Nicolas Winding is known in the cine lit world as an auteur, that is to say, his directing career has been marked if by nothing else than by his style that can be described as being somewhere between noir, crime, action, and horror, all framed with off-beat and affected cinematography. In 2011 he released the film Drive, starring Ryan Gosling. While his other films may have been seen as exciting and distinctive, Drive received much more critical attention than his previous works. Drive’s deliberate pacing, kitschy coloration and iconography and exaggerated violence, as well as bizarre synth-pop soundtrack, truly reflect both Winding’s auteuristic style. I argue that these elements fused with the setting of L.A. create a singular effect. Through a study of genre I will take into account the varying ways in which critics have classified and analysed Drive. In addition I will contextualize my own theory with which the film’s genre and intent can be understood. I believe close reading of the specific content and style of Drive may reveal a buried critique of some, or maybe all of what we come to expect from the movies.
My first source, “A Real Human Being and a Real Hero: Stylistic Excess, Dead Time and Intensified Continuity in Nicolas Winding Refn’s Drive” overlaps the mainstream Hollywood heist genre tendencies with the european auteur tendencies seen in the film. The critics, Kiss and Rogers, argue that these tendencies create a sort of genre tension that presides over the stylized off-beat mood of the film. They note reference to 80’s style in the shot pacing and the synth pop-soundtrack.
In “Generic Imperative”, Benson-Allott points out that in simplifying the contrivances that commercial action movies use to create heroism, Drive, in its editing and characterization, functions as an empty vessel of character archetypes and plot points, surmounting to this central assertion:“Drive is a movie about man’s relationship with machinery, meaning both the automobile and Hollywood car films. Both are mass-produced vehicles designed to induce illusory, programmed experiences of personal freedom,” (p. 13). This quality does seem to point to New Wave approach to filmmaking, wherein new ways to acknowledge the artifice of the film are usual means for stylistic innovation as well as some form of critique.
Critic Gabrielle O’Brien establishes her own interpretation of the film’s elements of noir as well as Driver’s motivations. In “Hero in the shadows: film noir, fairytale and postmodernism in Drive”, Gabrielle O’brien describes the film as ‘fairy-tale noir’. She links Driver’s fluid and subjective persona to the Noir genre. She points out that several sources including Refn himself have indicated that elements of fairytale actually did inspire Drive’s narrative. This does provide some account for the compartmentalized, flat criminals- objectively evil obstacles that are there to kill and be killed.Though she ultimately suggests that the fusion of noir moods and fairytale narrative elements point to the Neo-noir genre, a more postmodern product.
While neo-noir tendencies of the film might connote an otherness of time and place, many elements of the film are grounded very much in the setting and I argue, work to provide a meta-drivin critique. A pointed example of this is seen in an early dialogue between Driver and one of the leading criminals, Bernie Rose.In an attempt to garner Driver’s respect it seems, Bernie informs Driver, “I did some producing back in the 80’s. Interesting pictures. Kind of European. Shannon (Driver’s Boss) arranged the cars for us and did all the stunts”. The inclusion of this detail has the subtle yet deliberate effect of aligning the villains of the film with producers.This self consciousness is the epitome of meta- reinforcing in a new way Driver’s lack of agency. The angst he feels as a result of this is almost palpable, and I argue is what leads to the excessive outburst of killing. This is Driver’s attempt to escape his own movie- a trap embodied by L.A..
Driver, as the hero of the film, there to fulfill the viewers and producer’s needs for attractiveness, likeability intrigue, and romance, is introduced as a stunt driver. A central part of the Hollywood film making process, this immediately aligns him with the image of a mainstream Hollywood protagonist, yet also comments on the emptiness of this paradigm. Due to the contrived unrealistic expectations for Hollywood action heroes, Driver is there to heighten their heroism with his skill, while actors supplement the personality quota. While stunt driving, operating cars with finesse is what driver does, the film’s being titled Drive, indicates a lack of sentimentality outside of this skill. While the film ultimately promises and delivers the action that is essential to the Hollywood formula, Driver and the viewer alike falter with making a connection to humanity. Which renders ironic his sort of theme song, “A Real Hero” by College and Electric Youth.
This brings me to yet another genre appropriation that Refn’s film broaches on: the road movie. While narratively Drive differs slightly from this genre, as the typical road movie involves more widespread travel, my read of driver’s oppression by the Hollywood mold mirrors in many ways the struggle of the typical road hero. Developed parallel, yet in response to mainstream Hollywood, the road film is typically denoted as edgy, counter-cultural and often independent, that is to say on the cusp of many genres without settling on one. The act of driving and traveling symbolizes a commentary on society, usually an escape from it.David Laderman’s “Drifting on Empty: Existential Irony and the Early 1970s Road Movie” he proclaims the 70s road film as, “Laden with psychological confusion and wayward angst, these road movies adopt a nomadic narrative structure, focusing on existential loss more than social critique. Developing a psychological more than sociopolitical emphasis, these films thus more intensely reflect the influence of post-war European cinema, where auteurism, modernism, and existentialism merge.” (Laderman 83). David Laderman’s “Drifting on Empty: Existential Irony and the Early 1970s Road Movie” he proclaims the 70s road film as, “Laden with psychological confusion and wayward angst, these road movies adopt a nomadic narrative structure, focusing on existential loss more than social critique. Developing a psychological more than sociopolitical emphasis, these films thus more intensely reflect the influence of post-war European cinema, where auteurism, modernism, and existentialism merge.” (Laderman 83).
In an understated scene in the first act of Drive, Driver and the young Benicio sit together the bluish light of the aquatic cartoon they watch illuminating their faces. The pair muses about the shark in the cartoon; Benicio fears it, but Driver questions “why are you scared? What if it’s a good shark?” To which Benicio answers there are no such things as ‘good’ sharks. After the little boy’s comment something like sadness or fear flickers behind Gosling’s eyes, a subtle expression, but certainly significant for his typically stoic demeanor. I read this as Driver aligning himself with the idea of a good shark, an individualistic creature that roams at liberty, attacking for survival, but not evil at heart. Though the child makes clear in this universe Hollywood has created, there is no place for good sharks. Sooner or later Driver must abandon the sea of Los Angeles and he must abandon his own film, driving in to darkness or perhaps a new personal freedom. I choose to end on this scene for two reasons: it stylistically mirrors the genres critics has touched upon, the confined space and moody lighting, paired with the admirable relation with a child. However more importantly this off-handed interaction truly mirrors the critical intent that subtly underlies Drive’s shiney postmodern body.
No comments yet.