He lived and he drove according to the absolute duty dictated by the categorical imperative of the necessary non-contradictory eternal movement of the sensuously-intuitive manifold of the temporospatial toroidal perpetually rotating on its axis in infinite opposition to the asphalt. This eternally self-rotating opposition is nothing but the transcendental unity of apperception, which is the fundamental condition for the possibility of the experiencing of objects for the living consciousness, existing as his own act of self-positing, i.e. as the will behind the wheel impelling itself forward by the sheer negativity of its desire manifested as positive force upon this three-dimensional metal trapezium, which in accordance to the natural laws of physics glides frictionlessly by virtue of an underlying tetrad of eternally self-moving, circular unmoved movers upon the discursively-developed concepts of socio-historico-racionative nature¹. The perfectly rational will posits this duty as perfect and inflexible, thus being unable to deviate from this positing of duty as self-determination². The driver neither takes the money nor abstains from violence, for the absolute duty is in maintaining a secure direction for the constant motion of die Räder³. Drive is a film portraying a true Kantian subject. It is a work of the highest aesthetic speculation on the truth of practical reason. On a scale from transcendentally aesthetic to transcendentally apperceptive, I rate it antinomically striving towards the unattainable ground of driving-in-itself.
1. Known to us as ‘roads.’
3. cf. Immanuel Kant’s concept of the Ding an sich.