Steak

It's surreal. It's bizarre. It's darkly funny. It's got a killer soundtrack. The wardrobe is memorable. The choreography with the handshake - spot on. Cinematography is on point and absolutely gorgeous. That shot at the start where the police take him away? That sunset? Amazing. The performances - perfect level of mostly serious humorous. Comedy that's not forced or in your face. It's like the comedy equivalent of an avalanche. Starts small. Takes forever to build. Will probably suffocate an entire town in snow.

And the soundtrack - it slaps. It's so dang good. Each track is fun and different and great.

This movie is just the best - that being said, it's most certainly not for everyone.

Quentin Dupieux is a writer and director known for his very unique sense of humor, which can be best described as comedy of absurd and surreal situations that appear to be rather real and sincere as far as the acting and overall tone is concerned. Of course this specific sense of humor is not for everyone, but if you like his other more famous movies like Rubber or Wrong, you will probably like this one as well.

As a fan of Dupieux' work (having watched all of his other movies) I was very excited to watch his first feature film Steak, which appearently can only be watched in French with English subtitles to this day. Since my French is not that good I hesitated first, but my curiostiy was much stronger and I didn't regret it.

The movie starts rather slowly and humor-wise rather untypical for Dupieux. During the first 15 minutes I felt a little disappointed, since the focus is more on goofy slap-stick-humor instead of surreal dialogues. But after those initial 15 Minutes the movie gains back its Dupieux-esque qualities that made me love his other work. Unfortunately, this type of humor usually only knocks my socks off if I hear the dialogues in my native language, since they lose much of their surreal sincerity and authenticity in a foreign language. However, just imagining how the dialogues might sound and feel in my native language made me die laughing.

The ideas and situations are just as good and well written as in his other movies, yet his other movies are much better crafted, especially the sound-design and cinematography. The story is, like in other Dupieux-movies, not a stroke of genius but it serves as a good framework for the dialogues to fit in and slowly lead the viewer somewhere.

All in all, I can recommend this movie to anyone who likes absurd experimental comedy (like Dupieux' other work) and who has no problem watching this in French with English subtitles, risking that some gags might not be as funny as in your native language.

It's full of different analysable layers. It creates a new world with new rules and norms out of our unjust world, which is again supe chaotic and unjust!

In this new world, empathy has no place! Even the mother figure play a paradoxical role with the least empathy possible.

I made an account just so I could comment.

After a long time fan of Ed Banger and Mr. Oizo I decided to finally watch his movies, starting with this one at it did not disappoint.

Essentially Analog Worms in Video Form.

10/10 would watch again.

Chivers

This movie has one of the most interesting distributions of "votes" I have ever seen on IMDb. As of this date approximately the same number and percentage (23%) of voters think this is a "10" as think it is a "1" (with the balance evenly distributed in between). Clearly a movie you either love or hate! My vote was "1 (Awful)" and I honestly can't conceive what anyone who voted "10 (Excellent)" could possibly say to justify such a vote.

The story line is very minimal. Two "losers", played by Eric and Ramzy, want to belong to the "cool" high school group - the Chivers. The latter is a group of males who strive to be "perfect" - with plastic surgery, shallow girlfriends, non-smoking etc. Beyond this concept there isn't any plot per se, simply a number of inter-changeable incidents all showing that Eric and Ramzy are too much losers to ever fit into the group. The incidents aren't very original and you would need an IQ below room temperature not to foresee where they were going or how they would end. These carry on until, lacking any character or plot development, the screenwriter simply tosses in an ending. Obviously a counter argument would be that this is all a "brillant" satire on high school conformity and I've simply missed the point. To paraphrase LLoyd Bentsen's old political zinger "I knew satire and you are no satire". Look to "Heathers" or for that matter even "Animal House". There you have a variety of believable, if misfit, characters, unforeseen plot twists, character development throughout the film(s) and witty dialog. Regrettably all are lacking in STEAK.

There is no appreciable "acting" to comment on. Eric and Ramzy basically play one note characters similar to their other movies, sweet stupid and excitable stupid respectively. That does not change from beginning to end. The Chivers may seek conformity but unfortunately it is a very boring conformity with no distinct performances. Needless to say all the actors were 15 to 20 years too old for their roles. I watched Eric and Ramzy in "La Tour Montparnasse Infernale" and would rate it a "5". In retrospect one of the main distinctions of that film was a far more interesting supporting cast. I can't think of a single supporting actor in STEAK who generated much interest.

The technical credits, on the DVD I watched, were professional.

Obviously there is some market for Eric and Ramzy's "all stupid all the time" routine. I can only think of the reviewer of "La Tour Montparnasse Infernale" who, rating it 9 out of 10, explained that it got funnier the more alcohol he/she drank. I had the misfortune to see STEAK stone cold sober. Is it possible that the 23% of the voters who ranked it a "10" might have had a little alcoholic stimulus before they voted? P.S. the answer to the riddle was that the movie ended (84 minutes) before I laughed.