WOW !! MUCH LOVE ! SO WORLD PEACE !
Fond bitcoin pour l'amélioration du site: 1memzGeKS7CB3ECNkzSn2qHwxU6NZoJ8o
  Dogecoin (tips/pourboires): DCLoo9Dd4qECqpMLurdgGnaoqbftj16Nvp


Home | Publier un mémoire | Une page au hasard

 > 

John Carpenter, une mise en scène du menaçant

( Télécharger le fichier original )
par Julien Le Goff
Ecole Supérieure de Réalisation Audiovisuelle (ESRA) - D.E.S.R.A. 2005
  

précédent sommaire suivant

Bitcoin is a swarm of cyber hornets serving the goddess of wisdom, feeding on the fire of truth, exponentially growing ever smarter, faster, and stronger behind a wall of encrypted energy

II a progressive rise of the tension.

1-une simple and recurring structure which dominates it spectator.

1.1- seminal works with work synthesis: towards

a definition of Carpenter receipt.

Carpenter forms part this category of realizers film enthusiasts who express a visceral love for art that they try out as much like realizer that like spectator : Carpenter is thus prompt to convene the long list of films or scenario writers who influenced as well his work as the construction of his personality. He answers thus for example (28) a journalist asking for the list of his favorite films to him : « Only the angels have Wings of Hawks, thanks to its stylized romanticism, and to its fatalistic side which [him] likes much. The Quatermass Experiment (the Monster) and Quatermass 2 (the Mark) of Valley Guest. Both Quatermass terrifying, are turned with a ridiculous budget in black and white, environment is really atrocious there... Rio Cheer of course, the Big sleep for its cynicism... The Red River, Hundred dollars for a Sheriff of Henri Hathaway... Chinatown de Polanski... The Injury of Friday of Hawks because it is amusing... The list would be too long. » The list would be too long... Can one however try to define a restricted number of seminal works, which carry in them the germs of work carpentérien to come ? One obviously notes at Carpenter the influence of scenario writers as Jacques Tourneur (Go with the fear) for his capacity to be played on the out-field and the suggestion ; Sam Peckinpah (Dogs of Straw) for the capacity to build a progressive tension bursting in a fireworks of final violence, and also for this capacity to be freed from the system (« I am a rebel as Sam Peckinpah was it in the past. I assert this title. » (29)) ; Hitchcock, to which it pays homage in Fog : « in the two films [Fog and the Birds], a population is found subjected to a strange plague. Moreover we turned some plans in Bodega Bay, the city that Hitchcock used to turn the Birds. It is a small strange seaside resort, located in the north of California. » (30). It will even go (chance or voluntary choice) until employing Janet Leigh, mother of Jamie Lee Curtis but especially victim of the very famous scene of shower of Psychosis...

However, more still than the above mentioned list of scenario writers, if I were to retain only two names having posed the bases of the work of Carpenter, I will choose Howard Hawks and George A. Romero. De Howard Hawks, Carpenter already retained of course Rio Bravo, which was for him an experiment founder of its desire to make cinema : « Then, in 1959, at eleven years, I discovered Rio Bravo. All the city fought to go to see this film, I wondered what that could mean. I was not any aware of the system set up behind all that, but I said myself that something D `enormous was woven down there, and I wanted to form part of it. At that time, my father offered a small camera to me and I put into practice, or at least I tried into practice to put the ideas which passed to me by the head. The result was null. Nobody will never see my first attempts. Never ! » (31). It is quite naturally that after Dark Star, pastiche of 2001, the Odyssey of Space and film of end of study inflated for an exit in room, Carpenter will decide to be directed, with unconsciousness characteristic of the beginnings, to carry out its own version of Rio Bravo. Learning that it will not have the budget necessary to treat to horses, it writes in eight days a scenario transposing the diagram hawksien within a contemporary framework while taking as a starting point a quite real news item. It makes Attack a contemporary version of Rio Bravo, but also entirely will structure its work around the fundamental lessons which it draws from its film-reference. Thus, which it retains mainly of Hawks, it is the patient construction of a situation of threatened waiting (in Rio Bravo, John Wayne and Dean Martin, representatives of the law, prepare during the essence of film to the attack of gangsters wishing to release one as of their retained captive) which will serve as revealing for its characters : John Wayne learning how to open in the world and the love, Dean Martin finding his dignity by exceeding its original fault with knowing its dependence with alcohol. However, Carpenter would almost seem to be able to re-use this system ad infinitum (Attack, The Thing, Prince of darkness, Ghosts off Mars...) while reinventing it constantly in detail and sets of themes : for example, in Assaut, Carpenter exceeds the model hawksien, because if Rio Bravo exposed from the start the identity and the objective of the killers, the suspense being built at the time of the attack, Assaut voluntarily leaves in waste land ambitions and identity of the gangsters, Carpenter conferring a fantastic and metaphorical dimension in this connection that there was not at Hawks. It will also retain its intellectual guide an essential data of its catalog of films, work on the ambiguity of the situations and of the characters, underlining at which point the border between the Good and the Evil can appear thin, two extremes meeting sometimes even. Thus, at Carpenter, cop and gangster, heroes and threat, Well and Badly are never held well far one from the other : for more precision on this concept, one can refer to the part III 2.2 of this study, entitled « inversion which dissimulates a resemblance with human monstrosity , a reflection on what makes Humanity. » Lastly, last fundamental characteristic of the cinema of Hawks that Carpenter employs on his account, the idea that it is in the action that the Man proves his value, independently of its social or economic origins, each one among us having in oneself the potential to transcend itself to achieve miracles : the best example is John Nada, worker itinerant that a priori nothing distinguishes from the remainder

mass of excluded that produced the system American ultra-capitalist and who however, by his capacity to agree to upset its reference marks and its way of thinking, then by its will to defend what makes Humanity (capacity of initiative, freedom of thought and action) at the price of its own life, will endorse the statute of Saver to the noblest direction of the term. One could still raise of many quotations of less importance of work hawksienne at Carpenter (for example, Bertrand Rougier (32) notices that in Assaut Carpenter shows « until the cinematographic tics of the realizer of the Big sleep and Port of the Anguish, as the dominant position of the cigarette in any spiritual dialog attests some » ; with in particular the famous gimmick of Napoleon Wilson : « C you cuts has smoke ? »). Lastly, it will be noted that like Hawks, Carpenter tested itself, directly or indirectly (the western), to explore the kinds for better renewing them.

Carpenter, in his work of scenario writer and realizer, borrows also much from Romero. There is already of course in its films of many more or less direct references to the zombie so expensive with Romero, this fantastic figure obsessing particularly Carpenter: broken up leprous phantoms of Fog and their ahead inescapable walk which points out that of Michael Myers in Halloween, démoniaque character with the human appearance but which neither alive nor died ; the pack cannibal which quickly crosses Plissken in New York 1997 (to be noted besides that the musical composition which accompanies this sequence was entitled by Carpenter... « He' S still alive Romero » !!) ; had and mutilated bodies of Ghosts off Mars or even extraterrestrial broken up Los-Angeles Invasion ; moreover Carpenter voluntarily brought the look closer to the invaders of that death-alive his model : «We wanted that the aliens resemble the creatures of Zombie of George Romero. Those represented already rotted characters, whom corrupted... But I have fears that people think that the film put in scene thealive ones. This is why I chose to accentuate the extraterrestrial side with metal eyes, in order to robotize them. » (33) It will go even in this film until placing a wink directly addressed to Romero when a TV diffuses the images of a disguised invader discussing of the danger which represents the violent cinema of the realizer of the Night of theAlive ones. But it is especially the social speech of Romero who interests Carpenter ; indeed under fantastic cover of entertainment and cinema of exploitation, Romero draws up an extremely subversive metaphor, the decomposition of the corpses life income returning directly to the deliquescence of an American company in end of race : it should not be forgotten that the Night of Death-alive leaves on the American screens for the first time in 1968, date symbolic system if it is. Thereafter, Romero will not cease working and developing his matter through a permanent rewriting of his work (Zombie, the Day of Death-Alive and latest to date, Land off The Dead, whose speech on the social fracture in the United States, machine to be created excluded, recalls, by a curious reference of elevator, the speech held fifteen years more early by Carpenter in Invasion Los-Angeles.). In same optics, Carpenter always worked to create entertainments with a true bottom, developing in each one of his films a reflection pushed on Humanity or the American company, perhaps at the price of a commercial success which it too little met (with share perhaps, to a certain extent Assaut and Halloween) taking into account the quality of its cinema. He expresses a quite comprehensible bitterness of it (34) : « I do not make sure films. Rather wild tricks. People need some they ? Perhaps that in this moment they do not want to intend some to speak. One pushed back many dates of exits. Still for inappropriate contents. It is the American manner : you fold up, are afraid ! »

Lastly, it will be noted that if Rio Bravo and the Night of Death-Alive constitute seminal works, Ghosts off Mars, the last film in date of John Carpenter, seems well to constitute a work synthesis in the direction where it summarizes and synthesizes purely and simply with him only almost the whole of his catalog of films. One thus finds there all his leitmotivs and all his obsessions : work on the westernien kind (abandoned mining, true phantom city of the kind ; spirits of Mars whose tribal aspect directly refers to the Indians of America ; Martian topography strongly pointing out that of rock...) ; bringing together enters the two facets of the human nature (the collaboration of the cop, Melanie Ballard and of the gangster, Williams desolation) ; changes of tone (the brother which cuts the fingers in full preparation of the battle) ; concept of viruses (spirits of Mars which are spread from one body to another) ; closed space (they are besieged) ; concept of confrontation and survival to ensure its domination (the spirits of Mars want to recover their ground) ; the ambivalent position of the women (as well carrying hope as the matriarchy adopted like political standard in the future underlines it, that corrupted : Melanie Ballard takes drugs, WFP Grier badgers it sexually) ; the political speech (a criticism of the colonialist attitude and scorning of the United States)... Carpenter himself regards this film (35) as « a mixture of what [it has] which been able to make before (...) » : that to make after thus perfectly having analyzed and having synthesized its own work ? Carpenter, having the feeling to have made it tower of the question, considered one moment to withdraw circuit definitively. Against any waiting, it however announced there is little time to have started the preparation of a new enigmatic project, temporarily entitled the 13th apostle.

1.2 - entomological glance and time in advance of

spectator.

One of the first and more obvious observation than one can make in connection with the setting in scene of John Carpenter, it is that so to speak it is not seen: indeed, with the vision isolated from a film of Carpenter, without carrying out bringing together with the remainder of its catalog of films, the spectator perhaps tempted to define the pure technical cutting of transparency. It is a fact that at Carpenter cutting refuses to be conclusive and is erased with the profit of the narration; moreover one can indeed notice at his place a clear propensity with the use of broad or average plans allowing to deliver a maximum of information (scenaristic or space) and guaranteeing the narrative fluidity of the unit. Of course Carpenter does not exclude the use of the tight plan (even if it would be interesting to take time to count the average number of large plans per film in its catalog of films) or of the effect (see for example the ultra-effective use of the camera-sight in Assaut when the attackers seek a target): but it is important to note the extreme importance which it attaches to the use of the each large plans. Thus the insert is used only to give capital information, that it is of order narration (a hand seizes a weapon that it will use thereafter) or other (the insert on the package of cigarette crushed with ground whose is seized Snake Plissken- Kurt Russell, symbol of respectful America of the personal freedoms - that to smoke in fact, this activity being prohibited in film and being disappeared in the fiction from anticipation New York 1997). This parsimonious use gives only more smell to each use of the large plan, which created there a true visual shock at the brought spectator, even unconsciously, to wonder about the reason of its presence: for example, it is often used to translate a form of violence. Two examples will be noted: first of all in Los-Angeles Invasion, when the character of John Nada attacks the television broadcast station charged to retransmit the waves being used to control the population. Nada takes by storm the station by eliminating the extraterrestrial ones on its passage. A regular assembly connects sizes plans and broad plans of Nada which advances and drawing and the very large recurring plans from the gun of its weapon spitting of the balls: these large plans underlines the violence of the company of Nada, and in particular for the witnesses of the scene because it should not be forgotten that in film the extraterrestrial ones are dissimulated under a human appearance that only the resistant human ones (whose Nada) can bore using special lenses. Also for the employees of the station in ignorance, Nada is quite simply insane-furious drawing on the innocent ones. It is this violence received by the witnesses who is development here. Violence which is also that received by the spectator: indeed, Nada is equipped with special lenses which enable him to detect the enemy, but the spectator him, is not it. Of course, it is informed of this reality by the means of the scenario and the setting in scene (use of subjective plans of Nada seeing the extraterrestrial ones), but in this sequence, in the absence (voluntary) of the use of subjective plans, the spectator really sees... only one man who shoots at other men. And like already magnificiently showed it Brian De Palma, with the cinema what the spectator sees it is what is. There is for the spectator a truth of the image, and in this sequence it cannot differently receive the action of Nada than like violent, adopting in spite of him the point of view of the dormant mass judging the resistant ones as criminals whereas they represent their only chance of freedom.

One will be able to also note another example of this type of meaning use of the large plan at Carpenter in the Fog film: at the time of the attack of the leprous phantoms on the boat with the accesses of Antonio Bay, the sailors see to approach a strange fog which decimates them one by one. The last sailor does not see the fog behind him, from which is extracted phantoms which attacks it with a hook. follow a series of very large plans successively on the weapon then on the part of the connected bodies struck cut, this cutting expressing the suddenness and the brutality of the attack. There one finds in fact a direct reference to the cutting of the scene of shower of Psychosis with his succession of very large plans connected, the visual shock of cutting being the exact one during visual of the violence of the act. It is known that Carpenter regards as major the influence of Hitchcock on his work, even if Hawks and Romero remain his two greater sources of visual and scenaristic inspiration: moreover, this scene of attack is not the only reference to the Master of the suspense in Fog, Carpenter having chosen to turn some plans in Bodega Bay, the city used by Hitchcock as tallies for his film the Birds.

This quasi-systematic recourse to broad or intermediate values of plan makes certainly it possible Carpenter to register his characters in a space (and one can the importance of space at his place- see part I-) but also makes it possible to the realizer to be posed as an omniscient narrator, and even more as a demiurge observing his characters struggle in the situations which it A creates. However, these situations will appear genuine catalysts suitable to expose all the faults of the characters then to enable them to exceed them, and it is in that that the glance of Carpenter appears perfectly scientist and entomological: the broad plan is to locate the characters compared to space but also the ones compared to the others, it is to pose physically (distance/proximity, gestural...) the reports/ratios of force and the bonds which link (or precisely divide) the characters. Thus, one will be able to take the example by Storm, where the characters are brought physically, by their placement with, like very precisely the expression says it, «to choose their camp»: when dissensions are felt on the strategy to adopt, the operator of the police station comes to put herself at the sides of the policeman in order to mean that it chooses to grant her confidence to him, and of course Carpenter chooses to film them in average plan, the policeman leaving at his sides within the framework a space which the operator will come to fill who makes his entry in the field. As Rafik Djoumi concerning and the Village Prince of darkness notices it of Damnés, the use of the broad plan, and in particular of the cinemascope, «allows constant reports/ratios of force between the groups and the individuals the screen» (36). The cinema of Carpenter it is thus also that: to place characters in a restricted space (Attack, The Thing, Ghosts off Mars...), a restricted temporality on which weighs a kind of countdown (Vampires and contamination of Baldwin which progresses, the character of the Trent in the Cave of the Madness which must carry out its survey quickly...) and even both at the same time (as in New York 1997, where Plissken is locked up in New York and is contaminated by a virus); then to observe their reactions and to finally draw an analysis from it from the human nature, nature which appears in the crises. Thus, as we will see it again later, the subject of the cinema carpentérien, behind the fantastic cover, it is the Man, and perhaps even more precisely the American man and his place in the paradoxical American company.

However, as we said, to observe the human nature, it is necessary to place the characters in crisis. It is with a certain jubilation that Carpenter builds these crises patiently, taking time to realize its characters while posing the stakes of confrontation to come. In the beginning of Attack, an alternate assembly shows us on a side the various protagonists (the policeman, the father and its daughter...) to evolve/move within a daily framework (the agent in patrol, the father and the girl in the car) while on another side we see the threat being specified (the gang meets, is armed, ballade is conveyed some in the search of a target...): that makes it possible Carpenter to build a psychological base for its characters (the agent of return in the district of its childhood, from now on in prey with violence, the attachment of the father for its daughter and the concept of responsibility whom it develops in his connection...) while preparing in an inescapable way their meeting with the threatening force (the gang), the father of family being used as hyphen between these two universes, since, continued by the gang it will come to take refuge in the police station entrusted to the policeman. But Carpenter is even further involving the spectator in the jubilation of this installation via the use of the suspense and the dramatic irony: while always leaving a time in advance to the spectator lasting this preparation, this installation of the events, it makes it quite simply accessory to its entomological step. Thus the spectator knows some more than the characters... That is to say. But how that does it appear?

Firstly, there is additional information that Carpenter delivers to the spectator, in particular by the means of the assembly. In Halloween, one finds many demonstrations of this phenomenon: when Jamie Lee Curtis finds in car with its friend, assembly makes us to pass successively from interior of car where girls laugh and discuss, outside car, which enables us to note that the car is followed by another car, conveys that we saw being stolen by the killer little time before. During this time, the girls they do not suspect nothing... Moreover all the construction of film rests over these times in advance of the spectator: during nearly one hour we see the killer observing Jamie Lee Curtis, then when it is turned over, he is not there any more. But if it does not know, the spectator knows to him... What sometimes makes it possible to involve it in false tracks: thus when the baby-sitter goes in the wash-house, the spectator, knowing that the killer grinds, expects that it is made attack (what is also announced by the rhythmic musical one associated to the killer). However it will not occur anything: Carpenter poses his rules of the game, but does not hesitate to redefine them when that sings to him, thus preserving its capacity to surprise the spectator. Always from this point of view of time in advance of the spectator, one will note that Halloween is a very good illustration of the use the depth of field at Carpenter, which is often used to dissimulate a threat with the character all while delivering it to the spectator: one will quote the plan very famous, having often served as visual for film, where one sees Jamie Lee Curtis Net in the 1st plan, face camera, army of a knife, and in the depth, blur, the threat Michael Myers to approach in his back.

Secondly, there are the indices that Carpenter enjoys to deliver to the spectator: they are not strictly speaking information, but they direct the vision that is made the spectator of measuring, founding an unquestionable tension. In The Thing, Carpenter makes a very particular use of the figure of the dog recovered by the team of scientist. In the masterly opening of film, we see Norwegian scientists in the helicopter continuing a dog in order to cut down it: this surrealist situation takes all its direction in a plan which will intervene later with the court of measuring. Once the dog recovered by the American scientists, this one walks freely in the station. However, when Mac-Ready- Kurt Russell returns from the Norwegian camping, a plan of a terrifying simplicity shows us the dog looking at the return of Mac-Ready in an almost human way, as if it included/understood what it does without and the stakes this return. The whole accompanied by rhythmic musical a repetitive door of threat. In a plan, Carpenter makes sensitive the higher intelligence who lives this animal, and the danger which it represents, illustrating the matter even film: appearances are misleading... Later, when the scientists understand that this dog is not really what it seems to be and which they will wonder about the people exposed to the contamination, the spectator him will remember that it entered the room of the one of the members of the team, Carpenter choosing to cut the sequence into molten to the black at the time when the shade of the latter turns to the dog. While thus exploiting the out-field and the suggestion, the realizer lets function the imaginary one of the spectator with full mode, the manner simplest and most effective to cause the anguish... Lastly, in the list of the subtle indices delivered by Carpenter, always in The Thing, one will be able to note the following example, raised by Rafik Djoumi (37): at the time of each monolog of Mac Ready, «the camera panote on the faces of the protagonists and the words «the thing» are marked when the camera passes on the actually contaminated character». This effect rather anecdotic bus very difficult to notice is in any case a good illustration of the twisted spirit and calculator of Carpenter, who in his filmic construction randomly does not leave apparently anything!

2 - Threaten suggested and principles of avoidance.

2.1- characters built on the mode of the observation:

to include/understand before facing.

One of the first principles of avoidance which one can note at Carpenter, it is its quite particular manner to delay the confrontation between the hero and the threat which weighs on him. And this quite simply because the character carpentérien must initially carry out a work of study and observation in order to seize (with the intellectual direction of the term) his enemy ; it is indeed at the price of this study that the confrontation will be able to turn to its advantage. The first stage consists in agreeing to see the threat as such, Carpenter exploiting the very cinematographic importance of the glance : in Halloween, if Laurie Strode feels the Myers threat without never it to see during more half of film, it is also because it refuses to accept the possibility that the Evil can exist. It is not astonishing to note that only the children see initially the killer, because what characterizes them is the absence of prejudices on reality and the capacity to believe in the impossible one : in fact here the croquemitaine. On the contrary, Laurie repeats inlassablement that « the croquemitaine does not exist », to reassure the children as much that to be convinced itself. It will be necessary that it makes the experiment of a direct attack of Michael Myers for finally hustling his certainty of adult and agreeing to call in question its perception of reality, so that it goes, basically, of seeking in it its fears of child. One finds the same thing in Fog : if small Andy Wayne (Ty Mitchell) finds the piece of the cursed boat failed on the beach, it is because as a child it agrees to believe in the manifestations of the irrational one. Carpenter notices besides (38) that « it is not so innocent if in these two films (Halloween and Fog), the children play a great part. In a certain manner, the history is told through them. »

Even question of the glance in Los-Angeles Invasion : by fitting this pair of special glasses that it finds in a paperboard, John Nada discovers the back of the decoration, or how the whole company is handled by invaders. But Nada, if it does not show the choice (the fact that it finds this pair of glasses is a mere chance scenaristic) done at least that to believe. It almost immediately accepts this upheaval of its certainty and its reference marks and immediately chooses its camp, that of resistance, while awkwardly trying to only eliminate with him all the invaders. It thus accepts a double danger ; the first, according to Helene Frappat (39), is that to be seen (by the extraterrestrial ones understands itself), since John Nada will discover « that to learn how to see, it is to become aware to be seen. The glance is always reversible : I see in so far as I am seen. And being considering, it is to be likely to be killed (...) ». The second, it is that to be « badly considering » : indeed, the human ones not having the means of including/understanding the step of Nada, this one cannot be perceived differently than as insane furious (in particular when it enters the bank and kills the invaders with human appearance coldly), which cannot that to still contribute to reinforce its statute of bet and of excluded social. Franck, on the contrary, initially will refuse to him to see : one will need a Homeric combat with Nada so that, equipped in its turn with the famous pair of glasses, it agrees to see the world such as he is. Helene Frappat (40) stresses that it acts « of a crucial inversion in the middle of Los-Angeles Invasion, but also of all the work of John Carpenter in what it has of subversive : inversion of the blind man who acquires a glance, of the passive individual which decides to make a choice, of the slave which becomes free- short, of the controlled individual who manages to change the rules of the game. With the resulting one from this interminable combat, John Nada can conclude : « my brother, a new life starts for us ». » This first stage of the glance is thus an essential stage according to John Carpenter. Let us let conclude it on this subject : « the sight is without any doubt one of the most important directions. But the directions, whatever they are, can produce a strange feeling of reality. The hallucinations or the sight trouble are as many phenomena which can lead the man to see something of different. With the cinema, the glance is, obviously, something of fundamental. » (41)

Lastly, it will be a question for the hero carpentérien of clearly identifying the threat, to include/understand « scientifically » its operating mode for better fighting it. It is because it understood that the mirror is the point of crossing between the world of Anti-God and ours that the Loomis father, by breaking it, can stop temporarily his advent (the Prince of darkness). It is because it identified its biological characteristics that Mac-Ready and Blair (Wilford Brimley) can develop a capable blood test to detect the presence of the thing (The Thing). It is because Nada and the resistant ones understood that the invaders use radio waves in order to control the human ones that they can, while attacking their transmitting antenna, to reveal their true face with the population (Los-Angeles Invasion). It is because it dealt with Myers during fifteen long years that Dr. Loomis knows what this figure of the Evil is able and how to face it (Halloween). It is finally because Dr. Al Chaffee observed the child-invaders of Midwich patiently that it will be able to resist to them by drawing up a true mental wall against their telepathic capacities (the Village of Damnés). That which tries to face the threat without to have taken time to study it cannot whereas to meet the failure, and so death : thus, always in the Village of Damnés, when the police force tries of éradiquer the children cut off in the barn, they are put quickly at entretuer, handled by the telepathic capacities of the invaders.

2.2- a delayed threat bus suggested and incarnated.

Let us note that if the threat can be observed and studied by the character carpentérien, it is that before appearing frontally, it is incarnated initially initially physically by effects on our world scientifically observable. Helene Frappat (42) stresses that « the work of Carpenter [always] attempted to prove the existence of the evil by the effects which it produces ». Thus, in Fog, before the phantoms do not go on the city, a doctor practices an autopsy on the corpse of one of the sailors, this one carrying a physical mark (its body is broken up as if it had remained extremely a long time in water) supernatural but scientifically observable which was bequeathed to him by the fog malefic. In The Thing, Mac-Ready brings back Norwegian camp a proof of the existence of the thing with this body awfully deformed fruit of a fallen through change. This body, studied by Blair, in addition to incarnating the existence of the thing, will deliver invaluable information on its operating mode, which will make it possible to fight it. In Halloween, Dr. Loomis proves the presence of Michael Myers in the city thanks to the corpse of dog found in the given up house, corpse which will allow him in same time to prove to the police officer the extreme and free violence of the character, who as it will take care well to specify it, « is not human » (« It is not a human being. It is the evil in person. What lives behind this glance is only the evil in a pure state. » « With man wouldn' T C that. This is not has man »). Lastly, in Prince of darkness, Arnaud Bordas (43) precise that the threat finds its incarnation physical « in a corruption of the flesh which invades film literally. A character is completely devoured by a multitude of carnivorous cockroaches, while Calder cuts the throat of itself by means of a splinter out of wooden and that a strange blue grows bigger on the arm of Kelly. This viral progression of the evil, this contamination, is a trademark of Carpenter, and it gets busy, in Prince of darkness, to develop all the richness set of themes of it. The Evil, in its films in general, and Prince of darkness in particular, is not an abstracted concept, it is a tangible reality which is printed in the flesh and oozes of the walls. ». Concurrently to this physical and concrete incarnation of the Evil by the effects which it produces, Carpenter works with his suggestion via its setting in scene : one will not reconsider the way in which Carpenter manages his representation of space to impregnate the very whole city of the presence of Michael Myers, suggesting his oppressive presence permanently. One can on the other hand quote the use which it makes of wrongfully subjective plans in The Thing : when Mac-Ready approaches the Norwegian camp, the camera, placed inside the camp given up, behind the window, with breast height, carries out a light movement of dolly accompanying the movement by the visitor, giving the feeling that somebody (or something) is there and observes Mac-Ready. In fact, it of it is nothing ; it is just about a false track employed to make feel with the spectator the weight of the threat which weighs on the characters without needing to materialize it physically. Lastly, one cannot quote particular employment only made Carpenter of the music which it primarily composes by itself (in the list of films that we retained, only the music of The Thing was not composed by Carpenter ; it is the work of Ennio Morricone), used to suggest the presence of the Evil which grinds close to the characters : that it is the rhythmic musical one of Fog which accompanies the projections by the fog or even famous melody 5/4 (five times in a measurement) accompanying the boogey man by Halloween (and which Carpenter holds of his father), the music at Carpenter becomes a sufficient palliative with the physical representation of the threat : in other words, even if they are not present at the image, the simple fact of hearing the music which is dependant for them is enough for the spectator to physically feel the presence of the phantoms of Fog or that of Michael Myers.

This ambivalent use of the suggestion (which désincarne and métaphorise the threat) and of the physical incarnation (which on the contrary does not make it abstract but quite physical) brings closer much the setting in scene Carpenter of the writing of Lovecraft : this writer born in Providence (Rhodos Island) in 1890 and died in 1937, division indeed this same ambivalence in its representation of the evil, representation which is the heart even of its writing. On a side, it treats inexpressible Evil and unnamable which can irremediably only be suggested for the simple one and good reason that it exceeds the capacities of intellectual apprehension of the Man. Of another, it constantly seeks to express of them the physical, scientific effects on our world. As summarizes it Michel Houellebecq in his study of Howard Philips Lovecraft (44) : « More the events and the described entities will be monstrous and inconceivable, more description will be precise and clinical ». Carpenter, conscious of this formal filiation and set of themes, will have several times semi-officially adapted the universe of Lovecraft, in particular in Prince of darkness and especially in the Cave of the Madness : besides on this subject, it admits (45) being « replongé in the universe of Lovecraft before making film. The cave of the Madness is indeed a history of Lovecraft without Lovecraft. It is thus clearly about a homage to this novelist. I was not yet ten years old that I read already The Dunwich Horror in my bed. And I was frozen of terror to the bone. I quoted Lovecraft texto straightforwardly besides. When Lynda Styles reads passages of the new book of Sutter Cane, passages that the Trent will see materializing under its eyes, it reads in fact of the almost exact quotations of texts of Lovecraft, of the Rats in the Walls in particular. 

3 - flow and backward flow, a sinusoidal structure.

3.1- the swing of the stakes.

There are at Carpenter an unquestionable talent to cumulate the stakes and an obvious facility to be passed from the one to the other. As we saw previously, there is a stake principal and essential in work carpentérienne, it is that of survival. While analyzing of close his catalog of films, one however realizes that it is far from being an exclusive stake. Which are thus these other stakes?

Narrative stakes first of all. For the hero carpentérien, there is always a bound principal search, as one said, with its survival: to bring back the president or limp it black for Snake Plissken in New York 1997 then Los-Angeles 2013, to prevent the gang from coming to take the father of family taken refuge in her police station for the Bishop agent in Assaut, to escape the death masked for Laurie Strode in Halloween, to discover which is «the thing» and how to eliminate it for Mac Ready in The Thing, to find Valek the vampire for Jack Crow-James Wood in Vampires or even to include/understand the operation of the invaders in order to better push back them for Dr. Alan Chaffee- Christopher Reeve in the Village of Damnés... But this principal search will have for effect to make emerge a multitude of small secondary stakes like as many obligatory stages to the realization of the principal stake. Let us take the example by Storm: lieutenant Bishop decides to save the father who found refuge in his police station, as from this moment, it thus binds his own fate to that of this man. The principal stake of Bishop becomes that of survival, stake which we will name stake A. to survive, Bishop must resist the attacks of the gang during an unspecified time while waiting for the reinforcements, and thus organize the defense of the police station (stake B). However the defense of the police station can be made, but in the single condition that Bishop manages to convince his/her companions of the founded good of his step (to save this man that he does not know) and of its strategy: it is the stake C Thereafter., realizing that it is likely not to be able to resist sufficiently a long time, Bishop seeks a solution with Napoleon Wilson in order to escape from their refuge which is not any more one (stake D). One thus sees how principal stake and secondary stakes cross, answers oneself and builds the ones compared to the others (in particular in the fact that at Carpenter, very often the resolution of a secondary stake involves the appearance of a new secondary stake, and that the dramatic resolution of the whole of filmic work can be done only at the price of the successive resolution of all the secondary stakes) contributing to maintain a level of dramatic tension constant, without idle period. One will be able to also quote the dramatic construction of The Thing, where Mac Ready in order to survive must also solve a multitude of secondary stakes (to include/understand the operation of the thing, how to eliminate it, to discover which is infected, to convince that it is him even a «healthy body», to find a means of preventing that the threat is propagated...), just like Dr. Chaffee in the Village of Damnés (to approach the invaders for better destroying them, finding how to resist their mental attacks...). To note besides that, as we saw, to include/understand the threat is a stake secondary but necessary that one finds within all the work of Carpenter.

Concurrently to this stratification of the narrative stakes, other types of stakes appear, less waited but which find their place as much. One will be delayed thus on a major stake at John Carpenter, the metaphysical stake: indeed, to cross measuring carpentérien is also very often to put to the test the concept of reality. Finally what does this word indicate? For Carpenter it is an old question which «gives its definition to the fantastic kind: how to know that what one sees or tests is quite real?» (mad p.22) It is all the direction of this sentence of Edgar Al Poe placed forward at the beginning of Fog: «is is Al that we see gold seem goal has dream within has dream» («all that we see or believe to see only one dream in a dream?»). Indeed, to exceed appearances and to discover the true nature of the «reality» or of be-saying reality in which it evolves/moves can prove to be a fundamental stage in the step of the hero carpentérien: John Nada must thus fit by chance a pair of glasses to discover that the world in which it evolved/moved and in which it believed («I believe in America!» exclaim it naively at the beginning of film) does not exist, or rather does not exist any more. The ground is nothing any more but one mass of individuals apathetic and subjected régentée by a race of extraterrestrial hideous and dissimulated among the population. Consequently Nada must make close-cropped table of its old reference marks and be rebuilt a reality: charge with him with carrying out choices in order to determine how to place itself compared to this reality. Some, such homeless people between outline at the beginning of film, will choose to collaborate. Nada, will choose to him to die as a combatant, determined to be excluded from this world of which it discovered that it was only one lure. Even phenomenon at Laurie Strode who will discover that death is dissimulated behind the apparent peace of small «a suburb» American (Halloween), and especially at John the Trent, the private cynical one and income of all, which will see its design of reality exhausting itself as it will progress in his investigation. Indeed, John the Trent will end up discovering that he is anything else only one character of fiction invented by a démoniaque writer; the film is concluded besides on a John the Trent out of nightshirt, in a cinema, looking at ravelling since the beginning film of what it lived, realized by some... John Carpenter! The whole in a loop probably without end, the absolute setting in abyme perpetual undoubtedly absurdest and that it was given to see with the cinema... One will note with which control Carpenter exploits the various levels of reality, putting at evil the certainty of the Trent like those of the spectator: to see for example the splendid oneiric scene of the car where the Trent seems to unceasingly cross the same cyclist then where the car leaves the ground to find on the other side of the tunnel, i.e., and the metaphor in is obvious, on the other side of the mirror, where the border between fiction and reality does not exist any more. This work of déconstruction of reality also passes by the figure of the nightmare, appears ultra-traditional here revisited by Carpenter thanks to subtle an artifice: The Trent makes a nightmare, then alarm clock... in a new nightmare! Illustration with the word close to the remarks of Poe referred to above, and manner of saying that it would be illusory to seek to precisely define the limits of the reality in which we let us live, because that escapes the capacities from reasoning from the human nature. Carpenter does not tell to another thing to the beginning of his film the Prince of darkness, when professor of physics exposes to his pupils the limits of their perception of reality («drop what you believe being reality!» exclaim it): he shows, through the example of inexpressibly small (particles), which there are elements of which we are not aware but whose science proves the existence. To be a scientist is to seek with all to explain, but is as to learn how to accept as certain things can escape to us. Because to want to apprehend the limits of reality at all costs can prove to be dangerous, as will learn it with its depend John the Trent: the film starts with its imprisonment in a psychiatric asylum, where it is regarded as insane. However its apparently absurd speech will appear much more coherent than envisaged, since the events will give him reason: the final one, continuing the scene of introduction, quite simply will see to prove to be the destruction of humanity. But the Trent, which knows the truth (if as well is as there is a truth. as in an absolutely relative way one will specify it of the characters, «the truth it is that we say true being». And still, after all, all this is not it only another «dream inside a dream», one moreover...), can it be regarded differently than as insane by its pars? To accept its speech would amount calling into question the same principles of reality, of our reality... Like precisely Stephan Moïssakis says it, «which stage of Trent madness must it reach to prove in the whole world its logic imparable?» Here is that John Carpenter starts again a vast debate, and old man like the world: the insane ones, or regarded as such, are the marginal ones, excluded from reality, or in a paradoxical way let us be us, us them «healthy» people, with the margin of a reality which we wrongly believe to apprehend, the insane ones becoming elected officials then, a minority of beings which them «know»...

Lastly, behind these narrative stakes and metaphysics, are played at Carpenter of the human stakes: reports/ratios of force, confidence or distrust which are tied and are untied throughout film. This subject was already tackled in the sections entitled «an agglomerate of individuals which is built in the difference» and «to exceed the logic of elimination to choose human being», also we will not be delayed above... To note all the same how these human stakes can be found in the middle same of the construction filmic (writing and put in scene) of Carpenter: it is the case of The Thing, where the reports/ratios within the group are the condition even of its survival, and more still the subject of film. We attend permanent reversals of hierarchy, being able and confidence, Mac-Ready passing for example of the statute of leader to that of potential suspect which one seeks to get rid, each crack within the group precipitating a little more this one towards an inescapable death. To support the ones the others is to survive, to tear is to give capacity to the thing, and thus to die. But how to know which lies? Even the discovery of the blood test does not solve the problem, because to carry out the test one needs somebody of confidence! The human stake is well the central subject of film, beyond the fantastic argument, testifies the final one, of a total effectiveness: the confrontation of two men, lost in the icy vastness, condemned to await hypothetical reinforcements while suspecting themselves mutually, awaiting only one false step on behalf of the other to attack it... Carpenter is even even further leaving ambiguity: neither one nor the other are known which is «the thing», but the spectator either! In an irony all carpentérienne, one could even imagine that neither one nor the other is infected and that, doubting one of the other, they finish by entretuer... A quite contemporary illustration of the morals of «Door-Closed» of Sartre, «the hell they is the different ones».

3.2 - management of the rate/rhythm and art of the opposite course.

Whereas the scenaristic structure carpentérienne seems a priori relatively simple and easily dominated by the spectator, it however does not cease surprising it. Why ? Because Carpenter controls to perfection the changes of direction or tone and multiplies the secondary stakes which all rise from the central stake, that of survival (see the preceding part). Therefore borrowing a mathematical image one could qualify the structure carpentérienne of sinusoidal, the realizer choosing to dilate certain moments or of in ellipser others (thus, in Fog, one can notice that it takes time, in a very long prolog of almost 10 minutes, carefully to retranscribe the effects of the approach of the malefic force in a succession of plans to the four corners of abused- the cars city, cut electricity, ransacked supermarket- preparing even the incursion of these supernatural effects come to upset daily space in a long scene in the supermarket a priori banal, since we follow an employee in full cleaning, but where we however smell intuitively by play over cutting, the musky one and the length of the plans, that something will arrive. On the contrary, it chooses not to show certain moments, like the passage to the act of the relation between Jamie Lee Curtis and Tom Atkins), printing a variable rate/rhythm with its sequences, connecting moments of pause (in The Thing, it is for example the medical study of the deformed body, before the thing does not appear in the kennels) and abrupt renewals of tension (the scene of the blood test). On the management of the rate/rhythm, one will be able to quote the effects of assembly of The Thing, since « for traditional melted with the black, [Carpenter] substitutes for halves of strange molten for the white which ensure intraséquentielle breathing while wrapping the characters, with the choice, in No man' S immaculate Land or with deepest of the darkness. ». Even strange management of the rate/rhythm which hustles the reference marks of the spectator in the Village of Damnés : the many temporal ellipses put to us in difficulty to locate us compared to the time which passes, giving the feeling which the time can as well pass incredibly quickly (children which grows) that incredibly slowly (the sequence of mental resistance of Dr. Chaffee in the ultimate sequences which appears then in extremely long comparison). Let us see finally how Bertrand Rougier (46) analyzes construction, or rather the rhythmic déconstruction which Carpenter in Vampires adopts : « By the means of [its brutal introduction], Carpenter aims at captivating [the spectator] by a rate/rhythm which will not be slackened, the attack of the first sequence causing a shock wave which is propagated on all film, inflecting even his intrigue. The movement, the tension, instead of accompanying the account which generates them manage here to conceal it, to make itself some main, tending to soften cutting with the profit of the continuity of the rate/rhythm. The traditional filmic composition, founded on the principles of balance, variety and harmony, is upset by it so much so that Carpenter comes from there to dispute the directing role of the scenario. If the account progresses well towards a climax, each scene develops in an autonomous way by exploiting all its resources until exhaustion. In Vampires, Carpenter decides to develop the vitality of the movement to the detriment of the strict coherence of the account. But the permanent miracle of the chain reactions makes it possible Carpenter to preserve intact energy produced at the beginning. The scenario writer (...) play with the nerves of a public already quite surprised by accelerations and the decelerations impromptus of the account. [the opening] communicates upon the departure with the spectators all information which they will need to correctly apprehend film and his protagonists. Carpenter can thus allow himself to let fall down the pressure, the feature film adopting a throbbing rate/rhythm, not rocked by the crackling the weapons, but by the alternation of the cycle day/night, the sunny plains of Far-West being opposed to the reference marks narrow, lugubrious, in which the monsters are confined until the twilight, moment when great spaces open in their turn with the threat. » Thus, Carpenter, through subtle but precise work of management of the rate/rhythm of the sequences, of their sequence, their breathings (internal breathings with the sequences and breathings between the sequences), as thanks to a tangle of stakes which join answer and are developed mutually, Carpenter complexes and densified the structure of his scenario.

That is supported by the will of Carpenter to delay to the maximum the final confrontation (Laurie/Myers, Nada/invaders, Loomis/Anti-God, the Trent/Sutter Cane, Mac-Ready/the thing) promised by its scenario, because curiously, more than the climax, which seems to interest it it is what occurs front, all the scenaristic preparation which will lead the spectator to approach this final in a particular state of tension, conscious of the stakes of all kinds which were posed throughout film. For Carpenter, the preparation of the climax seems almost jouissive besides than the climax itself : perhaps because it is this preparation, as it places the spectator in a state at the same time of waiting and permanent anticipation, which is interesting émotionnellement. Besides Carpenter defines thus the feeling of fear (47) : « it should be held account owing to the fact that the fear emanates from the anticipation of an atrocious event. Once the event passed, one falls into the tragedy. Imagine in Hiroshima in 1945. The terrifying part of the events takes place before the dropping of the bomb, after it is other thing. » To continue to surprise the spectator and to reactivate his anticipation of the atrocious event unceasingly, Carpenter will play on two elements : work on the transitive state and the capacity to take the opposite course to waitings of the spectator. He thus works initially on the transitive state : transitive state of the hero carpentérien, who, as we saw builds ourselves in the physical and metaphysical confrontation, and especially transitive state of what threatens it. Contours of the threat are specified (One sees initially only the arm of Myers, then its back, then its mask and finally its face) where change (the creature of The Thing which changes with each appearance, signs of its protean nature), obliging the spectator, by upsetting his reference marks continuously and the visual representation that it can have of the threat, to be held constantly on its guards. Carpenter can also perfectly exploit the changes of tone or the effects of surprised which will come désarçonner the spectator in his waitings ; one will be able to quote two examples of features of black humor which come to defuse tended situations : in the Village of Damnés, in the sequence of opening, the arrival of extraterrestrial causes the unexplainable fainding of the inhabitants : when those awake without any memory what could well do without, the spectator notes, mid- frightened mid- amused, whom one of them disappeared... on its barbecue ! Even black humor and violent one in Ghosts off Mars, when the brother of Williams Desolation accidentally cuts all the fingers while wanting to show his force. But if Carpenter can defuse situations, it also knows, by thwarting waitings of the spectator, to start news of them : we delay on the management of the case Mac-Ready in The Thing. Rafik Djoumi (48) raises that in this film Carpenter goes so much far in his will to thwart waitings of the spectator whom it straightforwardly «will kill a narrative interdict. Indeed Mac-Ready, referent of the spectator, are in his turn suspecté to be the thing. However, instead of us to make share his feeling of exclusion, Carpenter puts all works about it so that us it suspections in our turn ! Its hand tries to open a handle of door slowly, in reference to a plan impossible to circumvent of film of phantoms. Then it appears to us in the handing-over of explosives, enlightened on an icy bluish bottom, the eyes brilliant, metal, and a beard of white frost which confers an appearance of death-alive to him. Impossible consequently, to push paranoiac confusion further from the spectator, who has just suspected his referent, the projection of oneself with the screen. » While posing as postulate which he is the only Master on board his filmic space and which it can constantly reverse the prospects for the spectator, Carpenter then involves the spectator in the meshs of his net, causing the disorder and the anguish of the next inversion : in a word, Carpenter, with brilliance created the anguish, this feeling to be able to rest on any certainty which is the characteristic even of its cinema. The spectator, literally, is subjected to the will of Carpenter !

III a mythology of threatened America.

1- a purification carrying direction.

1.1 - suggestion and means of production.

One often introduced Carpenter like an enthusiastic partisan of the suggestion and use of the out-field, which is true, but to a certain extent only. Let us note first of all that Carpenter knows perfectly suggested the threat which weighs on characters without showing it with the image : thus, in Halloween, the first time that we see Michael Myers at the adulthood, Carpenter takes care well to dissimulate its appearance. While playing with maximum on half-light, and especially on subjectivity of point of view of (in particular the point of view of the nurse in the car which sees only the Myers arm crossing the pane), the realizer gives us to see the element that it considers essential at this time film for the apprehension of the character by the spectator (its extreme violence) without for all this we know him anything else. Of course that answers a preoccupation with an effectiveness (to pose the violence of Myers while letting work the imaginary one of the spectator), but also a will of Carpenter to purify to the maximum his character : he does not have, in a strict sense, identity (an inexpressive mask, and under this mask a face quite as inexpressive as we will discover it at the end of film) because the identity for Carpenter it is humanity and Myers does not have anything human in spite of appearances. He is anything else only one pure representation of the Evil, just like are to it the attackers of Attack. Moreover in this film in the same way, Carpenter will play to initially suggest the presence of the mass of attackers thanks to the effects of their violence, in particular the multiple inserts showing the balls to strike the interior of the police station : preoccupation of effectiveness and an economy of course (it thus does not need to use hundreds of observers to make feel with the spectator the danger which they represent), but also real will to exploit the any power of the out-field ; Bertrand Rougier (49) notes thus that « the framework being restricted, the essence of film is played apart from this one, the camera being only used mechanically to record the devastator effect of the out-field ». When Carpenter thus chooses not to show, it is never free and that falls under a true reflection compared to its setting in scene : in Fog for example, Carpenter initially chose anything to show, taking as a starting point a Jacques Tourneur to work on « a setting in scene all the more distressing that it does not seek to represent the face of the evil, but which it suggests its solid drop shadow on our world. » (Helene Frappat (50)), even if it realizes to the assembly which the film just as it is does not function perfectly, then deciding to turn over certain scenes in optics to clarify them and make film more alarming. But the film rests still much on this concept to give to believe in the spectator whom it saw whereas it often did nothing but guess or distinguish, his imaginary filling the missing images : it will be enough to re-examine the scenes or the phantoms attack the sailors close to Antonio Bay. By a very precise play on the sound and the assembly, the scene seems much more violent than it is it actually (inserts on the face of the victim at the precise time where the weapon strikes, its flesh and bone which cracks while the blade transpierces the bodies out-field). To put in scene the fear, it is thus mainly to take up the challenge to find a balance between what I suggest and what I show.

Sometimes, on the contrary, Carpenter decides to show sometimes much more than one could not expect it: in The Thing, its film most representative of this established fact, the SFX particularly gores of Rob Bottin (probably the best make-up man of special effects with Tom Savini) traumatisent the characters very as much as the spectator, helped well in that by all the psychological preparation on which the scenario writer works. Let us notice with Rafik Djoumi (51) « that it is henceforth a question for Carpenter systematically of diverting the attention of its public, before the nightmarish visions lovingly prepared by the make-up man Rob Bottin do not burst. At the time of the reanimation of Norris, not only Mac-Ready occupies the main part of the plans, but scientists framings highlight the operations of Clark to seize the scalpel. During the blood test, an argument bursts a few seconds before the fateful moment. If the infernal and grotesque visions of Bottin have indeed a nightmarish impact, temptation to however laugh, quite real, is from the start defused by the long psychological preparation to which Carpenter subjected to us. » Thus not only Carpenter decides to show and incarnate physically the threat, but this conscious choice is accompanied by a whole work of setting in scene aiming at coming to support this incarnation. In the same order of idea, Carpenter makes the choice expensive show with the screen the inexpressible one in Lovecraft ;risked bet when one knows that to represent with the screen what one initially worked to suggest is highly likely to come to disappoint the imaginary Almighty of the spectator. In the Cave of the madness, Carpenter chose to represent the diabolic creatures which enter our world whereas it could have decided not to do it (this passage being in my opinion undoubtedly less successful of film) ; Carpenter confirms besides that it could have done without this representation (52): « It is true, the special effects are not essential for this kind of history. But I adore the special effects ! They make film more alarming, give him a strange aspect. If you want to suggest a creature of beyond or a metamorphosis, it is necessary to set a limit on what you want to show. Me, I decided to go thoroughly there on the effects. Then certainly they are not essential to film, but I am quite glad to have some. » Further, Carpenter raises an essential point concerning his manner of tackling the question of the limit between representation and suggestion (53) : « And then, it is a decision which I made at the time. You know, I do not have any reasoning stopped on my choices when I make a film. I always tell my stories like I feel it. I always sticks to my instinct. »

Here is a new interesting facet of Carpenter : a realizer of instinct whose work translates a very great coherence set of themes and visual. In any case, that it is a question of representing or of suggesting the threat, a constant emerges from the work of Carpenter : its skill to make the synthesis of its subject, the angle according to which it wishes to approach it and of the means of production which are granted to him. Carpenter is a true craftsman with the noble direction of the term, formed at the difficult school of the series B and « clear up » able to work with ridiculous budgets taking into account the its ambitions without however practically never exceeding them. Thus, the use of the out-field is sometimes quite simply an effective and economic solution pragmatically adopted by a scenario writer anxious to optimize his means of production. The Prince of darkness is surely the most obvious example : after the cooking failure Of the Adventures of Burton Jack in the Claws of the Mandarin, large-guignolesque homage vibrating to a whole side of the Asian cinema which it fascine (production come from Honk Kong from Shaw Brothers, Tsui Hark, Bruce Lee of course...), Carpenter decides to remake a health far from the pressure of the studios and to turn to what Arnaud Bordas (54) indicates like « an independent cinema, mown but clever, where the poverty of the budget has of equal only the rigor of the design. In short, of the authentic series B, to summarize quickly. » .Carpenter thus multiplies the economic images but fulgurating : proliferation of insect which it describes (55) like « a direct homage to the universe of Bunuel which adored to include images of insects », horde marginal as alarming the as inexpressive ones, premonitory dreams of the characters materialized by a dirty and granulous video image all the more worrying, Catherine captive on other side of the mirror... The representation of the Anti-god finally : how to retranscribe with the image an image reversed of God supposed to create greatest physical and metaphysical fright ? Most simply of the world while choosing not to retranscribe it, or if little : a green liquid in a container, a massive and indistinct form behind a mirror... And it is all. Not. The realizer lets simply the spectator be frightened itself by convening his own most intimate fears, which confirms Carpenter himself (56) : « At the beginning, we wanted that Anti-God has the aspect of a creature of Lovecraft but did not reach that point us. This is why I finally removed them final version. But perhaps that the Prince of darkness resembles in this way more one film lovecraftien that if we had included these plans. You know, one can manage to describe a monster of Lovecraft easily, but when it is a question of giving him a visual form, the problem takes another dimension. ». Let us leave the word of the end with Arnaud Bordas (57) summarizing work of Carpenter on Prince of darkness : « How Carpenter is able it to stick to us a similar funk with only one million and half of dollars out of pockets ? Having retained the lessons of a Robert Wise (the House of the Devil- 1963) or of a Jacques Turner (Go with the fear- 1957), it has a perfect command of the art of the suggestion and uses it better than anybody to generate the fear. Better still, just as at Lovecraft, in Prince of darkness what is in the black is not horrible but unnamable (in the literal sense). And imagination to harness with full output... »

1.2- open and ridiculous end, or rather ridiculous bus

opened.

It is clear that John Carpenter is far from being a follower of the Manicheism: in its universe, the «white whole or any black» does not find its place. It work constantly the question of ambiguity, and in particular in the way in which he chooses to finish his films, or rather in the way in which he chooses not to finish them. The cinema of Carpenter raises questions, but does not answer it inevitably, opening tracks and leaving the spectator and with his imagination the care to invest itself in order to find its own answers...

There are first of all the ends which carry in oneself the germs of a probable prolongation: last evocative image, final «In Media LMBO» i.e. right in the middle of an action... One will be able to thus quote final Village of Damnés, where we see the small David saved by his mother, its empty glance walking on the horizon while the car runs towards an unknown destination. However, if its behavior appeared different from the other invaders (much «humanized more), we know that David is not, and will be never, a human being. The nightmare of Midwich (of the identically perfect and perfectly identical children invading a community of the interior) is thus dedicated to repeat itself, the more so as like specified it the character of Kirstie Al, other communities saw themselves infiltrated in their turn... In the same way at the end of Ghosts off Mars, we see the character of Williams Desolation helping Melanie Ballard, then both to set out again with the attack of the «spirits of Mars», which escaped of their phantom city, come to attack civilization. We more about the destiny of our two characters, but of it is it necessary will not know any really? Just let us need to know that the evil is never overcome, that it is there, tapi in the shade loan to be struck again. It is in that that one could qualify the cinema carpentérien the ridiculous one, and even of absurdity: during 1h30, we follow the desperate combat characters to ensure their survival, before the last plans of film reveals us that the threat was only pushed back, and that it is intended to return, still and still, ineluctably, condemning the human ones to an eternal fights. Thus, at the end of Halloween, Dr. Loomis (Donald Pleasence) kills Michael Myers who fall by the window. However, when the doctor leans by the window it does not have there more body. Quite to the contrary, last plans, of the increasingly broad executives of the city (the house of Laurie, the street, the city.) accompanied by breathing throbbing and characteristic of the killer put to us on the track: Myers cannot die because he already died 15 years earlier when he coldly stabbed his sister. Any humanity died in him, and from now on, like specifies it Dr. Loomis, «he' S the evil», a figure of the evil dedicated to haunt the town of Haddonfield eternally (it is the direction of these last plans), with the research of the prey which has escaped him. One reproached Carpenter for having made a commercial calculation by choosing this end: to think thus is to pass completely beside the major direction of this final, i.e. to make of Laurie Strode a kind of contemporary Sisyphus condemned to eternally carry out the same combat to ensure its survival. Moreover, Carpenter will not hesitate to give up the frankness lately created to go to carry out Fog. This open end also contributes to make of Halloween a nightmarish tale: Myers it is the croquemitaine, and as Stephen King summarizes it, «he was once three baby-sitters who decided to leave during the night Halloween, and only one of them was still alive when came the day from All Saints' day.» It is the same phenomenon that one finds at the end of the Prince of darkness: Kelly sacrificed himself while plunging on the other side of the mirror which is then broken in order to avoid the advent of Anti-God. However, with final the character of Brian Marsh (interpreted by Jameson Parker), awaked by a recurring nightmare (in fact a message addressed by the future through time), approaches the mirror located in its room, tightens the hand... and the film finishes. Carpenter implies as well as the characters made a mistake in interpretation: the mirror of the church was not the only vector of entry for the malefic force; any mirror perhaps a sufficient condition allowing Anti-God to incarnate itself in our world, this data changing the situation, while making ridiculous the resistance carried out in the church, and especially while making ridiculous even any form of resistance. This is why Brian Marsh continuous to make his nightmares while at the same time they should cease: they express the unquestionable victory of the evil (the black form on the step of the church) some are the conditions. In Fog finally, in before last scene of film, the character of Adrienne Barbel, guardian of the headlight and voice of Antonio Bay, urge the inhabitants to supervise the fog: its «look for the fog» referring directly to the «watch the ski» enclosing film of Howard Hawks and Christian Nyby, the Thing of another World, film of bedside of Carpenter. Here, like Helene Frappat (58) specifies it, the voice of Adrienne Barbeau «then delivers the «morals» of the fable carpentérienne. The evil can return. In other words, the threat of Fog is all the more terrifying that it is dubious, unspecified, since it resides in the zones of shade and fog present of each one of us.»

Thus at Carpenter, paradoxically, any perhaps final end: of Crow Jack dedicated to eternally pursue his enemies vampires and in particular Katrina and Montoya, contaminated (Vampires, although the final fine met with the tracking of Valek and in revival a news, that of Montoya, stake not being more then the survival of humanity, but the report/ratio of competition between Crow and Montoya) with John the Trent in the Cave of the Madness condemned to revive with the screen a perpetual setting in abyme of its existence created of any part by Sutter Duck (final buckles some, at the same time open and closed), there is in its work an unquestionable taste for ambiguity and ambivalence. From where that does it come? Like specifies it John Carpenter himself (59), it «likes much the ambiguous ends. [It has] always have problems with the films which have a «true end». It is not as that which that occurs in the true life, all is much more stable and dubious there. This is why [it] often uses open ends. In fact, [it] resembles to them much. [it him] is very often able not to find a solution with a problem.» It is in this same optics that it carries out a comparison between John Ford and Hawks (60): «I appreciate John Ford, but I do not like his sentimentalism, his romanticism, nor his respect for the values morals. The films of Hawks are more ambiguous.»

Lastly, the choice of final open perhaps also occasion for Carpenter to hold a specific speech to with it, as it is the case in The Thing: at the end, Mac Ready seems to have eliminated the thing, but it discovers whereas another character survived. Consequently, the final plan shows the two armed men, lost in the icy vastness, supervising one the other in the search of a sign which can betray the presence of extraterrestrial protean. In only one plan very «sartrien», Carpenter summarizes the subject even film, i.e. the fear of the other: two men unable to trust each other, ready between-to commit suicide constantly, symbols of a paradoxical humanity which can only live groups some but without to be able to trust its next.

Carpenter is quite conscious that its taste for the open ends does not serve its commercial interests inevitably: «One of my major problems, it is that the majority of my ends are ambiguous and are not always very merry. They put badly at ease, whereas Spielberg, for example, is conscious of the feelings which animate us and knows how to flatter them. (...) Thing of which I am completely unable, because I make initially this trade for me.» (61)

1.3 - towards a pure evil.

Carpenter refuses to waste his time in explanation and justification: in its cinematographic space, the things arrive, a point it is all. Free to the spectator to refuse to enter the universe set up by the scenario writer, but if it agrees to enter there is to accept this starting postulate: the things arrive a point it is all. In the universe carpentérien, there is always a disturbing starting event which starts a crisis and which pushes the characters to be organized to exceed it, and it is important little to know why or how this event arrives: the children invaders who colonize the Village of Damnés, the thing which infiltrates in the American base in The Thing or the avengers spirits which awake over Mars in Ghosts off Mars...

One can easily establish a parallel with a film which belongs to the cinematographic references of Carpenter: Birds of Alfred Hitchcock. In its measuring, Hitchcock made fall down on an island (and its characters) a quite particular plague, since all the birds link themselves to attack the human ones without apparent reason. There is no explanation, and it is well there more terrifying. That of course makes it possible Hitchcock to make his film ultra-effective, since by not wasting time in explanations (which would have been in all ways probably not very credible), it has a maximum of time to set up his characters, in particular its heroin which incarnated by Tippi Hendren, a woman with the margin too modern bus, too «released» for its time, then to film the attack itself. But that also makes it possible Hitchcock to release from the realistic yoke for métaphoriser its speech and to deliver, through its birds, an incarnation of the Evil. However, that makes on its Carpenter side, if is not to explore in each one of its films a facet different from the Evil?

Thus in Attack, for Bertrand Rougier (62), Carpenter «never reveals frankly the ambitions nor the face of the gangsters, the film precisely nourishing these interrogations to feed the fantastic content of the account» .D'autre part, as Helene Frappat underlines it, «one will never know exactly which are the phantoms of Fog» (63). Of course, they have a history, a history of revenge more precisely since they return to eliminate the descendants from those which ruined their boat for gold, melting the community of Antonio Bay on an original crime. But this motivation, this explanation which Carpenter chooses is there before very conveying a metaphorical speech on the United States, country founded him also on an original crime, that of the massacre of the Indians. For the remainder, John Carpenter chooses, like precisely says it still Helene Frappat, to be interested in «confrontation with the pure evil (all the more «pure» that it is as vague as a bench of fog) and in the terror which it generates», seeking «a form of stylization very pure and abstracted from the horror». That is even more prégnant in the Halloween film, where Carpenter starts from a realistic figure, or all at least credible (the killer sociopathe) to make the figure of it even evil: slow and inescapable step pointing out the zombies of Romero, total absence of expression thus of emotion and thus of humanity as one of the last sequences of film shows it where one sees Laurie Strode tearing off the mask of its attacker and revealing a face quite as transparent and inexpressive (the same inexpressiveness that one discovered on the face of small Michael Myers after the murder of his sister: it there does not have any more trace of humanity in him), employs of a very precise lexical field on behalf of Dr. Loomis who designates Myers by the terms «devil» (= devil) or «evil» (= evil), feeling of invincibility: Myers is made draw above, fall by the window but does not die, surely because in a certain manner he already died...

Especially, an element in particular contributes to make of Michael Myers either simple a serial-killer of series B, but much more one mythological figure of the Evil, it is its capacity «to haunt space»: that was already approached in the part «put out of order and contaminated space» but specify the matter here. All the device of setting in scene of Carpenter, in particular in the space management, is intended to give the capacity to Myers «to be based» truly in the decorations urban of Haddonfield (streets, house...). Thus, there is a regular recourse to the system of following assembly: plan of Myers who observes Laurie Strode, then plane of Laurie who, smelling the threat intuitively, is turned over towards Myers, then return to the preceding plan (even value and even tallies) but this Myers time disappeared; this system confers on Myers the possibility of appearing and of disappearing as good seems to him within this urban space, or all at least gives to believe in the spectator whom it has this possibility. In the same way, Myers seems to completely control the space in which it evolves/moves: when Laurie Strode is dissimulated in the closet to escape the killer, this one immediately locates it like if it to be able to see through solid surfaces of this space which it endorsed; when it continues Laurie, in particular in the final confrontation in the house, Myers finds itself systematically behind it in a quasi-supernatural way... Moreover, as we noticed previously, the ultimate plans of film, these increasingly broad plans of the city with in background music the breathing of the killer, completely confuse Myers and his environment in a perfect and perfectly indissociable symbiosis. Lastly, last element which makes of Myers a character of tale terrifying like A defines Stephen King, it is the fact that during more half of film only the children whom keep Laurie seem to have the capacity to really see the killer: as known as the young boy of which Laurie occupies itself, «he' S the boogey man», «it is the croquemitaine». And indeed it is well that in question: Michael Myers it is the croquemitaine, the monster hidden under the bed or in the wall cupboard ready to return to terrify us at any moment. Consequently, the counting rhyme sung by the children when they leave the school concerning the «Boogey man» becomes, more than one stylistic effect, a true declaration of intent.

Moreover one will be able to note to conclude that the will of Carpenter to make of Myers a mythical figure was present right from the start project like it specifies it itself: «we sought to give our interpretation of an icon like Frankenstein de Boris Karloff. We liked these monsters. Godzilla for example, in its first film, was a horrible monster... And he became a hero! (64)» Just like Myers, entered to the Pantheon of the malefic figures of the cinema on the same basis precisely as Frankenstein, Dracula or Freddy Krueger...

2- an alarming normality: the paradox carpentérien.

2.1- the work of diversion of the daily newspaper and of

institutions.

One of the talents which one can certainly recognize in Carpenter, it is its capacity to be worked on elements of the daily newspaper, therefore to return elements a priori reassuring, them terrifying a posteriori. Streets of small «a suburb» American means, police a station, a village, a dog which runs in snow... As many elements, of images which in any traditional film would seem alleviating and which take very an other direction for the spectators of Carpenter. That can appear surprising, but like specifies it Carpenter (65) «some of the things more terrifying for me and for step badly of people, in fact the tricks have the air seemingly completely normal. A person, a district... But under varnish they are not like you and me.». In connection with district, one spoke already much about Halloween and the capacity of Michael Myers to be based in the urban space of Haddonfield, small city of Illinois: it is also a means for Carpenter of scrambling all the traditional reference marks of Laurie Strode, to choke it in this space which is it his since always and which should reassure it. Thus all the setting in scene of Carpenter will work is «to lose it» in space (use of the scope, and overall plans accompanied by an extremely short focal distance, almost deforming which isolates Jamie Lee Curtis and seems to put it at the thank you of its predator) that is to say there to lock up it with very made up executives where trees, cars, houses, washing line (all components of a city all in all) come to create lines and executives within the framework which imprison the character by limiting his possibilities of displacement, giving the feeling to prohibit any attempt at escape. Daily urban space, far from being reassuring, becomes by the work of cutting a threat for the character of Laurie. From this same point of view of diversion, one will be able to quote the plan of the dog already evoked in The Thing, when this one, looks by the window the return of Mac-Ready bringing back with him a proof of the existence of the thing: a dog looking by the window, here is an image which seems a priori well not very alarming. However, something comes to cause it Malayan of the spectator: is this this way of looking by the window as if it included/understood really the stakes of what is occurring? Perhaps, but not only. It is also the very precise work of setting in scene of the realizer who comes to give a force particular to the plan. There is already, as we have just said it, and as surprising as that can appear, a work of «direction of actor» if not raising: this fixity of the dog, the tended body, in stop constitutes already a disturbance for the spectator who cannot then prevent himself from carrying out a bringing together with the sequence of opening of film where one saw the dog being made continue by a helicopter. It occurs something with this dog definitively: but what? Lastly, Carpenter, chooses to film this dog in two plans which intersect with the assembly the action with Mac-Ready, Carpenter binding the two proposals (the dog/the return of Mac-Ready) as if the dog had a direct report/ratio indeed with what is being played, i.e. the discovery of the extraterrestrial threat : however, as we will discover it thereafter, it is indeed the case. Moreover, the choice of framework of the 1st plan of the choice is significant : Carpenter decides to place the camera behind the dog, with this one out of starter, placing the spectator from the point of view of the animal, type of framing which one in general employs for a human character since it underlines a conscious and reasoned observation, the whole contributing to confer on the plan a under-text which will become obvious when the dog placed in the kennels proves to be the body-vehicle of «the thing». Last example of this work of diversion, invaders of the Village of Damnés: Carpenter attacks an essential taboo here since it chooses children to incarnate a new figure of the Evil! Like Carpenter (66) specifies it, «the metaphor of the Village of Damnés is indeed rather complex and touches one of the most significant points of the current urban companies: what arrives when the children become cold killers and without remorse?» How does it begin there then to make his/her children alarming? And well it will carry out a whole work of setting in scene resting on the standardization: physical standardization obviously with all these children as perfectly identical as identically perfect, all fair to the blue eyes in a reminiscence of fantasmatic Nazi; standardization of reaction then as for example when one of the doctor accidentally wounds one of the children with ocular product and that we see all the other children waiting in the corridor to rise of a blow and to turn to the room (the children seem to react physically to the pain of the one as of their, like as many components of same and single body); standardization of displacements finally, with these many sequences where one sees the children crossing the village at exactly synchronized intervals, in a species of parody of military step (and the comparison is not alleviating: under are their appearance, these children finally other thing that «soldiers» sent to invade us? Besides Carpenter develops readily in his setting in scene a military lexical field when the children are represented with the screen, in particular the fact that the invaders come gradually to truly «occupying» the city...). But they is perhaps front even as the children do not make their appearance that Carpenter shows the most talent to divert the daily images; let us examine thus how the realizer gives us to see all the stages of the pregnancy of the women of the village of Midwich: Carpenter shows us the traditional images of a preparation of birth, but shift completely our prospect via a very simple principle, the principle of repetition. We see women thus first of all following one another at Dr. Chaffee, learning their pregnancy the ones after the others, Dr. implying thereafter that strictly all the women of the village having the capacity to procreate await «happy» an event. The first faintness: by generalizing in a surrealist way this wave of pregnancy, Carpenter removes any personal aspect to him creating a first fracture with the traditional image of the happy, awaited and prepared pregnancy. He will not cease thereafter, always according to this same principle of repetition, to use images seen thousand times but which this time take a fundamentally unhealthy turning: one will quote the wave of dreams striking at the same time all the women without exception lasting their pregnancy (and the same dream, repeated strictly with the identical one: there traditional antenatal anguish taking a turning much more threatening) or even preparatory gestures with the childbirth repeated by a multitude of couples of all ages gathered in a small space, this negation of individuality surrealist, almost absurd, completing to reverse our prospect for spectator like that of the characters: to see the face of the «fathers», completely exceeded by the nonsense of the situation being observed the ones others. This work even finds its apotheosis at the time of the scene of the childbirth, where in a hospital of fortune drawn up by the army, a long dolly passes in front of this multitude of women in full work (exactly at the same moment!), transforming the hospital into gigantic baby factory: the limits of the absurdity are reached here, but whereas the scene could lend to laughing it is absolutely not the case, because with this perfect negation of individuality, and humanity thus, in fact also the limits of the horror are reached... One will note also quickly that in the center of this standardization of the invaders Carpenter works to isolate a child in particular, David, this identity which emerges from the group not taking whereas more importance: for Rafik Djoumi, (67) «the small David becomes, by the force of the things the principal element which returns to the brittleness of this group of invaders, offering to the scenario writer the occasion to exploit the desynchronization on several occasions (while preserving the rate/rhythm of walk of the group, the small David is diverted some to penetrate in the cemetery)». However, if David is a disturbing element, it is because it is «orphan, with horse between two worlds». Character of an extraordinary ambiguity all in all, Achilles' heel of the invaders from his humanity surely, grave-digger of humanity perhaps because it remains despite everything a invader (cf the final one where the car moves away with the small David on his board, music implying that this history is far from being finished).

This direct attack with the taboo of maternity shows well that Carpenter thus does not hesitate to scratch the institutions: by institutions we understand the instituted things (rules, uses, organizations...) to which, by definition, one does not touch, fundamental laws governing the political and social life of a country. First institution put at evil in the work of Carpenter, the police force, and the concept of police force in particular. An image could summarize the feeling of Carpenter with regard to the police force, that of the nightmare of the Trent in the Cave of the Madness, where it sees, in a narrow lane a police officer to strike with dead homeless people. When the police officer is turned over towards the Trent to threaten it, it exposes a face bouffi and torn, this physical corruption referring directly to another form of corruption, mental this time. Carpenter lives in Los-Angeles: how not to see in this image a reference (hardly) dissimulated to police violences and in particular to the business Rodney King gone back to 1992, where agents of Los-Angeles are transfered filmed whereas they were caught some with an innocent Afro-American, racial riots bursting thereafter in all the city? The image of the police force is not more reluisante in New York 1997 and Los Angeles 2013 or even in Invasion Los-Angeles, the principal problem being that this police force is a police force, in other words an arm armed with the service with the established order, without possibility of judgment nor of reflection, including if this one appears morally debatable as can be to it the modes fascisants quoted films, where capacities of initiatives and personal freedoms of the citizens are gradually gummed (see thus the band announces of Los-Angeles 2013, where a voice enumerates the rules to be followed in the cinemas, the orders becoming gradually those which it will be necessary to follow in 2013: «prohibition to speak, smoke, eat red meat, to choose its religion, to marry without the assent of the department of health...»). Carpenter boulverse thus once again reference marks of the spectator by making police force (in the broad sense term, like guarantee of an established order) either a reassuring presence but a threat, one moreover, for the hero carpentérien: Snake Plissken is stopped by the police force, which will contribute to send it behind the walls of the penitentiary of New York (in a scene of introduction finally cut to the assembly of New York 1997, one saw Plissken being made stop and its accomplice to be made cut down), John Nada is continued by the police force while «Justiceville», the refuge of left for account, is put at bag in a sad reflection of the current police exactions in the United States. At Carpenter, the police force is thus, in the worst case, a threat, at best ineffective, as in Assaut where Bishop will hopelessly await reinforcements which will never come or in Halloween, with this figure of police officer of the completely transparent and useless suburbs...

The Church, and especially the ecclesiastical hierarchy, are also a target of choice for Carpenter, in his permanent will to dissimulate in particular for better controlling: in Prince of darkness, it is the existence of Anti-God who is dissimulated in order to avoid a counterweight which could harm the domination of the traditional religion on the men. But Carpenter goes even further in Vampires, since Jack Crow, engaged by the Church to eliminate the creatures from the night, will discover that it is its employer even who is responsible (by a disproportionate ambition) for the existence of Valek, which it always sought to hide! Thus the two extremes (the Church/vampires) end up meeting in a species of loop upsetting the traditional reference marks of the good and the evil: indeed, pushing the vampiric metaphor until in his last cuttings off, Carpenter links the two opposite ones by same and inextinguishable thirst, thirst for blood for Valek, thirst for being able for the men of God... But Valek, it, cannot fight against this dark share of itself, because its greed is physical and condition of its survival: if it does not have physically the choice, can one still judge his thirst for blood in term of good or evil? Does it make another thing that to consume to survive, that is to say the equivalent of what we make each day with the raw materials of our planet to the risk exhaust the resources? The more so as as Bertrand Rougier (68) explains it, «the existence of Valek is literally infernal. Hardly it is on foot that it is necessary for him to run after its subsistence, to watch for its victims, to allure them, absorb them. Valek is perpetually threatened by drying of these volatile bloods, these bad bloods making of him an eternal conscript provisionally exempted of death. Is its thirst, blind and irrepressible, that of living» (69) Pourquoi this eagerness against the religious institution, more precisely the catholic institution? Perhaps Carpenter delivers of it to us a key in one of his talks: with the question «are you a religious person?», it answers «not, I do not believe in the supernatural one. The only place where there is it is on a screen. The true life is such as it is: we sat in this coffee, there are cars outside, it does not have there phantoms around us, it does not have there an UFO above our heads, I will not transform myself into werewolf and you are not a vampire. If we were in a film, all this could arrive.» (70) .Voici thus perhaps the explanation of this conflict report/ratio: Carpenter would reproach the catholic religion, not to lie since the lie is a basically cinematographic data, but to lie with an aim of exerting a control on the Man. Thus he still in same maintenance (71) says, whereas the journalist notices that it is not very tender with the catholic authorities in Vampires: «I was high in Protestantism, at the methodists to be more precise. The methodists make a very particular branch of the Protestant religion: they do not recognize the culpability like a crowned value. All opposite of the Catholicism which, precisely, rests on the concept of culpability, of sin. Catholicism is very strange in my eyes. More especially as it grants an important place to the pageantry, the costumes, with the ornaments, with all these symbols ritual. I do not include/understand this manner of equipping a religion. All this decorum makes Catholicism very suspect. I am wary about it.» Pageantry, culpability, as many weapons of the Church to sit its position of superiority and to control crowd...

Lastly, the last target, and not least, of Carpenter: political institution. That those which directs us are manipulators (extraterrestrial of Los-Angeles Invasion which controls the human mass via subliminal messages) the, ineffective ones (in Ghosts off Mars, in spite of the interrogation of Melanie Ballard which announces the threat, the matriarchy is unable to organize a defense and is overflowed as the end of film suggests it: spirits gain civilization), made thirsty for to be able (the soldiers of the Village of Damnés who make of Midwich a laboratory of observation while hoping to draw some from information before being made, once again, to overflow) or heirs to culpability original (Janet Leigh which plays the part of a mayor in Fog, commemorating the birthday of a city - Antonio Bay- founded in the crime and blood), it is clear that Carpenter does not grant a blind confidence to the leading authorities. Probably because it made the experiment, as a man, of the injustices of the system in which it evolves/moves: thus he says, «I saw how the Man is treated by the large capitalist machine and how those which control it do not have absolutely anything to do others. I have evil to include/understand that. I was born in 1948, and I grew in this time of great hope. It was believed whereas the system was friendly and that it took account of each one. While growing, I realized that it was not the case, and that plunged me in a terrible anger.» (72) Thus, with his manner, Carpenter is what one could call a true (and large) political scenario writer, unfortunately underestimated. But a political scenario writer with the direction first of the term: étymologiquement, the «political» term comes from the Greek «polished» (= the city). Policy it is thus what concerns life of city, and that Carpenter makes if is not to observe the «city» in which it evolves/moves, i.e. the American company? But this observation, Carpenter does it with a certain passing, almost in a remote way, without never really delivering themselves, and good luck with that which will try to encircle the character! Stephan Moïssakis and Rafik Djoumi (73) were risked with this difficult exercise, drawing up a portrait in the shape of kalédioscope starting from its catalog of films: Carpenter is «a narrator (Cartesian), a perfectionist cameraman (mathematician), a naive pessimist and anarchist (individualistic but socio-capitalist), assembler-type-setter-interprets with rhythmic infallible (and its rock' roll attitude) and a faithful conservative of the great traditions, in love reserved for the entity cinema, short Carpenter the scenario writer!». But, they recognize both, «all those which are interested in its case recognize a certain constancy to him, assimilate without sorrow the character to his films, make him carry multiple more or less militant caps, without however agreeing on a satisfactory definition of what is «John Carpenter». Anarchist or gauchist for some, reactionary for others and even both at the same time (for Jan Kounen, «one finds in its films of the at the same time provocative and social ideas (Los-Angeles Invasion) but also on the sides plus reactionaries, sedentary (Attack, who is for [him] a masterpiece)» (74)), Carpenter is the scenario writer of all the parties and as no at the same time (speaking about Los-Angeles Invasion, it describes the film of «revolt against the left, the line, the censure and the politically correct one» (75) and for him Los-Angeles 2013, «does not tackle a party in particular, it types on everyone. More than quite simply to be used soup to the republicans or for the democrats, [this film] known as that the country currently gives up freedom with the profit of the order. A step moreover towards Fascism. Our company is mistaken, is deluded with illusion.» (76)), to finish often badly liked «because people do not know how [it] to consider, [it] to approach.» And it is all the more difficult «to consider» that it does not hesitate to be contradicted, contributing to make its image even more imperceptible! It thus criticizes «the large capitalist machine», before recognizing: «I would lie if I said to you that I never worried about the money. It is important, I am a capitalist, I am American! If somebody unloaded with much money I would be easily at its mercy.» (77)... For my part, if I were to engage me on this slipping ground of the definition, inevitably reducing, I would say that John Carpenter is a libertarian realizer, and deeply independent, in its work as in its opinions, very near finally to its character of Snake Plissken, as it recognizes it readily itself (78): «there is indeed of the John Carpenter in him. In Hollywood one perceives me like an outlaw. I am a rebel as Sam Peckinpah was it in the past. I assert this title. And it is true that it is what attracted me in the character of Snake Plissken». Then, Plissken-Carpenter, even combat?

2.2- Inversion which dissimulates a resemblance with

human monstrosity, a reflection on what

fact Humanity.

At Carpenter, the threat is never law, dissimulated in the shade, lends to

to emerge to seize the hero carpentérien thus (, in Assaut, when Bishop carries out its turn of recognition in the city at the beginning of film, it does not intend its radio to state worrying information, as an index of the explosion of violence to which we will assist thereafter. ) But while further going, T there it does not have not a border of thinnest which separates the hero carpentérien from what threatens it ? Thus, while looking at well, heroes and threats, once subjected to the analysis, dangerously seem to approach, almost to merge sometimes. One has already to speak about the strange resemblance of Plissken and Myers, both between two worlds, neither completely alive nor completely dead. Even case of figure between Jack Crow and Valek who end up meeting in their manner of existing only through their respective searches. Carpenter admits it itself (79) : « finally Jack Crow and Valek form only one and even nobody. They are so strongly implied in the same search ! The similarities between the goods and malicious give a little pepper to the scenario of Vampires. Following the example Wild Horde besides. In this western the gangsters are the heroes and vice versa. I have of it enough the Manicheism driveller of old films of vampires. » In the same order of idea, Bertrand Rougier (80) notes that « no character in Vampires can assert the role of good Guy. It is against the heroic figure generally incarnating the values of the American community that the attack of Carpenter carries most ardently. Laconically being able to be defined like a phratry of assassins stripped of heart, all the characters of film offer the image of an integral negativity. (...) Valek is not a haughty dandy but a mad animal, plugged by its hatred and its ambition. Tony Montoya is not the inébranlable right arm of Crow Jack, but a vulgar désarticulant himself puppet as soon as its Master gives up it. The pontiffs of the clergy are obviously not the representatives of an altruistic faith, but of cheap hypocrites animated by a vanity sacrilege : to become immortal. As for Crow Jack, it is rough stripped of spirituality, a being viscéralement, even exclusively, violent one. » Thus, the two sides of the barrier meet, the extremes are linked and come from there to merge, in a pulp of value where the traditional reference marks of Good and Evil do not have any more a value.

For Carpenter the line which separates the goods and the malicious ones in its films is « as in the quite thin life. The cops and the robbers are the same ones » (81). Not astonishing thus that they join (Bishop/Wilson in Assaut ; Melanie Ballard/Williams Desolation in Ghosts off Mars). To make sensitive this attenuation, even this disappearance of the border between the two worlds, Carpenter convenes the image of the mirror : the mirror, very present in the it, Prince of darkness is who reverses my image all while returning it almost to the identical one. Exactly as can be to it Crow and Valek, reversed (different camps, opposite searches...) but identical in the same violence, the same brutality and especially the same deficit of existence apart from their reciprocal tracking. In a sense, they do not exist that as they are fought...

Carpenter still underlines the thinness from what separates its heroes from the malefic forces while employing precisely and voluntarily of the anti-heroes. John Nada for example is the prototype even. John Carpenter notices on this subject (82) : « John Nada is an individual without much motivation, somebody of banal completion. (...) From the point of view of the company it is nothing (Spanish nada means anything literally. You know for the rich person the poor are invisible. They do not exist. » Carpenter goes even further in his will to scramble the tracks (and the values) by creating figures of the evil able to adopt the shape even of Humanity : Michael Myers posts a human face behind which any humanity died while the thing is able to reproduce all human being in its least details : voice, displacements, physics... In an opposite movement, as we saw Carpenter made of the referent even of the spectator (Mac-Ready in The Thing) a potential threat. In this confusion of the places and statutes where `one cannot know with which proud, which remains it to defend for Humanity ? Perhaps not its appearance which can be copied and imitated, but surely its values and its principles, and in particular the ethical combat which it can carry out against itself in order to contain the Evil which is of each one of us.

3- the human one with fantastic dimension, the fantastic one with political dimension.

3.1- a new off-centering: the logic of

successive domination.

The combat, resistance, survival is the principal stake of the cinema carpentérien. But survival against which, counters what? Gang of Los-Angeles in Attack, extraterrestrial in The Thing or Los-Angeles Invasion, Anti-God in Prince of darkness, vampires in... Vampires, phantom revanchists in Fog or Ghosts off Mars, writer demiurge and démoniaque in the Cave of the Madness. What plain all its threats? Quite simply will to impose its domination by subjecting the character carpentérien, thus opening the way with the introduction of a new astounding order, sometimes with exact opposed that established.

In Vampires, Valek seeks to recover an artefact which would allow him, with him and his, «to go during the day», making of him a complete predator. Indeed, in the state, Valek is a Master the night and tracked the day as an animal as the scene of opening shows it where Jack Crow and its comparses tear off the vampires with their reference mark and wildly expose them in the light of the day. At the beginning of film, in a surprising way, it is thus more Jack Crow (the man) which represents a threat for Valek (the vampire) that the reverse. But with this artefact, Valek would make ground a gigantic hunting ground, the man being reduced to the game row and loser of this fact his statute of being higher creation. After the first off-centering which the meeting with «the alter-ego constitutes», it is a new off-centering quite as fundamental, bus from now on the human being is put at bottom of its pedestal, is deposed of its statute of central and dominant figure of the creation, put in competition (and of course at its disadvantage) with other forms of existence. In Ghosts off Mars for example, the human ones are confronted with the spirits of Mars, and the final one, to be opened, lets well hear that the report/ratio of force is likely to be unbalanced, just like in The Thing: if the thing is beaten for this time (and within sight of final chosen by Carpenter one can doubt it), it only did not leave given, because how to fight against a force which is spread and which one cannot identify?

Same manner, in Prince of darkness, the advent of Anti-God would mean the advent of new perfectly opposed order, testifies to them the homeless people who surround the church: put at the service of Anti-God they would be the first to benefit from this total upheaval. Why homeless people? There perhaps precisely because they are the marginal ones, Carpenter founding an off-centering of a new type, and politically very subversive: paraphrasing a very famous biblical sentence, with the victory of Anti-God the last will be the first and conversely. In this off-centering, it is the majority, that of integration and the social success, which is threatened by the minority, that of excluded and left for account, in a total upheaval of the values and reference marks... One can easily imagine resonance that such a matter can have in an American company champion all categories of the social fracture!

If in a film as Prince of darkness the total inversion of the values is only suggested (even strongly: in any case, evoked off-centering, if it is made, will be done apart from filmic space, in extrapolation that will just like be made the spectator of «after-film» in Ghosts off Mars), in other films it is truly put in image: thus the final one of the Cave of the Madness which sees the humanity decimated with the profit of an obscure force, and which sees especially, in an inversion compared to the beginning of film, the character of the Trent initially considered as insane, to be right in the prophetic words which it had launched. From now on, they are the insane ones, or regarded as such, which holds the truth. Sometimes even this inversion of the values is posed like normalizes at the beginning of film and not only crosses all film but the structure even: in New York 1997, the town of New York, floret and pride of America, became a populated penitentiary of the worst criminals, and in Los-Angeles 2013, the town of Los-Angeles, become a ground of exclusion for all the misfits of the American company, is paradoxically the last space of freedom. In Los-Angeles Invasion, the off-centering which threatens traditionally the hero carpentérien is this time realized before even the beginning of film: if it relies on the world in which it lives, John Nada does not know yet that the extraterrestrial ones (temporarily) gained and that they seized the power. Beautiful (and subtle) mirror tended by the scenario writer to the American company besides: the human rich scorning exclude them without suspecting that they are themselves exclude them from a higher and dominant race... Consequently the mission of the hero carpentérien is not any more to avoid off-centering, but to reverse the inversion already operated by thus restoring the original order... Without, and it is that also the irony carpentérienne, which that changes something with the social inequalities as characteristic of the human society as of that installation by the extraterrestrial one... Once driven out invaders, basically that that will change? perhaps all. Surely nothing. Lastly, while being delayed on Ghosts off Mars, one will notice that it is this time the off-centering which threatens the hero carpentérien (spirits of Mars dominating the human one) who however comes to restore an original order: indeed this ground of Mars belongs to the spirits since they were there before the men, it make finally only take again their rights. As if the spirits of the Indians of America awoke and came «botter the buttocks» from the cow-boy all in all...

Thus Carpenter dares to threaten the statute even of the Man by posing the possibility, if not the certainty, that the human being is dedicated to being replaced by «something of other» that they are phantom, extraterrestrial or anything of other... Like the Man succeeded the dinosaurs, something of other, superior will succeed to him. And this for the simple one and good reason which the Man carries in oneself the germs of his own destruction...

3.2- codes westerniens with the internal threat : revisited America.

Carpenter forever carried out western, although it does not know very well itself why (82) : « I failed to do one of them but I do not know why I never passed to the act. I could not formulate a correct answer. Perhaps that I did not have courage. It should not be forgotten that the young people do not have of it anything any more to make westerns. They made their time. » However the kind crosses all its work, of the deserted city of Attack to the phantoms desperados of Fog, of the hat of cow-boy of Mac-Ready to the duels in the corridors of the station of TV in Invasion Los-Angeles, of the arrival of the Trent with Hobb' S End (only the name of this city is in oneself a proclamation !) a such cow-boy avenger in the Cave of the Madness to the primitive spirits of Mars come to recover their ground conquered by the land ones... in connection with Vampires, Bertrand Rougier (83) announces that « Carpenter signs as much a night western inspired by Rio Bravo (music), the Night of Word-Alive (the environment and progression of the account) and the Wild Horde (general sets of themes and the space management) that a remake of Prince of darkness. » But the films in which this influence of the western is felt more, it is perhaps the couple New York 1997/Los-Angeles 2013 ; Carpenter himself defines them thus (84) : « Los-Angeles 2013 is like New York 1997, a black western, a film with Indians and cow-boys ».

Why this attraction for the western ? by taste of course, since it is the popular cinema which rocked its childhood and caused its first agitations of spectator... But also because to evoke the western, it is to evoke the history of the United States, and not any history... It is to evoke the original culpability of a country which was built in violence and blood, and this culpability, Carpenter did not cease working to represent it with its way: in Fog with the phantoms come to make pay its crime at a community which takes pleasure in the lie, in Ghosts off Mars with the colonists who learn with their depends that one does not adapt a ground also easily (spirits being defined clearly as a reflection avengers of the Indians of America driven out of their ground), and finally through all its work. Indeed concept of culpability and cursed genealogy structure completely work carpentérienne. This is why Cédric Delelée does not hesitate to establish a comparison full with by the way between Carpenter and Clint Eastwood, both falling under the same logic of storytellers of the history of America (84) : « Carpenter approaches another large scenario writer fascinated by America and his mythology. It is indeed impossible not to think in Fog of the Man of the High Plains of Clint Eastwood, the only realizer with Carpenter to be fitted in a traditional vein inherited John Ford, Howard Hawks, Anthony Mann and John Sturges. Passion that Carpenter and Eastwood divide is there to prove it, just like their desire to transmit typically American legends (i.e. registered in the unconscious collective of a still young nation) and who can be forged only in these heroic spaces which are Far-West and the Ocean. In Fog, the spectra which emerge from the sea evoke more once band of desperados. And it is not a chance if Carpenter benefits from it to stress the fact that America was built on the corpses of innocent to which one stole their grounds, just like had done it Eastwood in Josey Wales Hors-la-loi. ».

Lastly, let us note that if Carpenter trotts us from one end to another of America (New York, Los-Angeles, suburb, province, coastal city, far North...), it is indeed, under cover of entertainment, to draw up a catalog of the threats which weigh on it... Which are they ? Threaten of standardization with the invaders of the Village of Damnés or the extraterrestrial ones of Los-Angeles Invasion which standardize the human behaviors (obey ! You marry !), this standardization being also that which specifically threatens the world of the cinema (Carpenter says thus (85) « that at the time its rage was not directed against a studio in particular or a producer. What made it insane, it was rather the state in which was the American cinema. It was revolted by what one proposed to the spectators, but also by the apathy of the public in general. A public which does not accept any more the originality and is reassured by consuming stupidly done everything formulas. »). In same optics, threatens of the loss of individual identity in The Thing, and threatens of the loss of collective identity, i.e. our culture, in Invasion Los-Angeles (what Helene Frappat describes as threat of the ugliness, a levelling down of our company which is locked up in the mediocrity : « the largest danger that the exploiteurs make run in our world is less its destruction that its disfigurement. » ), threat of the social fracture and the violence of the large capitalist machine (machine to produce exclusion) in Los-Angeles Invasion, threat of blind violence like only rule (Attack, New York 97 : it is virtually the law of the strongest which reigns), threat of the puritanism and the loss of personal freedoms (Los-Angeles 2013, Los-Angeles paradoxically appearing the last space of freedom.), threat of the censure against the difference (the Trent in the Cave of the madness is censured because its vision of reality is not in conformity... It is thus insane.) and finally threat of the alienating technology which reduces to us with the state dependant sheep... (it is the direction of the last arm of honor of unverifiable Plissken which decides to extinguish the world).

However these threats that Carpenter decides to make weigh in a fictional way on the United States (extraterrestrial, monsters...) under cover of entertainment are finally only the reflection of obsessions and the obsessions which corrode America of the interior. Finally here is all the metaphorical movement of the cinema of John Carpenter : to take the quite real threats which mine our company of the interior and to disguise them in less dérangeantes fictitious external threats. However, well in spite of we let us not be easily deceived. Here well all the lesson of the cinema carpentérien ; if it frightens us also, it is because it does nothing but tighten us the disgracieux reflection of our most intimate neuroses...

précédent sommaire suivant










Extinction Rebellion



"Tu supportes des injustices; Consoles-toi, le vrai malheur est d'en faire"   Démocrite