The 1999 film "Go" is not great cinema, due to its obvious ersatz Tarantino quality (i.e. monologues on pop culture, interweaving stories, dry humor about death/injury) BUT it's an interesting historical relic that reveals a few major turning points in culture...

First it's an ultimately *uncool* movie that captures the awkward, adrift aesthetics of post-grunge America — e.g. the Fatboy Slim big beat "electronica" soundtrack. But since raves never nestled into American pop culture, the characters feel like they're cosplaying "rave"

"Go" also shows you why The Strokes arrived in 2001 like gods: while electronica seemed to be "in," downtown NYC desired something more raw. Everyone sold their turntables for guitars. "Go" is represents the last moment where "maybe turntables are the future"

More interestingly: There are a ton of mediocre 1960s movies (e.g., The Trip, The Wild Angels) that became cult classics because they so embody the specific Sixties vibe. But "Go" only barely represents a unique set of styles compared to today — and it's 25 years old!

Scott Wolf's jacket and Jay Mohr's hair are very, very 1999, but people today still sort of look like the people in the movie. This makes the movie not quite strange enough to be full camp/kitsch retro. The Nineties-ness of aesthetic is subtle.

I saw this movie on opening night and even then it felt a bit ersatz/uncool. (And I liked Doug Liman!) "Go"'s opening credits scream 1999 to me, but I don't think this aesthetic was ever truly a major and rooted part of American youth culture

@wdavidmarx You say culture stabilized in 1999? Interesting. Tell me more.

@wdavidmarx Bigger question, is culture static or is the larger aperture of inputs in a digital society making it difficult to appreciate interesting subcultures?

@wdavidmarx Hipsterism as black hole of culture that sucks in novelty, squeezes out authenticity, makes things “over” and then moves on. It’s why we don’t have as defined subcultures any more - every aesthetic is just meat in the grinder, leading to a perception of stability from a distance

@wdavidmarx I'm going to write a grand theses called The Tyranny of Reproduction about how as copying becomes easier, ingenuity becomes harder. When we've run out of things to sample, and the samples' samples have lost all signal to noise, maybe we'll collectively recoil.

@wdavidmarx Can you explain what you mean by culture slowing down? It feels quite the opposite.

@wdavidmarx I blame 9/11.

@wdavidmarx I think about this issue with culture ALL THE TIME. Maybe "Go" is THE prime Hauntological film then?

@wdavidmarx What does “culture was already slowing down in 1999” mean here? Like just rave culture? Guess maybe I’ll give you that…

@wdavidmarx I don't think culture slowed down. it just stopped being a monoculture and split into niche micro cultures, if anything we have more culture progression but rather than it all going in one direction its branching in all, making it harder to see any actual progression

@wdavidmarx Culture didn't slow down, you just stopped being part of youth culture.

@wdavidmarx Agreed.

@wdavidmarx I think your NYC bent doesn’t fit for this movie. It’s a movie about LA in the late 90s. I was 20 when this came out and was in college in TN. The area I was in was more about Jam Rock bands and going to Gatlinburg or Atlanta to have fun. (1990s Nashville was not cool)

@wdavidmarx Great point. Were the same distance from Go, as Go is from 1974. Culture is defo closer to 1999 than 99 was to 74