Film Junk Podcast Episode #307: Dogtooth
0:00 – Intro
4:05 – Headlines: Die Hard 5 Gets a Director, Shane Black May Write and Direct Iron Man 3, Ryan Gosling to Star in Logan’s Run Remake, Shark Night 3D to Become Untitled 3D Shark Thriller?
33:05 – Review: Dogtooth
1:11:45 – Trailer Trash: X-Men: First Class, Arthur, Bridesmaids
1:29:30 – Other Stuff We Watched: Uncle Buck, Weird Science, Sixteen Candles, Gates of Heaven, Dazed and Confused, Nothing But Trouble
1:54:50 – Junk Mail: Reed Raimi Remix, Kiss of Death, Azrael in The Dark Knight Rises, Film Junk Ads, Greg’s Recommended Classics and Police Procedurals, Judging Acting in Foreign Films, New Watch vs. Rewatch, Horror Remakes and Sequels, Name That Movie 1 and 2
2:26:20 – This Week’s DVD Releases
2:29:40 – Outro
» Download the MP3 (70 MB)
» View the show notes
» Vote for us on Podcast Alley!
» Rate us on iTunes!
Subscribe to the podcast feed:
| Donate via Paypal: | Recurring Donation $2/Month: |
Sponsors:
This week’s episode is sponsored by Audible, the largest online provider of digital audiobooks. Head over to audiblepodcast.com/filmjunk and sign up for a risk-free 14-day trial, and get an audiobook of your choice absolutely free!
Comments (76)
I really like this movie very fresh, interesting, somewhat funny, and highly entertaining one question though may b spoiler the part when the father dumps fishes into the pool and one of the daughters asks him to take them out which he did wat was the point of that? It’s been bothering me I probably missed something
Posted by Cakadoodle on February 14th, 2011I found Dogtooth to be hilarious.
Posted by antho42 on February 14th, 2011http://www.rowthree.com/2011/01/31/5-things-the-world-can-learn-from-dogtooth/
Posted by antho42 on February 14th, 2011Wow, congratulations Jay!
Posted by kyri on February 14th, 2011This is really big!
Bravo!
had no idea what the FJ response to Dogtooth would be but knew it was a possibility at least one of the crew would react the same way I did. I gave it 1/5, if I had to describe the movie in one word to anyone it would probably be “Trash”
Posted by Goon on February 14th, 2011Dogtooth was great
Posted by Gustavo Caetano on February 14th, 2011I second Frank’s thoughts on Die Hard 5. Here, here!
Posted by rjdelight on February 14th, 2011Dogtooth was easily one of last years top films. I’m almost certain Jay would’ve loved it (Congrats to him though!). Disappointed by the lukewarm response to such a great movie, but great episode still.
Posted by Jason W on February 14th, 2011So what did everyone love about Dogtooth? Is it just that everyone else found it funnier than us? I’m still waiting to be convinced of its brilliance. I maintain that it is a twisted and original idea that doesn’t really live up to its potential.
Posted by Sean on February 14th, 2011‘Dogtooth was great’. ‘Dogtooth was one of last year’s best films’.
Why? Tell me why it was a good film. Fresh doesn’t equal good. Different doesn’t equal good. Original doesn’t equal good. What makes Dogtooth a great film?
Posted by Greg on February 14th, 2011I agree with Frank’s assessment regarding the lack of depth with the word swap – could have been more humourous.
That being said I think everyone could not depart from their personal external logic when reviewing the film. The best way to relate to the characters, particularly the children, is to see them as people raised in an religious commune of some sort from birth (kind of like The Village) or as people with a sensory disability. The children have been conditioned with nothing else and do not possess or care about the capacity to look beyond what is around them. It is like asking a person blinded at birth to describe the colour red. If you use that mindset when watching the film a lot of things like the Sinatra record, the car truck and the cat all make sense.
But you also need to take into account that the father, while the mastermind of the film, is doing this in a very loose manner. He hasn’t rewritten the entire dictionary for his kids; he makes up rules when there is need. The kids also do pick up on the inconsistencies like when the youngest daughter she blames the cat using the hammer. The father knows she’s lying but follows her story most likely to keep continuity with previous rules.
I think you have to take into account that the film is not about the totality of the father’s conditioning system but a particular moment when that system starts to fall apart.
I liked the film but I don’t think it takes high-minded thinking to understand the film. In ways Never Let Me Go is like the emotional, less extreme, cousin to this film.
Posted by alechs on February 14th, 2011I think Dogtooth is temporarily interesting, but gets very irritating very very fast, redundant even. The idea of the abusing language is great but its never really used properly or well explored, all the changes in language are inserted so obviously for the viewer to notice them in stitled dialogue. “Please pass the telephone”. it never feels like its actually part of the culture the family is putting together. It just comes across like a childish game rather than brainwashing.
The whole time the film feels so obviously like a film trying to shock, I didn’t buy this situation at any point, so the shock just came across as desperate, and when that happens, at the same time shock type stuff feels so… pathetic, that’s when it starts feeling sick, twisted, inexcusable. That’s the thing about pretension for me – you can throw all the murder and sex in the world in the film for me if it feels real or if it continually has something valid to say, but in this film its so clinical and so unconvincing and lingered upon for no good reason.
When comedies put grossout gags and shocking moments it gets pointed out as stupid garbage, but when you put this stuff in an art film it suddenly is ‘meaningful’ and ’smart satire’ and it gets awards. I don’t get it. Avant garde stupidity and absurd situations is given the benefit of the doubt, when its really most of the time pretentious bullshit, and I call bullshit on Dogtooth.
So yeah, I get the point – if you raise a family like this they rebel or they will find a way around the constraints you put upon them anyways. Theres a Simpsons episode where Homer and Marge go out to the car to argue and play the Mexican Hat Dance on the radio as loud as possible so the kids dont have to hear them fight. Cut to inside of the kids looking outside, understanding what is going on: “That music always sends shivers down my spine”. BAM, better satire, similar point, actually funny, and no need for over the top shock bullshit for 100 minutes with a story that doesn’t actually go anywhere, terrible acting, and on top of that I think the film looks like shit.
Haneke and von Trier are usually also kind of reserved with their films but they look a lot more interesting than this film. Even during the Dogme films there was more visual interest than here. The von Trier film it reminded me of is The Idiots, which I think I liked when I was younger but similarly of all von Trier’s films I find really pushes the limits of watchability. I’m not sure if I’d like that film anymore either. I think when I was younger I had not seen very many weird films, so anything unusual was pretty special.
These days, and I guess after seeing Funky Forest for example, I don’t have much tolerance for artsy shock weirdness that feels it can only make such easy parenting analogies by resorting to shit like you see in Dogtooth.
Posted by Goon on February 14th, 2011Kiss Colon Psycho Circus Colon The Nightmare Child was also released on Dreamcast.
It was also terrible.
Posted by Colin on February 14th, 2011One thing I just realized… I think Frank’s theory about the word swap being specifically for things that are forbidden actually holds true. I thought the phone / salt thing was the exception, but since they hide the phone in the bedroom and forbid them to have contact with the outside world, I guess it would make sense that they wouldn’t want them to know that word either.
Posted by Sean on February 14th, 2011Well I didn’t find Dogtooth that intellectually interesting either. I also didn’t find it shocking. I don’t think it is trying to say a lot but I did find it entertaining.
I have not watched many of Heneke or von Trier films so I’ll take your word for it.
I saw clips of Funky Forest and thought it was amusing in an exploitative kind of way. Hideaki Anno was in it so I have a bit of a soft spot for the film.
Posted by alechs on February 14th, 2011**Spoiler Alert**
About the ending that angered Greg so much, the girl didn’t get out of the trunk because…..she died, right? Thus proving the dad correct about the dangers of escaping to the outside world? That’s what I assumed.
I thought your criticisms were spot on. This is the kind of movie that professional critics like just for its differentness.
Posted by Sam on February 14th, 2011I didnt bring up Funky Forest as if it was bad, not sure if that was clear. Love Funky Forest… seeing that bizarre weirdness for the sake of weirdness was more up my alley.
Posted by Goon on February 14th, 2011I’m a social worker that works with kids & if you’ve heard some of the horror stories I deal with regularly, then maybe it would affect your perceptions a bit. That shouldn’t be the sole reason why I found Dogtooth to be fascinating and funny. Granted it’s also a social satire – originally it was supposed to take place in the future in which the “family unit” has completely broken down. And this family is trying desperately to cling to it. The movie is a depiction of operational condition at its most humorous and horrific. I wasn’t shocked by most things that took place, on the contrary, I was entertained by the surreal elements – like the dancing sequence. It showcases a lot how insanely flawed parental conditioning can be. Is it consistently entertaining? Not necessarily; I checked my watch a couple of times. Also, The ending is a bit disheartening in how ambiguous it plays out (or maybe I didn’t pick up on the fate of one character). I’m guessing that the director may’ve had the whole dystopian future element in mind when conceiving the ending. But I’ve heard some disturbing stuff that parents have done in my profession that are not unlike being hit with VHS tapes or told their kids about “monsters” and lied about word definitions. It was a brave film to bring Pavlovian manipulation into the minds of young adults, as both tragedy and comedy. My friends and I at work talked over an hour at lunch about this movie. Most of us were disturbed, but we also laughed. A couple of us were indifferent to the experience, but the majority of us continue to talk about our response to it. In a way, watching it and then discussing it was therapy for all of us, and not necessarily entertainment.
When I watch something, I like looking for both the good & the bad. The bad: not always consistent in tone which plays against it at times, as well as the ending. The good: the cinematography, the ideas (not always the execution of the ideas), and especially the acting by the young adults in this. I think my biases as a social worker dealing with kids, definitely played my a role in response to this. Whether one loves it or hates it, at least it’s an interesting example of provocation. You guys are smart and well-articulated. I just had a completely different reaction and remain surprised that a lot of people are fiercely critical. I didn’t like it because it was different, I liked it because of what kind of responses it provoked in myself and my peers. It was less of a movie, and more of an experience that wasn’t always pleasant, but definitely rewarding.
Posted by JW on February 14th, 2011Yes, the word switching was a stop-gap. As was the toy plane, and just about everything ‘weird’ is actually the parents compensating for their lack of control on the outside world.
For the record, Dogtooth for me was a near-perfect film. It gets at a lot of interesting things in the world without doing it literally, and gives you the safe remove to talk about them with the weirdness and obvious extreme of the parents and children here. I think Dogtooth will be very much remembered 20 years from not, and not as a ’shock film’ but as a minor classic.
Posted by Kurt on February 14th, 2011Jay’s not here so I better turn it off?? Even without Jay this is still far and away the best podcast on the interwebs.
Posted by rjdelight on February 14th, 2011“just about everything ‘weird’ is actually the parents compensating for their lack of control on the outside world.”
Excellent point and spoken like a true psychologist, Kurt. That’s true for parental control even outside of Dogtooth. Definitely a near-perfect film indeed
Posted by JW on February 14th, 2011Also, Weird Science is fucking awesome. What the hell, guys?
Posted by Colin on February 14th, 2011I didn’t hate Weird Science, but seeing as I never saw it back in the ’80s, I think that I missed out on some of the nostalgia that might be attached to it.
I liked it when the bikers came in and ripped apart the house.
Posted by Sean on February 14th, 2011I would actually go on record that The Village is a far far superior film to Dogtooth in absolutely any aspect you could bring up, technical, acting, writing, or message.
Posted by Goon on February 14th, 2011…and just like that I actually am rewatching the Village, which I honestly believe plays a lot better when you know the twist. At least the goofier aspects are something I find entertaining, which Dogtooth never is.
Posted by Goon on February 14th, 2011“If you can’t fuck your sister, who can you fuck?”
Still freaking laughing at that; so damn funny. Guess it’s good I do not have any siblings…
I’m glad Frank and Sean backed off on Von Trier a bit as I do not think he is all that comparable to Harmony Korine. While Von Trier does make some challenging films, he also does some briliant, nearly traditional works (I think Dogville is pretty much a masterpiece). Korine does some cool things and I like some of his work, but I do not think he is in the same class as Von Trier.
It would be cool if you guys did Mr. Nobody and had Reed on. I’d like to hear his thoughts on the sci-fi elements of the film; he always has some interesting insight.
Posted by KeithTalent on February 14th, 2011I also dig Dogville.
I worked at a video store in 2004 and between Dogville and Elephant you never saw more angry returns..
Posted by Goon on February 14th, 2011JW and Kurt make great points.
I was completely immersed in the world of Dogtooth and even more so as the film goes on and more rules and odd behaviors get revealed. I also didn’t find it offensive or shocking or blatantly trying to be this way. Keeping the film fairly simple and not explaining too much is exactly why this works. I find movies that have a high concept tend to get bogged down explaining the world and how it works (Inception) and they can easily be ruined by throwing a complicated plot. Keep it simple and let the audience use their brains.
Also, Uncle Buck rules! #1 John Hughes movie in my book. John Candy’s best film.
Posted by rj on February 14th, 2011Just finished rewatching The Village and yeah, definitely stand by what I wrote there:
did a quick search for ‘village underrated’ and find it ranks no 1 on this voted list of underrated films
http://www.filmaffinity.com/en/listtopmovies.php?list_id=519
The Village’s “Bad color” and monster-pact makes so much more sense as a basic control, the society seems sustainable and something that could be passed down from generations in a Santa-Claus revelatory sort of way, Adrien Brody’s character is so much smarter as an x-factor of chaos then the security guard/whore, the parents intentions are so much more sympathetic and obvious, and they could do all this without extremes.
On top of this the acting in the Village is top notch, the cinematography is fantastic, as is the score, the use of color, all around I feel the Village is a victim of its own deceptive marketing and the audiences expectations regarding Shyamalan twists. Definitely worth re-exploring. I guess I can thank Dogtooth for making me go back there.
Posted by Goon on February 14th, 2011Oh, and Jesse Eisenberg is in it for 10 seconds an hour and 40 minutes into it. hah.
Posted by Goon on February 14th, 2011I haven’t listened to the podcast yet, and I sincerely hope that nobody on it has completely embarrassed themselves by saying that Dogtooth is in any way a bad film. I mean, that would be credibility out of the window right there.
Besides that, Dogtooth is last year’s news anyway.
Posted by DavidM on February 14th, 2011I remember really enjoying The Village, but I don’t think I’ve seen it since the theatre, so I’ll have to give that one a re-watch.
Hopefully my copy of Dogtooth shows up soon so I can watch it and see which side of the debate I am on.
Posted by KeithTalent on February 14th, 2011Frank deserves a kick in the taint for not liking Weird Science. A true 80’s classic and hilarious.
Posted by Swarez on February 14th, 2011I’m still waiting for the Criterion release of Nothing But Trouble though.
I went looking for a copy of Nothing But Trouble as this podcast played. No success.
Posted by Goon on February 14th, 2011Why is Sean exempt from the kick in the taint? I think we both liked/disliked it equally.
Like most John Hughes material it was definitely an fun, easy watch. I just didn’t think it was one of his better films.
I found the Wyatt to be too annoying to root for, he really got on my nerves. Probably my biggest problem with the movie.
Posted by Frank on February 14th, 2011Yeah, Weird Science was one of my favourites from my youth.
When Anthony Michael Hall is drunk in the back of the car after being at the blues club, it was absolute hilarity, and I’m a big fan of hilarity. Gimme de keys, I’ll drive.
Actually I just went through and read some of the quotes on IMDB and I’m laughing out loud. You guys must be crazy.
Posted by KeithTalent on February 14th, 2011Jay, congratulations on the MoMA screening! That’s amazing news. Finally, living in New York City has paid off. I’ll be there with bells on.
Frank, just wanted to commend you on your hilarious contributions to the episode. Definitely stepped it up in the tirade department in Jay’s absence. So many quotable lines.
Posted by Mark on February 14th, 2011[Didn't read the comments yet so this may be addressed already...]
The point of word-swapping in Dogtooth:
Notice that all the words (except “pussy”) that are given new meanings have to do with ways of accessing the outside world, or suggestive *of* an outside world. Telephone. Motorway. Sea. Keyboard (as in Computer+Internet).
The parent’s seemingly-random definitions are due to spontaneous damage control whenever they discover a contraband idea made its way into the kids’ heads.
I don’t see it as random language-fuckery for the sake of being odd. The family’s bizarre behaviors all stem from the parents’ original desire to “protect” their kids and “raise them right.” It led to unforeseen circumstances and consequences to be dealt with day-by-day. After 20+ years you can see how off course the original plan has gone.
I wish the Movie Club Podcast would discuss Dogtooth and Bad Boy Bubby. That one is about a 40-something guy kept isolated by his crazy mom. It’s the much better film, because the entirety of Dogtooth is essentially only the first act of Bubby. The real fun starts when he’s forced to deal with the outside world, and it with him.
Ultimately I like Dogtooth but share some of your complaints. The flat acting, purposefully arty/odd framing and decision to end the story when it does are big flaws. As far as concepts, I give it props for fully exploring the idea of “family values” turned up to 11.
Posted by Mike on February 14th, 2011note i think i would of hated this movie if it were an american film i would have that it was a pretentious look at me kind of film but since it was foreign and the actors were good and strangers i was sucked into the story throughout
Posted by cakadoodle on February 14th, 2011Greg’s honest, blunt review of Dogtooth was one of the best things ever and totally made my day. Awesome.
Posted by Falsk on February 14th, 2011I really enjoyed the last two “themed” What we Watched segments. And after listening you guys talk about Die Hard, i wanted to throw another name in the hat. How about John McTiernan, he probably would be easy since his filmography isn’t huge but there are some quality films in there.
Posted by Gord on February 14th, 2011(Spoilers)
Posted by Dom on February 14th, 2011I really liked Dogtooth. Sean had a good point when he said it was a film about ideas rather than plot and character development. I think the themes it explores make it a satisfying viewing experience. For me, the film is about control and can be seen as a metaphor for a number of relationships: parent and child, government and citizen, religion and devoted follower. Those in authority can become corrupt and will go to great lengths to retain their hold on others. This is done by keeping those dependent on you isolated and feeding them disinformation. The ending was ambiguous, but made perfect sense to me. When someone has been oppressed all their life, the urge to break free is powerful but the fear of the unknown may be even more so. That’s why we’re left to wonder if the trunk ever opens.
I can understand people not liking the movie because of the unconventional tone and disturbing scenes. But I think it’s a mistake to flat out dismiss it. Dogtooth is filled with ideas and makes you think. That’s got to count for something.
“Iron Eagle 2″ ruined “Iron Eagle” for me forever, because just knowing that…
*SPOILER ALERT*
…Jason Gedrick’s character gets killed in the first 4 seconds or so of IE2 makes me think that all the trouble that he went through in the first one was all for nothing. *sigh*
In a somewhat related question, are your hopes for a sequel diminished at all when you KNOW there’s going to be another installment after it no matter what? I always get sort of a “How important can this possibly be?” feeling in instances like “Matrix” or “Pirates” where sequels were being filmed at the same time and being released mere months from one another. It seems like often those middle films have subplots that ultimately aren’t all that important (wow, good thing Neo saved Trinity in Reloaded, just so she could die ANYWAY in the next one…), and don’t get me started on the recent trend of splitting what should be one movie into multiple parts bullshit. Anyway, I think it’s that same sort of mentality that hurt “Iron Man 2″ for a lot of people. I liked it a lot, and I like all the setup and world building that they’re doing, but again, you know that Avengers is coming, and that’s gonna be where shit gets REAL. Or something. Maybe Iron Man 2 will be forgiven a bit once the master plan plays out.
Posted by PlanBFromOuterSpace on February 15th, 2011Oh, and I wanted to chime in on the Rotten Tomatoes discussion that you had. As you pointed out, many people seem to think that the percentage is like a letter grade, but I’ve always told people that it’s more of a yes/no thing, would you recommend it or not, and that even a movie with a perfect 100% could still just be a C+ movie across the board. Their “Best Of” section is also complete bullshit. I mean, of course everyone that bothers to post some sort of review on “Aliens” TODAY loves it, and most of these films with perfect scores on that site ARE great films, but it’s not like they’re posting reviews from 1986, where I’m sure there were a fair share of critics that didn’t like it for some reason or another. The scores on that site for anything not released in maybe the last decade (or however long the site has been active and worth talking about) are so ridiculously tainted.
Posted by PlanBFromOuterSpace on February 15th, 2011Just listening to Dogtooth Discussion. A Couple thoughts. *Mild Spoilers*
1) Greg, I’ll bit on your provocation. In this area, you are indeed a Rube. This movie is not that obtuse. Back to the WWE for you, sir.
2) Did you guys totally miss that the Dance was done because the oldest girl had watched FLASHDANCE? They were just re-creating it in their fashion (and the younger girl who wasn’t clandestinely watching the VHS tapes at night, and got bored because she was not ‘ready to grow’ up…in this movie growing up is being exposed to a different point of view (oddly enough this is represented by a few 70s/80s blockbuster films) or ‘ready to take on the outside world, even if you haven’t got a clue because you’ve been that sheltered…
3)I think Frank is wrong on the Sinatra song. I don’t think he gives different ‘translation’ for the chorus, the song never gets to the chorus. I’d have to watch it again.
4)In terms of the kids being smarter. The point of the film is that the parents are protecting the kids by keeping them dumb. That they are violent is a form of expression coming out as their personality and intelligence is stilted. This is all they know. The film is a form of mental rape over a lifetime.
5) In terms of requiring every film to have a plot. Really? Really? Many of the great films eschew standard narrative. A good movie should make you “FEEL” something, and plot can only go so far towards that. Immersion is more dependent on other factors in the film.
6) What Harmony Korine (and others) do to assemble weird footage is a lot harder to make ‘good’ There are literally thousands of films doing this sort of thing, and only a few of them (Korine for instance) are watched by anyone beyond the filmmakers friends)
7) If they were all children you probably wouldn’t have the sex thing, because they’d not be in puberty yet, so no need for security-guard conjugal visits. Furthermore, the film becomes far more interesting when they’ve gotten this far with their growth stunted. There was probably no issues around the household when the kids were 8-9 because at that age, you can easily be amused and happy just around the home.
http://www.rowthree.com/2011/01/31/5-things-the-world-can-learn-from-dogtooth/
9) The best comparisons are aspects of Lynch, Kubrick and Haneke. Not seeing the Von Trier aspects either, he is typically more blunt than even here. Oh, yea, I’m a big fan of Dogville and Maderlay.
10) Word swapping. The kids aren’t talking much in the film and especially not talking much about the outside world, thus not too many of the swapped words were used in the dialogue. It is very important to be in the film, as language is how you interact with other people and the world…which is what the movie is about. The film has enough on its plate to spend a significant portion of the run time on the language. They have just about the right amount of language-swap in the movie.
Posted by Kurt on February 15th, 2011I will admit that I am liking the movie a bit more as I continue to think about it and as we continue to discuss it. I still don’t think it will ever be a masterpiece to me, but some of the things that I initially thought were sort of random do appear to have some decent thought behind them.
I did indeed miss the Flashdance thing. I guess I just assumed since there were only two video tapes and she references Rocky and Jaws, those were the only two movies she watched.
As far as the lack of plot goes, I realize it’s not always an appropriate criticism, and yes there are a lot of great movies that don’t have a conventional plot. But I think it has to make up for that by being a character piece or by focusing on atmosphere and tone, and I don’t think Dogtooth does this. What frustrated me is that it introduced a plot near the end and I was just starting to get into it and then it ended.
Posted by Sean on February 15th, 2011Greg has redeemed himself with WHOSE HARRY CRUMB. An absurd masterpiece that has been completely forgotten. Great cast in that too.
I also have a big soft spot for Armed & Dangerous.
Only The Lonely is probably John Candy’s best though.
Posted by Kurt on February 15th, 2011My guess was that the Security Guard had a more than one ‘video exchange’ over the course of the film, albeit it was not shown explicitly on screen…
Posted by Kurt on February 15th, 2011With Kurt here (surprisingly). The first few minutes of this review had me nearly screaming on the bus. Sorry guys (mostly Greg), but saying you didn’t “get” pretty much everything within the story was really grating. I know you’re not that stupid so you were either being aggressively facetious or weren’t really paying attention to the movie. Like Kurt said, it’s not that obtuse.
I kept hearing complaints from you guys and then saying, “I know that’s not really the point of the movie, but still…” The funny thing is, those complaints you brought up ARE the point of the movie. But for me were not complaints, rather strengths.
I know it may sound like shameless self-promotion (I honestly don’t mean it to be), but rather than typing three pages here, if anyone wants a rebuttal to this review piece, we talked about Dogtooth last week on our podcast and pretty much unanimously loved it:
http://www.rowthree.com/2011/02/09/cinecast-episode-201-hes-got-punch/
And yeah, I hope to do this for the MovieClub soon.
Posted by Andrew James on February 15th, 2011What I like about movies like this is that it doesn’t matter “how it all got started.” That’s for the viewer to look at and ponder on their own.
As for the “completely not believable” or “outside the realm of possibility” comments, we actually tackled this on the podcast as well. I think if anything, that is exactly opposite of how I felt. As I was watching I was thinking that this is the sort of story that I could see absolutely popping up in the newspapers one day. It would be a big media circus for about two weeks with experts and pundits talking about child rearing and home schooling and the “plastic playground” generation. These discussion alone are what make the film interesting and there is so much more than just that.
I can TOTALLY see not liking this film (possibly even boring). But calling it stupid and just a bunch of weird imagery is simply baffling to me; and frankly just not correct.
Posted by Andrew James on February 15th, 2011I dont think Dogtooth is random, I think there’s a purpose behind most of what its doing….
but I think of something like Daybreakers, where the world building is pretty superb, there’s a lot of ideas in there, and theres a plot, even if its kind of stupid or laughable or cliched. But I respect that they took their worldbuilding and ideas and wrapped it around something.
Dogtooth never wraps these ideas around anything interesting, so what you’re left with is whether or not these ideas are entertaining or interesting for the full duration of a film. Since I don’t find the film funny or strongly satirical, since there’s no performances for me to dig, since I think the visual aesthetic is shit, and since on top of everything, the worldbuilding isn’t as interesting as similar fare I’ve seen, I have to ask myself: are the ideas in the film so profound, thoughtful or original that I can look past everything else I found lacking.
And the answer is a resounding no. The interest wears off and I’m left with a hollow shell of bullshit, hence calling it out on pretention, because its execution in no way for me meets its ambition. When things arent so well explored or explained when you have this much time where nothing happens, things start seeming more random than they may be intended, and if you start seeing things as redudnant or boring, you stop caring, you tune out, and then you can leave the film not understanding things that occurred after you stopped caring, so I give Greg a pass, just as I can give the gang a pass on a lot of the Harry Potter stuff they didnt get.
Simply put, when you have the time to explore something, and you don’t, its pretty easy to call it ’stupid’. This is not Children of Men where the missing details of the world don’t matter, in this film I think a number of them do matter. If the Village could find time for motivation I don’t see why this couldn’t. The Village did it with the shot of the towns founders in an old photo all together in front of a counselling center. More than you get in Dogtooth. I suppose you may want to spin it that it the lack of explanation makes the father more of a scary monster, but I think thats cheap, considering the film is supposed to also be saying something about protection and parenting. Its having your cake and eating it too.
Dogtooth is that “My Dinner With Andre” without the dinner for me. There’s no meat on the film’s skeleton.. The film is stripped, i can see it naked, and its ugly. I think the lack of detail is making it seem “interesting” and like Frank said, making people look at it not sure what they liked about it but being intrigued enough to give it a pass.
It’s like the ending of Donnie Darko, where most people don’t really have a clue about what’s going on, or a lot of Lynch. or LOST. Having missing details leads people to speculate or assume there’s some brilliance they haven’t tapped into but must be there, or that the open endedness is the point itself and that is what makes it interesting. But the difference is those other examples have real and rich content, whereas for me, Dogtooth is rather empty, lazy, and the application of its concepts is clumsy, obvious, and even redundant.
So in those terms I feel comfortable calling the film stupid.
Posted by Goon on February 15th, 2011If you don’t think that people are willfully keeping their children ignorant, overparenting, and home-schooling for religious beliefs isn’t widespread across the world, I guess you could call this movie irrelevent…I don’t see it that way, it does what a good ‘horror movie’ or ’satire’ does. Take an aspect of society and inflate it out to the point of ridiculousness. (See Videodrome which apparently was a massively inflated scenario/response to CITY-TV showing softcore ‘baby blue’ porn flicks at 3am in Toronto)
I think Dogtooth does this magnificently, and entertainingly. I expect to watch it several times, although I’ve only seen it once at this point
Posted by Kurt on February 15th, 2011And to Andrew, if we have to get into internal believability, here’s one example where it seems to fail for me:
In the scope of the film alone, you see the parents have to give enough spur of the moment explanations of words, or deal with situations that would supposedly naturally arise, that its hard to believe they would have ever pulled off this deception for this long. It’s hard to believe they were able to keep these kids this dumb for this long.
Likewise in the Truman Show so many mistakes keep happening in the first third of the film its hard to believe sometimes they kept that deception up for that long.
But in the case of Truman Show or The Village, or Pleasantville, there’s enough of an internal struggle or breaking point in the films characters that could spark noticing the world around them is fake, whether its love of Truman’s midlife crisis and dissatisfaction with his life. In Dogtooth the characters are supposed to be so dumb and resigned and brainwashed that I just don’t buy the little action and push forward that actually DOES take place.
Posted by Goon on February 15th, 2011“If you don’t think that people are willfully keeping their children ignorant, overparenting, and home-schooling for religious beliefs isn’t widespread across the world, I guess you could call this movie irrelevent”
I’d argue that it’s irrelevant if it can’t say it any better than stuff that is already out there, and I don’t think it does that. Jesus Camp is a better horror film than this, and it doesnt need to inflate a single thing, because it actually happened.
Posted by Goon on February 15th, 2011I keep going (shut up Goon, just shut up – signed, Goon)
I guess I tend to reject satire that needs to push to extremes to try and make a point, perhaps there are exceptions, but I’m remembering the debate over Blindness we had, which also has a number of extremes to show its allegory, which I also disliked a lot of.
I think its lazy and even condescending to have to do so in this manner, and for me the best satire says things in subtler ways that are still highlight the foolishness of the people doing them. Like the Simpsons example I gave above, or a lot of stuff on King of the Hill, both in Hank Hill, Hank’s dad, Khan, and I am expecting and hoping that Bob’s Burgers will be one of those shows too since it has some KOTH alumni there.
I even think of Bob Roberts, my favorite political satire, which has some blunt elements in attacking the Republican, but also very subtle elements to pick on just how much of a pussy the Democrat candidate is. I think of Tim and Eric, which is both Zappa/Ween absurd in a lot of its concepts, but is often so subtle in its dissection on the presentation of television as a medium. Since they’re so good at both I find that show to be one of the most brilliant shows on television right now.
This is the kind of satire that rally floats my boat. Dogtooth, not.
Posted by Goon on February 15th, 2011Well I don’t disagree with you, Goon, on the subject of Bob Roberts. LOVE THAT FILM.
Posted by Kurt on February 15th, 2011I didn’t like Dogtooth. Jesus. It wasn’t interesting to me in the least. I didn’t get a lot of it. Maybe it’s not obtuse…maybe the movie is just really stupid.
Rube? Go fuck yourself.
Posted by Greg on February 15th, 2011Greg is awesome! Don’t mess with The Voice!
Posted by Double_A on February 15th, 2011Great points mike I Just want to add one more thing on your comment regarding the Sinatra song.
Even if he does give different translation, it means nothing because first of all we do not know if the father even speaks English and furthermore it just amplifies the idea that they were so brainwashed that there was no way for them to challenge the dominant father figure, even if he was obviously wrong. Aren’t most of our leaders obviously full of shit? Do you see many people (especially women) who challenge them?
Posted by kyri on February 15th, 2011Does anyone know what episode the “Sigourney’s Weaver” comment first appeared on?
Posted by rjdelight on February 16th, 2011I believe it was the Avatar episode.
Posted by Sean on February 16th, 2011Frank, I love Fausto and Renalda from Nothing but Trouble as well. My favorite line is when they are crawling from the sewer and Fausto goes “it smells like Sao Paulo”
Posted by projectgenesis on February 16th, 2011Congrats to Jay on getting into MoMA. I knew you were a cocksucker, but I had no idea you were that talented!
Posted by Matt Gamble on February 16th, 2011First off, congrats to Jay.
Second: I couldn’t believe Frank didn’t like Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. Disappointed to hear that, Frank.
Third: I don’t get all the Die Hard 4 hate. It was 80-whatever % on RT because it’s good. I agree the end is ridiculous and the jumping-onto-the-fighter-plane sequence is the lowest point of the series. The start though was great and I definitely don’t get the “superman” Bruce Willis vibe until maybe the last third or even quarter of the movie. Until then it definitely feels like a Die Hard movie, and kicks the crap out of Part 2 which was a piece of shit. The PG13 I’m sure was no choice of the director, and yeah it woulda been better if it was R, but aside from a few missing swears and squib shots (and the ridiculous fighter plane scene) it felt tonally right in line with the other movies.
Posted by Cal on February 16th, 2011Great podcast as usual, guys!
I had a bizarre coincidence listening to it the other night though…I’ve been listening to your podcast for a few months now, and working my way through the older episodes. Even though I’ve listened to about 3/4ths of them by now this week’s was the first one I heard that was missing Jay. Which was a bummer because I wanted to hear what he thought of Dogtooth. Guess I’ll have to wait for next week…
Anyway, after listening to the new episode at work I picked an older episode at random for the drive home later that night, ep. #193, the Changeling review. Not only was Jay missing from that episode too, but it was also the debut of Frank on the show, where he talked at length about his love of…Nothing But Trouble (and got a ton of shit from it from the chatroom). Pretty weird coincidence, eh?
Posted by TJ on February 17th, 2011I am totally going to go to the beauty day premiere. Congrats Jay.
Posted by Joel on February 17th, 2011Greg, what did you think about the Rock’s return?
Also, a truly underrated John Hughes film, Dutch. F’N great!
Posted by Steve Kasan on February 17th, 2011What did you guys think about Punch Drunk Love?
That was an art film many people liked, but I didn’t understand or have fun watching at all.
All the audible audiobook clips you play suck. You need some recommendations….. ‘born to run’ and ‘the big short’ both were good and had good narrators. a bit far away from movie related fodder though.
Maybe you should ditch the sponsor and do advertising instead…it would be hilarious to hear Jay reading ads with his Squidward-like delivery.
Posted by ScottHK on February 17th, 2011http://www.podtrac.com/Podcaster/podcaster-main.aspx
Bob Roberts, my favorite political satire
Posted by DavidM on February 18th, 2011Bob Roberts, my favorite political satire
Bob Roberts, my favorite political satire
Bob Roberts, my favorite political satire
Bob Roberts, my favorite political satire
Bob Roberts, my favorite political satire
Bob Roberts, my favorite political satire
OK, lengthy post here:
Dogtooth happens to be one of my favourite films of the year, but that said, I’ll agree with Greg in that the film is not for everyone.
I’m not going to argue in a matter of taste. However, I’d like to offer my thoughts on what I feel are some of the more objective elements of the film, that if misinterpreted, might harm one’s appreciation of the film. I don’t mean any condescension. These are simply my attempts to elaborate on some notions that film address in a very subtle manner.
THE VOCABULARY
Frank in particular seemed to think there was an arbitrary nature to the misnomers provided by the parents. As I see it, the misnomers were actually calculated to help ensure that the children remain ignorant of specific things the parents didn’t wish them to be exposed to. So, at the beginning of the film we get “Sea”, “Motorway” and “Excursion” – all words that would suggest travelling beyond the confines of the home, something forbidden by the parents. The rationale here is the same one that underlies the parents’ wanting to establish the fiction that distant airplanes are actually models which, at any time, might fall into the garden. The parents don’t want the children to know that aircraft are a means of transportation, and that normal people not only occasionally venture beyond their gardens, but also actually visit distant countries and cultures.
The fourth word they learn is “carbine” (“shotgun” in some translations). Presumably this word is forbidden because it represents violence, one of the “bad” influences the parents hope their children can avoid. (The irony, of course, is that stifling the children’s development, fostering sibling rivalry, and effectively imprisoning them causes the children to lash out violently at one another.)
Later in the film we learn that “telephone” has been substituted for salt. Obviously the parents don’t want the children to know that a telephone is actually a device used to communicate with the outside world. This is why they keep the household’s only phone in a locked cabinet, why the children think their mother is talking to herself when she’s using the phone, and why the elder sister doesn’t know how to operate the phone when she tries.
“Pussy/cunt” is a sexual word, again representing the “bad” influences. Seemingly the parents’ warped world view dictates that their daughters should remain ignorant of sexuality, but that it is healthy for their son to have a sexual outlet, hence them hiring Christina to attend to him sexually.
The “zombie” moment again represents a “bad” influence – traditionally associated with violence/horror – that their children would never have been exposed to. Rather than even begin to attempt to explain the notion that a zombie is a re-animated corpse, and the cascade of further questions that that you bring, the mother, off the cuff, answers instead that they are flowers, something safe and familiar.
“FLY ME TO THE MOON” LYRICS
Frank also took issue with the father’s mistranslation of “Fly Me to the Moon”, I don’t feel this moment is as logically suspect as he believes. Notably, the father actually does repeat certain phrases when Sinatra repeats them in the song. When Sinatra initially repeats “In other words” the father translates this as “the spring is flooding” in both instances. Sinatra sings “In other words, hold my hand / In other words, darling kiss me” and the father translates this as “The spring is flooding my house, the spring is flooding my little heart.” Granted the father does not substitute the same Greek word for the same English word precisely throughout the song. However, the experience of watching Dogtooth can tell you that it’s difficult to pin down a consistent translation for unfamiliar foreign words. There were several times where the films subtitles (from a UK Blu-ray edition) translated what was audibly the same Greek word in slightly different ways. Add, on top of this, the fact that these children have been condition from birth to have the utmost and absolute respect for their parent’s teachings, and that they have never been formally educated, and I you can very credibly believe that they wouldn’t pick out what holes do exist in their father’s translation.
THE DANCE ROUTINE
As a commenter pointed out, the elder sister is re-enacting choreography from Flashdance. It isn’t meant to an empty attempt at humour – rather it’s meant to manifest one way in which the elder sister’s exposure to outside cultural influences had an irrepressible, and ultimately violent impact on her understanding of the constructs of the reality in which she’s been raised. That’s not to say it isn’t also funny – especially if you recognize it as Flashdance. If there is confusion here, it’s entirely understandable, as we see Christina give her two tapes, and the films on those tapes are elsewhere clearly meant to be Rocky and Jaws. This may be an oversight by the film makers, though my girlfriend suggested that one of the cassettes may have featured a trailer for Flashdance, which might account for how she picked up the routine.
GREG’S QUESTIONS – IN BRIEF
“Why is the family like this?”
The children are robotic and infantilised, because, like dogs, they have been conditioned to achieve a very specific, very narrow world view. They have not only been denied a conventional upbringing, they have also been denied knowledge of the outside world. They have not experienced socialization in the manner of an ordinary human being. The parents have treated them like children for their entire lives, hence their childlike behaviour. In that regard, I, personally, thought the actors playing the children were very good.
As to why the parents are like that – who can say? But, despite their skewed world views, they feel what they’re doing is right and clearly love their children, however misguidedly that might manifest itself.
“What’s on the other side of the fence?”
Generally – the outside world, representative of all the dangers and bad influences the parents hope their children can avoid. More specifically, the parents have also concocted an imaginary brother to use as a cautionary instructional tool. Presumably they have told their children that they once had another son, but that he misbehaved or was disobedient, and so was banished to the other side of the fence where he lives a life of hardship, isolation and deprivation.
“Why don’t they like that cat? / Why did they bark like dogs?”
The father tells his children that cats are dangerous, child-eating predators in order to further frighten the children into captivity and dependence. The more they continue to believe the outside world is filled with danger, the less they are inclined to want to leave the household. He specifically tells him that as long as they remain in their garden and household they will be safe. But, like every lie the parents tell they must reinforce it with an elaborately constructed fiction. It’s not enough to say “Cats are dangerous, stay in the garden”, he does the “logical”, “fatherly” thing, and teaches his children how to ward off the threat of the cat by barking like dogs.
“Who was the security officer?”
Christina was employed as a guard at the father’s factory. The father made an arrangement with her out of a bizarre (but not unfamiliar) understanding that a young boy needs an outlet for his sexual urges in order to remain healthy. He seemed to think that she was a suitable candidate, and that, as an employee, she was someone he could control. Evidently he miscalculated and was careless with the respect to the influences she would have on his children.
“Why was the mom crying?”
I took this as an indication of two things: 1) It demonstrated how passionately the parents believe in what they are doing. She genuinely wants to be a good mother to her children, even if though her notion of what makes a good mother appears twisted from a ordinary point of view. When the father criticizes her she feels guilty and is genuinely upset. 2) I think it also subtly demonstrates the stress involved in trying to maintain a fictional existence for three adult children. She’s constantly having to dictate their reality as they are experiencing it, and, over time, I imagine that sort of endeavour would be mentally fatiguing.
“Why did the girl get in the trunk?”
The girl got in the trunk because she desperately wanted to escape her situation, but her understanding of the world is that the only safe way to leave the confines of the garden is an automobile. This is one of her fundamental life notions. The father explains that the children can learn to drive – that is, leave the confines of their household – “only once they have lost their dog teeth” – something that the audience knows will never happen. The seriousness with which this father maintains the charade is demonstrated when he drives the car five feet beyond the front gate to collect the toy airplane. It also explains why his wife and children bark like dogs when he’s searching for the elder sister in front of the house – so they he isn’t attacked by the lurking dangers – like cats – that exist in the outside world.
WHY IS THIS MOVIE BEING HAILED AS A MASTERPIECE?
That’s clearly a subjective question, and again, I won’t fault anyone who doesn’t share this view, but Sean in paticular seemed genuinely curious as to what all the fuss was about. Briefly, to me, Dogtooth is brilliant because I feel it succeeds in building a remarkably credible, yet disturbingly skewed world that is fascinating both as a perverse curiosity and as a densely layered work of allegory. You can interpret it literally, as being about parenting, but I think it’s also concerned with larger themes – the degree to which socialization fundamentally shapes our world views, the degree to which biology interacts with socialization in determining who we are as human beings, the dangers of xenophobia and cultural isolation, and its (metaphorically) incestuous, intellectually deleterious effects, the hypocrisy that is often latent within dictatorial regimes, etc.
Also, the parents and the world they have created for their children are, to me, some of the most original cinematic inventions I have experienced, bar none. The parents aren’t evil people – they mean well, but they are also powerfully misguided – at times very humorously so. Also, I went into this film absolutely cold, and the time I spent piecing together exactly what the hell was going on in this world, was, to me, legitimately fascinating. Sure there isn’t a great deal of plot to the film, but I was doing mental gymnastics just trying to establish the rules of the wider world in which this film exists, the rules of the household, and exactly what effects those rules were having on the people within that household. I found the later “shock” moments in the film – the incest, the violent tooth extraction – entirely justified. Also, ambiguous though the ending might be, I found entirely fulfilling. 4/4 for me.
Posted by Julian on February 19th, 2011After reading these comments, I also wanted to address the question of the parents ability to maintain their elaborate fictions in general. I think it’s important to point out that:
1) Christina is quite possibly the only visitor the children have ever known.
We know the father maintains the fiction that his wife is in a wheel chair specifically as a pretense to avoid outsiders wanting to visit their home.
2) They have a television set, but it is almost certainly not connected to an aerial or cable signal. The TV’s only parentally-sanctioned uses within the household are to display home videos, and for the parent’s pornography.
These are the reasons that I find it substantially plausible that the parents are able to maintain control of their children’s vocabulary. These children have spent virtually the entirety of their lives having without participating in social interaction, except with their parents.
If the children don’t overhear their parents using a word, there is literally no other means for them to learn – apart from the books that their parents have allowed them to read (the medical book, for instance).
Also, the reason that there are relatively few misnomers used in the film is that in the course of their day-to-day existence, within the confines of their household, there aren’t many words that the parents would need to “censor”. The vocabulary that the parents have chosen to distort is very consistently concerned either with communication and the outside world, or with sexuality and violence.
The only “spur of the moment” definitions that we see presented are caused by Christina’s unattended presences in their home, and by them having left adult video cassette case on the television. Both of these are attributable to lapses in the parent’s judgement, but I don’t read the film as suggesting that these kinds of lapses have occurred regularly, throughout the children’s lives. If anything, I read the film as hinting that the parent’s ability to maintain their fiction is slowly waning – indeed, fatally so with respect to Christina exposing the elder daughter to the video tapes that help trigger her decisive moment of rebellion.
Posted by Julian on February 19th, 2011I think if Frank would have watched Weird Science in the 80’s, he would have had a higher opinion of the movie much like his nostalgia for Police Academy, Crocodile Dundee 2, ect…
Posted by Xidor on February 19th, 2011Great to hear a podcast without the constant shifting of phlegm, saliva and mucus that listeners have to endure when Jay is around. Please, get that guy a cough button.
Posted by Franck Lloyd on February 26th, 2011Ummm…why are you assuming that the constant shifting of phlegm, saliva and mucus is coming from me?
Posted by Jay C. on February 26th, 2011Ummm…why are you assuming that the constant shifting of phlegm, saliva and mucus is coming from me?
Posted by Jay C. on February 26th, 2011Hey gents,
Finally saw this film last night. It was like a Cohen film on acid.
Is it just me or did the father look like Reed Farrington when he had his glasses on ?
Not your everyday film.
Posted by Khan Farrington, HMV Manager on April 20th, 2011Leave a Reply