User reviews

About two hundred members of a Cleveland, Ohio USA film society, named Cinematheque, gathered on August 19, 2000 to view a pristine Cinemascope print of Michelangelo Antonioni's 1970 film, "Zabriskie Point." Cinematheque Director John Ewing, who does a superlative job of obtaining the finest prints for his series, shared with the audience beforehand that this print was specially flown over from Italy for this one showing only.

The audience was held spellbound as the film unfolded its artisty on the huge panoramic screen. Watching this superb print, shown the way Antonioni intended, made one aware that this is indeed a modern art work. It was all the more fitting that the series is housed in the Cleveland Insititue of Art in University Circle.

Antonioni's compositions are created for the Cinemascope landscape. His beautiful balancing of images, striking use of colors, sweeping choreographic movements, all are the work of a genuine artist, using the screen as his canvas.

At last the audience could understand "Zabriskie Point." As its narrative unfolded, it became obvious that this work is not about story per se, but rather an artist's impressionistic rendering of fleeting images of his subject. The setting of some of the more turbulent activities of the sixties provides only a dramatic motor for the artist's sweeping collage.

Antonioni is not bound by conventional narrative standards, and can pause at any point to creatively embroider an event with grandiose embellishments. The audience willingly went with the flow of his remarkable imagination, as his huge images on the massive canvas held one in rapt attention. While the audience may have been only tangentially involved in character relationships, it realized the theme here is human aleination, the director's recurring theme.

It was also realized that no print any smaller or of lesser quality than this original one in Cinemascope can do justice to this particular rendering. The audience was therefore all the more appreciative of viewing "Zabriskie Point" in its original, breathtaking format, and broke into thunderous applause at the end.

There aren't too many times when I see a film and go, "huh, what?", but this was one of them. Maybe after seeing Zabriskie Point I felt much the same way Woody Allen felt after seeing 2001- he only liked the film after seeing it three times over a two year period, realizing the filmmaker was ahead of him in what was going on. Michelangelo Antonioni, in one of his few tries at making films inside of the US (after Red Desert, he did Blow-Up, this film, China, and The Passenger, all filmed outside his native Italy), I could sense he almost tried to learn about the ways of the country through his own mastery of the medium. The results show that he doesn't lack the means to present images, feelings, tones, colors, sounds, and a visual representation of this era. "A director's job is to see", Antonioni once stated. Whatever that means, he doesn't disappoint for the admirer of his post-fifties work (I say post-fifties since I've yet to see any of his films from before L'Avventura).

What he does lack is a point, at least the kind of point that he could bring in Blow-Up and The Eclipse. You get the feeling of what is around these characters, what the themes are bringing forth to their consciousness, however in this case the characters and the actors don't bring much conviction or purpose. Antonioni, coming from the school of hard-knocks, neo-realistic film-making, does do what he can with his mostly non-professional cast (those who look most like real actors are subjugated to the roles of the corporate characters), but the two stars Mark Frechette and Daria Halprin seem as if Antonioni's under-directing them. Perhaps that was the point. The story's split into three acts, thankfully not too confusing, as Mark escapes his existence around the boiling, dangerous campus life going on in the circa late 60's LA area, and Daria is sent out from LA to drive to Phoenix for some business meeting. They meet by chance as Mark's plane (how does he know how to drive, maybe a little background info there?) and Daria's car meet up, and they spend some time together in an existential kind of groove out in the desert. Aside from a stylistically mesmerizing if bizarre sex scene, much of this act isn't terribly interesting.

The two leads are fair enough to look at, but what exactly draws them to each other outside of curiosity? The ideas that come forth (in part from a screenplay co-written by Sam Shepard) aren't too revealing, except for one brief instant where drugs vs. reality is brought up. Then the film heads towards the third act, as Mark decides to do the right thing, under disastrous circumstances, and Daria arrives at her boss' place, only to be in full disillusionment (not taking into account the infamous last five minutes or so of the film). Although the film took its time telling its story, I didn't have as much of a problem with that as I did that the story only engages a certain kind of viewer. I understand and empathize with the feelings and doubts and fears as well as the self-confidence of the "anti-establishment", but maybe Antonioni isn't entirely fully aware of it himself. In some scenes he as director and editor (and the often astounding cinematography by Alfio Contini) find the scenery and backgrounds more enlightening and fixating than the people in the foreground. Not to say the technical side of Zabriskie Point isn't involving to a degree (this may make some feel drowsy, as Antonioni is probably far greater as a documentary filmmaker as he is a theatrical director like say Francis Ford Coppola is).

The deserts, skies, city, and even the faces in close-ups are filmed with the eye of a filmmaker in love with the art of getting things in the frame, bringing us in. The soundtrack is equally compelling, with a master stroke including a sweet Rolling Stones song at one point, and then a crushing, surreal Pink Floyd song (re-titled from 'Careful with that Axe Eugene, one of their best pre-Dark Side) in the explosion sequence. If only the performances weren't so one-sided I might find this to be on par with Blow-Up or The Eclipse. It's an unconventional stroke of genius on one hand, and on the other a boring take on what was the hippie/radical movement of the late 60's. But hey, what may be boring for an American such as myself born in the eighties may not be to others outside the US, such as say, Italy. And it does ask to not be discarded right away after one viewing.

At the time of its release, ZABRISKE POINT caused great division in film-going circles. A "wannabe classic but artless piece of empty canvas" was the view of the establishment, most critics included. To the alternative movement...a "revelation of everything that is wrong in the world today (1970)" Not too much has changed judging by the comments here, although an overall user-rating of an almost respectable 6.2 suggests an increase in the appreciation factor.

Poor old Mark Frechette and Daria Halpin as the star crossed lovers - definitely in the wrong place at the wrong time (weren't they EVERY wronged and downtrodden teenager of the period???) copped most of the flack, totally unreasonably. They were SUPPOSED to be Mr and Miss typical troubled youth, not Rhett Butler and Scarlett O'Hara on a bender! This was an image-driven film and many flag waving americans were incensed that Italy's outre director Antonioni was given free rein to portray the angst of American youth.

Cinematically, the film was awesome. In London at the time, I saw it on its release and thought that from an objective viewpoint it was quite brilliant (admittedly, I was only 24 myself). Many have commented on its alleged self-indulgence. Yeah, well it WAS Antonioni's film - surely he was free to express his art-form in whatever way he saw fit at the time? The desert scenes have not been topped by any film since.

ZABRISKIE POINT may be shy of "masterpiece" status (mind you, who amongst is solely qualified to make THAT call?) but it is probably now, THE defining film of 70's culture. A time when acid trips, communal living, even just plain old fashioned "love" were not that easy a choice to live with!

Antonioni really showed some 'cojones' when he had this movie made. He went to America working under a contract from the most lavish studio (MGM) and he made the most damning portrait of American society i've ever seen. Having seen LA first hand this is the most accurate portrayal of the crowded, overheated and impersonal city. If only Antonioni had met Bill Hicks...

The subsequent burial by the studio is understandable, after such a whopping investment and dismal return. It is sad that people don't get to see this film any more as i believe Antonioni has been proved right. Here he predicts the end of the hippie/civil rights movement in the politics of America. Everyone is much more interested in what goes into their pockets and the relentless expansion of living space into the inhospitable (yet beautiful) desert and beyond. How i would love to see interest in this film re-kindled and a lavish DVD release.

I beseech people to watch Zabriskie Point with an open mind and an open heart. We have a genuinely unique film commenting on a turning point in the history of the most powerful nation on the planet, and we have forgotten about it.

An unexpected gem.

I was told it was one of those "either you love it or you hate it" movies. Well, I loved it. Obvious hippie-era, dated and easy symbolism and all. So, I probably have no taste at all when it comes to Antonioni, but this and La Notte (made exactly a decade earlier) are my favourites among his movies so far. Made two years before I was born, Zabriskie Point was supposed to have been Michelangelo's great American epic. But apparently, it turned out to be a flop. I really can't see why. Before watching it I'd read that it was rather boring, so I braced myself for a very slow movie - though I love me a slow movie. For my taste, Zabriskie didn't have a tedious minute in it. While watching it, I made a mental note of how European it was on the director's part to make such frequent use of advertisement billboards in almost every urban scene, enormous billboards dwarfing any human form in sight. This recurrent visual element is obviously there to underline the way that consumerism crushes the individual in American society. But then I watched L'Eclisse straight afterwards, which is set in Rome in the early 60s, and noticed that Antonioni often included billboards in it as well. After all, the masterful use of landscapes, architecture and inanimate objects in each frame with or without human beings is an Antonioni trademark – this is precisely the way that he evokes his characters' psychological states, with more or less understated power and great visual impact. He is virtually unsurpassed in this skill.

Zabriskie Point starred two very appealing leads that should have become big stars of the 70s, but never did. Mark Frechette, whom I'd already seen in Francesco Rosi's fine WWI-set movie Uomini Contro, had a very tragic life and died aged just 27. According to his biography page, he donated his $60,000 earnings from Zabriskie to a commune. Mark's co-star Daria Halprin, apparently also Dennis Hopper's wife later on, has the stunning, natural beauty and appeal of a young Ornella Muti – one of those luminous beauties that don't need a shred of make-up to turn heads. Like Frechette, she has only graced a couple of obscure movies and has never become a star, but at least she didn't die tragically. Most notably, Zabriskie Point contains one of the most original sex scenes ever filmed - one that brings home a sense of youthful playfulness like few I've seen - as well as a powerfully cathartic ending. It may be the most banal sequence ever filmed as far as its symbolism goes, but I can't see how anyone can deny its beauty and wonderful sense of emotional release. Never has an explosion looked so good, and so poetic. It seems to be an explosion that restores order rather than bringing chaos.

I must admit, it's been (around) 2 years since I last saw Zabriskie Point...

For some reason it's never totally left my conscience yet generally for all the wrong reasons. While the cinematography is certainly impressive throughout I found that the whole ordeal just dragged, and dragged...and dragged, literally to the point of tedium. In the first instance then, Zabriskie Point is clearly suffering from pace, or lack of. The 'desert' or 'love' scene being a prime example of this - it's not art; it's not even vaguely artistic - but mundane and self indulgent. The gorgeous and sweltering locales of the desert are what's worth noting here; not two young protagonists who appear to share little, if no, connection.

In that respect it would seem that most people's opinions of Zabriskie Point are either deeply 'for' it or very much 'against' it. Were the 60s really like this?! Zabriskie Point seems to linger on too many stereotypes and while films such as Easy Rider managed to successful capture the ambience of counter-culture 1960s America Zabriskie Point falls just a bit short. Antonioni certainly knows how to lay-on some thick anti-establishment slurs but it's just so blatantly obvious and very hard to believe. On the plus side, the documentary-esque footage at the start of the film does help to give off a very 'real' vibe and is duly convincing. The acting, or lack of, is apt to an extent but hardly noteworthy. This is the frustrating element - it just seems to try so hard and has now gained a small reputation of being somewhat of a 'cult classic' but it's not justified. For those who try to read what they want to read into a film for the sake of art or intellect; those who subsequently look for hidden meanings that aren't there - maybe try this. If I wanted to do that I'd happily watch El Topo - not that I would ever compare the two.

Oh, did I mention Pink Floyd contributed to the soundtrack – perhaps one of the only serious redeeming qualities here. Thanks Dave and Roger.

6/10

This is the film in Antonioni's middle period that most critics dismiss quickly, as a 'flawed' look at 60s American youth culture/politics. For what it's worth, I found it more touching and memorable than his more acclaimed films like L'AVVENTURA, perhaps because he shows more emotion & empathy here than anywhere else. The story is simple, but it is used as a frame for Antonioni's brilliant observations of, and critique on American consumerist culture, student life, the counter-culture, and the whole anti-establishment, anti-war backlash that was so prominent then.

Even from a purely technical point of view, it is a remarkably crafted film; from the opening credits sequence to the bizarre desert 'love-in', to the use of billboards, and right down to that jaw-dropping, cathartic finale that used 17 camera set-ups (in it's own way, as powerful as the climax of The Wild Bunch). Also, Antonioni chose one hell of a leading lady with Daria Halperin, one of the most beautiful ever to grace the screen. There isn't much 'acting' involved, as this feels more like a docu-drama, and so the use of non- professionals as the lead couple works quite effectively within that context. And the soundtrack is not only filled with marvelous music, its use is impressive as well (I can't forget the start of the film, mostly due to the selection of music - by Pink Floyd - that grooms the visuals so well).

Contrary to popular opinion, this is quite an achievement in cinema, and one I would enthusiastically recommend to anyone with a taste or tolerance for the off- beat. Well worth seeking out, and one of those key films of the 60s that demands a DVD restoration/release.

In the late 60's, in Los Angeles, a group of revolutionary students is fighting for changing in the campus of their university. Mark (Mark Frechette), who has been expelled by the dean after many infractions in his academic life, decides to leave the area during a riot and hijacks a small airplane. Meanwhile, the student and temporary secretary Daria (Daria Halprin) is driving through the desert to attend a meeting scheduled by her boss Lee Allen (Rod Taylor) in Phoenix. Mark lands the airplane in Zabriskie Point where he spends the afternoon making love with Daria. When he returns to Los Angeles, he is shot inside the cabin by a police officer.

This is the first time that I see "Zabriskie Point", a film that was censored in Brazil by the military dictatorship in the 70's. This polemic movie shows empty characters and many billboards and advertisements to disclose the emptiness of a generation and the excessive consumerism of the American society in the late 60's in the view of Antonioni. The cinematography, camera work and soundtrack are spectaculars. The original ending with the airplane writing "Fuck You, America" in the sky was withdrawn by the MGM president. The amateurs Mark Frechette and Daria Halprin became lovers after this film. Mark was sentenced to prison after robbing a bank and he died in prison in 1975 when the weight that he was lifting felt on his throat. Daria Halrpin married Dennis Hopper in 1972 and divorced in 1976. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "Zabriskie Point"

I know that this is an unpopular position concerning Zabriskie Point, but I LOVED this film. I know, I know - I can legitimately be called an Antonioni fanatic. I love L'Avventura, I love La Notte, I love L'Eclisse, I love Red Desert, I love Blowup, and I love Professione: Reporter (aka The Passenger). The only Antonioni film that I don't love, the only one I've ever given less than an 8/10 (and one of only three that I have given less than a 10/10, La Notte and L'Eclisse being the other two, though I fully acknowledge that I have to see both of them again), is Beyond the Clouds, which can fairly be called an awful film. However, there is not better awful film, if you catch my drift. So if you're NOT an Antonioni fan, you should only logically ignore me. If you are even a casual fan, though, and you are wondering whether this particular film, whose name, when spoken, is often followed by

a spit, which is generally despised by even Antonioni's admirers, is at all worth seeing, the answer is YES.

Okay, the reason that people tend to hate it is because 99% of film watchers care ONLY for the narrative of a film. Well, that's not exactly true. If a film is amazing in a particular aspect, say acting or cinematography or direction, and just decent in its narrative, film watchers might very well love it. But a film can be the most amazing visual masterpiece and have a lame or illogical story - that's another thing that has ruined the cinema over the years: logic - then they absolutely hate the film. I will actually agree with that in some ways. As much as I may dislike it and want to change my view, it really is difficult to love a film whose narrative I perceive as poor. However, other people tend to get annoyed at a loose narrative. This is certainly what must drive viewers away from Zabriskie Point. I could relate the story to you, but you probably would just think it was nonsensical. It is, actually, but, to me, that just made the whole endeavor more fantastic and beautiful. I'd actually compare it favorably to 2001, which is my favorite film. However, 2001 is perfectly coherent compared to the rambling narrative of this film.

What Zabriskie Point has in spades is mood. The music helps a lot; the score includes a lot of acts of the day, including Pink Floyd. The mood is kind of similar to the moods of Antonioni's other masterpieces, filled with loneliness and desolation. Also the freedom that comes from that. The best sequence in the film is when the lead man and woman (her name is Daria, I know, but I don't remember his name) pull over in their vehicle next to a historic marker on a desert highway. There is, beyond the stone wall that has been erected to keep cars from flying off, an ancient lakebed. It's basically a rocky desert, and the two go to play in it. The setting is enormously beautiful. The woman says: "This is such a beautiful place. What do you think?" The man: "I think it's dead." There's no inclination to whether that's a good thing or a bad thing. This is a lot like sentiments expressed in other Antonioni films - characters are constantly wanting to disappear or become invisible. Instead of David Locke, the protagonist of The Passenger, fed up with journalism, we have the young hippie sick of his friends' politics - he thinks they talk too much and don't act out what they feel is right, or at least he says he does. It seems to me more like he just wanted out of the situation.

The film is also simply amazing visually. Antonioni's films are all identifiable by just a few frames, but his visual style was always building. I like The Passenger more than I do Zabriskie Point, but Zabriskie Point might be his ultimate accomplishment in that aspect. Well, that might sound odd - L'Avventura and Red Desert are amazing pictorially. I think it's the camera movements that are particularly amazing here. He obviously made a ton of money on Blowup, which was the biggest arthouse hit of its day, the biggest ever at that point. He spends it well here, especially with his aerial shots. One of the film's greatest sequences involves the man, who has stolen a man's private airplane, dive-bombing Daria in her car.

The one thing that can be fairly criticized is the film's politics. They're certainly facile. Not that hippies were facile, but that Antonioni's vision of hippies - there weren't any in Italy, of course - are bizarre and, well, filtered through a foreigner's eyes. There's a rather childish criticism of advertising, but it's a criticism that still exists today. I say, can't you people just ignore it? What does it hurt? Are you walking around buying things you don't want because of billboards? Or there is also the criticism against capitalism. Daria, a secretary, works for a company that is stealing the land in the desert - the land that she and the man enjoyed to themselves - in order to make cheap, suburban homes for families. Rod Taylor, a very underrated actor whose most famous roles were in The Time Machine and The Birds, plays her boss. The ending, which I won't ruin - you've got to see it - is almost offensively cheap. I can, though, understand the treatment of police officers. Not that I disdain them generally, but they were awful at the time. They can still be awful now. They've always had too much power.

These trite arguments against the American way of life still don't effect my opinion of the film much. I find this filtered view of America extremely interesting. I really don't think a hippie would have disagreed with Antonioni. 10/10.

Michael Medved had Zabriskie Point down on his list of 100 worst films. But just looking on the critical reaction here there's a lot who feel he was harsh. I'm not one of them however though I've seen much worse.

The main problem here is that Michelangelo Antonini chose a pair of non actors for his two young leads, symbols as they were of a new generation that was to reform all before it.

The problem is that for long periods of this film Mark Frechette and Daria Halprin are on screen together. Put it simply, they couldn't act. I've seen better from high school plays.

Zabriskie Point is a waste of time for people like Rod Taylor, G.D. Spradlin, and Paul Fix they've all been far better. Zabriskie Point should be seen as a reminder that even big budget films can have a dearth of acting.

The movie presents a view of the United States that only a foreigner could have. Sadly, foreigners can't relate to it and persons from the United States cannot believe it. The movie is, therefore, caught in limbo without an audience. Reviews of the film tend to reflect this.

I have lived away from the US for 30 years and can now pretend to be able to understand what Antonioni was wanting to achieve. My view is that he has excelled. The film is a stunning indictment of the United States and, tragically, I see no remediation in the 29 years since it was first released.

When this film was made, the hippie thing had gone mainstream. The ideas of the counter culture was well established, that is why such a big film could be made. Yet it has something to say, and it is said really beautifully. Apart from those who're only waiting for the wanking material, this film is given credit for its beautiful scenes(which in itself is more than enough reason to see the film) by the most. The soundtrack to this film, which actually became more popular than the film itself, is another plus. Pink Floyd's "Careful with that axe Eugene" suits really well with the explosions, the absence of music in other scenes gives the film a nice quiet mood. But. It seems as though the messages in this film have been overlooked by the most. If you didn't understand it, which seems to be the case for the most, I'll give you some hints: The man(tough guy, what ever his name is-Mark?) is a part of a "reality group". He leaves this group saying something like "I'm willing to die. But not of boredom" He later go for a joyride with a stolen plane, probably to seek some action. As he is in the air, Grateful Dead's Dark Star(from the Live/Dead album) is played(i think). This song contains the phrase "Shall we go you and I while we can", this is though not heard in the film.(Perhaps stretching it a bit too far meaning that quote is essential?) In the plane, he checks up a girl(Daria), who is driving in her car to a conference(about giving typical suburban families the opportunity to live in a super-relaxing place in the desert, where everything is so simple and nice. For the whole family!), by diving down, almost hitting the car. He lands the plane, and joins the girl on her way to Detroit. They stop at Zabriskie point, where they enjoy each other as living creatures and the nature. Later a family with a big car(of the type which you sleep in) and a speed boat is showed visiting Zabriskie Point, the father saying something like "what a waste driving all the way up here", and the kid sitting inside the car, grinning. I sensed a "this wasn't much better than on the telly"-attitude. Daria takes Mark back to the plane which now is painted in a psychedelic style, with the identity number changed to "no war" on one side and "no words" on the other. "Bucks Sucks" is also written on the plane. Mark takes the plane back to where he stole it from, saying to Daria before he leaves "I don't risk anything" or something, one of several hints about he not caring too much about his destiny. (This because he has the feeling that the environment that surrounds don't give him anything- "I wonder what happens in the real world") On the airport he is met by police officers who shoots him even though he just has returned the plane. Daria hears this on the radio, but decides to go to the conference in the fancy mansion. Here she feels alien after the adventures with her just killed friend. She enjoys fresh water running down a rock, more than the swimming pool. Inside the house the viewer is once again given a hint about anti-materialism -She looks out through a glass wall, holding her hands on the glass like she was trapped. The business men is seen arguing, the one side eager to make a big deal, the other afraid of losing money. Daria leaves the house and looks back at it, visualizing it blowing up. After the house, several other things blow up, for example a television. She smiles, happy she has inside herself destroyed what she after the meeting with Mark look upon as something negative.

To summarize: Mark obviously experience the "reality group" as not very useful as they just sit and talk, taking no action. He clearly has bad feelings about things being as they are, and it seems like he feels that it's no use fighting against it. He wants to leave. He helps Daria, who is "in mind but not in action" seeing his point of view. Where his feeling of being misfitted turns out leading to his death, one can hope Daria uses the ideas in a way that will turn out more constructive. In the film you see how a town (LA) is being polluted by commercial (too bad you have to show the commercial to make the point), you see business men deciding what is the future, et cetera, and you see people being unhappy with these and other situations which is parts of the modern world.

I have only seen the film once, so I have not caught all points, but I certainly got a feeling of what this film has to say, and I find it strange that this film can be called meaningless. If you say the points are being too obvious, I can see why, this film probably intended to appeal to the post-hippie radicals "digging" the thoughts of anti-establishment. Even though, it has a lot to say, and its message is still needed today, things pretty much evolving in the same direction as it did before the sixties. Zabriskie Point is a really great film, telling a story about quite normal young people (not far out hippies tripping around tip toe on acid, digging everything) seeking what they percept as real, dissatisfied with the conventional. And it is done in a truly beautiful way.

This film has a powerful philosophical ending. But that ending has meaning only if you watch the movie from the beginning.

Youth alienation in the late 1960's, from the viewpoint of a young man and a young woman, is the obvious theme of "Zabriskie Point". Neither Mark Frechette nor Daria Halprin had much acting experience, a fact that actually enhances the film's message. Having untrained actors conveys a sense of realism, as both players seem emotionally detached from the turmoil around them.

This is not a script-driven film. Except for the first ten minutes, it is mostly visual, with stunning cinematography. The beautiful naturalistic images seem other-worldly, and perfectly in sync with the emotional detachment of Mark and Daria.

I would have replaced the thematically weak Pink Floyd music with the more cogent music of The Doors. Many scenes cry out for "Riders On The Storm".

Even so, I like this film. It's different; it's unique; it is artistic and imaginative. And the desert badlands are beautiful.

As the years go by, "Zabriskie Point" seems more and more attractive. It conveys the mood of the late 1960's in America. It is amazingly artistic, in a bohemian sort of way. And the film's last eight minutes are philosophically mesmerizing.

I saw ZP when it was first released and found it a major disappointment. Its script seemed forced and arch and too fakey '60s. It's politics too upfront and ridiculous. And let's face it, I was still under a love-spell known as BLOWUP : and I still haven't completely shaken it. Now the "love" is twisted up with all sorts of nostalgia it evokes and, oh well . . . Good Luck to me!

But time marches on and time has been kind to ZP and time has been a teacher to me. I revisit this film about every ten years and it just gets better and better with age. And ZP is it's own "experience"and is only really linked to BLOWUP through its creator, the late,great Mr. Antonioni.

Twelve years ago, I had the great good fortune to see an absolutely pristine print, projected at its correct size (immense), restored by an Italian government cultural agency who knows a good work of art when they see it and knows the importance of keeping such a thing of beauty in good shape. To this day I remember the gasp from the audience when the first shot of Death Valley appeared. It was like a thousand volt visual shock Antonioni had intentionally delivered to wake us up to a new level of awareness. And indeed what follows from that point is an entirely different sort of "place".

What is astonishing to me is how this film is coming into its own.

I remember the second time around seeing it --- the early 80s --- I had begun to feel affection towards the film as a whole and towards Daria and Mark in particular. Whereas, before these two seemed like a smart-alecky shadow version of Zefferelli's Olivia and Leonard (read: Romeo and Juliet)they now were engaging me --- particularly The Girl in her insistent slo-motion-ality. She-took-her-time . . . To Live. Everything, EVERYTHING dies around her.

Upon exciting the theater the daylight of Reality quickly began to erase my new found "enjoyment". The encroaching shoulder-padded, big haired 80s whispered "But that's a hippie fantasy --- let it go"

The force of Antonioni's vision had, I had realised, already worked itself inside of me the FIRST time around so I answered "80s" with an "Uh-Huh" and guarded my "love" secretly, possessively and jealously.

But, this, then is what good art does it lives inside of you, and, if you wish it has its way and "loves" you back: secretly, jealously, and possessively. And you get "changed".

Was thrilled to see that Turner Classic Movies had decided to show ZP in its March lineup. Undoubtedly, ZP must be seen on a gigantic screen so that it can truly take you into its constructed environment. But, hey, sometimes even a glimpse of the Beloved in a newspaper photo is no better than no glimpse at all.

Today reality hit, ZP has been withdrawn mysteriously and replaced with the whiney antics of ALICE'S RESTAURANT.

So, it is still too "difficult", too "disturbing", too "what"?

Maybe it's that, as with all good art, it Lives while everything dies around it.

Peace.

I saw "ZP" during its initial theatrical release at a theater on an Air Force Base in Texas. Although it was a little more controversial than "My Fair Lady", it was not the revolutionary and subversive piece that many of its current admirers like to believe, or at least the armed forces saw fit to make it accessible to the troops. Of course that was at least in part because nobody could figure out what Antonioni was trying to communicate with this film.

So let's get real, "ZP" is neither the masterpiece its fans claim nor the hopeless morass that most casual viewers find it after their initial exposure. It has some interesting themes and some innovative techniques. It was Antonioni's only foray into America and he had been marking time for several years after "Blowup". As a foreigner he was attracted to the growing student protests on US campuses, these were already a tradition in Europe but were almost unprecedented in America.

His outsider status provided an excellent opportunity for an objective evaluation of US culture at the end of the 1960's. Unfortunately his rambling tale was too superficial to really capture the moods, atmosphere, and dynamics of this period of social change. Other films like "The Strawberry Statement", "Getting Straight", "Joe", "Medium Cool", and "Gimme Shelter" are far better time capsules.

Antonioni's screenplay (if it can be called that) is more an excuse for filming lots of ordinary things in extraordinary ways. You don't ever forget his heroine's smile as she fantasies about blowing up her lover's luxury house, with slow motion images of our materialistic society being blown over the desert. All this to the Pink Floyd's "Come In Number 51, Your Time Is Up"; a retooled "Careful With That Axe Eugene".

Antonioni was probably trying to tell us something with his film, maybe that positive change is an internal attitude thing and that violence is not the way to change the system. In 1971 the obvious message was that it was irresponsible to run away or dropout from even an extremely decadent society, that once you get your own head together the responsible thing is to return and change the system with a positive example, even if it gets you killed.

The one thing I always like about a Michelangelo Antonioni movie is that it never lays out everything for you. You constantly have to invest yourself into the movie and fill in all of the blanks for yourself.

In that regard this is also being a very typical Antonioni movie, that perhaps is not as good or intriguing as his earlier works but it still remains a more than good watch, especially for those who like or appreciate his style of film-making and storytelling.

The main premise and time period of the movie is pretty interesting. It isn't really featuring a main and straightforward story but it's more a movie that is dealing with its reoccurring themes, concerning the sixties, rebellious youth, in America. It's also being a true product of its time in that regard, that gives a good portrayal of its time and overall mood.

But thing that mostly prevented me from seeing this as one of Antonioni's best was its second half. The movie started to become more vague, which also made the movie less interesting and pleasant to follow. It somehow also felt less focused, though its second half in essence is probably more focused than its first, since it features less characters and locations in it.

The acting is a bit of a mixed bag. Seems to me that they mostly used non-professional actors for this movie, which should add to its realism but more often takes you out of the movie.

It's still a good movie and also original, as you would expect from Antonioni!

7/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Mark is bored with the continuing student strike on campus. His friends get arrested and he goes to bail them out of jail. Instead, he is arrested. He is released and buys guns with his friend. During a campus protest, a policeman is shot. Mark flees the scene and steals a small plane. He's flying over the desert and Daria driving her car. He lands and joins her.

It's a little too free form and amateurish especially considering Michelangelo Antonioni as its director. It could trim some of the first half. Sometimes, it looks like a student film. It's almost halfway before Mark and Daria get together. The leads do more or less student level acting. They are hippie-rama and the embodiment of that newfound free-spirit. It's fine to have a road trip through the desert and suddenly, there is a hippie sex orgy in the dusty landscape. As a narrative film, it is a meandering slow jog. It's not surreal enough to be a hippie psychedelic fantasy. I wouldn't say it's beautifully filmed but the desert setting is compelling. At least, that's better than the real estate office. The explosions montage as a finale only serves to punctuate how lackluster most of the movie is. The box office was an unmitigated financial disaster. It's a little better than that.