Sweet Movie

It's one of those movies, where you really question yourself how far can they push the whole thing (like the Rape in Irreversible, the "impalling" in Cannibal Holocaust and pretty much all of Saló, 120 Days Of Sodom), and why (or should it) can't that be covered with a little subtleness.

But then again, it's not a trendy shock-flick , like the Larry Clarks and the Gaspar Noés of our times. Things have their place and reason. It may get uncomfortable a couple of times, but it's always good to know that images can still affect us, other than just inducing into eating, shopping or masturbating.

Though the greatest part of this film is just how naturally strange it really is, and the great sense of humor that comes along with the whole thing. It's an extreme comedy, but they don't waste the poo jokes like the silly American Pies, they actually defecate. And, anyway, the narrative doesn't lose it's focus. The thing begins and ends as it's due.

In these times of controversial conservatives, where the J-Los gross billions on their buttocks but find it humiliating to bare a nipple on film, it's good to see that there were once different people doing different things, not really caring if their nipples were to show, if they had to drink a little urine or vomit on screen.

There are some films that are designed to shock, some designed to titillate, some that delight in disgusting the view. For Makavejev, shock, disgust and titillation are never the purpose, but a means to a form of psycho-liberation. Makavejev in Sweet Movie hurtles us head first into the confronting theses of Post-Freudian Wilhelm Reich. We are forced to confront our relationship to our primal beings. He literally smears our consciousness with faeces, vomit and carnality.

We cannot watch orgiastic scenes of regressive acts, a sensual striptease played out inches from the faces of young boys, Carol Laure masturbating in a pool of molten chocolate without a visceral reaction. We are forced to confront our own repressed desires and shine a light in the dark recesses of our own psyche.

Here is revolution at it's most personal, montaged together with lashings of wild humour. Allow your head to give up control and come along for the ride. Recommended to anyone who is willing to put their concept of themselves on the line a risk a flirtation with prurient madness.

8/10

First reaction to this challenging and astonishing film might be to pronounce it depraved or that the director is but then there is no suggestion that one will come away from this unique film a less moral person and so the accusation fails. Certainly I would like to think that for everybody there will be at least some part of this they find hard to take, indeed I don't think I would like to sit too closely to anyone who lapped up every frame. Excess of all kind on display here plus a really difficult striptease among young children. And yet, I think despite some of the more flip and seeming silliness, Makavejev is screaming out for the individual to rediscover his private and public freedom. The Soviet Union comes in for most of the kicking, but then why wouldn't it in 1974 when they were still presiding over the director's birthplace and still denying the massacre of Poles so distressingly shown in original b/w footage. Personally, having previously only encountered Otto Muehl through the films of Kurt Kren, I found his antics here the hardest to take. Here the overt element of homoerotic SM as overweight men spat and sicked up over each other seemed to go further than the catharsis of those other movies. But hey someone might find those bit's the best. Brave, bold and very well shot with a marvellous soundtrack.

...and if that statement makes sense, you should see this movie! This is a very funny movie for its first half, because one-of-a-kind director Dusan Makavejev populates his mess of randomness with the same docu-in-your-face absurdity and crude outrageous view of sex that his best film, WR, had. We meet Mr. Kapital (John Vernon, of all people, though it is not his own genitals used when the character is seen on camera with them dipped in gold) who brushes a napkin across his daughter (if it is his daughter, maybe his girlfriend, played by Carole Laure) on one side of the super loose narrative-side, and on the other Potemkin Sailor (ho-ho), who takes on board a stray, even though to have sex with her will lead to certain death.

Then there's also Jeremiah Muscle, who flaunts his black snake like it's nobody's business but the lady's, and a Hispanic singing sensation (on record only, of course, as he makes a music video with the backdrop of the Eifel tower, leading to getting stuck with another women in the act), all mixed up in a crazy lot of scenes that emphasize phallus imagery, the female form, and bright, primary colors- as Makavejev put it "a love letter to Kodak".

This isn't to say the film doesn't take more than a little- actually quite a lot of- work on the viewer to know what the hell is going on. Like WR, the director throws in a few times throughout some real found-documentary footage, only this time without much relevance to the film that the director has made around it (albeit the song used in the clips is excellent). And yet for the first half of Sweet Movie this isn't of a terrible concern, at least for one knowing that the unexpected and anarchic is all in tasteless fun. It's is a little like if there was a rogue Marxist (i.e. the awesome pipe Kapital has, and the ship's main mast) who got kicked out of Monty Python and was obsessed with genitals and went off and made an independent film.

That is, for the first half, anyway. After this, when Miss Canada/1984/whomever runs into the commune group- this is where, all of a sudden, the randomness of tasteless acts starts to try one's patience. I can even see what Makavejev was going for here without trying to add to much meaning to what it all is: the disgusting depravity with food, vomiting, infantilism, nudity, barbarism of communism as satire. But it just goes on for much too long; where the first half had little stabs of wild wit, this, along with the long sequence with Anna Planeta around the young boys, soon fall flat not because of there not being any cohesive narrative structure, but because they just aren't as captivating, or hilarious, as what came before.

It might be a tough act to follow such a crafty and controversial hybrid like WR Mysteries of the Organism, but Makavejev's method of throwing caution completely into the wind soon starts to reel into the tedious, with the exception of the sugar sex scene and Laure's naked chocolate session, which are some of the best scenes in the film. This being noted, the shards that do work in Sweet Movie make it a somewhat worthwhile viewing; certainly for those who are die-hard avant-garde cineasts Sweet Movie marks as something like an X-rated milkshake- lots and lots of nudity and pushing-the-line sexual acts done to a style that can only come out of a man with a real vision at work.

What it is precisely I can't quite say. It is, at the least, an 'experience' of its time and mood. That it's not the sort of work one would want to watch it again from start to finish for quite a long time (unlike WR) is its biggest sort of drawback.

I've seen people write that the only true Surrealist films were made in the 20's-30's with of course Bunuel's Un Chien Andalou heading the pack. Now "Sweet Movie" might not be a true Surrealist film, but I think an argument can be made that it's definitely surrealism that follows the path of the aforementioned classic from Bunuel. I've seen Jodorowsky referenced to describe it, and to me it was reminiscent of Fernando Arrabal's stuff, aside from the obvious shocking imagery and 70's vibe.

I've just watched it, and besides some symbolism (repressed/sheltered life vs "liberation"), I'm not going to champion the film as having some deep meaning behind it. There is an evident juxtaposition of innocence (Miss Virginity) and the surreal messed up journey she embarks on and the abuse she has to endure, along with interspersed Holocaust footage and a parallel tale of a supposedly Communist woman and her deviant activities and relationship with a fellow revolutionary. What ensues are scenes that are designed to shock, but Makavejev would probably say that he wanted to "Freudian out" with it. Despite the plethora of shock scenes, there are definitely humorous parts and it's all done in a lighthearted manner to me).

I didn't think it was great, as it was too much of an amalgamation with no strong substance, but it still works for what it was (see above) and besides being offbeat it had an inviting festive vibe (combined with the exploitation!). I suppose art-house exploitation is a proper title.