Dogtooth (Giorgos Lanthimos, 2009)

[MacGuffin]

I wanted to start a new thread since I imagine when this comes out on DVD, everyone who thinks they'll like it will.

Dogtooth is amazing. I think I like it better than Enter the Void. (Edit: but maybe not quite) Here's a film that manages to do so much with so little.

With an economic runtime and an almost episodic nature, Yanthimos is able to create an otherwordly sense of dread, but interestingly enough, the dread always seems to perspire from the almost cult-like residence of the family's household. For example, the few scenes that take place on the outside world almost feel safe compared to any of the scenes at the family house. The only things out of place in these scenes (where the father is at work or driving Christina around) are things caused by the father himself--the blindfold, for example.

It never feels like Lanthimos is ticking off a laundry list of atrocities. The film is structured in a way where the patriarch is always trying to maintain the upperhand and constantly struggling. At one point he remarks about how there's no one to trust anymore. It's in this way that the film serves as a legitimately thought-provoking commentary on the modern family and their relationship with society. The adults' efforts to separate the children from society (and indeed, attempt to reinvent their society through isolation) are loving, but insanely and terribly misguided.

When it comes time for the Match Cut awards, it's going to be difficult to give Best Cinematography to Enter the Void over this. Thimios Bakatakis works with Yanthimos to create this rich world with striking watercolors and eloquent sunspots (and an extremely dark night scene where the family pool lets off a radiant blue in the night). But the compositions are most striking. Upper bodies are framed at weird positions, objects and landscapes generate true claustrophobia--the film is shot like The Headless Woman on steroids.

A masterpiece; see it!

[megladon8]

Wow, great review! I'm definitely intrigued.

[NickGlass]

I'm not exactly sure I understand your comparison between Dogtooth and Enter the Void--or are you just pointing out that both films may seem taboo, yet they have different styles? Sorry, the connection just seems flippant and I'm confused if you're trying to get at something deeper between them.

[MacGuffin]

I'm not exactly sure I understand your comparison between Dogtooth and Enter the Void--or are you just pointing out that both films may seem taboo, yet they have different styles? Sorry, the connection just seems flippant and I'm confused if you're trying to get at something deeper between them.

I was only comparing them as movies that stand among the years' best.

[Spinal]

Argh, this movie is so frustrating. I watched it for a second time and I'm still not convinced it completely works. It starts from a compelling premise. It has the courage to be audacious. But most of the scenes just don't land. I don't know quite what it is, but it all seems to just lack authenticity. As if the director is borrowing heavily from Trier, Breillat and Haneke, but not asserting a style of his own. The dancing scene comes and I want to buy in totally. And then the family starts acting like dogs and I'm like, you are so full of shit. I sorta kinda get what he was trying to say, I think, but it's a fairly shallow allegory. Eh, whatever.

[Spaceman Spiff]

I'm seeing this tonight. Can't wait.

You're 'meh' review has sold me totally, Spiney.

[Boner M]

As if the director is borrowing heavily from Trier, Breillat and Haneke, but not asserting a style of his own.

I don't really buy this, since neither Haneke nor Breillat have a style that's completely their own. Plus, the former tends to pin down and trap characters, while Lanthimos' compositions trap them as much as he lets them protrude out of frame, just as his the children naturally veer away from the rigid system imposed on them. As for the alleged sincerity of Lanthimos' vision, how is the family barking like dogs less "full of shit" than a fox growling "chaos reigns"? The film's a flat-out absurdist comedy.

[Adam]

AA Dowd wrote this

What insight can you gain into 21st-century living by diving headfirst into this screaming-mad nightmare? A twisted cautionary fable about a deranged couple raising their grown children in Pavlovian captivity, "Dogtooth" takes allegorical aim at all forms of social conditioning, at the way not just our families, but our governments, our religions and our media fundamentally shape who we are. Yet the film operates on such a primal, alien wavelength—unfolding like singular science fiction, its tone wavering from dreamy to coldly clinical to vaguely menacing, often within the space of a single scene—that it eludes tidy topical allusion. Yorgos Langthimos, merciless master at the helm, has the exacting aesthetic prowess of cinema's great scolds. But he also has a wickedly-pronounced, pitch-black sense of humor. That's the ultimate provocation here—staging this madness as comedy, staring down its atrocities of infernal, parental manipulation with a bloody, broken-toothed grin of triumph.

[Spinal]

I'm seeing this tonight. Can't wait.

You're 'meh' review has sold me totally, Spiney.

Just trying to be a jerk or what?

[Spinal]

I don't really buy this, since neither Haneke nor Breillat have a style that's completely their own. Plus, the former tends to pin down and trap characters, while Lanthimos' compositions trap them as much as he lets them protrude out of frame, just as his the children naturally veer away from the rigid system imposed on them. As for the alleged sincerity of Lanthimos' vision, how is the family barking like dogs less "full of shit" than a fox growling "chaos reigns"? The film's a flat-out absurdist comedy.

The comedy in the film is not very funny. Mostly it's labored.

Did I say Haneke and Breillat have a syle that's completely their own? No. They do however add something distinct that is special and unique. I don't think Lanthimos does.

"Chaos reigns" is one of the most startling, haunting moments of recent cinema. It fits perfectly with the film's bold themes of nature as a merciless, unfeeling force that cares nothing for the exploits of man. It is full of meaning, full of import. The family barking is a tired obvious realization of a tired obvious metaphor.

[Ezee E]

This is very much "Haneke-ish."

[Spaceman Spiff]

Just trying to be a jerk or what?

Not at all, just that your complaints sound like things I'd probably like.

As for Spiney, it just sounds so right.

[Spinal]

Not at all, just that your complaints sound like things I'd probably like.

As for Spiney, it just sounds so right.

Everything about the film sounds like something I would like on paper. I think the soul's missing though.

[Raiders]

The comedy in the film is not very funny. Mostly it's labored.

How is it labored at all? It springs fully and organically from the very seriously disturbed method of autocracy the father wields over the children and the ways in which their lack of any form of social normalcy intervenes. Labored is second only to "forced" as the last words I could think of to describe what we see.

"Chaos reigns" is one of the most startling, haunting moments of recent cinema. It fits perfectly with the film's bold themes of nature as a merciless, unfeeling force that cares nothing for the exploits of man. It is full of meaning, full of import. The family barking is a tired obvious realization of a tired obvious metaphor.

I'm honestly not trying to be a jerk, but this made me roll my eyes. I'm fine if you buy into Trier's vision, but the mere image itself is an absurdist statement and it is far from subtle itself (a self-cannibalizing fox in a film about the uncaring aspects of nature and the foils of man and woman their own undoing? Please.) The image in Lanthimos' film springs from the fact that the characters doing the barking don't know it isn't a natural form of expression. It isn't that the children are "reduced" to an animalistic state but that their only form of expressions is primal at best; to go further, that when humans either choose not to, or aren't given the chance to, think for themselves with the full gamut of human expression at their behest, then we aren't any more mature in our own emotion and expressions than a family pet. The film is calling out its own form of Pavlovian experimentation. Obvious isn't in itself a critique and I don't think there is anything tired when put into the context of this film.

[Boner M]

"Chaos reigns" is one of the most startling, haunting moments of recent cinema. It fits perfectly with the film's bold themes of nature as a merciless, unfeeling force that cares nothing for the exploits of man.

Eh, don't see it, but different strokes.

The family barking is a tired obvious realization of a tired obvious metaphor.

They were trained to bark to keep the cats away. It's a plot point as much as a metaphor, and of a piece with the film's humour and tone. I don't see this as evidence of artistic charlatanry, certainly no more than a lot of von Trier's stunts.

EDIT: Dammit Raiders.

[Spinal]

Gotta head out the door, but one example of the forced comedy of the film:

The film sets up the fact that the kids are fed false definitions of words by the parents. However, they seem perfectly capable of engaging in long conversations without misusing words. Whole scenes go by and they use all the appropriate words. It is only when the film wants to score a cheap giggle that the words get mixed up. It's really quite lame.

[Spinal]

And yes, I know that they were responding to the cat. This is why I saw the film twice. To make sure I had all the events down because I knew this was not going to be a pleasant experience for me on this website in regards to the film. It still lacks much of the poetry and imagination of Trier's vision. It's kidstuff by comparision.

[Raiders]

Gotta head out the door, but one example of the forced comedy of the film:

The film sets up the fact that the kids are fed false definitions of words by the parents. However, they seem perfectly capable of engaging in long conversations without misusing words. Whole scenes go by and they use all the appropriate words. It is only when the film wants to score a cheap giggle that the words get mixed up. It's really quite lame.

Incorrect, sir! The children are taught regular expressions and vocabulary. They understand verbs, pronouns and regular phrases as well as all the objects within the house and property. Only words, specifically nouns and things, that have to do with either travelling (highway, road trip) or things that they either don't have or get to know exist because it points to the outside world--or because it is "taboo"-- (sea, cunt) or provoke violence (shotgun) are given different, more colorful definitions. It is actually very exacting by the filmmakers and the father.

[Raiders]

The language thing--in addition to being a plot necessity (confusing their speech keeps them further separated)-- is also relatively brilliant in being both darkly humorous but also being a microcosm of the film as a whole; that life stripped of context is not only alien and strange, but begs the question why and how certain words (read: customs) and combinations of words comes about.

[Spinal]

Incorrect, sir! The children are taught regular expressions and vocabulary. They understand verbs, pronouns and regular phrases as well as all the objects within the house and property. Only words, specifically nouns and things, that have to do with either travelling (highway, road trip) or things that they either don't have or get to know exist because it points to the outside world--or because it is "taboo"-- (sea, cunt) or provoke violence (shotgun) are given different, more colorful definitions.

What? You mean words like salt?

[Raiders]

What? You mean words like salt?

No, "telephone" was the word. They were told it was the salt shaker (not the salt itself) to avoid knowledge of communicating via telephone.

[Pop Trash]

I'm not sure movies that are obviously "Spinal-esque" are going to be liked by Spinal himself anymore. The dude likes Lars and the Real Girl and Babel for Jebus' sake.

[Watashi]

Lars and the Real Girl and Babel are the shit. Don't be hatin'.

[MacGuffin]

Babel is just too easy, too simple. It feeds the viewer everything and that's why Hollywood loves it.

[Rowland]

Dogtooth and Antichrist are both awesome.