Showing posts with label Jan Svankmajer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jan Svankmajer. Show all posts

Sunday, 15 May 2016

Review CXXXIII - Lunacy

Review 133
Sílení (2005)

Somehow I always stumble back on Jan Svankmajer. In fact, I’d say he’s the director I have visited most consistently over the years, well, in terms of blogging, anyway. There’s something eye-catching about raw meat making love or creepy dolls running around in endless circles. So of course when I finally got the opportunity to watch Sílení, or Lunacy in English, starring Pavel Liska, Anna Geislerová, Jan Tríska, and Martin Huba, I was there. Normally I force my boyfriend to watch these films with me, but I sat through this one solo – I think maybe he’s getting tired of having to watch such messed-up stop motion.

Lunacy starts off a bit differently than Svankmajer’s other films as our beloved director steps in front of the camera and describes the film we are about to see. He describes the film as a horror movie, describing how the current world as it stands places lunatics in mental wards that encompass the worst of both libertinism and religious dogma. However, while he claims the film to be about mental wards, the film should be placed as an explanation for society today. Also, major spoilers ahead, so be warned!

Jean first experiences the horrors of nihilism when he witnesses the Marquis’ orgy the first night he is there. The whole scene is the most extreme it could be – the Marquis hammers nails into a life-sized crucifix, three women and three men eat – seriously – feces-looking chocolate cake until they commence an orgy, and a woman is raped against her will. I was waiting for a blood ritual, but I think the Marquis’ Baphomet mask was enough. In an argument with Jean, the Marquis reveals that God would never create man in order to let him live such a life unless to make us suffer, as well as claiming God has done worse than he has. This alone is definitely an argument many atheists and agnostics place in front of creationists whenever religion comes on the table. Even if not consciously debating, those who do not hold a moral standing in line with God can’t really argue that what the Marquis did was wrong, and hence, orgies or even one-night stands exist and are prevalent.

Now, apart from this topic, we learn that the Marquis attempts to recreate his mother’s demise every so often when he pretends to die only to come back alive. When he does it in front of Jean, he chokes on a banana, which, given the circumstance, is quite a particular food to take, if you know what I mean. Anyway, this leads to the Marquis explaining his “purgative method” of helping the possibly mentally ill; he and fellow psychiatrist Dr. Murlloppe believe that letting the mentally ill do as they wish will help them in their recovery. This somehow seems flawed when you think of depressed patients who may wish to kill themselves, although the film does say the patients there are not ill yet. But if you think of other circumstances, such as letting your child have reign on what they want to eat or what they can do, you realise this is a current-day situation.

On the other hand, we have, toward the end of the film when the original directors of the psychiatric ward, a Middle-Ages type of view on the disease. The head director believes in extreme forms of punishment to ward off the mentally ill, claiming he has thirteen forms of punishment in store for those who disobey the rules, including the removal of the tongue and eyes. This was definitely Marquis de Sade all over again, but now with the idea of God behind it. We find out that the director also attempted to follow his punishment method by removing his penis, but in the end, buys a replacement in order to fornicate with Charlotte. So really, the mentally ill are considered mentally ill, even if they aren’t, but they never learn to truly escape their problems. After starting to complete a psychology degree and stopping, this definitely reflects practice today. At least in Western medicine, people believe medication can be the one all, end all for a psychological disorder when we actually don't know the effects of antidepressants over long periods of time, and the reason you take medication is only to stabilise a problem so therapy can be effective and thus, one day get off the medication.

I suppose before I close this off, I should mention the little meat segments. While somewhat disturbing to a new viewer, a knowing fan will be reminded of Svankmajer's shorts. The segments themselves often reflect what the previous scene was about in the film, while really showing us as "nothing but meat".

I think Lunacy is a great surrealistic piece of work as it tries to do something weird, but brings the viewer along. With Svankmajer's introduction, you know what you will be seeing in the film, so everything is there. But even without the introduction, I'd say you could get the message Svankmajer was trying to convey. And that is surrealism I like - some things are messed up, but I get the message. Unlike Black Moon...

Crazy as usual, Lunacy stands up to its name, all while giving an interesting message in an interesting way. Thank you, Svankmajer!

Friday, 15 May 2015

Review CV - Lekce Faust

Review 105
Lesson Faust (1994)

It's been difficult finding films to watch lately. Maybe because the weather has been improving (somewhat) and I've been less willing to sit down and watch a film, but I've been slowing down for the month of May. Consequently, I haven't been able to review a film in a little while. However, while attempting to learn some German, I recalled the story of Faust and, consequently, remembered the ever-wonderful Jan Švankmajer had done a version, Lekce Faust, or Lesson Faust. I also haven't reviewed a Švankmajer film in a while (let's just say Alice was terrifying and Conspirators of Pleasure, even more so), so I think it was due time, mmm yes?

Our "Faust" of the story (Petr Čepek) exits the metro when he comes across two men distributing a map with a red marked spot. Ignoring it at first, "Faust" eventually gets curious enough to visit the spot after a supernatural event.

I can't even continue a synopsis because it's really hard to give a serious-sounding explanation of an empty egg inside bread causing a great gust of wind and suddenly our main character being played as if he were a puppet. It's Jan Švankmajer - what do you expect? If you know of the original Faust tale, it won't help much. I watched the film with someone who had seen the 1926 version of Faust, based on the original story from Goethe, and, while some parts were straight from the legend, it really did borrow from some other versions of the story, as well as just Švankmajer's imagination. But I guess you weren't expecting a copy of the Faustus legend since the movie is called Lesson Faust. There's some bit about it just being called Faust, but I like the official English title - it distances it from the original. And I wish I had known this prior to watching the film because I thought it was a version of Faust. Sigh. I guess with having watched Alice, I should have known better.

Now, while the film diverges from the original, that doesn't mean it is bad. Because it isn't. It's a typical Švankmajer film with such creativity I feel absolutely jealous that I don't have such an imagination. The way it goes from a normal plot to a crazy, surreal one is amazing. How "Faust" goes from being one of our characters of our movie to a character in a play being watched by an audience in the film is pretty ingenious. And it does it smoothly, even if it is odd. And really, this is what sells the film. The acting was nothing spectacular, but that's something in Švankmajer's films. You don't really watch it for the acting - you watch it for stop-motion, claymation, the surrealism. Honestly, usually I complain about surrealism because it serves no purpose and is just so cryptic that you don't even understand what's going on. But with Švankmajer's surrealism, you get it. You have to pay attention, but his meanings, his message, is obvious enough that it isn't like the white canvas with the three dots on it at the art show which could mean just about anything. His shorts are obvious in what they're conveying and instead of making you guess, give you the general idea and let you figure it out. And I am so for this, especially since Švankmajer does it so, so well.

Leske Faust is an interesting take on an old legend while combining it with modern life. It can be a bit slow at times and, while the acting is not the best, if you're into surrealism, definitely check it out. And if you haven't heard of Jan Švankmajer, watch a short from him and decide if it's for you. Happy watching!

Saturday, 22 June 2013

Review LXII - Otesánek

Review LXII
Otesánek (2000)

I can't remember if I ever spoke of Jan Svankmajer on here, but, if I haven't, well, this guy is odd. I first discovered him a few years back when I read about his adaptation of Alice in Wonderland, Alice. I soon watched a few of his shorts, and, well, I think Meat Love sums up his style well. Anyway, I was in the mood for something odd a little while back, and so I suggested to my movie-watcher friend that we check out Otesánek, or Little Otik or Greedy Guts as it is known in English. Trust me when I say it was definitely odd.

Bozena (Veronika Zilková) and Karel (Jan Hartl) desperately want a child, but, due to unfortunate medical circumstances, the couple will likely never have a child of their own. Karel, while fixing up his wife's and his cottage house, discovers a giant tree stump. He jokingly carves it to look like a baby. Bozena, however, takes the situation seriously, adopting the stump as a real child, naming him Otik, and begins faking pregnancy to bring him into their home permanently. However, as foretold in a fairy tale, Otik might be a bit more troublesome than the couple expected.

The synopsis alone, I think, can already foretell how weird this film will get. Still, while it was off the wall, I really enjoyed it. Why? I'll try and answer that since I'm not entirely sure why I loved it so much. For one, it is funny. I found myself laughing at the ridiculousness of the couple ("He's our son - we must stick by him!"), the random pedophile neighbour (Zdenek Kozák) and his scary hand-penis (you'll understand after watching the film), and little Otik himself. The film doesn't have a lot of the stop-motion Jan Svankmajer is known for, but, when you do get it, while it was creepy, you can't help but admire it. I'm a sucker for stop-motion, so I can't help but admire Jan Svankmajer's work. Again, though, I have to stress that this isn't stop-motion heavy at all, so if you're seeking such a style, check out his shorts or Alice. Still, it is easy to see it's a Jan Svankmajer film, and, given that I admire his work, that could be a second reason as to why I liked it. Finally, I really enjoyed the film because, while there was the surface story, there was one left to interpret. I'll go into deal in a new paragraph, so, if you're looking to have fun interpreting the film and avoiding any spoilers, just skip the next paragraph.

Okay, so for all of you who don't spoiling the film and its message, let's go in depth! The last English teacher I had in high school told me that, if ever you're given the chore of interpreting a story in college, just say it's about sex. Not surprisingly, this seems to work for films, as well! My friend and I decided that Otesánek is all about impotency and sex. Let's go with the father as an example given that he really displays the impotency bit well. First of all, at the beginning of the film, we can see Karel observing people getting babies in a charcuterie style. Not to mention there is a lot of emphasis on baby penises throughout the film, though especially in the beginning (it was a tad awkward). Yet, he and his wife are unable to have a child. Erectile dysfunction anyone? It seems he overcomes this baby issue when he produces the tree stump baby (with meticulous details of the penis again), but his wife soon takes it to another level and he loses control again. Every time he tries to tell his wife that the baby needs to go, even after it chews off part of her hair, eats a cat, and even starts eating people, he is unable to stop it. The first time, he's ready to take an axe, a phallic object n'est pas, to the baby, but he fails. Impotency strike one! Again, throughout all this, he tells his wife the baby needs to go, but always backs down. Finally, when he decides to take a stand given that two people have died, he asks his neighbour for a chainsaw - another phallic object, we shall say. He's asking for help, as well, which could mean something. Anyway, he goes to the basement, chainsaw in hand, ready to face the beast which has now grown to a ginormous size, and... he throws the chainsaw to the ground and gets eaten. Once again, an extraordinary example of impotency. The women in the film don't go unscathed, either. It seems that every woman who has the ability to have children is way off psychologically. The mother wants to have this tree stump baby so badly she fakes a pregnancy and is not put off by the fact that her "child" is eating people. In short, she's crazy. The little girl (Kristina Adamcová), who is lonely and extremely interested in babies and sex, feeds people to little Otik, and, after learning how Otik will be stopped, tries her best to prevent it. Finally, the little girl's mother (Jaroslava Kretschmerová) seems neglectful of her child, to an extent. However, when she notices people in the building are being killed, she locks her entire family in their apartment and stands watch. While in this particular instance it might make sense, it is still a slightly off reaction. The females, all within the age to be sexually active and have children - except for the pre-pubescent girl who is a little bit younger, though some girls at ten get their period - are all slightly off in the head. The girl and the mother are also entranced by "wood", where the word can also mean penis. Anyway, there are more details, but I think that is detailed enough for here.

The film was interesting, and I was really able to enjoy this one, so I'm giving it eight stars on ten. If you like peculiar films, definitely give this one a watch. Otherwise, make sure you have an open mind if you decide to check this one out.

Pirate Bay torrent (with English subtitles!)