This film takes a major detour when it
comes to intrigue. I have seen a number of film noirs in the past,
and I felt this one sort of just lacked something. Don't get me
wrong, I did enjoy the film, the story was interesting, and I liked
how it seemed so believable. This particular story seems like it
could happen to anybody, just a normal person trying to fulfill a
personal goal who befalls unfortunate circumstances. The main
character is sort of like the typical “everyman” archetype, and
the leading lady fulfills the part of the femme fatale.
According
to the online version of the Merriam Webster dictionary, an antihero
is “a
main character in a book, play, movie, etc., who does not have the
usual good qualities that are expected in a hero”. Usually, the
hero of a story displays desirable traits such as altruism, bravery,
and fortitude. However, an anti-hero lacks these ideal qualities and
instead displays a different set of characteristics. In Detour,
the main character, piano player Al Roberts, strays from a typical
anti-hero stereotype. While a stereotypical anti-hero would be
selfish, cowardly, and weak, Roberts actually displays a mix of
characteristics from both the hero and anti-hero stereotypes in order
to attempt to fulfill his goals. The film begins with Roberts sitting
in a diner, telling his tale through a flashback. Roberts is
embarking on a cross-country trip to visit his girlfriend who moved
to Los Angeles. He hitchhikes his way, with little initial success.
Eventually, a car stops and gives him a lift. The car is driven by a
bookie named Charles Haskell Jr. As the trip progresses, Roberts
takes over driving while Haskell sleeps. As fate would have it, it
begins to rain, so Roberts pulls over to put the top on the
convertible. While doing this, Roberts opens Haskell's door to get
his attention. Haskell falls out of the car and hits his head on a
stone, killing him. At this point, Roberts panics. He fears the
police will not believe the truth and assume he killed Haskell. In
this situation, Roberts displays the anti-hero characteristic of
cowardice; he makes assumptions that lead to his decision to dump
Haskell in a pile of brush off the side of the road. He plans to make
a quick getaway, but then he reasons he will need money for gas, and
a driver's license. Here Roberts is using logic, which is a typical
heroic trait. He is going beyond the scope of the typical anti-hero
to add to the mystique of the film noir style. It could be argued
that Roberts is displaying selfisness by taking the money, but since
he plans to use it for gas and food money and not for his personal
bank account, I would say he is being logical and selfless in this
case.
As
the story goes on, Roberts, now posing as Haskell until he can get to
Los Angeles and dump the car, picks up a hitchhiker of his own, Vera,
despite his better judgment. In this instance, Roberts again steps
past the borders of the anti-hero framework to display an honorable
trait of consideration. He offers to help Vera, when instead, he
could have just left her alone. However, in order for the story to
work, Roberts has to pick up Vera. There wouldn't be much of a story
if Roberts left the rest stop by himself. One of the only ways for
him to successfully advance the plot is to engage in heroic behavior
and offer to provide assistance to someone in need. By some bizarre
coincidence, Vera, like Roberts, had been given a ride by the real
Charles Haskell Jr, therefore she knew Roberts was lying when he
claimed to be Haskell. Vera then blackmails Roberts for her benefit.
The pair at last arrive in Los Angeles. Roberts plans to sell the car
off so he can back to his life, but Vera has other ideas. She plans
to use Roberts to con Haskell's family and get rich quick. This is a
pivotal moment for Roberts; he can either go fulfill the anti-hero
stereotype and go along with the scam or he can conform to the heroic
form and try to stop Vera. Roberts goes with the latter. Again, just
in when Roberts faced the choice of whether to give Vera a ride, if
he decided to go along with Vera's deceitful plan, the story in this
movie would be drastically different and the film noir effect would
be altered. In order for the film to maintain its sense of mystery,
Roberts has to go against Vera's plan to create a conflict. Film noir
thrives off the tension between characters rather than physical
violence. If Roberts hadn't made up his mind to go against Vera, the
tension between the two characters would have been lost. And the only
way for Roberts to advance the plot in this manner is to engage in
selfish (anti-hero) behavior.
As
Vera presses Roberts to participate in the ruse, Roberts once again
engages in behavior that goes against the anti-hero stereotype. He
admits his own faults, that he is not perfect and does not know
everything. In order to impersonate Haskell, he would need to know
the man's life story, which he does not. He realizes he has
limitations, which is something a classic anti-hero wouldn't do.
Ultimately, Vera and Roberts argue. She plans to call the police on
Roberts, but not before he attempts to pull the phone cord from the
wall. Unknown to him at the time, the cord is wrapped around Vera's
neck, and his pulling actually kills her. Back to engaging in
anti-hero behavior, Roberts panics and leaves the hotel where the
pair had been staying. He doesn't attempt to cover his tracks or hide
any clues, he simply leaves the building. In the end, once Roberts
has finished telling his story, he leaves the diner and is picked up
by the police. Where an anti-hero would have tried to run or fight,
Roberts returns to the hero stereotype and goes quietly. He does not
put up an argument or a fuss, thereby accepting his fate, which is
something a true hero would do. This works to maintain the film noir
style because if he had put up a fight, the police would have turned
to violence to stop him, and film noir prefers to rely on tension
instead of actual physical violence.
