Rubber (2010) Reviews

This movie was shot in a decent way and had some decent acting, but that was it. I watched only because of other people talking about it. I thought it was really stupid and didn't make any sense from beginning to end. Lame. Seemed like a "I thought of this when I was drunk" idea.
There were a bunch of scenes that I did appreciate the way they were shot though. I loved the tricycle at the end. Oh and the scene of the "tire" watching a Nascar race.... classic. LOL

I kept bumping in this movie so I was really curious to check what it was about. Well, it seems to be one of the most polarizing movies that came out recently and, apparently, you either love it or hate it. Personally, I’m one of the few remaining in the middle, in the sense that I thought it was pretty good but I still don’t think it was really brilliant though. Basically, it is a really weird flick with some very experimental elements. I almost went completely blank before watching this movie and it is only a few days ago that I found out that it was about a killer tire. Fortunately, I didn’t know anything else and it is the best way to watch such a flick. Indeed, there were so many ‘WTF’ moments, it was just really cool. Unfortunately, it gets a little bit repetitive pretty quickly. It is like the audience watching the show. It was at first pretty neat but it got old really fast. The point is that Dupieux had a few good ideas but he kept repeating them on and on and it would have been interesting if they went further than those few ideas. Still, they get some extra points just for the sheer originality and absurdity of the whole concept and it is rather impressive that they managed to make an enjoyable and interesting flick about a damned tire. Anyway, to conclude, even if I wasn't completely sold, I thought it was still pretty good and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in experimental movies.

If you're coming to this movie like I was, in hope of a fun, silly, truly original horror film, then you will be bitterly disappointed. Rubber is none of these.
It is a pretentious and frankly dull 80 mins that you cannot get back.

The sequences with the actual tyre aren't too bad. They are shot beautifully, and with some humour that really works. But there are not enough of them to save the film. What you mainly get is an attempt to be clever by breaking the fourth wall and directly addressing the audience and the filmmaking process, that is so filled wih clunky dialogue and even clunkier acting that all you can do is cringe.

A real shame as the premise of a killer tyre is so filled with possibilities.

"Ladies, gentlemen, the film you are about to see today is an homage to the "no reason" - that most powerful element of style."

The opening moments of Rubber break the fourth wall, with a character randomly climbing out of a car boot to explain the principal of "no reason" which governs movies and real life. The principal essentially states that there are things we do not question because they have no real reason behind them. ("In the Steven Spielberg movie E.T., why is the alien brown? No reason.") Writer-director Quentin Dupieux invoked this "no reason" policy for every single aspect of Rubber's narrative, thus allowing himself the freedom to craft a dark comedy that's completely absurd. How is a tire alive? No reason. Why does a tire have psychokinetic powers? No reason. Why are there spectators watching the "movie" about the tire? No reason. It's a brilliantly innovative style of meta filmmaking which additionally explores the relationship between movie-goers and Hollywood, and functions as a hilariously biting satire of the movie-going climate of today.

The story takes place somewhere in the desert, where a ragtag group of spectators with binoculars are metaphorically positioned as the crowd of theatre-goers watching a "movie". In said movie, a tire named Robert comes to life, rising up from the sands armed with psychokinetic powers to explore the world. As he wanders around the immediate area, Robert uses his powers to kill people by making their heads spontaneously explode. The crowd of spectators, meanwhile, are thinned out, but one of them (Hauser) refuses to stop watching the movie because he wants to know how it will end. His stubbornness compels a police lieutenant (Spinella) to persist in his pursuit of the lethal fugitive tire, though he wants to just go home.

The sneaky marketing implied that Rubber was nothing but a rehash of slasher conventions with a tire instead of a masked killer, but this is another classic case of significant mis-marketing. CHUD's review describes the film as "Roger Corman by way of Samuel Beckett", and that's pretty much an ideal summary of this quirky, postmodern oddity. In amidst the logic-devoid story about the strangest cinematic serial killer in history, Dupieux finds time for satire. With the fictional audience comprised of all the usual cinema-goer stereotypes, Dupieux essentially presents a cultural cross-section of today's movie-going public. It satirises cinema-goer attitudes as well - the geeks break out into discussions at various times, and a bratty kid complains that the "film" is already boring barely a few minutes into the show. A cynical spectator even approaches the actors at one stage to criticise the stupidity of a certain scene. The most brilliant instance of satire, though, involves the audience gobbling up a turkey that's thrown in front them, as the "organisers" know that they'll lap it up regardless of quality. Astute viewers will understand this sly metaphor, which is furthered in subsequent scenes to side-splitting degree. The layers of satire go deeper than this, but suffice it to say this material is best experienced than spoiled.

On top of writing and directing, Quentin Dupieux carried out several additional duties on the film; he was the cinematographer, camera operator, co-editor and co-scorer. It's fair to say that this was his baby, so he gets tremendous credit for making it work as well as it does. He set himself a huge technical challenge by making a tire the central character, but Dupieux rose to the challenge. The visual effects which brought the tire to life are stunningly seamless; guaranteed to provoke murmurs of "How did they do that?". This technical excellence thankfully extends to the gore, which is satisfyingly brutal and for the most part looks like it was pulled off with practical effects. Also worth mentioning are the actors, all of whom understood the type of movie Dupieux was aiming for and delivered appropriate performances. Stephen Spinella stands out the most, which is relieving since most of the humour and the satirical elements are conveyed through his character of Lieutenant Chad. Wings Hauser gets a massive kudos as well for his amusing portrayal of a wheelchair-bound audience member.

It's been a long time since a filmmaker has made such a weird movie for the sake of being weird in a cinematic climate packed with so much mainstream Hollywood fluff. Even though Rubber falters towards the end as it struggles to find a coherent plot and devise the best way to close the door, it's difficult not to like such an original movie.

8.0/10

And now for something completely different. One of the things that depresses me the most as a moviegoer is the fact that, although there's SO MUCH room in the film medium to do things that are original, interesting and even mind-blowing, filmmakers hardly ever go that route because they know that audiences prefer being fed what they're comfortable with rather than having to deal with understanding something new. Roger Ebert has said that the film medium is the best type of art out there, because it can encompass all types of art, seeing as, in a movie, you can hear music, and see people singing, dancing, etc. While I'm not sure I entirely agree with Ebert's assertion, since I think other types of art (as viewed outside of film) have their own merit, I do agree that the film medium is probably one of the most ripe for potential to DO a lot, whether it's visually, audibly or emotionally (or all three, in some great cases, like MULHOLLAND DRIVE). But since that potential is hardly ever even half exploited, originality in the film medium often has to be found in the realm of small independent films like RUBBER, one of the quirkiest and most interesting films of 2011.

If you've heard anything at all about RUBBER, you've probably heard that it's about a tire that kills people. Yeah, a tire that kills people, not by running them over or choking them or anything, but by telepathically blowing their heads off. That's all I knew about RUBBER before seeing it, and it's exactly why I opted out of seeing it in theaters - I thought it would simply be one of those dumb low-budget indie horror films. But on a friend's recommendation, I rented the DVD, and as it turns out, there was another key element of RUBBER's plot that I was completely unaware of. In fact, it's an element we're exposed to right at the beginning of the movie, before we even meet the murderous tire. RUBBER is an indictment of the movie-watching community. It's a criticism of that majority of ticket buyers who have told the movie industry that they don't want quirkiness or creativity in their films: they just want as much of TRANSFORMERS and TWILIGHT as filmmakers can shit out.

We know we're in for something terrific as soon as RUBBER gets under way. A police man gets out of a car trunk, stands right in front of the camera, and immediately starts addressing us. He tells us that "All great films, without exception, have an important element of 'no reason' in them." What this means is that, in all great films, there's an aspect of the plot that doesn't really make much sense, but it's there anyway because it's necessary for the story to move forward. Of course, the character offers us several examples of films in which we see this, but I won't spoil them for you here, because they're simply too good. All I'll say is that the references to JFK and THE PIANIST are utterly hilarious. The character informs us that "This film is an homage to the 'no reason' because life itself is full of 'no reason'." Of course, the point throughout RUBBER is that there's no need to wonder HOW or WHY a tire is capable of moving and telepathically killing people. It just happens.

But that's not all. Before the film's plot even starts kicking in, we see a group of people gather together, and we soon discover that these people will be "watching" the movie that we'll also be watching. All the inconveniences that those of us who hate having to sit in a crowded room with people to watch a movie are familiar with emerge here: a kid complains "It's already boring" and his dad responds "It's just the beginning, it's gonna pick up". Soon, those audience members (and us as well, obviously) start getting to know our protagonist, who is, indeed a tire that meanders through a desert-like area, occasionally running into people, and yes, telepathically killing them by blowing their heads off. In a very commendable move on the film's part, these moments are never gratuitous: they just happen, as if they were of little importance.

However, just because the tire takes up most of the film's running time, don't think for a second that the film forgets about our little "audience" of folks who are supposedly watching the film along with us. The scenes in which these people show up serve as an incredibly effective criticism of gullibility. Let's face it: most people like bad movies. That's why they keep getting made. You might know that bad movies are sometimes referred to as "turkeys"... and well, I won't include any spoilers here, but what RUBBER does with that reference in this movie is nothing short of pure brilliance, and I have to admit, absolute hilarity (though it's comedy of the darkest type, of course). We soon start getting a spree of awkward and undoubtedly funny scenes in which the actors in the movie (mostly cops who are trying to stop the murder spree) start wondering whether or not they should continue working on the movie or if they should just go home. What's most interesting about this is that we never see a film crew or cameras. We just see the audience and the actors, which means that there are times at which you could reasonably argue that there's a blur between what's supposed to be part of the film and what isn't. And that's, of course, interesting and different.

The culmination of the above explained awkwardness comes with what may be the film's best moment, in which one of the audience members literally gets to interact with the actors in the movie. Have you ever been frustrated with a movie because you know that what a character is doing makes no sense, or even worse, that there's a much easier way to accomplish what he/she is trying to do? If you have, then I have no doubt you'll laugh knowingly at this scene.

The film does make the curious choice of repeating the same lines that were spoken at the beginning of the film at some point during the middle, despite the fact that there doesn't seem to be much explanation for doing so other than perhaps feeling a need to remind viewers of its main point, though I certainly don't think it was necessary. There are also some questionable aspects regarding the events during the film's final few minutes. A shot of the Hollywood sign feels like an all-too-obvious way to inform us of the direction in which the film's satirical arrows are aimed.

Still, there's little doubt that this is one of the most refreshingly creative pieces of celluloid I've seen in recent times, certainly a dozen times more boundary-pushing than anything else I've seen in 2011 thus far. Before watching RUBBER, I thought perhaps the only effect it would have on me would be to make me scared any time I looked at my car tires, but that's far from the case at all. The object that kills people in RUBBER happens to be a tire, but it may as well have been any other object. The fact that it's a tire is of little importance. The truly important aspect of the movie is that effort to play around with people's expectations and viewpoints on what a work of cinema should and shouldn't contain. The film is terrific because it deals with that subject admirably while never letting go of its inherent quirkiness. If you think that this film and the things I've talked about here sound stupid, fear not, for the third TRANSFORMERS movie is only a few weeks away. To everyone else who's open-minded enough to marvel at what the film medium can accomplish, especially on a budget as small as the one that went into this film, RUBBER is highly recommended.