Spanking the Monkey

Writer/director David O. Russell gives us a disturbing look at a dysfunctional family. Turn your head, Granny. Incest, masturbation, sexual impropriety and a family failing in communication, honor and respect. A promising pre-med student(Jeremy Davies) returns home from his freshman year at MIT to tend to his bedridden, mentally unstable mother(Alberta Watson)while dear old dad(Benjamin Hendrickson)is engaged with extended 'business trips' that allows him to practice adultery. Davies is caught up in a wad of sexual confusion. The family dog keeps interrupting the young man's attempts at self gratification. A young neighborhood girl(Carla Gallo)accuses him of rape after some heavy petting. Mom is attractive and needs some attention. The dutiful son ends up drinking with his mom and next comes the horizontal bop. This totally drives a stake into his secret fixation on his domineering mother. This dark comedy flirting with taboo subjects is disturbing as much as it is interesting. Now time to go spank the......

The climax it where it's at in this movie; didn't see it coming the first time I watched the film. Plenty of nice shots and solid character development. Funny and at times painful to watch, but definitely makes you think. The characters are written well and are performed admirably by the cast (with an early role for Jeremy Davies).

Great movie to watch in the middle of the day, with the pacing slow relative to many movies. But it works, and it makes the payoff all the more rewarding. The interactions feel so real. This is as good as it gets for under $100,000.

This is a film whose title and poster not only give nothing away but actually mislead. The name Spanking the Monkey – a euphemism for masturbation – makes you think this must probably be a bawdy teen sex-comedy, while the poster depicts the picture of a real smart aleck. Both factors are bizarrely inappropriate, as the title, while mentioned once in the passing, is pretty much irrelevant, while the guy on the poster in no way reflects the character in the film who is anything but confident. Overall, this is a movie whose content is a very different proposition to its marketing. And perhaps that is because the material here is pretty difficult and challenging to say the least. I'm sure this must have stoked up some controversy in its day. After all, it deals with one of the ultimate taboo areas – incest; although, in this case it is admittedly of the consenting kind. It explores the troubling idea of the Oedipal Complex, via a sexual relationship between a mother and her son. It pulls off the impressive trick of simultaneously not pulling its punches, while still exercising a certain restraint. Material like this is so tricky that it needs very careful execution and David O. Russell, in his directorial debut, shows impressive ability to do just that.

It's about Ray, an introverted college student, who has a disastrous summer. He is coerced into looking after his bed-ridden mother by his uncaring, immoral salesman father. She is overly dependent on him not only physically but emotionally as well and soon is encouraging an unhealthy relationship. At the same time Ray is developing a very awkward relationship with a neighbouring girl and hanging out with old friends who antagonise him.

It's a drama about discomforts. Ray lives a life of humiliations at every turn. His father bullies him, his mother manipulates him, his girlfriend makes him feel sexually inadequate and his friends display little respect for him. Even his dog seems to antagonise him by constantly interrupting him while he has a, shall we say, moment with himself. It's a drama with a fair bit of black comedy sprinkled throughout. At heart it's about a very dysfunctional family. It works so well because of the characters and acting. Everybody is well-drawn and convincing, which is important given the extreme areas that the film explores. In particular, Jeremy Davies is really very good as Ray. He is definitely a sympathetic character who finds himself lost in a messed up situation that he struggles to find a way out of. Alberta Watson is also excellent in the role of his mother. She is an alluring presence and like Davies strikes the balance just right in what is also a very tricky and complex role.

Given the budget limitations ($80,000), "Spanking the Monkey" manages to hold interest albeit with some poorly chosen scenes.

The core of the movie is the relationship between mother and son. The rest of the cast exists to point the way to the inevitable.

The philandering, materialistic, self absorbed husband/father illuminates the barren marriage.

The fumbling sexual attempts of the son with the girl next door and her contradictory accusations of his sexual attempts as either too rough or not rough enough (gay), understandably confuse the son and provide the mother with a mentoring, nurturing sexual role for her son about how to sexually succeed with women.

The mother, stumbling upon a bedroom sexual session between the son and the girl next door, reacts more in jealousy than in any maternally disproving fashion.

The mother's flirtatious ways with the male neighbors, doctors, and ultimately with the girl next door's father point out that while she may be her son's mother, she is still a very desirable woman in the eyes of the rest of the male world.

From the beginning through the end, you never believe the son and mother ever had a mother/child bonding. Both of them are intellectually superior, highly educated. The mother was young when she gave birth and she thinks of herself as her son's educational, intellectual and ultimately sexual mentor, not his mother.

The teenage son's inability to "spank his monkey" combined with the boredom, liquor and medications downed by his mother provide the explosive elements that are just waiting to be lit. The mother's seductive smile and a slight hiking of her nightgown set off the explosion.

This movie is nowhere near perfect, but it's compelling enough to let you sit through the unnecessary (e.g. stoner friends) and that's a lot more than you can say for most movies with a budget that is a thousand times greater.

The title "Spanking the Monkey" derives from an American slang expression for masturbation. The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals will doubtless be relieved to learn that no monkeys were spanked during the making of the film.

The Wikipedia entry for the film describes it as a "black comedy", which surprised me. There is little that is comic, even blackly comic, about it. It is rather one of those independent dramas about bickering, self-tormenting, dysfunctional American families. (See also "Lymelife", "Margot at the Wedding", "The Lifeguard" and many others). The main character is Ray Aibelli, a young man in his early twenties. He is a medical student who has just finished his first year at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He has been offered an internship with the Surgeon General's department, a much sought-after appointment, but has had to turn it down, at his father's insistence, to look after his mother who has broken her leg.

Ray has a difficult relationship with his father, Tom, a travelling salesman whose job means he is often away from home. He has little sympathy with Ray's academic aspirations or his choice of medicine as a career and resents having to pay his college fees. Tom's relationship with his wife Susan is equally difficult, and he takes advantage of his frequent absences on business trips to cheat on her with prostitutes.

Ray's relationship with his mother is closer, although he is unhappy about being unable to take up his internship. There is little to do in the small town where he lives. He tries to get in touch with old friends from school, but finds that they are childish and immature with little in common with him. He dates a local teenager, Toni, but she is too young for him and their affair does not get very far. And then comes the development which has made this film notorious. A sexual attraction grows up between Ray and Susan and they have an incestuous relationship.

Some will find the very idea of a film about incest distasteful. This is not just because incest is widely regarded as immoral and is illegal in many countries. There are many other illegal or immoral human activities which do not evoke the same reaction. Murder, for example, is almost universally condemned as the most heinous of all crimes, but there are a vast number of films which involve at least one deliberate killing compared to the very few about incest. It is as if the cultural taboo against incest extended to writing, talking or even thinking about it, whereas we are perfectly free to write, talk or think about murder provided that we do not commit it.

Despite this cultural taboo, there have been some very good films on the subject. The two I am particularly thinking about are Louis Malle's "Le Souffle au Coeur" and Bertolucci's "La Luna", both of which, like "Spanking the Monkey", dealt with mother/son incest. I would not rate David O. Russell's film as highly as either of those, but it does have its points of interest. There are no major stars in it, which is not surprising; even in 1994 a Hollywood big name would not have got out of bed, much less signed up to do a movie, for $200,000, which was the film's entire budget. Nevertheless, you don't always need big names to make a well-acted movie.

All three of the main roles are well played. Benjamin Hendrickson as Tom probably has the easiest part to play because Tom is a straightforwardly unsympathetic character, a cold, selfish and domineering man who always puts his own needs and interests before those of his wife or son. Jeremy Davies as Ray and the late Alberta Watson as Susan have a more difficult task. Their characters, after all, are breaching one of our most basic taboos, and yet it is important that the audience should, if not necessarily sympathise with them, at least be able to understand their motivation. I think that, to a large extent, Davies and Watson succeed in this task. Even if this film is not in the same class as Malle's or Bertolucci's, it is considerably better than many "dysfunctional family" films- certainly better than the three I named in my second paragraph. 6/10.