Professione: reporter (1975)

User Rating:

7.7/10   

Director:

Michelangelo Antonioni

Writers:

Mark Peploe (story)
Mark Peploe (screenplay) ...

Release Date:

9 April 1975 (USA)

Genre:

Drama | Mystery | Thriller

Tagline:

I used to be somebody else...but I traded myself in.

Plot:

A frustrated war correspondent, unable to find the war he's been asked to cover, takes the risky path of co-opting the I.D. of a dead arms dealer acquaintance.

Plot Keywords:

Desert | Reporter | Identity | Hotel | Journalist

Awards:

4 wins & 1 nomination

Cast

Jack Nicholson	...	David Locke
Maria Schneider	...	Girl
Jenny Runacre	...	Rachel Locke
Ian Hendry	...	Martin Knight
Steven Berkoff	...	Stephen
Ambroise Bia	...	Achebe
José María Caffarel	...	Hotel Keeper
James Campbell	...	Witch Doctor
Manfred Spies	...	German Stranger
Jean-Baptiste Tiemele	...	Murderer
Ángel del Pozo	...	Police inspector
Charles Mulvehill	...	Robertson, the Dead Man (as Chuck Mulvehill)
Narciso Pula	...	Murderer's accomplice
rest of cast listed alphabetically:
Miquel Bordoy

Also Known As:

The Passenger (International: English title) (UK)
El reportero (Spain)
Profession: reporter (France)

MPAA:

Rated PG-13 for some violence, nudity and language. (edited version)

Runtime:

126 min | 119 min

Country:

Italy | Spain | France

Language:

English | Spanish | German | French

Color:

Color (Metrocolor)

Aspect Ratio:

1.85 : 1

Sound Mix:

Mono

Certification:

USA:PG-13 | Argentina:13 | Iceland:L | Singapore:PG | Australia:M | Italy:T | Finland:K-16 | Portugal:M/12 | Sweden:15 | USA:PG | UK:PG (video rating) (1986) | UK:A (original rating) | West Germany:12 | Netherlands:16

Filming Locations:

4 Lansdowne Crescent, Notting Hill, London, England, UK

Company:

Compagnia Cinematografica Champion

Trivia:

In the DVD commentary, Nicholson states that Antonioni constructed the entire hotel entirely so that the final shot could be accomplished, though he suggests that the entire hotel was built on hinges instead of simply the bars outside the window. This assertion is incorrect as production photos and several books testify. The shot was made by opening the bars which were on hinges and allowing the camera to pass through and be picked up outside. What also attracted the director to this building is it used to be a church and was across the street from a bullfight ring.

Quotes:

David Locke: My name is Robertson. I've been waiting for someone who hasn't arrived.
Man With Cane: Ninos. I've seen so many of them grow up. Other people look at the children and they all imagine a new world. But me, when I watch them, I just see the same old tragedy begin all over again.

Movie Connections:

Referenced in Apocalypse Now (1979)

Antonioni's best film.

Michaelangelo Antonioni has been given a hard time by some critics, and even more so by audiences. His Blow Up is an art house classic, and Zabriskie Point is the film that the critics love to hate. The Passenger is his best film, but a total failure in commercial terms (probably because it asks a lot of the audience and only rewards viewers who give it multiple viewings).

The story behind the film is almost unimportant, in the way that the story behind Apocalypse Now is unimportant. It's a journey, a parade if you like through the last days of a disillusioned reporter working in some forgotten quarter of North Africa. He knows his life is pointless and he knows he's not lived it the way he truly wished he had. Then he finds a corpse in his hotel and decides to assume the identity of the dead man. Too late, he discovers that the dead man was involved with dangerous people and he has inadvertently become a revolutionary gunrunner.

Jack Nicholson has never given a more restrained and quiet performance, but it works all the same. The backdrop is amazingly beautiful and makes the film visually extraordinary, like a painting of a film.

I like this film a lot, but I can see reasons why it was a commercial disaster. I had to watch it three times before I began to piece together its elliptical plot. On each viewing, I found something new and interesting. But in all honesty, how many movie-goers are prepared to give a film that much time and effort? The ending is downbeat and a little intriguing, not to mention loose. Again, how many movie-goers are prepared to sit for two hours and not be rewarded with a grand, logical pay off? To enjoy this film, you need to be a patient watcher. You need to like visuals more than substance. You need to be happy to be challenged and happy to look beyond the surface. If that is you, then you will surely like this film.