Buffalo 66 (1998)

 

    I remember seeing Buffalo 66, a now seemingly forgotten 90’s film, when I was a young girl around 2008. I only remembered bits and pieces, and how much I loved Christina Ricci’s dress and makeup. I didn’t really understand it the way I do now as an adult, but I was taken by its imagery and story. I am fascinated with Vincent Gallo’s worldview, despite the disparity between what he portrays and who he ultimately is. I’m here to talk about the movie itself, but I find it impossible not to mention his behaviors because of my own moral compass and because the creator of a work absolutely matters when we’re talking about interpretation. Separating the art from the artist is a phrase I don’t think I can support; I find it ridiculous. When I praise this film, I want to make it clear that I’m not endorsing Galo or the crimes he’s allegedly committed or the way he treated the people he worked with; I am merely stating how it came off to me when I didn’t know all of those things, and I’m also here to explain how it made me feel after. It’s important for me to explain this clearly before I dive in. So…

Buffalo 66 was made in 1998 by then newcomer Vincent Galo (although from what I researched he was well-established in the underground art house scene of New York for a while before this.) When Tarantino became successful there were a lot of studios (and audiences) willing to give a chance to small-time filmmakers. I imagine that’s why it caught the interest of Christina Ricci, who was a child actor now in her adulthood looking to play more adult roles. This would be a big moment in her career. Unfortunately, I think the weakest part of the movie was its treatment of Layla, the character she plays.

At first, I thought the kidnapping scene was kind of funny in a weird way. Layla just goes along with it, maybe she had nothing better to do that day? There are instances where she can clearly get away, but she chooses not to (I like to think this is one of those things where only attractive people can get away with this.) Billy seems to have an aversion to intimacy and yet at the same time craves it intensely. In order to have intimacy, you must have vulnerability, but Billy doesn’t know how to do that and spends much of the movie trying to figure it out. This was where the movie really became relatable to me personally and had its strongest points. His parents are at the heart of his troubles, who clearly don’t like spending time with him and would much rather watch a game of football instead. His parent’s glory days are behind them, and they resent their son for it. Random terrible childhood memories will pop up like television screens, suggesting that this is all Billy can think about when he’s around his family. Okay, I can see why that would be pressing on someone’s psyche. It’s common for people in abusive/neglectful households to want to impress the same people who did them wrong, as a desperate cry for their love. Clearly Billy is screaming for it.

When Billy goes to kill Scott Wood for losing the game he lost a bet on, at first the audience is led to believe that he shoots him in the head and then ices himself, until we’re shown that it was all in Billy’s head. Scott Wood was a manifestation of everything Billy didn’t want to end up being, losing himself at a topless bar surrounding himself with women who didn’t actually care for him. By killing Wood in his mind, he kills a bleak, loveless future along with it. Finally, something in him snaps into place.

Maybe that’s a moment Galo himself is hoping for; something that categorizes his life into “before” and “after.” A love that changes him and encourages him to be a better man. The truth is Billy should be a better man for his own sake. He shouldn’t wait around for a girl to come forward and give everything without asking for anything in return. That’s what disillusions me about Buffalo 66, because Billy expects Layla to give it all. We don’t get to see a lot about Layla’s personality, or what she likes or doesn’t like (other than trivial things like hot chocolate.) She has to do much of the emotional heavy lifting. Anything that she needs she is left to provide for herself. I like when Galo flips the gender roles in scenes when Layla pursues Billy, or Billy’s hesitancy to be immediately intimate like men often like to do. That kind of writing is subversive and appreciated. However the scenes where Billy is completely neglectful of Layla’s feelings is where it loses me. Galo understands that men have an unfair pressure on them not to reveal their emotions, but then ruins it by dumping his burdens onto women because he thinks that’s what they’re there for. The dynamic of man as a provider is oddly flipped. I’m not saying that men and women have to be in certain positions but if you’re going to uphold that standard then you must also “play the role,” so to say. What I’m trying to explain is that Galo paints a world where men are allowed to subvert their narratives but women aren’t. He has empathy for himself, his own gender and that’s pretty much it.

she was the best part, sorry

And so that brings me back to Galo and his many, many allegations. Abuse, assault, harassment, etc.. Everything heinous that a lot of directors get accused of. Personally, I will always believe victims, and based on what I’ve seen of Galo’s movies I can only believe them. Anytime you see a lot of misogyny in an artist’s work it’s a good indicator of how they treat women in real life. Galo making himself the star in his own film doesn’t help his massive ego, either. But this helped me get into his brain and made me see the film clearer. It leaves a lot less to interpretation when you’re aware of a work’s creator, and I don’t find it ridiculous to say. I spent most of my college experience analyzing classic works of literature, and always before we’d get into a story we would go over the author’s life to get a better idea of where they’re coming from. Why should that not apply here?

I liked this movie because of what it could’ve been. This is a movie about a man taking responsibility for his own life and uplifting himself, processing his emotional trauma, and finding true love because of it. Billy receives love because it is blessed upon him for seemingly no reason, when in reality that’s something you have to work for. Galo rewards his main character for not being a total piece of shit and murdering an innocent person; that’s hardly a big strive. If someone asked you your opinion on their significant other and the best that person could do was not murder, you’d definitely tell them to reconsider, that’s all I’m saying. All the glamor Galo displays cannot escape the black hole that is Billy’s self-centeredness. I can tell he wants to emulate Pasolini or Jarmusch, and he could’ve gotten there if he had done just a little self-reflection; a “come to Jesus” moment if you will. A “what if I don’t murder this guy” moment. I still think Buffalo 66 is worth a watch, though I don’t think Galo himself is worth supporting, so watch at your own discretion. It sucks to know that Galo doesn’t listen to women very often, because if he had it would’ve made this film much better.