Review of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998) by Catherine S — 24 Aug 2014

Hunter S. Thompson has got to be one of my all time favorite writers, with both his novels and his articles being among my favorite reads. I admire how he started the trend of the journalist becoming integral to the event they're reporting, as well as his pieces on the various political movements of the 1970's. However, when it comes to his work, I've never found them all that great to transfer to film. All his books (barring "The Rum Diary") are classified as Non-Fiction/Journalism, meaning that there isn't really a plot to any of his writings. His stories flow back and forth and there's plenty of space where nothing much is happening or he's ruminating on a memory that may or may not pertain to the event at hand. In other words, his works aren't very friendly for transferring to cinema. With that in mind, "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" is probably the best choice from his work to make into a film, and that reflects in the film's execution as it's probably the best film to be based on Hunter S. Thompson's work.

Based on his 1972 novel of the same name, "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" stars Johnny Depp and Benicio Del Toro as Raoul Duke and Dr. Gonzo respectively (character stand-ins for Hunter S. Thompson and his attorney Oscar Zeta Acosta), travelling to Las Vegas to witness the Mint 400 race and write an article about it. However, the majority of the film focuses on our two protagonists trying to find the "American Dream", thought dead by both. As the film progresses, the protagonists slip further into their own drug induced hazes and the film becomes more distorted as they come to the realization that the American Dream may not only not exist in Vegas, but no longer exist at all.

This film is very difficult to talk about as solid plot points are few and far between, even more so than in the novel. The main focus of the film is really Raoul Duke and Dr. Gonzo going on drug-induced trips to various Vegas locations and having scary hallucinogenic trips in their many hotel rooms. Other than that however, there's little to talk about with the film's plot. Acting wise this film is superb, with Johnny Depp doing a fantastic job as Thompson and Del Toro being even better as Acosta. However, the real star of the show here is the cinematography. The camera tricks and lighting all enhance the style and tone of the film, sending the audience deep within the drug trips our characters experience, making this film at times difficult to watch. (I know I felt disoriented after watching the movie.).

However, there's one hang-up about the film that I can't quite get over, being that I love the book so much: The message. To me, the point of this film (an exploration on the aftermath of the 1960's and the subsequent "loss" of the American Dream) was muddled and not as strong as in the book. It felt like at times the film was too engrossed in celebrating the massive drug trips that, while may have brought in some readers, wasn't the reason they loved and returned to the book. At one point in the film, Depp's Thompson goes into the famous monologue about his time in 1965 and about the confusion of the Hippie movement. That's really the closest this film gets to the point it was trying to make. Other than that, the message isn't explored to its potential and leaves the point by the wayside, hidden in a muddle of bright colors and crazy acting.

By no means is this a bad film, it's actually very good and I recommend this film to anyone who likes Hunter S. Thompson's work. I will say though that it's a mixture of good and bad, mainly good but some bad in there as well. If you're interested in this movie, definitely give it a watch. But for those who aren't interested, it may be worth the watch for the cinematography, but not much else. (Real Rating: 79%).