All this Mayhem (2014)
The initial appeal was an appeal to my own generation, its obsessions and accoutrements. The brothers that are the subjects of this film are basically coevals of myself and one of my own elder brothers. And though neither of us were any good at it, skating was present as a part of suburban male teenage life, as something you might want to be interested in or to aspire to. And so, seeing the trailer for the film I thought: ‘I’d like to watch that’. And then when I saw the cover in the library my hand darted out to grab it as if it might escape. It would be a ‘treat’, some light entertainment. I watched it last night.
Its attitude, that of its subjects as teenagers and young men, is that of a kind of Jackass-style male homosociality. It also bears strong resemblances to the equally self-serving documentary about the Bra Boys, which came out 6-7 years ago, so much so that it’s hard not to think one emboldened the production of the other. Both were about brothers from working class backgrounds (a fact often recalled), who succeed in very showbiz-style sports (skating and surfing), and do so by beating the reigning American champs, and both stories end in murder.
The disc itself was quite worn and scratched. A sign of its popularity? And it stalled often in the early stages. I had to remove it twice to clean it.
The form of this movie is sort of like the Trump-esque ‘extended prologemena to the actual apology’, which in both cases never really arrives.
And most of this prologemena was entertaining, even if it relied on the threadbare trope of the rough hewn aussie male versus the more effeminate american one, and even though the signs of its self-serving nature are there to be seen at this point (they become much clearer later). The insane single-mindedness with which they went about their goals (and the spectacular results) had the mythic resonance of other australian sport stories, like Bradman as a kid knocking a honky nut against a fence with a stick a million times every afternoon before tea (or whatever it was).
Entertaining because I’ve always liked watching people skating – the weird weightlessness of it. There was an interesting theme along these lines, briefly suggested but never followed up, about the hyper-(body)-image-consciousness of skating, and about it being fundamentally an aesthetic form. From the beginning, the two brothers had a kind of embedded reporter, filming them, and it was clear that this was an integral part of the sport, or rather this rhythm of performance followed by the studying of one’s and others performance on video. Given its fledgling status as a sport, the way it was plugged into the market was mainly by ‘making videos’, which could then be sold to and watched by aspirationals, who would perhaps go on to make their own videos. This image aspect is true of all sports now, but in skating it was more of a closed-loop situation, there appeared to be little else. There was no game aspect, it was more like gymnastics or diving – essentially about style, and new tricks.
As such, the tone of lament, towards the end, for how skating was ruined by the Big American promoters (against which the brothers were cast as the heroic rebels, and so on) was hard to credit. It had always been about showbiz.
My thoughts and feelings about this movie kept turning over after watching it. I didn’t know the story before watching it, hadn’t heard of its subjects. I was expecting something fairly light, something, I guess, nostalgic, and so it caught me by surprise. The accompanying material alluded to a downfall, to drugs. It didn’t mention murder. Indeed I don’t think the word was mentioned in the documentary itself, and the brevity with which the event itself was passed over, the lack of interest or inquiry into its effects, was breathtaking.
‘Greek tragedy on skateboards’ proclaimed the cover. I can only read this as a facile, and quite weird attempt at exoneration, following a logic of the kind: ‘People get murdered in Greek tragedies; Greek tragedies are understood to give insight into the human condition; A person is murdered in this story; This story give insight into the human condition.’
Another set of statements. There is not one woman interviewed in this documentary. We don’t actually hear a woman speak. One of the main subjects went to prison for violence against his female partner. The other murdered his female partner and then committed suicide.
And yet, its title, ‘All this Mayhem’, is, it appears, to be read as a general reference to that idiotic, coyly euphemistic (and very American) gerund ‘partying’. No reference then to the trail of tears these two men left in their wake.
Searching for reviews after watching it I see that the main subject successfully campaigned against (bullied?) another, earlier, film going into production, with the contention that it was ‘exploitative’. In the place of that film, then, we get a PR film for this subject’s New Life™, as slick as any skating video (the New Life™, by the way, involves that most American of tropes: born again Christianity – amusing mainly because of the anti-American stance he adopts throughout). The final shot is a long take of the guy skateboarding along a busy road, and then along a footpath, with his son riding on his shoulders (wearing a helmet), as a background to a set of short captions appearing on the screen. This I believe is intended to show how the child and family life have redeemed him, but also how skating, by a circuitous route, has redeemed him. But, I have to say, the kid looks terrified. And I recognised the second shot as the footpath next to Melbourne General Cemetary, which I know for a fact to be full of corrugations and potholes, so all I could see this image depicting was his continuing carelessness with other people’s lives.
But the thoughts about it continue to turn around. This morning I thought: where was the critical culture to receive this film? Was it ignored by serious critics because it was a film ostensibly about skateboarding?
What it needed, what it needs – and I don’t think this is should be that much to ask – is someone to show how it is about something quite other to what it purports to be about; to pay attention to those cracks in its surface, to those parts of the story it somewhat cack-handedly tries to smooth over, but which, with a little reflection, emerge as its truth. One of these cracks, I think, suggests that a correct reading of the film would be to understand it as self-parody. It is an uncanny moment. One of the brothers has been arrested after trying to smuggle cocaine into Australia. It is the late 1990s. The shots are of a familiar kind – a young man is in a suit, girlfriend by his side, walking quickly towards or away from a city courtroom. Who then, in his former life as an ABC TV Court Reporter in Melbourne, pops up to give the breathless account of events, but Chris Taylor of The Chaser.
— Oct 12, ‘16