What is the line between trash and art?
That is the question on critics’ minds after the release of “Drive-Away Dolls,” Ethan Coen’s latest project as director and the writing debut of his wife, Tricia Cooke. A loving homage to violent exploitation films and vulgar camp of the 1960s, “Drive-Away Dolls” has divided audiences, but it is undoubtedly a fun ride.
Set in 1999, the film follows free-spirited Jamie and her uptight friend, Marian. When Jamie’s girlfriend dumps her, she and Marian rent a drive-away and embark on a cross-country trip to Tallahassee, Fla., for a fresh start.
Unbeknownst to them, the pair drives off in a car that was rented by a trio of criminals. When they discover the briefcase the criminals were transporting — and the grisly secret within it — the girls are thrown into a web of crime, scandal and politics.
Called a “lesbian B-movie,” a B-movie being a low-budget commercial film, by its creators, “Drive-Away Dolls” is not what most consider “fine art.” The movie is violent and raunchy, dealing in slapstick humor and one-liners. Its hyper-stylized editing includes animated, exaggerated transitions. Peppered throughout the movie are hazy, psychedelic sequences that seem totally random until the third act.
These choices have frustrated and baffled many viewers, who came to the movie expecting something more akin to other Coen brothers films. Frankly, it is unfair to the movie to come in with those expectations. “Drive-Away Dolls” is not a Coen brothers movie — it’s an Ethan Coen and Tricia Cooke movie — and her contributions have been widely ignored.
Cooke roots the movie in an authentic queerness, with a loving but tongue-in-cheek attitude toward lesbian tropes and spaces. Her script and editing are clearly inspired by another queer creator, John Waters, the “pope of trash” and creator of some of the most famous vulgar camp classics like “Pink Flamingos,” “Polyester” and “Hairspray.”
Whereas Cooke’s expertise manifests in lesbian bars and hammy transitions, Coen takes inspiration from the stylized action of exploitation films.
As is a common thread in his work, “Drive-Away Dolls” is hyper-violent, with corkscrew decapitations and bloody beatings. This and the overarching crime plot show that Coen has not strayed from what he does best; he is just doing it in a different setting.
From the beginning of the genres, exploitation and camp films have created critical divides. Can something this trashy be considered “good art?” Can a movie be sleazy and silly and still be worthwhile? This is a debate that can go on forever, but the answer will always be clear to me: Any movie that is aware of its sleaze and humor, perfectly realizes what it wants to be and does so with style is art.
If you disagree, “Drive-Away Dolls” probably will not be the movie for you. “Drive-Away Dolls” is unapologetically lowbrow and fully committed to being in “bad taste.” The film proves itself to be funny and brutal, stylish and vulgar, beautiful and grotesque. But no matter how you feel after it, prepare yourself for a wild ride.
“Drive-Away Dolls” is currently playing in theaters everywhere.
