MovieChat Forums > Twentynine Palms (2003) Discussion > Not subtle, anti-American horror SPOILER

Not subtle, anti-American horror SPOILER



Pretentious. Can be summed up as:

meandering film shot in the 29 Palms area of the Southern California desert. An American man who is a film scout and who drives a ridiculous Hummer, takes his languid French girlfriend with him.

They drive around, have sex (there's plenty of nudity, set in front of a dramatic desert backdrop), fight, and then, unexpectedly, they are rear ended by an almost equally large (albeit American made) white truck. They're pushed off the road and three men emerge. They brutally beat and rape the man (very graphic), strip the woman and leave them in the desert.

They return to their hotel, he broods, locks himself in the bathroom, mutilates himself, shaves his head and then takes a knife and repeatedly stabs her in a manner that would make Friday the 13th's Jason proud. Naked, he heads to the desert where he is found dead (or shot by police, it's not entirely clear -- they may have been chasing him, given that he was naked and covered in blood and looked completely insane).

This, like Gerry, would have been a fine 15 min. short. Or if not fine, better than this film

reply

So the movie is suggesting that Americans are violent homosexual rapists? Sounds about right to me. Just look how America is raping the entire world.

reply

[deleted]

God Bless America!

reply

The claim that Dumont is "anti-American" (whatever that might mean, anyway) surely should stand alongside his portrayal of (a section of) French life in his other films - - - which is presented in broadly similar terms.

In other words, it is a spurious and false claim.

He reminds me a lot of Dostoyevsky - revealing the depths of human depravity and despair - and hinting at a way out, too.


But perhaps that is too subtle for those who prefer to see everything in nationalistic or political terms.

reply

Yeah, us American men just can't wait to catch a Frenchman bent over.

At least we "violent" American's aren't beheading anyone yet.... not yet.

This film would have been great! If it had a plot.

reply

[deleted]

Well said FortySecondStreet. Period.

"Pez. Cherry flavor Pez. That'th eathy."

reply

"At least we "violent" American's aren't beheading anyone yet.... not yet."

Naah. Beheading someone actually requires some BALLS - which you yanks don't have. You prefer to drop cluster bombs which uranium tips that mutilate innocent children instead ...

reply

Are you one of those idiots that keeps forgetting that limeys have taken part in the wars in the Middle East as well?

reply

OK, dude.

I just assume you are American because you can't stand any slow and artistic movies and want to watch everything as quick as possible and only filter out some useful information from the movie you just have seen. Well, that's not what movies are about... "sorry"

Hey, one advice (although it won't help help you I think): Take a deep breath, lean back and just enjoy films like that. Watch the beautiful scenery, how great the actors play, the camera's work. This was never intended to be an action movie and I don't say that every slow indie movie is good (because that's sooo wrong) but just accept it as what it is.

Yes, I liked it, gave it 8/10 and think it really deserves that rating.

____
ARNOLD & JOSH SLEPT ON MY COUCH! - OW MY GAAAAWD!!!!
www.myspace.com/anzycpethian

reply

Provinces is absolutely right. I lived in Europe for sixteen years, and I know a "let's trash America" film from a European director (who doubtless keeps a second home in Santa Monica) when I see one.

In all of these gentle tourists-waylaid-by-homicidal-rural-loons films, my first thought is always (I work in law enforcement), "if they had had a gun, they would be alive today." This idea would offend a European director far, far more than the sick violence he presents and implicitly glamorizes, while pretending,like Oliver Stone, he's trying to make a point against violence.

reply

to say, this film is simply "anti-american" is the opinion of somebody who did not
understand, that this and the other dumont films are "anti-human", to put it into
unsufficient words, which maybe would be understood by these narrow-minded fools.

but, hey ... let's be happy to have something, that someone can just
bash, without putting some more tought to it (because it is just to hard).




"best/worst-movie-ever"-idiots don't deserve to watch movies at all ...

reply

This film sucks you know what. And lord have mercy! I know that the French ain't got the nerve to talk.. look what they've done in Africa and many other place's as well. The French are trifling.

reply

@kritiker75

that's a very interesting post.

reply

It's hardly a great film, and is seriously flawed, but I don't think you understood this film. Well, since you think that Katia was French, you clearly didn't. (She's meant to be Russian, and they speak French to one another because it's a common language -- she speaks very broken French in the film, but if you're not a French speaker yourself you may have missed this). She is on the run, the guys who attack them are most probably Russian also (it's not spelt out), and the only definitely American person in it is David, who seems a nice enough bloke until he gets raped and bashed in the head by people who clearly have a vendetta against Katia. Katia of course has told him none of this (though she may have done in Russian -- which is the only way she can tell him and not feel ashamed -- as I said, there are scenes when she speaks Russian to him, normally when she's extremely agitated or nervous.)

So yes, the one American goes rather doolally after being raped, bashed in the head several times with a baseball bat enough to disfigure him, possibly getting brain damaged as a result, and discovering that his girlfriend has a huge secret she could have warned him about(*). He kills her, drives into the desert and kills himself. I don't think it's "anti-American" in the slightest.

(*) If you want to see my "take" on this film, explaining why what happened happened, then see http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0315110/board/nest/224205746?d=224205746#2 24205746

So, when you say it was "not subtle", perhaps it was too subtle!

reply

It's never suggested that their attackers were Russian, and its totally irrelevant where they were from, and has nothing to do with the story or what the film is even about. It was a random attack, no suggestion that their attackers knew them or there was any vendetta. You could see the couple was a bit unhinged right from the start. Its not 'about' the attackers or any of that, its about the minds and inner turmoil of the characters.

reply

[deleted]