Jim
Jarmusch followed up his much-lauded, anti-narrative film Stranger than Paradise with the
more comical Down by Law, but
despite the lighter tone, it is a bold film which directly challenges
the domination of the classical Hollywood narrative while remaining
true to the director's unique vision. Opening with slow,
extended sequences expressing the aimless lives of Zack and Jack,
Jarmusch continues the life-between-the-drama approach he's known for,
but throws a kink in the wheel with the addition of Roberto Benigni as
the comic relief. At first it appears that his role is simply
that - a relief from the mundanity of the other two characters - but he
is intelligently used as a commentary on the conventional narrative
itself. Throughout the film, he's the one creating movement in
the narrative, driving the story forward by convincing the others to
escape, keeping them together as they travel and falling in love on
their final stoping point. In a sense, it's as if a Hollywood
character was thrown into a film like Stranger
than Paradise simply to make it more accessible, but Jarmusch is
clearly too smart to make such simplistic use of this. Roberto's
presence in the film is something of a comic miracle as he crosses
paths with Zack early in the film and somehow ends up being put in the
same prison cell later on. This, along with the intentionally
over-the-top nature of the character and his deliberately ridiculous
character arc complete with happy ending, is evidence of Jarmusch
self-consciously using him to comment on the manipulative and wholly
unrealistic character types of those other films. He puts his
faith and career into lovable losers like Zack and Jack who help him
represent the simple beauty of moments of everyday life, so it's no
surprise that the funniest and most touching scenes of Down by Law occur in the very same
manner. Scenes like the unforgettable "I scream, you scream, we
all scream for ice cream" sequences are hilarious and magical because
they come from the materials of aimless, bullshitting conversations
rather than in service of a contrived story. Of course, it'd be
silly to suggest that this film isn't
contrived, but only inasmuch as it is critical of the devices it
mocks. Its soul is the same as all Jarmusch films, but here he
digs a bit deeper into the roots of his own methodology and that to
which he is opposed. The fact that he does all this within his
funniest and probably oddest film makes it all the more impressive.
Cinematic
Reflections
