Down By Law

DOWN BY LAW (1986). When fate lands three hapless men -- an unemployed disc jockey (Tom Waits), a small-time pimp (John Lurie) and a strong-willed Italian tourist (Roberto Benigni) -- in a New Orleans prison, their adventure toward escape and freedom begins. Director Jim Jarmusch delivers a twisted comedy filled with fine performances and sharp black-and-white frames from cinematographer Robby Müller. (107 mins)

Some themes that came up in the discussion:

*As noticed by a few people, for a "road movie" Down By Law has a striking lack of on-the-road scenes and an absence of a actual car, and yet we sense the arc and denouement of a road trip film here. How is it that we still feel more or less ok with categorizing film in this road movie genre? Or do we not?

*If not, perhaps it's because we are responding to a quality -- general to most of director Jim Jarmusch's films -- of ambiguity, and a sense that nothing is ever realized from the journey, that it may all be pointless. In his often farcical or satirical films, the characters have been described as seeming "listless" or "jaded," and this signifies a movement away from Hollywood and back to independent filmmaking. In fact, Jarmusch is known to have distanced himself from "high concept" and MTV aesthetics, and particularly in this film the slow and ambiguous action on the road is itself a rebellion to the crash-and-burn quality in mainstream Hollywood cinema, especially in the road genre. As one critic says, "Jarmusch embraces the artificiality of performance and the performance of artificiality." Stylistically, there is the feeling of stasis, due in part to his long single takes and sparse editing which reflects his resistance to intermingling the the styles of televion/advertising with filmmaking

*Jarmusch's characters (who are often somewhat listless) don't have the same kind of more traditional metamorphosis or transformation that we see in other more mainstream road movies (like Thelma & Louise for example). So in the end do we, Rowhouse Film Fest members, leave satisfied that this road trip had gone somewhere meaningful -- either literally or metaphorically?

Roberto (played by Roberto Benigni, who might remind a modern-day viewer of Sasha Barron Cohen's character, Borat ... or vice-versa) is hardly jaded at all; he is talkative, confident, of course comedic, and is even oblivious of his own comedy -- which is exactly what makes it comedic in the first place. His scene are filled with culture clashing and language barriers and are played perfectly by Benigni who offers relief to an otherwise muted, more subdued film.

*Yet Zack (Tom Waits) is the opposite: he is almost completely silent during his time in jail -- that is, except for when he is asked by Jack (John Lurie) to prove his identity; and he does just that during his fake broadcast scene where he instantly transforms himself, for a moment, into the cool, New Orleans DJ , using his invented radio voice, which is in fact just a ruse for how sad, down-on-his-luck, and alcoholic his really is. Zack is perhaps the saddest and arguably most pathetic character in this film of listless escaped convicts. He seems more concerned about his shoes than his albums (his source of employment), for example, when he's thrown out of his girlfriend's apartment and into the street.

*Some last questions posed by the group: Does this film feel similar stylistically to Easy Rider, a now classic independent film of it's era? And what is it about the "I scream, you scream, we all scream for ice cream" scene that is so compelling?

*Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, how f-ing cool are these two cats? (Below: Jarmusch & Waits, 1984). Wow. (Nice shoes indeed, Tom!)