Man Bites Dog
Sat July 18th, 2015
Been meaning to see this for a while now. A black and white low budget “mockumentary” about a serial killer. Definitely original in its concept, it isn’t heavy handed with any morals. I can see this type of film inspiring many copycats...Film wise.
It does invite further analysis though. What was the original concept? What kind of film could a low budget crew create and still have an impact? Mockumentary seems to be the easy way out. What kind of mockumentary would garner interest? We seem of have a fascination with serial killers (we as in “this so called society ugh”). This all leads to the inevitable conclusion of a film like this existing. Maybe I haven’t seen, or made enough films, but it seems very hard to screw something like this up, filmically. Although I have no idea why they tried to humanize the guy, his family and friends. Is it some “they live among us” kind of idea?
However I believe there are shortfalls to this film. They went for the brutal realism of serial killing, but perhaps a more abstract route would have benefitted the film. Of course that requires a bigger budget.
What do I mean by this?
So all the situations portrayed in this film were kind of plain, as far as the killings were concerned, it’s the type of things we see all the time in the media. This might be symptomatic of what’s being shown nowadays. Argument for media desensitization. Make no mistake though, the nonchalant manner of the killers are horrifying and monstrous. Strangling, shooting, blunt force trauma to head ...etc.
How would I improve on this?
I really don’t want to dwell on this too long, for fear of gazing into abyss too long. There should be other motivations for killing, other than just money, misogyny, xenophobia. It should have called into question the abstract concept of killing for joy, the character in question never seems manically overjoyed in his killings. He comes off as a kid following a trend because he thought it was cool, not because he actually wanted to do it. His nonchalance enforces that premise.
Ideal Scene:
So throughout the movie, there are hints of his maniacal joy, and pleasure from killing. His psychopathy becomes blatant. Some conflict arises and the film crew decides they need to kill the guy. An et brutus moment, they all stab him repeatedly. But there isn’t betrayal in his eyes, a grin spreads on his face, blood soaked teeth, deep-set eyes. He’s enjoying his own murder, he takes the knife, begins stabbing himself, while laughing, while reciting one of his shitty poems. Some horribly innocent stanza. (the birds so lovely in spring, singing to me, and endless ring) The joy is primal, endemic, and completely incurable. Pure id, it’s a commentary on psychopathy, horribly cynical because what it’s stating is that there isn’t anything to be done for people like this, they came out wrong, it’s a lovecraftian terror, and the only solution is the capital punishment.
What does that mean?
Well I think I might be fucked up. Or maybe just read too many things with the joker. I never thought a movie about a serial killer would leave me wanting more. The movie was stylized violence, but little substance in the end.