I was a teenager when I first saw "The Hitcher" on good old VHS in the mid-80's and thought that it was an extremely nasty and violent movie. Almost 40 years later, I watched it again and it is exactly the same thing. It is a thriller exercise in the "Duel" vein except it has absolutely nothing to say - this is brutality for brutality's sake. "Duel" had suspense built on the average working man not knowing why a truck is relentlessly chasing him. One can argue that brutality was the name of the game with "The Texas Chain Saw Massacre" yet that film was potent - a never-ending nightmare of seismic proportions and it stayed true to its convictions. "The Hitcher" is some superhuman villain who can materialize anywhere and everywhere in those desert highways and kill freely. But for what purpose and why does he taunt the young man who is driving on those roads to California?
C. Thomas Howell is the young kid who picks up a mysterious stranger on a rainy night. The stranger is John Ryder (Rutger Hauer) and their dialogue almost immediately conveys brutality - this Ryder was already picked up and he dismembered that poor driver. Gee, think Howell can survive this? I should think not yet the movie grows repetitive and wearisome before the end of the first reel. Ryder kills indiscriminately though he certainly loves killing the police officers on his tail. Well, the police actually think it is Howell who is committing murders left and right. When Howell shows up at a cafe and we are introduced to the waitress (played rather dimly by Jennifer Jason Leigh), more blood and guts is headed our way as he eats french fries and almost consumes a severed finger! When the Hitcher vanishes without a trace, the police apprehend Howell who then escapes after the Hitcher kills everyone at the police station. Then Howell is at a phone booth about to make a call when he seizes the opportunity to hold two cops hostage at gunpoint! The Hitcher appears and reappears and is finally apprehended as well. Howell is found innocent and then seizes the opportunity to hold another cop at gunpoint! And on and on.
The Hitcher has no singular purpose other than to kill, kill, kill. But he does not kill Howell nor does he seem to be interested in killing him at all, so what gives? Some critics at the time ascertained a gay subtext, as if that made it any better. Yet if the filmmakers wanted nothing more than a one-dimensional homicidal maniac on the road, then why get the charming, powerful presence of Rutger Hauer to do nothing except aim a rifle and shoot and throw himself through windshields? You could have gotten Schwarzenegger to do the same thing and called it (at that time) "Terminator 2." At one crucial point, the kid asks Ryder why he is pursuing him. Ryder responds, "You are a smart kid. You'll figure it out." I still couldn't figure it out when the Hitcher pulls apart Leigh who is suspended between two trucks with police swarming the area. The movie is on a nonsensical hyperdrive mood and I suppose I wouldn't call it boring. It is all gratuitous violence and noise and, in retrospect, about as pointless as any 80's slasher picture.







