![]() ![]() This distinct feeling of detachment and loneliness is expanded on when Gallo interacts with a young woman at a petrol station, desperately persuading her to come with him on his travels but then, after convincing her to come, ditching her. Gallo’s voyeuristic approach is quite different to his more direct style adopted in Buffalo ’66, and this only makes the distance stand out all the more. When it comes to the characters, the camera is frequently uncomfortably close, often cutting parts of faces out of the frame and focusing on specific parts (typically the eyes), and this seems to only add to a disturbingly distant feeling that pervades the entirety of the film. The film maintains a great distance from landscapes throughout, with them all being quite sparse and empty and the camera seeming to hold back from them as much as possible. Gallo makes this clear from the opening shot, one that builds a huge distance between the audience/camera and the characters as they circle a racing track, the only noise being that of the bike engines roaring. This film follows Bud Clay, a motorcyclist who seems able to have anything he wants – he has a successful racing career, he is able to convince practically any woman to see his appeal and money never seems to be any problem either – and yet, something in his life is clearly missing. However, there’s no way to properly prepare for The Brown Bunny – a harshly detached film about the modern American man. With a tagline that very frankly states “I’m not going to be okay, Bud,” it can’t be said that Gallo didn’t at the very least try to warn us of what was coming. Unexpectedly, The Brown Bunny teaches us the exact opposite – or, at the very least, it warns the audience about the darkest moments of insecurity and mental anguish by outright presenting them without holding much back. ![]() The entire film builds towards this release of anger and an endorsement of hope and love, a loss of insecurity in a trade off for a fresh slate. If the moment of clear emotional success in Gallo’s previous feature Buffalo ’66 told his audience anything, it was that Gallo ultimately believed that hope was more beneficial than nihilism and anger. ![]() Vincent Gallo was twice as outcast within Hollywood as he was before, never to return… or at least, not yet. According to Ebert, the two were able to get past the insult of “I will one day be thin, but Vincent Gallo will always be the director of The Brown Bunny” and the wishing of colon cancer upon Ebert by Gallo – but by then it was too little and too late. It was completely torn apart, most infamously by Roger Ebert who landed himself in quite the verbal boxing match with Gallo. This one was instantly reviled by almost everybody. ![]() But his work as an actor and a director often also show a dedication to artistry that knows no bounds.įive years after Vincent Gallo released his debut feature length film Buffalo ’66 (to a middling reception – the film has become something of a cult classic since), the outcast director returned with his second outing, The Brown Bunny. Whether it’s the scene in which he plays himself in Julie Delpy’s 2 Days In New York and buys Delpy’s soul only to keep it in a pouch on his groin, his appearance as ‘Flying Christ’ in the hilariously titled Vincent Gallo as Flying Christ or just his website (particularly the merchandising section – there is some real gold there!), he’s definitely earned that reputation. Vincent Gallo is certainly a director known for his ego. Warning: Spoilers for both Buffalo ‘66 and The Brown Bunny ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |