Richard Linklater, like no other director these days, knows how to craft a film around the language being used. He understands how language is used in a particular time and place, and whether that language is intelligent or ignorant, it seems authentic to the situation. In Tape, the language is intelligent and its authenticity derives from the opportunities available in the context. The context is first of all the film's setting; a hotel room. The context is, furthermore, a game of sorts; and like all games, it can elicit the worst in its players. Finally, the players are three people who are friends from high school, and possibly still are, though probably not.
One room movies are a tricky business. In varying degrees, they suggest irrationality will come into play and escape will only come at a price. Tape utilizes the anxiety implicit in one room settings to an unprecedented extent. The entire film takes place in a hotel room without a single camera shot elsewhere. We do not even see out the door of the room as characters come and go. The curtains remain drawn throughout as well. The setting is simply bleak.
As the film opens, Vince (Ethan Hawke) is in an obvious state of preparation and the rest of the film is a matter of carrying out his plan. Because Vince is seen preparing, we know the events of the film are a game of sorts. The game is played as a matter of deciding whether Vince's friend Jon (Robert Sean Leonard) date raped Amy (Uma Thurman) during their senior year, just after Amy had broken up with Vince. Much like the room they find themselves during the movie, high school was also a confining and maddening experience, so the question of how they leave the hotel room accrues the added meaning of whether the characters are any more adult now then in high school.
In terms of the film being played out as a game, we see what we would expect from a game; hostility and obscenity, which Freud took to be the primary aims of a joke. The games we play seem to have the capacity for degrading into hostility and obscenity even when they begin in fun, and Tape is no exception to games so conceived. Whatever it is about games that so often leave at least one person frustrated is hard to say, but Tape does an excellent job at exploring a range of answers. Is it that Vince is competitive with Jon? Thankfully, the film only mentions this overused explanation and considers deeper motives in explaining how games have the capacity to degenerate.
Of the characters, Vince clearly enjoys the privilege of being direct, or what Foucault labeled the "speaker's benefit." His courage in speaking directly to the taboo generates a powerful performance, too. And despite taking courage to a brazen excess, Vince is essential in drawing out truth.
Jon on the other hand explores the situation with a far higher degree of pathos. It is as if his circumlocutions and euphemisms suggest that there is something to explore prior to naming something. At one point, after making arrogant statement, Jon says, "If it sounds pompous, it's only because I haven't fully honed my skills yet." His skill is precisely the ability to suspend judgments made in naming things, and to assess the world with a little sophistication (literally, with a move toward a more complex notion). Jon is essentially capable of processing the truth.
If Vince draws out the truth, and Jon processes it, Amy is the one who puts it into perspective. She is capable of saying things like, "People change. They end up having nothing to say to each other even if they were best friends years before." She seems to have enough wherewithal to play their games and then step back and ask "Is that what you wanted?" She has a leg up on Vince and Jon since perspective includes both Vince's direct approach and Jon's sophistication.
In terms of the film being played out as a game, we see what we would expect from a game; hostility and obscenity, which Freud took to be the primary aims of a joke. The games we play seem to have the capacity for degrading into hostility and obscenity even when they begin in fun, and Tape is no exception to games so conceived. Whatever it is about games that so often leave at least one person frustrated is hard to say, but Tape does an excellent job at exploring a range of answers. Is it that Vince is competitive with Jon? Thankfully, the film only mentions this overused explanation and considers deeper motives in explaining how games have the capacity to degenerate.
Of the characters, Vince clearly enjoys the privilege of being direct, or what Foucault labeled the "speaker's benefit." His courage in speaking directly to the taboo generates a powerful performance, too. And despite taking courage to a brazen excess, Vince is essential in drawing out truth.
Jon on the other hand explores the situation with a far higher degree of pathos. It is as if his circumlocutions and euphemisms suggest that there is something to explore prior to naming something. At one point, after making arrogant statement, Jon says, "If it sounds pompous, it's only because I haven't fully honed my skills yet." His skill is precisely the ability to suspend judgments made in naming things, and to assess the world with a little sophistication (literally, with a move toward a more complex notion). Jon is essentially capable of processing the truth.
If Vince draws out the truth, and Jon processes it, Amy is the one who puts it into perspective. She is capable of saying things like, "People change. They end up having nothing to say to each other even if they were best friends years before." She seems to have enough wherewithal to play their games and then step back and ask "Is that what you wanted?" She has a leg up on Vince and Jon since perspective includes both Vince's direct approach and Jon's sophistication.
Under Linklater's direction, and with his penchant for working from language, the film flourishes in the hands of actors who are perfectly capable of being their character. In a way, the film sets the bar high for what counts as a compelling film.
IMDb rates this film 7.2 stars out of 10
Film 101 rates this film 2.5 stars out of 5
IMDb rates this film 7.2 stars out of 10
Film 101 rates this film 2.5 stars out of 5