Page: 1 | 2
In the script, Travis listens to the guy about he's going to do with his .44 Magnum and right after is buying guns from Andy. The cause and effect relationship is much more obvious. The Belmore scene is much later on and follows Travis' gunning down of the convenience store robber and sitting at home watching soap operas, gun in hand. In the Belmore scene in the movie, Charlie T. calls Travis "killer" for no apparent reason, as he has neither obtained the guns nor shot anybody yet. In the script, it is alluded to that the boys have at least heard about Travis' acquisitions (from cabbie Doughboy) if not of his "heroic" deed.
In the script, Travis' unsuccessful attempt to articulate his existential malaise to Wizard is seen as his very last resort before deciding to plunge ahead with his assassination scheme. The new haircut featured in the following scene is definitely an indication that there is no turning back any more. In the film, coming much earlier, the scene has a different emphasis. He has not yet made a decision about acquiring firearms. It seems as if his inner debate is whether he should exact some sort of revenge upon Betsy for the way she dumped him. Would he like to do to Betsy, what the passenger was saying he would do to his wife? This does lend an interesting new twist to the character and makes him out to be much more mysoginistic than he appears to be in the script. In the script, the emphasis is different, he is more a racist than a woman-hater.
The filmmaker's stated premise is that point-of-view in this story is of the utmost importance; that "everything in the movie should take place from the taxi driver's point of view, and if he doesn't see it, it doesn't exist" (Schrader on Schrader, p.116). This is adhered to for most of the film, but at the end it breaks down badly and gives us some of the sloppiest parts of the movie. When Sport and Iris are dancing in her room, Travis cannot be present. An awkward cut using an outtake from another scene of him sitting in his cab (where he has longer hair) and reaching for something inside his coat is juxtaposed before this scene meaning to imply that he is looking at them through a window or something. I'm sorry, but this simply does not work for me. And when Sport is seen handing some cash over to some guy with a badly concealed gun, Travis is nowhere to be seen. This scene comes right before the slaughter at the brothel and almost seems to have been added as an afterthought as if the filmmakers somehow realized that the audience would be wondering who is this guy in Iris' room who joins in the shooting spree? Another scene, written at Scorsese's request, between Palantine and Tom, the Albert Brooks character, was wisely left on the cutting room floor, as it would again violate the aforementioned rule of point-of-view.
So finally here is my question: Why go to all the trouble to shoot the movie respecting the hairstyle changes indicated in Schrader's script, which would necessitate all this skullcap and make-up work, and then go and edit the movie and drastically reorganize the structure in such a way as throw all this work out the window? The other thing I don't understand is how come nobody, to my knowledge, has ever pointed this out. I admit it took quite a few viewings of the movie to notice this myself; I tip my hat off to Scorsese for having the courage to try this sort of thing and apparently succeed, but I would have imagined that seasoned film analysts would have commented on this at some point. I would be very curious to hear any opinions on this.
To my mind, it was obviously done with the intent, on the part of the filmmakers, to somehow improve the movie. But I have played the movie in my mind many times with the scenes reorganized as they are in the script and find that it in no way detracts from the impact of the movie, which remains unchanged and as powerful as ever.
It would appear that much of the restructuring was done to bring in Iris, the Jodie Foster character, much sooner in the picture, as it was probably felt at the time that this was one of the filmmakers more powerful audience hooks. It illustrates that a man dressed in army fatigues and sporting a mohawk haircut who shows up at a brothel with an arsenal of weapons to "clean-up" the place was not enough of a selling point but that the prospect of seeing a 12 year-old prostitute was!
In the movie, we do not expect this man, after all the difficulties and disappointments he has had connecting with people, to give it one more try with a teenage prostitute. In the script, the character of Iris is introduced quite late and gives the story in an entirely new meaning. By placing the meeting of Iris after Travis has resolved to go ahead with his suicidal plan, their meeting becomes Travis' last try and ironically he succeeds in connecting with her because he has given up consciously trying. For the first time, he is giving something without thinking what he will get back in return. He has overcome his egotistical tendencies to a certain degree. And by being willing to give up his life to "save" her, he ironically achieves the notoriety he was secretly hankering for. The nobody who wants to become a somebody. The movie itself never really gives many clues as to why would Travis want to connect with a girl he does not desire.
These were some thoughts on the movie TAXI DRIVER. Any feedback or commentary would be greatly appreciated. Especially, if it came from people involved in the production of the movie. Thank you for bearing with me throughout this long drawn-out analysis.
J.L. Seguin
Send feedback to seguinjl@odyssee.net
Home :: Reviews & Commentary :: Taxi Driver: CommentaryCopyright © 2007 - The Taxi Driver Movie Site | Site Map
