Rebel Without a Cause, USA, 1955
It’s never good to watch a film with high expectations. It’s like asking for disappointment. [Does this apply to life as well?] Unfortunately my expectations for Rebel Without a Cause were quite high. James Dean, cult movie, rebelling youths, you name it, this film has the reputation of delivering it all.
It is deemed unfair to judge any film from nearly 60 years ago, especially one that focusses on social norms and conventions, from a “modern” point of view. But is it? May I be so bold as to question this paradigm, madame or sir? I can’t possibly know what it is like to live in 1955, sometimes I’m not even sure what it is like to live in 2013, to be honest. I can try to understand the significance of a film for its timeperiode, but that doesn’t mean my experience becomes more “authentic”. [Now that I’ve written that, I’m not sure anyone actually claims that. Hm…] But don’t get me wrong, I love films and art in general that breaks conventions and questions the unwritten rules of society.
Somewhere in this confused first paragraph, you might find the reason why I don’t get this film. Or James Dean. They feel very remote. I can understand why this film was important at the time it was made but I don’t quite get its significance for today. Just take a look at James Deans character Jim Stark, the unruly teenager, strong and independent, but deep inside he just wants a real father and a real mother. This ideal of a father-mother-child-family is everywhere in the film. All problems in it are explained by the fact that the teenager don’t have this standardised family to depend on. There is no hierarchy therefore there is chaos.
It also doesn’t help that all the teenage characters in the film look a lot older than they actually are. This may sound like a ridiculous complaint, but it is really irritating. Not as irritating as the fact that no one in this film actually cares if someone dies, though. The whole plot is crammed into 24 hours and yet it’s enough time for Natalie Wood’s character Judy, to get over the tragic and unexpected death of her boyfriend, fall in love with his rival and become best friends with the weird outsider who dies just a couple of hours later. But she doesn’t care because she has finally found a man she can really love. Hm. I’m not quite sure what to make of that.
There is an offputting amount of characters seeking male approval in this film. Jim Stark and his mother need a strong father figure to function “normally”. Judy needs Jim to compensate for the rejection she experiences from her father, but only after Jim has proven to be manlier than her boyfriend, who dies in the process. There is the überfather working for social services, whose absence in a time of need triggers even more tears. Plato, whose absent father is the reason he feels so attracted to Jim. Insert homosexual tension here. But of course these forbidden feelings result in Plato’s death, there is no room for such perverted affections in this film. [Now that was unfair. Or was it?] And it just goes on and on.
You might have guessed by now, Rebel Without a Cause is not going to be one of my favourite films of all time. I can understand why people are fascinated by it or think it is an important movie. But is it really good?
barbarisk 