Avis des utilisateurs

This short film is incredibly Lynchian. It's purely a signature of style, and I mean that in the most positive way possible. However, I can't help but wonder, if this short came from anyone else who lacked the renown which Lynch has, would it be viewed as anything more than a peculiar piece that you pass by after five minutes? It's good in its eerie, dream-like quality, truly, but I'm torn as to whether this is noteworthy solely because of what it is in style or simply because of who made it--content aside. I suppose I'm at a stalemate of neutrality on this one. Draw your own conclusions, and I hope you enjoy, either way!

Dialogue is always pointlessly on the verge of collapse, but never does.

Standing next to most films, "What Did Jack Do?" is utterly absurd. But alongside David Lynch's work, it is actually rather tame.

This short movie from the notoriously surreal auteur premiered in 2017 at Paris' Fondation Cartier pour l'Art Contemporain. It then arrived at Netflix in early 2020, making it Lynch's first original contribution to the streaming site.

At seventeen minutes long, "What Did Jack Do?" has a cast of four. Lynch plays a detective and Emily Stolfe a waitress. Meanwhile, a capuchin monkey named Jack Cruz takes the titular role, and a chicken named Toototabon is also credited as herself. Oddly enough, the monkey gets most of the lines, as the plot focuses on Lynch's character interrogating the creature during a murder investigation.

The dialogue between Lynch and his primate co-star is the kind of witty sharp stuff that we've come to expect out of his this unique writer/director. The only difference is that, this time, half the conversation comes from the mouth of an exotic animal, who cusses, jests, and delivers impassioned soliloquies against Lynch's steadfastly hard-boiled law man. Late in the film, Jack even sings a cut-away musical number.

Of course, it is not actually Jack speaking or singing these lines, but some uncredited voice actor. To visually pull this off, a human mouth is digitally pasted onto Jack's unassuming face. Does it look believable? Not quite. In fact, it looks no better than a Snapchat filter. However, when we're watching a capuchin monkey defend himself against criminal accusations with no explanation, we're embracing the uncanny enough to easily accept such visual inconsistencies.

Otherwise, "What Did Jack Do?" is aesthetically simple. It's mostly crosscutting mid-shots between Jack and the Detective talking across a table. Cinematographer Scott Andrew Ressler filmed in black and white with hazy edges to seemingly emulate classic film noir.

After all, Lynch clearly pokes fun at the noir style with this short. The script could very well be a scene from a genuine crime drama, but when one of the characters is of a different species, the whole thing becomes a gag. With hilarious outcome, it demonstrates how over-the-top some movie dialogue can be, as the prototypical detective retains a straight demeanor, coolly dragging on his cigarette while listening to a monkey talk about life, love, and loss.

Again, it is a strikingly weird piece of cinema, but coming from the man behind "Eraserhead," "Twin Peaks," and "Mullholand Drive," "What Did Jack Do?" could be far more esoteric than it is. The mere fact that we can follow this short film's manifest content proves that it is a conservative-leaning Lynch project.

Then again, my interpretation could be completely wrong. Lynch might've not had noir on his mind at all here. Alternatively, he might be making a statement about language, evolution, society, the id, or any other aspect of humanity.

Or, he might just be having some fun with a camera and a monkey.

Either way, we are left laughing.

If you're into a noir aesthetic, a surrealist script, and, yes, a talking, cussing, singing monkey, look no further! What Jack did was perfect.

I loved Twin Peaks. Full of odd mystery. So I saw this was a David Lynch film and knew I was in for the odd. I'm not sure what to make of it. That was probably his intention. But one thing I noticed but haven't seen talked about was that the dialogue was a string of cliches. Makes me wonder why - what meaning is he conveying by that. I was glad it was short because it was strange and I couldn't figure out what he was doing with it. He loved to put out puzzles. And I hate it when I feel that I'm not up to the challenge.

I loved this film! I suppose there is a point--a commentary on mainstream movie dialogue being so rote that a monkey could be cast or something?--but I don't care if I get it or not. It was just charming and funny.

What did I just watch? And how high should one be to understand it?

I loved this short film. It is very creative. Maybe I am reading too much into things, but I see this film as a satire on the hackneyed state of the English language. Lynch is making fun of the way many people speak. He is also indirectly criticizing the way many screenwriters write. His basic premise: Even monkeys can be trained to speak movie dialogue, because the dialogue in so many films is filled with cliches.

At 17 minutes, anybody can watch this...but I feel it's a game because everybody thinks they can devote 17 minutes of their life to this but as you watch it you realize that 17 minutes is a REALLY long time and it's a game to see if you can hold out until the end. Wow.

Probably has already been said but... Toototabon is the greatest femme fatale to ever grace the silver screen.

What Did Jack Do? Is just peak David Lynch - totally bizarre, oddly captivating, and somehow funny without making any traditional sense. It's 17 minutes of Lynch interrogating a talking monkey (yes, seriously) about a murder, shot in moody black and white like an old-school film noir fever dream.

If you're a Lynch fan, this will probably hit that surreal sweet spot. The dialogue is intentionally awkward, the monkey's mouth is hilariously off-sync, and the whole thing feels like it came from another dimension. It doesn't really go anywhere, but that's kind of the point - it's all about the mood, the absurdity, and the strangely compelling weirdness of it all.

It's not for everyone. If you like clear plots or expect answers, you'll probably be left scratching your head. But as a strange little art piece with a great title and a talking monkey named Jack, it's definitely something.

The film is a load of tosh but somehow it's charming enough to watch to the end and only feel mildy annoyed

In a train station booth, a cop interviews a murder suspect. The cop is David Lynch and the suspect is a monkey. They smoke and talk in dialogue that often doesn't make sense but yet somehow holds together. It is essentially the type of film that you expect it to be if you've seen anything from David Lynch - and it is the type of film that will annoy you if you haven't seen his work, or if you dislike him.

I do not mean that to come over to suggest that those that 'get it' are better than those that don't like it - not at all, mainly because there is nothing here to 'get'. Rather, if you like his offbeat style and tone, then this is a pleasing little short because of how it enjoys itself by being that way. The old 1940's style to the look is nice, but it is the dialogue that engaged and amused; at times it is too silly to stand, but it holds together well and provides just enough frame for the absurdity not to collapse the film inwards. There isn't more to it than that; no great narrative or commentary, just David Lynch doing what he enjoys and producing the sort of oddity that I like from him.

An experiment, written, directed, and acted by david lynch. Lynch discusses recent events with a talking monkey. In a suit. It's mostly nonsense. Sometimes the answers match the question, sometimes they don't. It's silly and creepy, but fun. Apparently, there was a murder, but nobody knows what's going on. Lynch and the monkey don't actually seem to be in the same room during the interview, as the camera is always on one or the other, in a close-up. At the end, the monkey even sings a song! And then runs out of the room. It's all done in seventeen minutes. Funny stuff. Is it a commentary on film-making, or just a fun, silly Monkey-Noir ?

When I first watched this movie I loved it so much that I put it on another 3 times straight after. What did Jack do? Really changes a man's soul after watching it 4 times in a row.

Not sure to give it anything more than a 6 as the dialogue comes across as the sort of conversation you'd have with a natural language program (written with Tom Waits in mind). There is a story, but it does feel clunky, and there is that end. I'd still recommend watching it though as it very 'Lynch'.

I love every minute out of that short. Why? Let me explain. It gives us a simple story, a cop who questions a bad guy who did something bad, seems familiar? That's because it's meant to be like that! Lynch is exposing that cliche dialogue scene, which is used in every crime movie. This quick scene uses absurd to critique the language of cinema and give us some good laughs.

Of course there are people who don't like his humor, but I'd heard they've been seen with chickens.

I would say my reaction to this short was that it was...okay. Either as a satire or parody, it didn't break much, if any, new comic ground. Or even evoke a chuckle, really.

I'd call myself a fan of Lynch, though not a superfan. I enjoy most of his work but don't really consider this a particularly good example. One major problem I did have with it was that he did a bad job editing it in places, especially in the unnecessarily long pauses between the backs-and-forths in the dialogue. It was just annoying. There were a couple places toward the end where they were appropriate to suggest classic noir self-reflection, but for most of the early running time, these pauses just held on a little too long to work in a professionally-edited piece.

Also, the integration of the mouth with the monkey was very well-done...except during the musical number, where it became distractingly obvious.

Lynch once again proving what a hack he is. Either that or he is just performing some kind of trollish social experiment where he sees how low he can set the bar while still having a bunch of lemmings sing his praises about what a brilliant genius he is.

I'm not sure what i just watched. I'm not sure if i liked it or not. I'm not sure I'm going to trust my brother when he tells me what to watch on Netflix ever again. However i feel a bit like something very important happened in my life in the past 17 minutes.

My Rating : 6/10

Absurd, odd, maybe funny but definitely living in a surreal world - reminded me of Eraserhead.

17 minutes short - good enough for a one-time viewing I suppose.

Laughing at this pointless waste of celluloid, not with it. This is the offspring of a kindergardener's rambling, made up short story & a Fellini plot on LSD. I guess some people can read a gum wrapper & contemplate the secrets of the universe, but this short is not esoteric, not avant garde, not deep.....it's just dumb. Someone needs to say the Emporer is not wearing any clothes.