Existential Critique of Natural Born Killers

            Natural Born Killers (NBK) is perhaps one of the most controversial movies of the 90’s. Its controversy is in its explicit depiction of the connection between sex and violence, and the extremely graphic and extreme presentation of gratuitous violence. Over 50 cuts had to be removed because of overly graphic violence in order to secure the movie’s ‘R’ rating rather than ‘NC-17’. Based on a Quentin Tarantino script, director Oliver Stone took and rewrote much of the content and presentation, and Tarantino quickly divorced himself from the end product.

NBK traces the career of serial killer couple, Mickey and Mallory Knox. They’re murderous rampage down ‘highway 666’ is chronicled by a publicity hound and tabloid producer, Wayne Gale—the host of ‘American Maniacs’ which packages all manner of violence and exports it to everyone watching in TV land. Gale himself refers to his work as “junk food for the brain” and to all his viewers as “zombies”.

The plot of NBK takes us from their early beginnings, slaughtering Mallory’s incestuous father and mother, through they’re killing spree until their apprehension at the hands of Det. Scagnetti, a fast talking homicide detective who is obsessed with catching the couple. The conclusion centers around the media frenzy, and Mickey’s live interview on American Maniacs in which he insights a riot and jailbreak.

The entire movie is very stylistic, incorporating five to ten different mediums and containing over 1000 edits. It’s style is very experimental and choppy, and the way it portrays the events is designed to appear as part of a drug trip. It’s color scheme is very hallucinogenic, and incorporates many image overlays that are expressive of internal ideas in the characters.

The film was very controversial because of it’s gratuitous violence, and the controversy centered around the age old debate whether this merely reflects culture, or is didactically prescribing culture. Many “copy cat” cases followed the movie, young couples going on killing sprees. The perpetrators of the Columbine case were well versed with the movie. Stone has been accused of causing such events as Columbine by romanticizing violent behavior.

As a cultural object which has profoundly influenced the majority of the current generation, NBK provides an intriguing and fascinating undertaking to explore its ethical, theological and philosophical roots, where in no doubt can be found many, many references and aspects of modern existentialism in its various forms.

Irrationality

            The incredibly involved composition of the film exemplifies much of the films modus operandi. It often places certain cuts of the same shot out of linear order, and may reduplicate the same shot with a different medium or a different take. This can be seen in the opening scene of the movie in the diner. The double take of the waitress, the disappearance of the character later named Owen, and the deluge of images. In rhetoric, this purposeful departure from rationality is known as anacoluthon, where what does not logically follow is placed to give emphasis and gain attention.

This is what Kolker[1] calls a profound dislocation and seeks to displace the structure of the film into subjectivity. The goal of this technique is to overwhelm the audience by bombarding them with images and edits which are irrational by film standards. It’s an attention getter. Stone said in an interview, “What characterizes the film is a complete lack of consistency to the point of being deliberately, totally illogical, which is fun.”[2] Likewise, the film quality chosen is quite violent and jerky, to accompany the violent, erratic content.[3] There is a definite deconstructive element in NBK, it allows the audience to be aware that they are watching, with shifting points of view, and yet the audience is so aware of what is going on, that they are intentionally left out of any sympathizing, and the mass murder and mayhem becomes dehumanized.[4]

            NBK is purposefully deceptive in its depiction of violence. Stone says of himself, “I’m a distorting mirror.”[5] The prime example of this distortion of reality is the sequence entitled “I Love Mallory” which parodies the American sitcom. It is however a distorted mirror containing the type of content that would never be aired on television.[6]

With the addition of the laugh track and music, it distorts the subject matter and “numbs the audience to the grim reality of the situation.”[7] The violence both in this scene and in the diner scene is portrayed as ridiculous, and certainly seeks to be seen in a comical light. It is “cruel, mean, gratuitous even— but above all, absurd, blatantly cartoonish.”[8] This catches the audience off guard, but at the same time renders them unable to object, since the difference between Mickey and Mallory drowning Mallory’s father in the fish tank and then setting her mother on fire is placed into the same category in our perception as the violence in Sylvester and Tweety bird cartoons.

This is contrasted to the ending scene in the prison break, when the violence becomes ultra real, and as Tarantino says in an interview, “I think ultra realism is absurd, real life is absurd.”[9] The violence begins by being harmless, like a cartoon, and end in being fully authentic, but like toads in water, the patient slow heating has not alarmed the audience one bit, and now witness murder and mayhem in the prison riot with the same attention they gave absurd cartoon violence. As they make their way out of the prison, Mickey tells Wayne, “You wanted reality, you got it.”

In other areas of the film, we see this extreme irrationality, which pervades both the films composition and the characters mentalities. When rattlesnakes bite Mickey and Mallory, in a deleted scene they first journey to a drive-in theater, in a very eerie scene that does not follow any semblance of rational thought. Other scenes that display this absurdity are the title sequence with blue-screened backgrounds, and the fact that in every scene there is a television present, whether it is in the background, coming through a window, etc. It is ubiquitous in the film.

The agents of the violence are Mickey and Mallory, that is they’re function in the plot. It is highly ironic that they’re violence is mirrored equally by that of Det. Scagnetti and Warden McCluskey, and even Wayne Gale.[10] This is irrational, and shows that the entire reasoning of those who are in the movie is illogical. They are hypocritical and remove any sense of higher standard. Scagnetti even assures Pinki the prostitute that he will not hurt her and then goes and does the opposite by strangling her to death. In this way reality disintegrates. “Stone deconstructs the split between cop and criminal while associating the categories of cop and media.”

“Indeed, the film denies the possibility of an objective, normative ‘reality’ as a frame of reference, insisting on multiple hallucinatory subjective series of the same approximate series of events.”[11]

Stone explains, “The film is not about violence, its not about bad or good; you either understand it or you don’t. It’s very disturbing, and very ambivalent. There is no single message.”[12] And as T.L. Jones observed in a documentary about NBK, “Chaos is the star of the show.”

Fate

            Fatalism runs through out the movie in a very thematic way. When Mickey first arrives in “I Love Mallory”, he asks her “do you believe in Fate?” Similarly, when he is in prison in the beginning of the movie, he assures Mallory, “No one can stop Fate.” When Mickey kills the Shaman in a mushroom-induced flashback sequence, he claims it was an accident. Mallory’s reply is, “There are no accidents.” In some ways the final murder of the Shaman resembles the murder in the Stranger, when the main character kills the Arab ‘on accident’ and isn’t sure what really happened. Mallory’s statement is a loaded gun, if you will. She not only expresses fatalism, but also the supreme human responsibility in an absurd world. 

In Mickey’s Manson-esque interview with Wayne Gale, He calls himself “Fate’s messenger.” Fatalism is a trait common with many existentialists, and in NBK is serves as the source of many other lines of thought in Mickey. He becomes free from personal responsibility to others, and assumes what he is doing is out of his control, though he actively participates.

Mickey elaborates in a somewhat nihilistic strain, “It was all just fate…the wolf don’t ask why he’s a wolf, the deer don’t ask why he’s a deer. God just made it that way.” But Mickey’s God is simple fate, and himself. We see this in the diner scene, when the couple lets chance decide who will live and who will die, one of two “eenie meenie” scenes written by Tarantino.

The Overman

            NBK has been called ”pure cinematic Darwinism”,[13] and establishes a great deal of thematic material in regards to the idea of superiority and domination. Mickey  and Mallory encounter the first type of “Overman” in the Shaman. He is a hermit and has his own way of living. He keeps an un-caged rattlesnake as a pet. By his own words, he understands what the danger is in having Mickey and Mallory in his house, but he welcomes it. He is a shepherd, which is a very symbolic expression, one who is “over” the herd. He is a natural man. In Stone’s indictment of the media, this is essential to the true overman, that he is unspoiled by media. When Mickey kills him, Mallory shrieks, “Bad, bad, bad!” The Shaman is the only one whom Mickey and Mallory regret killing.

            In Mickey’s own words, and his portrayal in NBK, he has set himself up as the Nietzschean Overman. In the interview in particular, he claims to have had “a moment of realization”. He also references the evolutionary idea, telling Wayne Gale, “You’ll never understand, Wayne. You and me, we’re not even the same species. I used to be you then I evolved. From where I’m standing you’re an ape.” indeed, though Mickey and Mallory are both spoiled by the Media, they find their “will to power” in overcoming the media and “executing” it in the symbolism of Wayne Gale.

The herd of followers in the media, Gen X-ers that say things like “If I was a mass murderer, I’d be Mickey and Mallory. Don’t get us wrong, we respect life and all”, contrasts their singular existence. As the psychologist is explaining them, he says, “In Mickey and Mallory’s world, only two exist, him and her…they share a love of Shakespearian magnitude.” We see this in Mickey’s scene writing letters to Mallory, and in the marriage scene on the bridge. Their existence is in a very biblical sense, one, but together, they live above all norms and social standards, and pursue their will to power in Nietzschean Overman fashion. Stone even calls NBK, “Romeo and Juliet for the 90’s with a happy ending.”[14] In the final scene, they are similarly contrasted and separated out by the prison riot, aimless and chaotic, Mickey and Mallory’s escape is very calculated by contrast and elevates it to a higher level.

Another great allusion that points to this concept is the references to Frankenstein. Images of Frankenstein’s monster appear in the random deluges of images. Stone explains in an interview that this symbolism extends to a conceptual level, and the entire prison setting represents Frankenstein’s castle.[15] Shortly before killing Wayne Gale, Mickey remarks, “Frankenstein killed Dr. Frankenstein, didn’t he?”

Mickey also elaborates at the end on how he is a “natural born killer”. He is not guided by what he has been taught, or by selfish motives. To him killing is predatory and natural.[16] He simply does it for it is what he is meant to do. He uses this natural instinct in his will to power. Clearly the implication of all this is the transcendence of Mickey and Mallory.

Theology

            There is no real overt confrontation with the idea of God. The parallel between Mickey and Wayne is very clear. When Mickey weds Mallory and himself on the bridge, he says “This right here is our church…by the power vested in me as God of my universe…” This is matched by Wayne Gale’s statement “Am I God, or what?” These men are both fatalistic and atheistic and are the two characters most associated with the director.

            “Mickey sees himself both as both creator and destroyer. He is both a murderer and a revolutionary social thinker. His destructive actions are the expression of his visionary philosophy. Paradoxically, he is at the same time the creative God of his world and a powerless pawn of fate. His acceptance of fatalism has made him free to invent alternative moral standards and as a result, he views the world from an alternative, more comprehensive point of view.”[17]

Authenticity, Nausea and The Media

            Mickey claims that he is a natural born killer, and so the truest and most authentic expression of life for him is killing. He claims that his murder is “pure” and that it is warranted by the lack of innocence in the world. Mickey sees himself as “Fate’s messenger” (an interesting parody of murderers who have claimed to be “God’s messenger”), and goes crusading about killing those who have sinned.

            Dr. Heidi Hochenedel, expands on this a great deal in her article, NBK: Beyond Good and Evil: “The difference between the Knoxes and the media is that they do not portray themselves as something they are not. Mickey and Mallory are murderers but they have a strong ethic of authenticity…For Mickey, sin is "some secret awful thing." It is bad faith, inauthenticity, and the unwillingness to affirm one's actions. In his view, bad faith kills the spirit who harbors it. The only means of redemption is to acknowledge and validate one's endeavors…sin is something experienced subjectively, not judged objectively.” [18]

            Thus Mickey seeks an authentic life of purity in murder. He pursues the most natural course of life, and yet, he still finds loss of meaning. He and Mallory are using drugs for a majority of the movie, and this is highlighted by Mickey’s mushroom induced flashbacks. When they run out of gas, he gets out of the car and vomits. Although they live an extremely authentic life, Mickey and Mallory still seek the Nausea that reminds them of their existence. They, like the audience, as victims of the media, have become desensitized.

            In some sense, the goal of the film is a cathartic experience,[19] and so although it attempts to make the audience feel purposefully desensitized at every point, “The key is to acknowledge [the violence], not to run from it.”[20] The violence, particularly when it is portrayed in Ultra realism ought to serve as the spark of Nausea for the audience, by the shear fact that it is completely naturalized in Mickey and Mallory.

            Mickey is contrasted by Wayne Gale who as Mickey says is “not even an ape; you’re a media person. Media’s like the weather, only it’s man made.” Which is to say that Media is everywhere and polluted by sin. Wayne even tries to be like Mickey in his own search for purity, violently murdering would-be rescuers during the prison break. He puts his tie around his head and looks similar to the random images of African tribesman that had previously been splashed on the screen. But this is an illusion and an inauthenticity, which is sin in all media and which Mickey and Mallory seek to destroy.

            The extremely symbolic killing of the media is the least moving scene of the picture, but it is the thesis that Stone has set out to communicate. Wayne Gale is shot to bits, and rather than an authentic witness, he is survived only by the recording on a video camera.

            The nature of the film puts an existential twist on the media. Stone explains, “Criminals are perceived in the movie via the media. In the old days they would have had an independent existence…but in the 90’s version of the gangster movie they exist only through the media.”[21] This brings up a very interesting point, and that is that is the self-indictment of the movie. “NBK is a double edged sword, unafraid to implicate itself in the sadism of spectacle, its punishing, unrelieved harshness and in-your-face excess is the only way for it to make its point.”[22]

The Self Taught Men

            Mickey stands in stark contrast to all the other men in the film. Scagnetti, Gale and McCluskey are all self-taught men. Mickey’s actions are all instinct, while the other three have learned and been conditioned to think the same way the Mickey thinks naturally. And they are all fatally flawed.

            Scagnetti is obviously depraved, and is so to the point that he kills women in the act of sexual congress. He also chases fame in the same way as Wayne, writing a book about apprehending Mickey and Mallory and desiring to be known in the media. His third vice is his sexual fixation with Mallory, which is expressed in both his violence towards her, threatening to disfigure her breasts with a knife as well as propositioning her in her cell, which leads quickly to his downfall and death.

            McCluskey is singularly harsh, and in many ways has taken on the character of the prison and the prisoners around him. He seeks to murder Mickey and Mallory when they are transferred from the prison to the asylum. He has learned the traits of the prisoners around him including Mickey and Mallory, and now seeks to act as “fate’s messenger” and condemn so-called sinners. This leads to his downfall as rioting prisoners rip him to shreds.

            Wayne Gale is the third in this model of self-taught men. He is similarly inauthentic, being worse than an ape in Mickey’s eyes: one who propagates falsehoods. In the end he becomes a wolf like Mickey but this is learned, and so in the end Mickey and Mallory kill him. It is at the same time very ironic and very symbolic. He chronicled the Knoxes marauding exploits and how he is a victim of that pure, authentic murder which he packaged and sold in his inauthentic lifestyle. It’s symbolism is of Mickey and Mallory succeeding in killing the media, n which represents all the impurity of the 20^th century.

Snakes and Symbolism

            The experimental, choppy, and hallucinogenic nature of the film is heightened by the symbolism. The most clear and graphic symbol in the movie is that of the snake. They are everywhere. The couple wears intertwined snake rings as wedding bands, they are bitten by rattlesnakes, they drugstore logo is a giant snake, and the animation that interjects is usually involving reptiles of some sort. In the first barrage of images, as well as the last, there are snakes.

            This representation creates a very predatory feeling, and the harshness of the world. In the Garden of Eden, the snake was the wiliest animal, and the animal chosen by Satan, “the demon” to pray upon man. In many ways, the fatalistic and atheistic commentary is heightened by this imagery as being absurd, and showing that snakes, like Mickey are simply predatory, and in some sense there is purity in that. The rest of the images enhance this interpretation, containing all manner of brutality, violence and predatory animals.

Conclusion

            Oliver Stone has taken a Tarantino script and created a true masterpiece in satire and cultural indictment. The controversy surrounding this movie and the state of our culture today owes much to the existentialist traditions, and this can be seen in almost every facet of the characters and the occurrences portrayed within NBK.

            Mickey and Mallory, Scagnetti, McCluskey, and Wayne Gale all bring such stirring reflections of an existentialist philosophy and the narrative of NBK knits them together showing the philosophical makeup of the west. Though graphic, NBK is a chronicle of the last decade and holds great importance for our generation, both philosophically and morally.

Bibliography

Botting, Fred & Scott Wilson. Tarantinian Ethics. London: Sage Publications, 2001.

Bouzereau, Laurent. Ultra Violent Movies. Toronto: Citadel Press, 1996.

Hochenedel, Heidi. “Natural Born Killers: Beyond Good and Evil”. 2001.

http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/2682/heidi1.htm

Kagan, Norman. The Cinema of Oliver Stone. New York: Continuum Publishing, 1995.

Kolker, Robert. Cinema of Lonliness. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2000.

Kunz, Don. Films of Oliver Stone. London: Scarecrow Press, 1997.

Peary, Gerald, ed. Quentin Tarantino: Interviews. Jackson: University Press of

Mississippi, 1998.

Silet, Charles, ed. Oliver Stone: Interviews. Jackson: Univ. Press of Mississippi, 2001.

Toplin, Robert Brent. Oliver Stone’s USA. Lawrence, KA: Kansas Univ. Press, 2000

---

[1] Kolker, Robert. Cinema of Lonliness, Pg. 66

[2] Toplin, Robert Brent. Oliver Stone’s USA, Pg. 188

[3] Bouzereau, Laurent. Ultra Violent Movies, Pg. 55

[4] Bouzereau, Pg. 59

[5] Kagan, Norman. The Cinema of Oliver Stone, Pg. 234

[6] Kolker, Pg. 67

[7] Hochenedel, Heidi. “Natural Born Killers: Beyond Good and Evil”

[8] Silet, Charles, ed. Oliver Stone: Interviews, 123

[9] Peary, Quentin Tarantino: Interviews p. 31

[10] Kunz, Don. Films of Oliver Stone, Pg. 267

[11] Silet, Pg. 124

[12] Bouzereau, Pg. 62

[13] Toplin, Pg. 200

[14] Bouzereau, Pg. 66

[15] Silet, Pg. 127

[16] Kagan, Pg. 228

[17] Hochenedel

[18] Hochenedel

[19] Bouzereau, Pg. 67

[20] Bouzereau, Pg. 69

[21] Silet, Pg. 125

[22] Silet, Pg. 123