Skip to main content

Just a little whiplash is all.


(SPOILERS) I don’t know if it’s just me, but Spielberg’s ’70s efforts seem, perversely, much more mature, or “adult” at any rate, than his subsequent phase – from the mid-’80s onwards – of straining tremulously for critical acceptance. Perhaps because there’s less thrall to sentiment on display, or indulgence in character exploration that veered into unswerving melodrama. Duel, famously made for TV but more than good enough to garner a European cinema release the following year after the raves came flooding in, is the starkest, most undiluted example of the director as a purveyor of pure technical expertise, honed as it is to essentials in terms of narrative and plotting. Consequently, that’s both Duel’s strength and weakness.

Strength, because while it was positioned as a TV movie, it carries with it the relentless dread and oppressive nightmarishness of the horror film, The boogeyman as a mechanical dreadnaught of the highways, bearing down with inexplicable fury on its prey. Weakness, because at ninety minutes, you do begin to notice that there’s nothing else to it. No luxuriation in finely wrought characters or comic relief as there is in Jaws, where Spielberg would take Duel’s essentials and swim with them, to undreamed-of box-office rewards.

Richard Matheson’s fortunes on TV and in movies – outside of The Twilight Zone, of course – we’re mixed, starting with the acclaim of The Incredible Shrinking Man, and followed by the various flawed interpretations of I Am Legend, the adaptation of his The Martian Chronicles and all the way up to Richard Kelly’s take on The Box. He adapted his own short story here (originally published in Playboy), and Spielberg knew well enough to accentuate a good thing. The TV movie was about quarter of an hour shorter, with the director reconvening to shoot several further scenes subsequently, several of which are fairly essential to a divergent reading of the movie. These comprise the opening departure and city drive-through by David Mann (Dennis Weaver), the conversation with his wife (Jacqueline Scott), the encounter with the school bus, and the rail-crossing drama.

Without these, Duel is pretty much what it says on the tin: man vs machine, the personification of technofear as an unquenchable behemoth will not stop until it has crushed its target (the truck is The Terminator, basically). Indeed, one might stretch – and stretch is the word – the reading further; the truck represents the Elite (the driver’s face remains hidden throughout), bent on depopulation. David’s surname is, after all, “Mann”.

It seemed clear to me watching Duel on this occasion, however, that the truck is the manifestation of Mann’s wife’s id, set on doing unto him what she very nearly suffered due to her blithely inattentive husband: rape (the truck is, after all, always bringing up Mann’s rear in the most threatening manner). “I’m sorry about last night” David confesses when he calls her, but she is having none of it, owing to how he failed to defend her against Steve Henderson “trying to rape me in front of the whole party”. Naturally, David’s car is a Valiant, the very opposite of his demeanour; his worm has to turn, in order for him to express himself in a Mann-ly way. He can do this only by going up against the inflamed truck, a reflection of his toxic masculinity (is there any other kind?)

However, even conjured in this way, the terror truck isn’t simply a manifested demon. Indeed, it displays a nurturing, maternal quality that belies its phallic rage, and so underlines the feminine force behind it. Mann is disinterested in helping those he encounters on his way. He can’t wait to get away from the bus load of kids (Spielberg, obviously, wants to linger in their company for as long as possible). The truck, however, halts its predatory mission to rescue the vehicle, pushing it back on the road. And perhaps there is also an implicit disapproval of the exploitation of animals when it proceeds to wreck the roadside gas station with its caged creatures for sale; it’s the only time where we see intentional endangerment of life beyond David himself.

Spielberg was up to his ears in an era of everyman protagonists during the 1970s, flawed men who don’t stick up for their wives (David Mann), or even leave their whole families (Roy Neary in Close Encounters of the Third Kind). Or fail them by winding up dead (Clovis Poplin in Sugarland Express). Weaver is spot on as the little man who, even in triumph, doesn’t really become a big one (his jig of jubilation after the tanker has crashed to its doom). There’s lots of smart, low-key observation here, from David’s washroom internal monologue, to his café imaginings that the driver is also among the patrons, to his nervy laughing along with the radio (“I never heard of anybody who plays meat”) to take his mind off the menace.

Kim Newman, in the first edition of Nightmare Movies, called Duela survivalist Luddite masterpiece, and just about the best monster movie of the last twenty years”. It’s operating very much in the survivalist pose of Deliverance, but rather than the untamed wilds, the foe is the beast lurking beneath notionally civilising methods.

For such movies to work, there needs to be a special means of isolating the hero. Sometimes, that simply entails disposing of anyone who might get in the antagonist’s way (The Terminator). At others – Joy Ride – it’s about an environment where there’s only you and your oppressor. Such as on a boat in the middle of the ocean. It’s not for nothing that many still regard Duel as one of the best pictures Spielberg helmed. Becoming slicker doesn’t necessarily make you better, and picking more demanding material doesn’t mean you’ll rise to the challenge. The decade following Duel amounts to far and away the director’s best work.



Popular posts from this blog

Maybe the dingo ate your baby.

Seinfeld 2.9: The Stranded The Premise George and Elaine are stranded at a party in Long Island, with a disgruntled hostess.

I think I’m Pablo Picasso!

Venom: Let There Be Carnage (2021) (SPOILERS) I get the impression that, whatever it is stalwart Venom fans want from a Venom movie, this iteration isn’t it. The highlight here for me is absolutely the wacky, love-hate, buddy-movie antics of Tom Hardy and his symbiote alter. That was the best part of the original, before it locked into plot “progression” and teetered towards a climax where one CGI monster with gnarly teeth had at another CGI monster with gnarly teeth. And so it is for Venom: Let There Be Carnage . But cutting quicker to the chase.

These are not soda cans you asked me to get for you.

The Devil’s Own (1997) (SPOILERS) Naturally, a Hollywood movie taking the Troubles as a backdrop is sure to encounter difficulties. It’s the push-pull of wanting to make a big meaningful statement about something weighty, sobering and significant in the real world and bottling it when it comes to the messy intricacies of the same. So inevitably, the results invariably tend to the facile and trite. I’m entirely sure The Devil’s Own would have floundered even if Harrison Ford hadn’t come on board and demanded rewrites, but as it is, the finished movie packs a lot of talent to largely redundant end.

Are you, by any chance, in a trance now, Mr Morrison?

The Doors (1991) (SPOILERS) Oliver Stone’s mammoth, mythologising paean to Jim Morrison is as much about seeing himself in the self-styled, self-destructive rebel figurehead, and I suspect it’s this lack of distance that rather quickly leads to The Doors becoming a turgid bore. It’s strange – people are , you know, films equally so – but I’d hitherto considered the epic opus patchy but worthwhile, a take that disintegrated on this viewing. The picture’s populated with all the stars it could possibly wish for, tremendous visuals (courtesy of DP Robert Richardson) and its director operating at the height of his powers, but his vision, or the incoherence thereof, is the movie’s undoing. The Doors is an indulgent, sprawling mess, with no internal glue to hold it together dramatically. “Jim gets fat and dies” isn’t really a riveting narrative through line.

Did you not just hand over a chicken to someone?

The Father (2020) (SPOILERS) I was in no great rush to see The Father , expecting it to be it to be something of an ordeal in the manner of that lavishly overpraised euthanasia-fest Amour. As with the previous Oscars, though, the Best Picture nominee I saw last turned out to be the best of the bunch. In that case, Parasite , its very title beckoning the psychic global warfare sprouting shoots around it, would win the top prize. The Father , in a year of disappointing nominees, had to settle for Best Actor. Ant’s good, naturally, but I was most impressed with the unpandering manner in which Florian Zeller and Christopher Hampton approached material that might easily render one highly unstuck.

So the devil's child will rise from the world of politics.

The Omen (1976) (SPOILERS) The coming of the Antichrist is an evergreen; his incarnation, or the reveal thereof, is always just round the corner, and he can always be definitively identified in any given age through a spot of judiciously subjective interpretation of The Book of Revelation , or Nostradamus. Probably nothing did more for the subject in the current era, in terms of making it part of popular culture, than The Omen . That’s irrespective of the movie’s quality, of course. Which, it has to be admitted, is not on the same level as earlier demonic forebears Rosemary’s Baby and The Exorcist .

Fifty medications didn’t work because I’m really a reincarnated Russian blacksmith?

Infinite (2021) (SPOILERS) It’s as if Mark Wahlberg, his lined visage increasingly resembling a perplexed potato, learned nothing from the blank ignominy of his “performances” in previous big-budget sci-fi spectacles Planet of the Apes and, er, Max Payne . And maybe include The Happening in that too ( Transformers doesn’t count, since even all-round reprobate Shia La Boeuf made no visible dent on their appeal either way). As such, pairing him with the blandest of journeyman action directors on Infinite was never going to seem like a sterling idea, particularly with a concept so far removed from of either’s wheelhouse.

I can do in two weeks what you can only wish to do in twenty years.

Wrath of Man (2021) (SPOILERS) Guy Ritchie’s stripped-down remake of Le Convoyeur (or Cash Truck , also the working title for this movie) feels like an intentional acceleration in the opposite direction to 2019’s return-to-form The Gentleman , his best movie in years. Ritchie seems to want to prove he can make a straight thriller, devoid of his characteristic winks, nods, playfulness and outright broad (read: often extremely crude) sense of humour. Even King Arthur: Legend of the Sword has its fair share of laughs. Wrath of Man is determinedly grim, though, almost Jacobean in its doom-laden trajectory, and Ritchie casts his movie accordingly, opting for more restrained performers, less likely to summon more flamboyant reflexes.

You got any Boom Boom Lemon?

Kate (2021) (SPOILERS) The dying protagonist subgenre is a difficult one to get right. The customary approach is one of world-weary resignation on the part of the poisoned or terminally ill party that sweetens the pill, suggesting they’re being done something of a favour. It’s also a smart idea to give them some sort of motive force, in order to see them through the proceedings before they kark it. Such as a mystery to solve; there’s a good reason D.O.A. is generally seen as a touchstone in fare of this ilk. Kate fumbles on both counts, leaving the viewer with a rather icky poisoning – you don’t want to be too distracted by that sort of thing, not least because suspension of disbelief that the already superheroic protagonist can function at all evaporates – and a lead character with the slenderest of relatability working for her. Most damningly, however, is a revenge plot that’s really rather limp.

Five people make a conspiracy, right?

Snake Eyes (1998) (SPOILERS) The best De Palma movies offer a synthesis of plot and aesthetic, such that the director’s meticulously crafted shots and set pieces are underpinned by a solid foundation. That isn’t to say, however, that there isn’t a sheer pleasure to be had from the simple act of observing, from De Palma movies where there isn’t really a whole lot more than the seduction of sound, image and movement. Snake Eyes has the intention to be both scrupulously written and beautifully composed, coming after a decade when the director was – mostly – exploring his oeuvre more commercially than before, which most often meant working from others’ material. If it ultimately collapses in upon itself, then, it nevertheless delivers a ream of positives in both departments along the way.