you I allowed my daughter to tape Xanadu over it.
Author: Quag7 from Tucson, AZ
22 January 1999
Too often this film is relegated to retro documentaries and cheap nostalgia for an era too often reduced to its superficial artifacts (flower power, popular music).I was born in 1972, three years after this film was made, but the themes in it are still relevant and important to me. Maybe I'm the last of a certain kind of American; someone wondering about what's still possible in the USA, and searching for the realized potential of the American Dream. Perhaps what has changed since this film was released is that freedom - that is, real freedom, just doesn't matter as much to people as it once did.
Self-enslavement is a popular past-time for today's numb middle class; a group of people who, I am convinced, do not dream when they sleep.This movie defined the road film genre, even though it was not the first of its kind. I owe a debt of gratitude to Fonda, Nicholson, and Hopper for pointing out a very real truth about America and its often twisted approach to "freedom." By any standard, this is a film which should not be missed. It is a film I wish I had written myself.
I had "Easy Rider" on my to-watch-list for a long time, because it's glorified as an all-time-classic. What I saw was a bore. Two long-haired (I love hairy men!) bikers with a hoseful of drug money heading to New Orleans. Not the worst initial position for an entertaining movie. After dragging the plot for no point thru some community disputes, the FIRST EVER INTERESTING CHARACTER IN THIS WHOLE NOTHING ascends: the all-time-drunk-lawyer/Jack Nicholson. AND he gets beaten to death by the all-around rednecks, and while his body grows cold, his hitchs (? sorry; what's the proper term for someone giving a lift to an hitchhiker?) consider (!) "to send his remains to his relatives", but simply continue heading to New Orleans instead.
Didn't they have some questioning to answer? While the greatest actor of this movie has left the scene so rushly, it must have been other things than acting which made this bore an instant success. Could it have been that LSD-related intercourse on a cemetery? I don't hope so.What's left is that drive-by-shooting by some rednecks, the climax of the movie. Is that what the movie is all about? Being a free spirit, feared and murdered by rednecks? I've seen better movies about that."Life is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." So are some movies.
Author: juanathan from United States
11 July 2005
To me, a flawed masterpiece is a film that is not perfect but by the end achieves something so great it overcomes its' flaws. The two films I can honestly say that about are Lars Von Trier's Dancer In The Dark and Easy Rider. Easy Rider perfectly defines it.The flaws: Well, the first half although entertaining it pointless. They basically just ride around and pick up hippies and go to a commune. Peter Fonda although he looks the part but for some reason something seemed missing from his character. Also, in the beginning there is a pretty annoying editing technique which they luckily soon abandon.
The film really gets astounding in the second half. The whole film is shot very well by DP Laszlo Kovacs and the music might be one of the best soundtracks ever in film. I might even buy it. The film is filled with genuinely poetic ideas. Jack Nicholson gives a star making performance and Dennis Hopper is once again and forever THE MAN. This film is filled with many biblical metaphors which never came off as pretentious but very powerful. The film is filled with very strong visuals. No wonder Dennis Hopper once wanted to work with Alejandro Jodorwsky.
The ending is might be the best part of the movie. It is almost the ultimate "what the f*ck?' moment in history, but for such a chaotic film it fits perfectly. The ending is also powerful. It represented to me the end of a generation.Well okay. This movie I know will definitely not please everybody but for those who are open minded and into visually driven films, this film will certainly live up to its' title as one of the most influential films in American history.
How did Jack Nicholson and the writing get Oscar nods? He was totally unbelievable. It's a bunch of badly edited shots of driving across country on bikes set to music. I read that they made it up as they went along, and it shows. The actors wrote their characters as cool, tragic, rebels that have to turn down beautiful young women. Maybe if I had more experience with psychedelic drugs I could've appreciated it more but since I haven't it was just annoying, boring, pretentious, hateful, self-indulgent, dated and preachy. The ending is completely ludicrous. These drug abusing criminals are portrayed as heroes, while conservatives are portrayed as evil murderers. How AFI put this in their Top 100 is beyond me.
The good: Peter Fonda's jacket, Dennis Hopper, and I smiled twice.
Author: sbradios from United States
7 February 2005
this has to be the most ludicrous and pretentious movie i have ever seen. the dialog is so corny and awful that it is almost unbearable. Peter Fonda made a total fool of himself and he probably did a lot to sink his entire career as an actor. even allowing for the fact that it is a timepiece and has to be taken in context, this film is still embarrassingly bad. Dennis Hopper was believable but nothing could save this movie from what Fonda did to it. it's sad to say, but the best part was probably the ending. in the case of any type of work or "creation" it is pretty easy to tell how much effort went into it - and they apparently slapped this one together pretty fast. what i can't figure out is how something so laughable became so famous.
The partners and friends Wyatt (Peter Fonda) and Billy (Dennis Hopper) buy drugs in Mexico and deal in Los Angeles, raising money to travel to the Mardi Grass in New Orleans in their bikes. They cross their country disclosing a period of counterculture and intolerance through spectacular landscapes."Easy Rider" is certainly among my ten favorite movies ever. I do not know how many times I have watched this hypnotic cult movie in movie theaters, VHS, DVD and television, and I still love it.
This film is certainly the first road-movie of cinema history and together with its stunning music score (among the bests of the cinema), partially portraits my youthfulness and my generation in a period of free love, drugs, relative freedom (I lived my adolescence in a period of military dictatorship in my country) and wonderful songs of some of the best bands of the planet, and also the never-ending intolerance of a conservative society that does not accept the changing and evolution of the next generation.
The landscapes of North America are also magnificently shown through a wonderful cinematography. I do not know whether the younger generations can understand the deepness and the importance of this movie for older guys like me, a time-machine of a period that will never return. My vote is ten.
