Propeller scene from Blow-Up (1966 - Antonioni)

[@Allan-et5ig]

"Nepal Is All Antiques." All time statement - about EVERYTHING!

[@kextrz]

There's a guy near where I live who manufactured powered paraglider propellers for years. The shape is identical. It's much smaller in size. More practical. Too bad he sold his business. I could have put many of you in touch with him.

[@alanhesketh9265]

Susan Brodrick (The girl in the antique shop) was married to the late actor Robert Swann, who played prefect "Rowntree" in Lyndsey Anderson's 1968 film "If", starring Malcolm McDowell and David Wood.

[@jasonking6892]

I liked Gazette tv Show 1969 Yorkshire TV 👍🇬🇧

[@freelancer9955]

) Thanks for the video. Good.

[@trevorsmith7753]

See the radio-telephone aerial just left of the LH reversing light. C-reg = 1965. Radio telephones started in London, 1964. Eat your heart out, Vodafone.

[@DaveAhl]

wow old wooden propeller-"fall in love with heavy things on Saturday morning"

[@Allan-et5ig]

First person besides me to catch that.

[@kunoichi24]

I don't get it?

[@larrypeacock1928]

Does anyone know the name of the song that the antique shop owner is playing on the phonograph when David Hemmings enters her shop?

[@makeit7579]

"Say you want a revolution"

[@vingotaq777]

Great movie , I wonder it that lovely little park area with the trees still exists ?

[@ppuh6tfrz646]

Yes, it does. To be honest, it would have taken you just a couple of minutes to find out.

[@idiosinkrazijske.rutine]

Reference to this scene was also made in Woody Allen's "Midnight in Paris"

[@RafaelSordili]

Really?! In what context? It's been a long time since I've watched that one, I don't recall a reference. I need to watch it again. Thanks!

[@idiosinkrazijske.rutine]

@@RafaelSordili Blond guy visits antique shop where a bit strange but cute girl plays old records, they struck a conversation too. The visual was too familiar! Check it out!

[@Sids60sSounds]

now that's what you call a film prop!

[@barry5787]

Boom Boom. Love it.

[@Sixtiesdude1]

@BethGoth15 The meaning of the propeller is that the character David Hemmings plays is based on several Sixties lensmen one of whom was David Bailey,during the research for the movie Antonioni or his assistants found out that Bailey had actually bought a propeller a few years before, so they put it in the film.Simples

[@k.t.5405]

Naaaah, the "Antique Shop" represents (within the meta-narrative) old Hollywood. They wont give Antonioni the time of day at first, but after his visit to America/ "White House" (park scene) , his career gets a MASSIVE boost with his three movie deal with MGM (propeller). 😲😲😳😳😳

[@ppuh6tfrz646]

It doesn't have a 'meaning'. It's just an item that the photographer wanted to be buy and another example of his impulsiveness.

[@craigbrown9987]

Because of this film, I've always wanted an bi-plane propeller of own.

[@big-a6368]

Are you interested in the actual one from the movie? I have it..

[@craigbrown9987]

@@big-a6368 Actually, i might be - though collection might be a nightmare. What provenance do you have for it?

[@big-a6368]

@@craigbrown9987 Hi Craig, I'm in the US. I don't have a twitter. I responded on your you tube account. I can send you pics. Do you have an email that I can send them to?

[@craigbrown9987]

@@big-a6368 [e-mail]

[@mrbazzabee4013]

A friend of mine likes wasting his time........any options...? asking 4 his brother.

[@MattFlinders67]

This film is an excellent spoof of Austin Powers International Man of Mystery. Or is it the other way round ?

[@tbwatch88]

he's an artist so he tells the truth--"Nepal is all antiques" is a very English thing to say, a no-nonsense statement of facts. English people have been so corrected by their schoolmasters that they often become pedantic in turn in later life. or they're just addicted to precision. to getting things right. David Hemmings' character doesn't even notice this girl as a beautiful woman: and she IS gorgeous. he's so fed-up with "bloody birds" that she's just another banally pretty face. the way she holds the propeller's meant to be sexy as--and it is. a sort of reverse-phallic come-on. that's the way to treat women if you want them to want you: with indifference. but it doesn't hurt if you look like Hemmings did. in this scene, Antonioni showcases a bit more of the artist's obsessive-compulsive nature. later on, he hardly remembers he even bought the blasted thing. much of art-making is whims. and whimsy. great great film. up there with Barry Lyndon by Kubrick.

[@Allan-et5ig]

Yep. I agree with your antiques remark - indeed I've had a t-shirt made. It's an all-time statement about, well everything - especially delusion and the futility of 'travel' as the means to escape issues. When friends of mine say they are tired of this or that - they invariably get a right old dose of the antiques line! There's another great typically English line (well, there are many) in the film I'm sure you've noticed - "I don't even have time to have my appendix out." That's actually in the lingo... My dream is to one day see this film in 3-D. THAT - would be something. And finally - imho - way beyond Barry Lyndon.

[@k.t.5405]

nah, nah...you got it ALL back ass-wards, bud. This movie is about the ONE and ONLY thing on every artist's mind back in '64-65 (when this was shot)... The assassination of JFK.

[@lukecheuk]

The point is that there IS no point. The propeller is the most useless and random and impractical and pointless thing to "fall in love with on a Saturday morning". It's preciselly because of this that the David Hemmings character WANTS it. And as an added bonus, he would come off as indifferent & un-predictable and self-possessed. The 60s was when the popular culture was starting to embrace youth and rebellion , the dismantling of traditional values: Nihilism. It's the idea that there really is no purpose, it's all relative, it's all illusion. Why? Because when you dispense with all those nagging, traditional values of knowing right from wrong, of exercising restraint, and having a purpose, then the sky's the limit! When you discard all of that (like antiques in an antique shop?) then there's nothing to get in the way of having unrestrained, hedonistic fun! ( bountifully on display in this movie ). Blow-Up is so revered because it takes the traditional mystery thriller and then turns it on its head. There is always a PURPOSE that drives a traditional Mystery: to SOLVE it. But instead: Nihilism. "Nothing matters,.". Blow Up proceeds to veer from purposeFUL, to purposeLESS. At the start, the protagonist is gathering more evidence and honing in on solving what appears to be a murder, but then the evidence of the murder's reality, the film negatives, are stolen. And, right on cue, the film itself becomes disjointed. The need to have some resolution, some catharthis, seems to fade from importance. The film becomes full of flashes of hedonism: raunchy, unrestrained, but also, purposeless sex. What is real (the murdered body) is suddenly gone, and all he has left is a photograph to be scrutinized. But it's not real, it is film, much as the movie itself is just film. And so, nothing is real, it's all relative truth. No Absolute Truth. And so Blow Up completely dismantles the traditional Mystery Thriller. (It Blows it Up). Your expectation is that a story has structure, a resolution, a satisfying conclusion. But Blow Up subverts that (back then, way before Game of Thrones, subverting expectations was a Good Thing, a marvellous thing!). The film takes away the heart of a story: a moral, a driving purpose, a message, (even the simplest of traditional stories have a message). The murder never gets solved, because it's all pointless, or maybe it was all in his head, now a distant memory... Then, in the process, you also dispense with something else: meaning. Much of life becomes meaningless, so why pursue anything meaningful at all? Not even a supposedly spiritual place like Nepal is going to save you. Not with their ancient thousand year old beliefs ("it's all antiques, isn't it?"). This is what happens when all values are relative, what's precious to you is trash to me, and vice versa. It could get a little slippery from there on out though..

[@tbwatch88]

@@k.t.5405 hahahaha.

[@k.t.5405]

@@tbwatch88 My reading of film IS kinda funny, but its a meta-narrative nonetheless...Why would Antonioni want to make an entire film about the JFK case? Why would he be so invested in this crime? Does he have a dog in this fight for the truth? So I began to dig deeper...Did you know there is only ONE SINGLE reference on the ENTIRE internet regarding JFK and Antonioni? A TIME magazine article : When Antonioni Blew Up the Movies (2007). It briefly mentions that in 1961, Antonioni was actually INVITED TO THE JFK WHITE HOUSE and, (get this) , to discuss, of all things, a feature film about SPACE EXPLORATION 😯😳 BTW....the "Antique Shop" represents, within the meta-narrative, old Hollywood (MGM). They wont give Antonioni the time of day at first, but after his visit to America/ "White House" (park scene) , his career gets a MASSIVE boost with his three movie deal with MGM(propeller). 😲😲😳😳😳

[@tbwatch88]

it hurts that another of my favs--Mike Leigh--has said he hates this great film.

[@actualityfilms]

Leigh is jealous he doesn't have Antonioni's talent.

[@bigbong620]

@@actualityfilms Quite!

[@jchrisiciplan]

compulsive shopping is just what I like

[@dabreu]

First let me say I agree completely with Mircea 1910 in her answer. If you want another movie to "not" understand by the same director I recment "L"Eclipse". Bsides we get the gift af Alain Delon's beauty. My question here is...who is the actress working in the propeler scene?

[@berenicegalilea]

white jeans and boots

[@RafaelSordili]

Hi Beth. I'm sure that you can do many readings of the scene in the greater context of the movie. I'd link it directly to the guitar chase following the Yardbirds. Or maybe it ties to the way the photographer relates to women and other objects of his desire. Well, the list could go on... I used this video on a presentation I had for a class on the Critique of Judgement. Kant says that art is something that has no purpose. I wanted to use the scene to discuss this proposition.

[@dahawk8574]

No _utility._ It is a mistake to say that art has no purpose. It could be said that art is the most purposeful thing in the universe. Something artistically created but having a purpose ceases to be pure art. If it serves a function, then it is design. The prop is in a curious position. It was created strictly for function. But once relegated to being an antique, its design has its utility vacated. It's form is then transformed to pure art.

[@k.t.5405]

@@dahawk8574 I think that within the film's meta-narrative, the "Antique Shop" represents old Hollywood (MGM). They wont give Antonioni the time of day at first, but after his visit to America/ "White House" (park scene) , his career gets a MASSIVE boost with his three movie deal with MGM (propeller). 😲😲😳😳😳

[@dahawk8574]

​@@k.t.5405, I love how we as the audience are free to interpret things in this much deeper way, often down to layers that were never intended by those who created the piece. I know there are artists who push back on interpretations they don't connect with, saying that it isn't the meaning. But once it is out there, the interpretation is out of their hands. And has been placed into ours, where it takes on this whole new life within the minds of each and every person who experiences it. Thanks for offering these angles which I've never considered myself. I like how the propeller, in your take, literally propels. And the antique shop seems to be quite fitting with Old Hollywood.

[@k.t.5405]

@@dahawk8574 Notice how the second time he comes around there's a "NEW" owner, so to speak. A younger generation that really could not care less about the "antiques" (Westerns, Noirs, WW2 movies, period pieces, etc). She's looking for new ideas, new destinations...naively switches Tibet for Morocco, not knowing that a true transformative journey takes more than switching plane tickets. IMHO, everything starts to change for Antonioni after his initial visit to the park (America/"White House"). I also think the "meta-narrative" is established in the opening couple of scenes...Post war Europe, a US Army jeep carrying a victorious American generation into the continent. The mimes embody a sort of "zeitgeist" so to speak. An American counter-cultural movement breathing fresh air into an old and battered Europe. Notice how Thomas comes out of a dingy old homeless shelter with his art under his arm. Just like Antonioni originally emerged out of the dark, scruffy, Italian neo-realist film movement. In one scene it looks like he's literally hanging out with DeSica, Visconti, Rosellini on a street corner (next to a pyramid embedded in the wall : "Consort Road"). But he's not really one of them...

[@BethGoth15]

I watched this film last night and enjoyed it very much. However...that stupid propeller drove me mad!! I'm a Film Studies student, so I'm constantly looking out for meaning/symbolism. But with the propeller, I just couldn't work it out!! I thought maybe it had something to do with the dead body. You know, like, he was more concerned about the propeller rather than the body. Now I'm not so sure. Grr...I can't stop thinking about it!

[@lukecheuk]

The point is that there IS no point. The propeller is the most useless and random and impractical and pointless thing to "fall in love with on a Saturday morning". The 60s was when the popular culture was starting to embrace nihilism, the post-modernist mindset, that so much of life is meaningless, so why pursue anything meaningful? Not even a supposedly spiritual place like Nepal is going to save you. This is what happens when all values are thought to be relative, there are no absolutes, no real right or wrong, all that disaffected indifferent hippie-think, what's precious to you is trash to me, and vice versa. Things could get to be a bit of a slippery slope from there on out though...

[@diamondp.9688]

Not quite a gentleman, took the propeller outside with help of the girl and then just left them )

[@anthonyharris7226]

It's up there to break up the straight lines.

[@mircea1910]

problem is the movie's not that easy to explain, it kinda makes the viewer think for a bit (and I like the movies that make you think, take Zabriskie Point or Space Odyssey); so I could tell you what the movie means to me, but you should really ask yourself what it means to you, you know?

[@nicholasgerrish6022]

Jimmy Savill’s car!

[@sprucetree49]

Well in part it's the useless object theme. As the man who does commentary on the DVD points out, Immanuel Kant's theory of art claims that art has to be useless. The David Bailey echo pointed out in another comment is probably not an accident, for whatever it's worth.

[@allancerf9038]

no, no no! the scene accomplishes 2 things. it shows the futility of (that period's) hippy dream of "getting away from it all." girl wants to get away from antiques and the photographer reminds her that the horribly static country (nepal) is a "living antique." because the 'photographer' gives her this (perfect) heads-up he is established as being not a complete bastard.

[@Moribus_Artibus]

CAN SOMEONE PLEASE EXPLAIN ME THIS MOVIE!!!!!! THE ENDING IS SO WEIRD!!!! Please!! Im desperate to know!!

[@stephanesonneville]

Carlo Ponti was fed up with the time and money spent by Antonioni - he cut the cash. So there's no real ending...

[@clichyx]

I've seen this film 8 times, one of my all time favorites, I've read many articles and reviews of it, and what I came up with is that the film's original premise would've been something like "the anarchic adolescent stereotype is just and illusion". We can see that when he realizes the murder didn't exist, the neighbor's painting's where nothing makes sense, the mimes who play with an invisible ball, the propeller which may be a ceiling fan, the part of the guitar that's worthless, and a very small, but important detail: the billboard behind the park, it resembles a gun, but at the same time may be nothing at all, specially because of a triangle on the right side of it, that same triangle can be seen throughout the film, most notably on Thomas' house (big wooden triangle coming out of the wall). That triangle is what makes the gun not look like a gun, that triangle is what make everything look like an illusion. And that's what teenage years really are. This may seem like a very forced explanation, but in fact that billboard was put there specially for the film, and Antonioni was an architect, so he was very fond of geometric shapes and man-made structures which alter the landscape. When he disappears at the end is because he has understood that, so he has grown up, he's no longer the same.

[@makeit7579]

IT'S A METAPHOR FOR WHEN THINGS GO WRONG

[@vgovger4373]

I saw it as lost inspiration. The artist lost his best work, so now what?

[@johnpastore7685]

The movie is weird. The Yardbirds, made the film. That to me was a funny scene.

[@k.t.5405]

I think this movie is about the JFK assassination...

[@RafaelSordili]

No. It's about the artistic creation, the relationship between the artist and the audience, the act of looking, love, the search for connection in the modern world, 1960's swinging London, and many many other things. You should check it out!

[@k.t.5405]

@@RafaelSordili No? Hmm...On a certain interpretative level, perhaps it can be seen as a story regarding "artistic creation". Nevertheless, since posting my comment a week ago I have done further research into Antonioni, JFK and Blow Up. I am now convinced this movie is not only about the JFK assassination but also Antonioni's journey as a filmmaker and artist into a world of intrigue and paranoia triggered by some sort of inside knowledge of the tragic events in Dallas. IMHO, the movie should be viewed with a "proto-Kubrickian" lense; in other words BLOW UP is a film locked within a GIANT meta-narrative replete with symbolism , metaphors and coded ciphers on many levels. For starters, the famous poster with the photographer straddling the model...upon closer observation, you will see it is actually a "peace symbol" or the inverted "broken" cross of the Aquarian age of enlightenment. That is where Antonioni's journey begins...

[@RafaelSordili]

@@k.t.5405 Cool man. I misread your first comment, i thought you were asking a question. My bad. This movie is a classic, it contains multitudes and can be interpreted through many lenses. Your JFK angle is interesting, I had never though about the movie that way. Cheers!

[@k.t.5405]

​@@RafaelSordili This movie has been a fascinating investigative journey to say the least... At first I thought : Why would Antonioni want to make an entire film about the JFK case? Why would he be so invested in this crime? Does he have a dog in this fight for the truth? So I began to dig deeper...Did you know there is only ONE SINGLE reference on the ENTIRE internet regarding JFK and Antonioni? A TIME magazine article : When Antonioni Blew Up the Movies (2007). It briefly mentions that in 1961, Antonioni was actually INVITED TO THE JFK WHITE HOUSE and, (get this) , to discuss, of all things, a feature film about SPACE EXPLORATION 😯😳

[@arricammarques1955]

Make-up artist forgot to touch up the actress before this take.

[@ppuh6tfrz646]

That would be assault.