O slavnosti a hostech

This simple and intelligent movie skillfully and effectively questions conformism and obedience to authority. It was made within the framework of the Czechoslovak New Wave and banned as "subversive" after the Soviet intervention in 1968. The critique developed in this movie is applicable to every society, not just Cold War Czechoslovakia, and therefore is still very topical and significant.

The plot is surrealist: a picnic turns into an interrogation, but the guests are soon escorted to a birthday party, which then becomes a manhunt for the one man who refused to participate in it. Along with conformism and silent consent of the oppressed, the movie shows how those who have the monopoly over means of coercion and violence arrogantly enjoy their power and control, how they meet people's fear and uncertainty with smugish delight. Each scene is ambiguous and filled with symbolism - every conversation, as well as many one-liners, can be interpreted outside of their context and applied to various social issues, which makes the movie additionally provocative and politically interesting.

It's a political allegory set in 1966 Czechoslovakia that was banned for many years except for a short time during Prague Spring in 1968.

The story follows a group of seven middle-class men and women having a picnic near a lake. There is a discussion about an obscure future event. At one point, they see what appears to be a wedding party dance by at a distance. They finally decide to proceed to get to the "celebration" in time.

Suddenly, the group is accosted by a significant number of men. The men are led by Rudolf (Jan Klusak). It's not clear if they are threatening or joking. Karel (Karel Mares) defies Rudolf at one point and is roughed up. Josef (Jirí Nemec) from the picnic group helps to bring peace. Then an older man in white appears. Known as The Host (Ivan Vyskocil), he welcomes everyone to his joint birthday party and wedding celebration. He reprimands Rudolph and seems to smooth everything over.

During the meal, the Host learns his guests occupy the wrong seats and that one of the men from the picnic has left. This causes great consternation, and the Host and Rudolf decide to go and find the missing man and return him to the party. They use a large dog with massive teeth to aid in the search.

The aura of threat over a façade of peace apparently offended the Czech government of the time. This is not usually my type of film, but I thought it effectively communicated its point. It was banned in 1967 because it had "nothing in common with our republic, socialism, and the ideals of Communism."

A group of happy picnickers are accosted by a group of strangers led by a bullying sadist who has an unbreakable hold over his followers. After he interrogates one of them, a stranger then invites everyone to a nonsensical, but elegant and formal banquet outdoors.

How can you beat being distinguished by being "banned forever" in the Czech Republic? That is just about the greatest selling point. As another person said, "Jan Nemec's 'A Report on the Party' is a great film from the flowering of the Czech cinema in the 1960s. It is a political thriller that satirizes unquestionable conformity."

Indeed, Czech cinema of the 1950s and 1960s is incredible, and this film (along with "Daisies") really needs to be seen by more people, particularly Americans. When we think "foreign film", we might think Italian or French, possibly Russian. With the "new wave", it is France that seems to hold that title tightly. But no one ever says they love Czech cinema. And the only reason for that can be that nobody watches it -- but they should.

The Czech film O slavnosti a hostech (1966) was shown in the U. S. with the translated title A Report on the Party and the Guests. It was co-written and directed by Jan Nemec.

This movie starts off innocently enough. Several friends are enjoying a picnic in the woods. Suddenly, about a dozen men interrupt the picnic, and, politely, but firmly, escort the group to a new location. One of the picnickers is roughed up, but no one is badly hurt.

Then, another man, who is in charge, invites the picnickers to an outdoor wedding party. The whole situation is threatening, but not terrible. Much is made of one of the picnickers who decides to leave, but the other picnickers decide to stay to enjoy the party.

This film was immediately banned when it was completed. The government knew that it was an implied attack on the authorities who ruled Czechoslovakia with an iron fist. It was released during the Czech Spring period, but then banned again after the Russian tanks rolled into Prague. It wasn't released until Soviet rule ended.

This was a difficult movie to enjoy. After the first few minutes, the plot was very tense. On a more basic level, we saw the film on an old VHS cassette, which was in bad condition, and may have been a duplicate. The subtitles were often white on white, so we missed some of the dialog.

The film has an IMDb rating of 7.1, which is pretty good, all things considered. I rated it 8 for the movie I would have seen if I'd watched it on DVD.

Masterfully lensed film. Wonderful black and white compositions with great placement of figures in the frame.

This is a fiercely anti-Stalinist work that can relate to anyone who hates unquestionable authority. It's opening scenes are pure Kafka-horror. A sadistic magistrate sent down to interrogate people just trying to live their lives seems to have absolute freedom to torment and humiliate.

Then, the magistrate is himself humiliated by a benevolent, yet all- powerful, "host". At this point the tone becomes one of blackest satire. Clearly a commentary on the post-Stalinist USSR and eastern block, the authorities "banned the film forever."