The Rambler

I can't picture a single festival screening of Calvin Reeder's The Rambler that wouldn't result in at least half the crowd walking out in revulsion. There's just no way to put it lightly when describing the alienating, severely soul-disturbing kind of sickly atmosphere that hangs over the entire film like a radioactive blanket of surreal dread. The DVD cover barely suggests the beyond Lynchian, out to lunch, bugfvck nuts events which unfold, and instead hints toward a western with vaguely horror themed aspects. Couldn't be more different than that. The conventional elements like plot and the theme of Western are dimly present, shaky railroad tracks for a train that careens straight into the subconscious of bizarro world, some of what we see even too messed up and disassociate for the hardiest of cultist buffs. Few films are able to capture the purely illogical and disjointed feeling of a dream, but this one nails it scarily well. Sentences don't match responses, human behaviour is terrifyingly devoid of inhibitions, events repeat and come out of nowhere, and we really and truly feel lost, removed and detached from any kind of rational thought or action. Now the film doesn't outright announce that it's all a dream, save for a few hints embedded in the story, but it sure felt like one long nightmare to me, evoking psychological feelings which words really can't describe. Dermot Mulroney does a 'Man with no name routine' as a vacant ex con who is released from prison and blows back into his one horse trailer park town. He does indeed have no name, now that I think of it, and is only ever referred to as The Rambler. Upon returning, he finds his volatile girlfriend (Natasha Lyonne) has taken up with another man, and no one seems to want him around anymore. Time to hit the road, he figures, sauntering out into the acrid desolation of the southwest in a dead cool opening credits scene set to Terry Allen's Red Bird, one of my favourite twangy tunes. From there it gets hard to describe, comprehend and stomach. He's off in some John Waters style twilight zone of very unsettling characters, saying and doing things that make little sense and get increasingly shocking and vulgar. A mysterious girl (Lindsay Pulsipher) weaves in and out of the story and seems to be the only one besides him who is remotely coherent. A crackpot doctor (James Cady) shows him an extremely defective device that is supposed to look into people's dreams. There's ugly, misanthropic fiends running all about with nothing to say other than loosely strung together verbal diarrhea, and a constant nauseating film of unease over everything. I've read reviews wailing about how this film has less than nothing to say, and should have shut it's mouth. But that's the point to a nightmare; it doesn't teach, enlighten or otherwise change us in any way other than to give our sense of dread a workout and provoke a cold sweat. Similarly, the film simply is there to scare, to induce the gag reflex and doesn't strive for anything else, and in that sense it's pure, primal and honest about it's intentions. The very definition of not for everyone, this will even put off bands of counter culture cinephiles who scoff at anything mainstream. Deliberately vile, constantly off its rocker and so far beyond the event horizon where bizarre ends and something truly indescribable begins, The Rambler will shake the soul out of anyone who claims to have seen it all. You have been warned.

The Rambler isn't for everyone,and I'm not sure it's for anyone. There's fragments of something more profound within it but it's not an easy movie to enjoy. It is very Lynch-esque...layered and at times beautiful as it strides a limbo length of highway in search of...well, that's the problem for many. What is this movie saying??? Reviewers who trash it because they don't get it are short-changing the metaphorical depth and visceral experience of the movie...and much like a Lynch movie this is a visceral journey. The cinematography is very good, the acting is what it needs to be for this type of movie. It's all very dream like. I admit I don't quite understand "The Rambler" and that subtracts points for me perhaps unfairly. I'm sure a few metaphor champions will crack the code and see the brilliance but for the rest of us there's probably a feeling of confusion. I saw this listed on some best of horror lists for 2013 but it's not a horror movie, not in the conventional at least. It's more of a ramble through subconsciousness and a desire to be free from the "logic" of society. A quest to stay within oneself and live without meaning. Or...maybe not. The meaning might be ambiguous and if that type of thing drives you crazy then stay away. If your feeling adventurous and want something that escapes the typical Hollywood polished package type movie take it for a spin.

First of all let me say this" this film is a trip" . I wont say if it was a good trip,but i will say that you don't see stuff like this a lot.If you enjoy films like "The Deadly Drifter " ,or "The Big Empty", you,ll be right at home.Fellini-type images,flashing between dreams ,and nightmares,light ,and dark.Dis-jointed,non-liner , and just plain weird.I like these type of movies,and love abstract things,in art ,and film.If this sounds like something up your alley ,go for it. If not,move on to the next ,trendy ,garden path plot movie,at the nearest 10 plex,and have no worries.I myself like a challenge,and a film NOT set up like a paint-by-number art set.Its up to new story-tellers to give us something new, like this.If you like stuff thats NOT mainstream,this is for you.

Yes I am aware what I chose as summary "line". And as you can see I understand how to use the "" to make a point. Now this movie does not make it a secret that it imitates and likens David Lynch. And while there is a certain quality here (the main actor for example, the framing, the quality of the cinematography), the overall attachment is missing.

But maybe that is what makes it great for you. Maybe you can see something in this, that many others can't. I know the phrase has a negative connotation to it, but I mean it without any ill will: good for you. Anyone who can get something out of a movie, cherish that. And while I generally don't talk about the story of a movie, it wouldn't even help in this case. It is not so much about the story, but about the journey ...

It is for those who think that David Lynch makes far too few Movies, or for those that haunt Film Festivals and Midnight Movie Screenings, or the Counter-Culture Hordes who abhor anything from Mainstream Hollywood. That is to say this is one of the Weird Ones.

It is incomprehensible and defies Classification. It is Bizarre and proud of it. Disturbing imagery abound and Ugly People populate this Misanthropic Movie and it has no pretensions other than to make you squirm and squabble about its Meaning (it has none other than what you provide).

Definitely worth a watch for those interested in Underground Cinema and Films that inhabit the edge of the Universe defiling anyone who dares venture into proximity. It cannot be explained and doesn't attempt to offer any coherent Story. This is an exercise in Art and is filled with nothing more than Imagery and Sound to elicit a response. The Dialog is so strange that it really has nothing to do with anything.

There is one exchange between a Cab Driver and The Rambler that is directed at those who will hate this Movie. Cabbie: "Have you seen the Movie Frankenstein?" Rambler: "No." Cabbie: "I Love that Movie, but I would have made it in Color".