Easy Rider
1969
Dennis Hopper
Great film. I say that right here at the beginning because I'm going to express skepticism, and I don't want my shitty writing to make it seem like that I'm skeptical about the film itself. I'm more skeptical of the legacy that the film has, and why. These are just idle thoughts of a young man who's been watching too many so-called "important" movies lately, an act that's warped his mind slightly.
I will mention New Hollywood here. I'm not the guy to tell you about the history of cinema in America, so I direct you toward the Wikipedia page that I'd be attempting to regurgitate anyway. My extremely broad understanding of it is that the "studio system" of the 1950s and prior was waning, and there was a class of movies that jumpstarted the idea of "movies" again, made by young voices from the next generation. They implemented the style of French New Wave films, and (crucially) saw box office success.
Easy Rider is a landmark film at the beginning of the New Hollywood era. There are so many words in that previous paragraph that I would need to clarify if you are starting from scratch like I am (and I encourage those "in the know" to hop down in the comments and correct me regarding any or all of this), but let's at least touch on "style of French New Wave films." There was "new approaches to editing, visual style, and narrative" in those French films (and Italian, and etc.), as well as an attempt to have direct conversation with modern political ideas and struggles.
All this to explain, I think, why a certain type of person (not naming names, oh no, not on this blog) might walk away from Easy Rider thinking something along the lines of: "nothing happened." Which is obviously not true, not even in a literal way (lots of stuff happens in between the long motorcycle sequences!). It's more that it doesn't feature a traditional narrative, with a beginning, middle, end, or an inciting incident or satisfying conclusion. We're privy to flashes of plot regarding why these two bikers are traveling across the country, but it's never explained outright. We're mostly just along for the ride.
Yes! "Ride" is a pun! There's a lot of motocyclin' in this film, set to some great '60s tunes (lotta Byrds up in here). This is a visually compelling film. I'm not thrown by it because it's sixty years later and I'm used to experimentation in film at this point, but I can imagine it threw some contemporary audiences for a loop. Long, lush sequences of wide-open spaces. Scene transitions that were jittery on purpose (flashing back and forth before finally transitioning over). The no-doubt infamous drug sequence at the end almost being too much for me. Easy Rider felt at times like it moved in stops and starts, with shots of nothing happening and then shots where everything is happening.
Overall, it was easy to watch, and fun to think about, and I'm at the point where that's mostly all I want out of a classic film. I think it's cool that we get to watch three great actors fuck around in desolate areas of the country, and I think it's cooler that this was a film that started a whole new era of modern film history. Ebert tells a story of Peter Fonda's dad, Henry Fonda (of 12 Angry Men), seeing Easy Rider and being extremely confused, not only regarding what the film was about, but what made it so popular with young audiences. It didn't read like he was being dismissive, more curious.
I'm right there with him. Always curious about this kind of shit. Show me this film and not tell me anything about it, and I would not have guessed that it was a "premiere film at the start of the New Hollywood era." I would've just thought that it was a weirdo film that connected with young audiences that saw themselves on the screen. The wayward youth with no direction and so why not direct yourself into the theater to see some other wayward youth. But it makes sense, too... I mean, the film itself is directionless at times. That's the point. That's why it's effective. That's why it's new and exciting. That's also why it probably turned some of the oldheads away, being so used to "how things work in Old Hollywood."
Shit, I mentioned skepticism up at the top, and then immediately moved away from that. I should get back to that, before I talk myself out of it. Or I could bullshit you and say something like, "Aha! This is by design! A narrative-less blog post for a narrative-less film!" If only I were that clever.
I think my skepticism comes from the idea that this movie was only important because it was commercially successful too. It's not completely the art leading the charge in its legacy. It wouldn't have a legacy if it didn't make some money. It would have been forgotten. The style of French New Wave would have been deemed inviable to American audiences. But because it made money, then you see a whole new wave of artists being given commercial backing to make something similar ("Be more like Dennis Hopper and Peter Fonda" they were suddenly saying).
I think my skepticism comes from the idea that this movie was only important because it was commercially successful too. It's not completely the art leading the charge in its legacy. It wouldn't have a legacy if it didn't make some money. It would have been forgotten. The style of French New Wave would have been deemed inviable to American audiences. But because it made money, then you see a whole new wave of artists being given commercial backing to make something similar ("Be more like Dennis Hopper and Peter Fonda" they were suddenly saying).
At a certain point, a film's legacy is cemented, and I'm too used to just unquestioningly accepting it. Oh, Easy Rider was important? If you say so! I'm getting a little suspicious of that now, though. Maybe I'm getting paranoid like Billy. But, like, who decided what's important? Who's to say that maybe audiences were so willing to accept this experimental film because they thought Jack Nicholson talking about weed was funny? What, we're gonna be talking about A Minecraft Movie in sixty years as a film that saved movies and started the next wave of New New New Hollywood Cinema? Just because it made a billion dollars and everyone remembers throwing their popcorn in the air when a rotund Jack Black yells the phrase "chicken jockey"?
That can't possibly happen... unless it does. Unless the next wave of film critics decides that it happens. Because that there's the gatekeepers, and if they are saying in at most thirty years that A Minecraft Movie was a misunderstood cult classic, then who among us is going to be brave enough to stand up and defend their once-contemporary takes? Or will we all just file in line and follow 'em over the cliff to our deaths?
How could Peter Fonda's dad have possibly known Easy Rider's legacy? He couldn't have. I don't blame him for being as confused as I was when I personally saw on the big screen in April 2025 that Jennifer Coolidge was having sex with a video game character who sounded suspiciously like Matt Berry.
No. No! I'm not continuing this chicken jockey hypothetical any longer. It's bad and I won't stand for it. Easy Rider means something! Yes, it was commercially successful. Yes, it had at least a little bit of established muscle behind it, with Fonda's Hollywood connections and Nicholson's already-started ascendence. Yes, I'm only watching it because it was told to me that it was an important film, and I watched it without knowing whether it actually warranted that reputation. But I can watch this film and I can understand what it's about. I can feel something when I watch it. I can, and I did. And just because there were some older folks in audiences at the time that weren't in touch with those feelings doesn't mean that the feelings didn't exist. They did for me, even now.
For example: "You know Billy, we blew it." What does it mean? It felt so poignant when Peter Fonda wistfully mused on it in the movie's climactic campfire dialogue. It's more than prognostication (even though the doomed end for our heroes is flash-forwarded earlier in the film). It serves, I suppose, to reframe the mostly gleeful exploits that we witnessed during the majority of the movie. I think it's possible to watch Easy Rider as a celebration of alt/hippie culture in the '60s, up until that scene where the line is said. Suddenly, it's impossible to view the film in that way. Suddenly, you start to see the heroes as failures. You see the commune from earlier in the film as doomed. You see the drug trip as something very unfunny and quite toxic. You start to question whether you should've been rooting for these guys in the first place.
Which is wild, because up until that moment, my takeaway had been shock at how harsh the world acted toward these guys. Hotels denying a room, cops licking their lips at a chance at beating the long-haired sissies up good, good ol' southern boys playing chicken with a gun and then finishing the job. I hear so much about the previous generations and their peace and love and have long viewed this certain set of hippies as the "heroes" of the story, that it was tough to witness how it actually was at the time. They were viewed as the villains. And that "we blew it" quote might ultimately be viewed as an act of self-deprecation, as the hero admitting defeat, finally succumbing to the ill-will directed toward him constantly throughout the film. It's incredible depressing.
I could keep going, but the hour is late, and I have a lot of driving to do in the morning. Let's pee on the side of the road and quietly contemplate Easy Rider under the roar of the hog's motor. No skepticism required.
GRADE: 4 pukes out of 5
DISCUSSION: I couldn't fit these into the main blog post, so I'm gonna post 'em here. First, there's this discussion about "freedom" that felt particularly relevant.
That feels pretty close to the truth for me, and offers a nice flip on the incessant "muh freedoms" bullshit of the modern maga crowd. I'm probably gonna use this one.
And then I was wondering about "Born to Be Wild" too. I thought the soundtrack generally was pretty rad, but this one stood out as outdated and lame. Why? I think it probably has to do with the fact that every knock-off bullshit popcorn-fodder movie that's come about in the sixty years since uses "Born to Be Wild" as shorthand for a character who is trying to act tough or mean. Not to mention the fact that it's often used ironically.
My theory, if I need one, is that this was the first time the song was used in this manner. Any other use of it is directly or indirectly referencing Easy Rider. It became cliché because of the references, not because of the original use itself. And it's not Easy Rider's fault that I hate this song because of its overuse elsewhere.
AND ONE MORE THING:
Sam watched Easy Rider, and then came across an Easy Rider poster in the wild. He would also probably like me to direct you toward his Letterboxd review of this movie.
DISCUSSION: I couldn't fit these into the main blog post, so I'm gonna post 'em here. First, there's this discussion about "freedom" that felt particularly relevant.
"Oh, yeah, that's right. That's what's it's all about, all right. But talkin' about it and bein' it, that's two different thangs. I mean, it's real hard to be free when you are bought and sold in the marketplace. Of course, don't ever tell anybody that they're not free, 'cause then they're gonna get real busy killin' and maimin' to prove to you that they are. Oh, yeah, they're gonna talk to you, and talk to you, and talk to you about individual freedom. But they see a free individual, it's gonna scare 'em."
That feels pretty close to the truth for me, and offers a nice flip on the incessant "muh freedoms" bullshit of the modern maga crowd. I'm probably gonna use this one.
And then I was wondering about "Born to Be Wild" too. I thought the soundtrack generally was pretty rad, but this one stood out as outdated and lame. Why? I think it probably has to do with the fact that every knock-off bullshit popcorn-fodder movie that's come about in the sixty years since uses "Born to Be Wild" as shorthand for a character who is trying to act tough or mean. Not to mention the fact that it's often used ironically.
My theory, if I need one, is that this was the first time the song was used in this manner. Any other use of it is directly or indirectly referencing Easy Rider. It became cliché because of the references, not because of the original use itself. And it's not Easy Rider's fault that I hate this song because of its overuse elsewhere.
AND ONE MORE THING:
Sam watched Easy Rider, and then came across an Easy Rider poster in the wild. He would also probably like me to direct you toward his Letterboxd review of this movie.
NEXT TIME: Group A offers seven thoughts about Seven Samurai.
No comments:
Post a Comment