..."Man Bites Dog," aptly re-titled in English to reflect its illustration of a long-standing journalistic aphorism (i.e. unusual events get the headlines, rather than the mundane; also well-stated as "if it bleeds, it leads")--the original French title translates as "It Happened in Your Neighborhood"--is a Belgian faux-documentary gem that rightfully generated much controversy upon release, and continues to stand as somewhat of a yardstick for countless films since. The basic conceit is that of a film crew following the exploits of a serial killer as he plies his trade, and the blurring of the moral lines between observation and participation. Despite its flaws, it remains a potent satire of the darkest order, and in some ways superior to similar mainstream fare like "Natural Born Killers," "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer," and mostly recently, "Funny Games," as well as thematic forebearers like "A Clockwork Orange" and others.
Taken at face value, of course, the film is blatantly absurdist. The viewer is placed *in media res* as the subject of the piece goes about his brutal business duly recorded by three filmmakers of dubious means. No attempt is made to explain how this project came to pass, nor is there any genuine attempt to establish the credibility of such a thing; "Man Bites Dog" is a satire that simply can't work within the parameters of reality--(Are Belgian forensics/homicide units truly so incompetent? Can a film crew really operate within such a bubble of outsider inattention? Is a serial killer at all likely to allow his crimes to be recorded?)--and that is how it should be. The killer, played by Benoît Poelvoorde, a member of the screenwriter/producer team, is simultaneously repellent through his actions, demeanor and appearance, and yet oddly likable; his logorrheic wit and goofy charm disarm the viewer as readily as his brutality and lack of conscience repel.
The absurdity deepens as the film progresses and the filmmakers themselves are drawn into the mayhem, transforming from complicit observers into willing accomplices and finally into active participants. The viewer, of course, implicitly follows in their footsteps by continuing to watch the goings-on. As a result, when "Man Bites Dog" at last climaxes in a sordid scene of rape and post-coital butchery, said viewer is confronted with some stunningly unsettling conundrums of self-aware moral responsibility. Soon thereafter, there follows one more startling demonstration of the killer's true nature, and then a closing epilogue of discovery and retribution that offers a facile cleansing of conscience, but by then it's too late; the viewer has already been irredeemably indicted. It's a neat trick, to say the least, and one that will strike a nerve in all but the most incompetent, unfeeling of audiences.
Highly recommended to all but the squeamish who may be interested in matters of mass media portrayals of violence, the associated culpability of said media, and the various moral and ethical questions involved for manufacturers and consumers alike. The filmmakers made it clear in various PR appearances that "Man Bites Dog" was meant to be as much about making a cheap, successful film as it was about the subject matter, but don't let that fool you. "Man Bites Dog" examines the fallacy of documentarian objectivity, anticipates the phenomenon of *found footage* films like "The Blair Witch Project," etc., as well as the rise of reality-TV excess, but its true strength lies within the unflinching gaze it casts upon its audience's innermost hearts, minds, and souls. Watch at the risk of your own self-satisfied and smug ethical certitude.
Edit: It came as no surprise to me to learn that one of the film's creators committed suicide a few years back. Correlation doesn't equal causation, of course, but one can't help but wonder...
Taken at face value, of course, the film is blatantly absurdist. The viewer is placed *in media res* as the subject of the piece goes about his brutal business duly recorded by three filmmakers of dubious means. No attempt is made to explain how this project came to pass, nor is there any genuine attempt to establish the credibility of such a thing; "Man Bites Dog" is a satire that simply can't work within the parameters of reality--(Are Belgian forensics/homicide units truly so incompetent? Can a film crew really operate within such a bubble of outsider inattention? Is a serial killer at all likely to allow his crimes to be recorded?)--and that is how it should be. The killer, played by Benoît Poelvoorde, a member of the screenwriter/producer team, is simultaneously repellent through his actions, demeanor and appearance, and yet oddly likable; his logorrheic wit and goofy charm disarm the viewer as readily as his brutality and lack of conscience repel.
The absurdity deepens as the film progresses and the filmmakers themselves are drawn into the mayhem, transforming from complicit observers into willing accomplices and finally into active participants. The viewer, of course, implicitly follows in their footsteps by continuing to watch the goings-on. As a result, when "Man Bites Dog" at last climaxes in a sordid scene of rape and post-coital butchery, said viewer is confronted with some stunningly unsettling conundrums of self-aware moral responsibility. Soon thereafter, there follows one more startling demonstration of the killer's true nature, and then a closing epilogue of discovery and retribution that offers a facile cleansing of conscience, but by then it's too late; the viewer has already been irredeemably indicted. It's a neat trick, to say the least, and one that will strike a nerve in all but the most incompetent, unfeeling of audiences.
Highly recommended to all but the squeamish who may be interested in matters of mass media portrayals of violence, the associated culpability of said media, and the various moral and ethical questions involved for manufacturers and consumers alike. The filmmakers made it clear in various PR appearances that "Man Bites Dog" was meant to be as much about making a cheap, successful film as it was about the subject matter, but don't let that fool you. "Man Bites Dog" examines the fallacy of documentarian objectivity, anticipates the phenomenon of *found footage* films like "The Blair Witch Project," etc., as well as the rise of reality-TV excess, but its true strength lies within the unflinching gaze it casts upon its audience's innermost hearts, minds, and souls. Watch at the risk of your own self-satisfied and smug ethical certitude.
Edit: It came as no surprise to me to learn that one of the film's creators committed suicide a few years back. Correlation doesn't equal causation, of course, but one can't help but wonder...