Jídlo

Very funny surrealist partially animated dark comedy. It is divided in three segments with independent weird situations: breakfast, lunch and dinner. The first one is by far my favourite, and I would give it a 4.5. I laughed out loud! Luch is also good, and reminds me the style of another famous film by Svankmajer, Virile Games/Manly Games; however, it is the less impressive, and I rate it with a 3.5. The dinner segment, the shortest, have a 4.0 and it is quite funny and cheeky.

Jan Svankmajer is the most unusual stop-motion filmmaker whose work I have seen. Instead of the typical models which are brought to life using this method, Svankmajer takes everyday objects or creepy stuff he's found, perhaps, in antique shops to create films that are truly unique.

I hate reviewing the films of Jan Svanmajer, as each time I see one of his films I am convinced that it's THE weirdest film the man has ever made. And yet, time and again, I find I am wrong, as some other film of his turns out to be even weirder. This is definitely true of "Food"--a truly bizarre and fanciful film that is really impossible to describe--you just need to see it for yourself. I will TRY to briefly explain what the film is like. As in other Svankmajer films, this one uses stop-motion but in this film it's mostly to animate people--making them move in a very jerky and robotic manner. What, exactly, they do is beyond belief but always involves the eating process. It consists of a segment about several different meals and all are VERY creative and ultra-strange--so strange that you might want to show this one to others. And, unlike a few of his films, this one is okay to show to most kids--it's creepy but in a very cartoony way. And, interestingly, it also uses some claymation which is blended into the characters. Very much worth seeing--especially if you are a bit weird yourself (which I happily am). I assume that this is NOT for everyone's taste.

Not to be missed!

This film is one of the tightest most beautiful short films I have seen, as well as being one that truly forces you to think . From an animator who has delivered so many incredible films ,I see this as a true center piece for his constant trials with censorship authorities. Using food itself as a social commentary for poverty and oppression, Jan is able to make us both visually intrigued while still delivering an intellectual point,something rare in todays world of film.

It's an apt title and solo-focus for Food to be a Jan Svankmajer short; he's obsessed with it, in case you couldn't tell from his other movies (it's used sometimes to ridiculous amounts in Little Otik), and in both playful and gleefully deranged ways. In this short we see his knack at mixing live-action and stop-motion as two gentlemen at a table have plates of food and eat them up... then they eat the forks, then the plates, then the table, then the chairs, not to mention their clothes, and we see how their mouths suddenly flip over to stop-motion for just that bit of mastication and then back to the real human forms. There's also the great bit with the man as a kind of cash-register of food as people sit down and at the flick of a button on his jacket get plastic forks and other things to munch down on their lot of good. Sometimes its disgusting, and at the end when actual body parts get in the mix of things (including, not too undeservedly, a penis and testicles, which actually are the dividing line that isn't crossed) it's downright crude, but it's downright raunchy and crazy and quintessentially Svankmajer. The icing on the cake, of course, is the Blue Danube used as the two naked men munch on their table.

The film goes as the summary tells but it is much more than that. Otherwise it would be another boring idea with no details. The major focus is on the lunch, other meals appearing to be only preface and epilogue, which is pacing faster and faster to reach a point of craziness at one time dumbfounding and mesmerizing. The contest and contrast between two diners are not on how fast we can eat but on what can be eaten and how do we eat them.

This short piece is a good example because the audience feels that it refers to something which cannot be clearly identified, thus allows for multiple explanations. You can substitute 'eat' with various other words, to see what you get there, and you are no where near the director's idea. Maybe he didn't have one at all!