Ben at Work

Man Bites Dog (Rémy Belvaux, André Bonzel & Benoît Poelvoorde, 1992)

From the country that has culturally enriched us with Jean-Claude Van Damme, the saxophone and mayonnaise on chips, Belgium’s dark comedy Man Bites Dog remains a significant work that has left a lasting impression upon the found footage format and the mockumentary film.

Originally called C’est arrivé près de chez vous (It Happened Near Your Home), Man Bites Dog is a disturbingly comedic treatment of a small film crew capturing a fly-on-the-wall documentary on serial killer Benoît Poelvoorde; better known as Ben. The film shines a satirical spotlight on Ben’s world; along with his heinous influence upon his documentarian entourage. As the film draws closer to Ben, the distinction between the subject matter and his observers becomes increasingly blurred. The film crew become complicit in the crimes; while Ben becomes even more involved in the documentary, by becoming its producer.

While chronicling Ben's crimes, the film also depicts the more tender side to him; showcasing his relationships with family and friends. Ben proves to be a charismatic individual with a penchant for the fine arts, philosophy and boxing. Like all murderous psychopaths, Ben feigns empathy, sympathy and respect for most people. In the film, it's used for comedic effect. While lamenting over his latest victim, he confesses to burying two Arabs nearby; facing Mecca.

Shot in 16mm black and white, Man Bites Dog mixes cinéma vérité with the snuff film. The film’s gritty and raw look compliments its theme perfectly. Plus, many of the actors use their real names, which adds to the film’s sense of realism. Scenes with Ben’s family are his actual family; unaware of the type of film they are starring in.

Following the murder of a female passenger on a train at the beginning, the film shifts to Ben preparing to dispose of a corpse into a canal. Ben’s candidness towards Rémy Belvaux’s film crew, where he shares his expertise in dead body disposal, establishes the film’s underlying tone and twisted sense of humour.

Benoît Poelvoorde: There’s a ballast ratio for corpses: Three times body weight
for an average adult like this victim. But for children and midgets, it's different. Kids are lighter. So, it's four times body weight. What?

Rémy Belvaux: Never had problems?                   

Benoît Poelvoorde: No. Midgets are heavier, so you double the weight. Midgets have denser bones, so you double the weight. For old people, multiply by five. Old bones are porous.

As well as murder being his living, Ben takes pride in the innovative methods he employs in extinguishing the very life of his victims. After being invited into an elderly woman’s apartment, he discovers a box of heart medication on her coffee table. He induces a heart attack by shouting in her ear. As she succumbs to shock, he derives satisfaction from not having to waste a bullet on “Granny Snuff”.

Ben places a greater priority on the elimination of the elderly population as they typically possess greater financial resources than younger individuals. But he doesn’t alway adhere to his code of murder. Ben commits a home invasion in a well-to-do suburb; killing a married couple and their young son. This was to prove to his accomplice film crew that he is capable of being amongst the most notorious serial killers in history.

The central theme of Man Bites Dog is the gradual complicity of a group of impoverished student filmmakers in killer Ben’s sickening crimes. Initially subtle, their involvement escalates from assisting with the disposal of a corpse, using their equipment to track a person, and ultimately, gang-raping a woman before mutilating her and her husband. This shocking turn of events turns this twisted comedy into a sobering depiction of evil. The film can be interpreted as a commentary on the media’s impact on society. It questions the point at which impartiality is abandoned and the extent to which the media is willing to compromise its principles given the circumstances. However, an archive interview with its directors suggests that Man Bites Dog is intended to be a meta-film on film making rather than media as a whole. The scene in which Ben and company encounter another film crew also following a killer is an obvious example, and down right hilarious. It is likely that this inspired a similar scene from Shaun of the Dead (2004).

Man Bites Dog is a remarkable mockumentary that bridges the gap between This Is Spinal Tap (1984) and The Blair Witch Project (1999); in terms of genres and technical execution. It stands out in the genre for its ability to elicit laughter while simultaneously evoking a sense of moral revulsion. This dual effect is a rare achievement, particularly for a film that appeals to a desensitised audience. Consequently, it is highly recommended for viewers who are not easily offended by its disturbing scenes.

Along with being available on a far too expensive Australian Blu-Ray, you can watch Man Bites Dog for free on YouTube.

Our Flag Means Death

Punishment Park (Peter Watkins, 1971)

Andrew Legge's LOLA (2023) has had me fiendin' for other alternate timeline films lately. With some digging, a name synonymous with this theme is Peter Watkins. Only managed to catch two of his films so far, and they've both turned out to be amazing discoveries. The once banned BBC mockumentary The War Game (1965) is a shocking film regarding a nuclear attack happening in Britain; an eye-opening pre-cursor to the utterly terrifying eighties docu-drama Threads (1984). The other film is Punishment Park (1971), a cinéma vérité take on US dissidents and alleged insurrectionists being tried by a tribunal court; followed by them being hunted by police officers and the National Guard. Both highly impressive films, but Punishment Park gets the dedicated coverage here as it's the most intrguing of the two for your host. Also, it's because I'm a fan of films where people are being hunted, like Turkey Shoot (1982).

Like the film's diametric political factions, Punishement Park is divided into two groups: one is about  a collective trial in a military tent; the other, is about a previously sentenced party, deprived of food and water, on a three day hike in the dangerous heat in the Californian desert; their attempt is to reach the Star-Spangled Banner. If they capture the flag within the allotted time they are acquitted of their crimes. This is Punishment Park. Prior to this, the prosecuted party are offered the choice: serve their sentences in a federal penitentiary, or take the three day run? Punishment Park is the obvious choice for them all. If they fail; it's straight to jail, regardless, or a fate that's much worse.

Cinéma vérité to the core. The cast is comprised of both professional actors and amateurs playing it unrehearsed and improvised. Their words are their true opinions. Well done to folk singer and defendant Nancy Smith, for being so excrutiatingly annoying during her hearing that any sympathy I felt for her comrades went completely out the window; even after defense attorney, James Daley went all Perry Mason with his killer closing statement:

James Daley, Defense Attorney: Ladies and Gentlemen of the tribunal, I would like to read you something: "The streets of our country are in turmoil. The universities are filled with students rebelling and rioting. Communists are seeking to destroy our country. Russia is threatening us with her might and the republic is in danger. Yes, danger from within and without. We need law and order or our nation cannot survive". We might all be forgiven for supposing those to be the words of our President. But they are not. Those words were uttered in 1932 by Adolf Hitler. 

Defendent Lee Robert Brown: Sieg motherfucking Heil!

The sense of realism is further enhanced by the choppy edititng and Watkins's film crew capturing everything in a fly-on-the-wall manner. For a dystopian mockumentary, it looks and feels remarkably genuine. The anger and frustration between both parties highlight the brick wall which seperates them. Worryingly, both have the common belief that violence is the only solution to resolve their problems.

While filming, Watkins pretends to remain impartial in all the madness. However, as the film progresses, it becomes obvious which side he's really rooting for. It's a loaded film. The authorites lie over water being available at the mid point of the course for the parched hippies. Watkins also drops the act once the bullets start flying. None of this is a real problem, if you're able to accept Punishment Park for its obvious left wing bias with the same regard as Ron Ormond's unintentionally comedic, Christian fundamentalist propoganda film, If Footmen Tire You, What Will Horses Do? (1971) happens to serve the right. However, despite the latter being an inferior film, it does at least get genuine props for being upfront with its ridiculous bullshit.

Looking forward to checking out some other titles in Watkins's filmography; particularly his one and only non-documentary film, Privilege (1967). The film revolves around a pop star becoming an avatar to control the minds of the British population. Forerunner to The X Factor? Don't really know yet, but it definitely sounds like my cup of tea.