MovieChat Forums > The Hitcher (1986) Discussion > Analysis of the film and connections bet...

Analysis of the film and connections between John and Jim


It's pretty clear symbolically that the boundary between John Ryder and Jim Halsey as characters is smudged. Onscreen, they're objectively separate, but certain scenes, moments and plot points hint at a deeper connection in the film's subtext.

John Ryder repeatedly displays basically supernatural powers: wiping out a police station full of armed cops, appearing and disappearing from nowhere, bringing down a helicopter with one bullet from a pistol, killing everyone in a heavily armed police escort vehicle. Characters make decisions that would be nonsensical in a logical, literal film.
The desert is a significant landscape: a flat stage for character and psychological drama to be played out on ("figures in a landscape"). John is never presented as a realistic murderer- he's something symbolic, supernatural.
In rough chronological order:

-In the beginning of the movie, John makes Jim say "I want to die", with the often pointed-out implication that John also wants to die on some level. This, and the two sharing that line of dialogue (though Jim rejects completing it), links the characters immediately. See the coin scene for further elaboration on this particular connection.

-Jim is literally always in enclosed spaces with John. The car, the gas station, the diner booth, the truck, the police station. The only time he's "outside" is in the final confrontation, the scene with the little girl, or when he's driving in a car alongside Jim- much shorter scenes. This may sound like a weird observation to make but the film is set in such a vast, empty and very open landscape that crowding the two together makes a distinct subconscious impression.

-The police mistake Jim for John, which is strange considering the two look very different. They also find John's knife in his pants pockets, despite there not being any point in the film where John is shown putting it there.

-Throughout the movie, the police and other outsiders consistently believe Jim is John. While presented as John framing Jim in-story, it's clear more is going on under the surface. It's interesting that this identity confusion is one of the main plot points of the film.

-As Jim is in the back of the Ranger car he hijacked, John's black truck emerges from behind his head (notably) and John shoots the two officers in front with a nearly identical gun to the one that Jim is holding. There is a quick cut between Jim screaming and John lowering his gun where the two are in the same position and space in the frame.

-The scene where John puts coins on Jim's eyes is very interesting. John licks both coins, but wets the second on Jim's lips. Due to the death symbolism of the coins, this implies their deaths will be somehow connected. It could also perhaps suggest the two are "two sides of the same coin". Throughout the film, John is obsessed with either killing or being killed by Jim. Perhaps there's not really a difference between the two.

-Another interpretation of that scene is that Jim is dead, and is trapped in some sort of purgatory with the supernatural Ryder. The great thing about this film is that it lends itself easily to many different interpretations without being overly vague with its symbolism. It's a very tricky balance to have.

-Jim contemplates suicide during the film, holding a gun to his head (that he didn't know was unloaded). John, who later gives him bullets for this gun, obviously has a death wish during the film as well. In my opinion, John represents violent and suicidal urges Jim is grappling with.

-Jim gets progressively less innocent throughout the film, a clear sign of John's growing influence over him. He starts off as a sweet kid who's naive enough to pick up a very shady-looking hitchhiker, and develops into somebody who hijacks cars, shoots at cops and blows his enemy away with a shotgun.

-John gets into bed with Nash while Jim is in the shower, in the same spot Jim was. She also mistakes him for Jim at first.

-This isn't a "connection" per se but it took me a bit to understand the meaning of the scene in the truck: John demands Jim shoot him in the face and kill him, knowing full well that his death will be the death of Nash. He's trying to rile up Jim to the point where his vengeance against John outweighs Nash's life- thus marking the final step in transforming Jim into a killer. He doesn't do it, and John is really disappointed.

-John is background checked by the police and found to have no identification, recorded history or papers. The same thing happened when Jim was taken in by the police earlier in the film- another strange connection.

-In the police station, the investigator asks John his name. Jim, not John, answers with "John Ryder" (and is heard by John despite being through soundproof glass). Funnily enough, the original script specifies that John is looking at his reflection in the two-way mirror in this moment, and through his reflection, is looking at Jim.

-There is a brief scene when John is in the armored vehicle where John and Jim are both eyeing the firearms of the police officers in their respective transport vehicles. They later both grab them.

-Right before Jim kills John, John throws his shackles between them and smiles. This is a very obvious visual metaphor that the two are "linked"- chained together.

-Jim kills John with the shotgun John was using moments earlier. The death means little other than as a cumulation of John's effect on Jim. It's not framed as justice or satisfying revenge or even as something Jim necessarily "wants" to do (he just "has" to). It's exactly what John wants.

-After John is shot by Jim for the final time, his body simply disappears into the sand, one final hint at his unreality.

-The last scene of the film is Jim leaning against a car and lighting a cigarette... which along with being a bookend is also basically what John did during the film's beginning. In this interpretation, this could represent the merging of the two characters: Jim has killed John, doing exactly what he wanted, and has now subsumed him and taken his place. Of course, this can also interpreted in the sexual way: the final shotgun fight representing male-male intercourse (notice how sweetly Jim caresses John's head with the gun barrel?) and the cigarette being the accessory to post-coital glow.

-On that note, the gay analysis of this film is quite popular. I can see why and I consider it a key part of the movie's appeal. It comes largely from Rutger Hauer's acting and is partially why his performance in the movie is so brilliant.

-On one last note, Rutger Hauer more or less obliquely confirms the theory in this post in his video logs (viewable on the filmfactoryshorts Youtube channel) about the film; twice he refers to Ryder breaking out of his cell and killing a bunch of cops while in prison (Jim Halsey is actually the one imprisoned at this point), and refers to him "not remembering" this and having an "alter ego" (this isn't a misremembering of Ryder breaking out of the bus at the end, he mentions that scene too).

reply

Awesome.

reply

(It looks like moviechat has a word limit per post and I have to split this up.)


I have not analyzed the film as much as you have, but I agree with most of what you have written. Throughout almost the entire movie, I thought Jim and John were the same person and that Jim was the killer the whole time.

I think the movie is trying to say that just because someone looks or acts like a certain type of person, they could be anyone and you should not trust them. They may be a normal person, but they could have some underlying traits that they are holding back and something one day could make them snap and change or they could just have multiple personalities. I think he was a normal person up until he fell asleep and almost crashed head on into the truck. This near death experience had a powerful affect on his mentality and for some reason brought out the serial killer that was always tucked away in his head (John).

The both had the knife and no identification because they are the same person. John wanted Jim and only Jim to kill him because John is in Jim's head which means that Jim is the only one that can kill him. There is no person to literally kill, Jim is just fighting with the serial killer mentality in his head.

reply

Nash trusted Jim and believed him, but she paid for it with her life because Jim was the serial killer the whole time. Jim was the one driving the tractor trailer with Nash tied to the back. The cops wouldn't shoot him because then she would die. Jim liked Nash and wanted to save her, but the serial killer in his head, John, wanted to kill her. His two mentalities had a discussion with eachother in his head, this is where Jim got in the truck. The real Jim was in the driver seat the whole time, but the serial killer mentality was in control. In order to talk to his other mentality, he thought about the cops bringing Jim to the scene to talk him out of it, but that was just in his head, it never really happened. John won the argument in his head and killed Nash. Jim was the one actually arrested for the murder (because John doesn't really exist) and put in the back of the transport bus. We just saw John in the bus because that was the mentality that he was currently portraying, that is who he saw himself as at the time. Nash's death was the last straw that led Jim to realize that he needs to get rid of the serial killer in his head and stop the killings, so he decided to confront John and end it.

When Jim goes to the gas station to use a phone, John just randomly drives out of the gas station from inside the closed garage. This makes no sense that he would be at the exact location Jim went to and waiting for him in the closed garage. This makes no sense, not because it is a bad movie, but because this never happened, this was just John showing up in Jim's head. John always seems to just show up out of nowhere like he has super powers because again, he is not real, Jim is imagining these things.

When Jim is in the diner and the owner goes into the back room, John shows up. Jim and John have a long conversation and argument, but the owner never comes out or even acknowledges anyone else is there, because there is not, no conversation took place.

reply

When Jim is in the back of the cop car turning himself in on the radio, John pulls up next to the side of the car and you can hear the loud engine revving, but the cops don't even notice he is there, because he is not, Jim is the one that shoots the cops.

I think this is what the movie was originally supposed to be, but when they were filming it, they couldn't decide whether to make it a psychological thriller or just a straight action, survival movie with a real serial killer. I think most complex movies that people have to think about to understand go through this when being made because they know that if the audience does not understand the movie, everyone will just say it is a bad movie that doesn't make sense and it will not make money. Unfortunately this happens with a lot of good movies that you have to think about and I think the same happened with this movie. In general, most people do not want to have to think to understand a movie and that is why these type of movies do poorly at first when released and then gain a cult following.

I think this is why it is so hard for people to come to an agreement with what is really happening in the movie because, there are some scenes that don't make sense with this theory and some that don't make sense with other theories. The movie is not consistent because they didn't have good direction when filming. They need to add big action scenes with explosions, like when he shot down the helicopter, because they are trying to sell to a broad, dumb audience that just wants action and at the same time they are film the psychological thriller where that scene may not fit well.

In the end, the people providing money probably get to make the decisions and they don't want to risk losing money on a confusing movie or something the general audience won't understand or like, so they change it to turn it into an action movie and end up making the movie worse. This is what happened to Ultraviolet (2006) and many other movies.

reply

Holy crap. I've been saying this to people for some 25 years, and no one ever agrees. Your analysis is far deeper than I ever got to.

reply

John's knife is in Jim's leather jacket pocket, not his pants pocket

reply

Analysis of the film and connections between John and Jim

Yeah, these two had the hots for each other, underneath all that animosity

reply