actor profiles mailing list
animation
book reviews
director profiles
documentaries
experimental &
avant garde
exploitation
film festivals
film noir
film reviews
gay & lesbian
hong kong films
horror
interviews
japanese cinema
music & musicals
silent film
tranny cinema
- - - - - -
To be automatically notified when the next issue is posted, join our mailing list.
writers gone wild!
Keep up with Bright Lights between issues by visiting our companion blog, Bright Lights After Dark.
our space at MySpace
Visit us at MySpace.
support
Support Bright Lights and get something nice for yourself, too, by shopping at Amazon via this link
Consumerist Ultimate Indigestion
La Grande Bouffe's Deadly Physiological Pleasures
Francis Bacon once said: "We're flesh, potential carcasses. If I go to the butcher, I'm always surprised for not being there instead of the beef." Marco Ferreri once said: "Enough with feelings, I want to make a physiological film." Ferreri was never clearer than this in declaring a film's intent. This time, spare time, emptied by the System only to be consumed as mere commodity, is filled by bodies centred around the limits of their own bellies, attracted by sex only as an ideal instrument to complete the process of emptying.
Produced by the brave Jean-Pierre Rassam, La Grande Bouffe is perhaps the most French film in Ferreri's filmography, that, through the paroxysmal celebration of food, destroys also the civilization of which food is the emblem. The body seen (and filmed) as the last shore of the wreckage, food as the last hope hidden in the despair of living. A living that is reduced to the most basic functions: swilling, digesting, sleeping, drinking, burping, vomiting, fucking, pissing, shitting, in the desperate attempt to eliminate, along with vital substances, also the dregs of bourgeois ideology.
The discreet charm of the four dinner guests in the Parisian villa is the incarnation of one power and three products of that ideology, namely justice (Philippe Noiret), spectacle (Michel Piccoli), food (Ugo Tognazzi), adventure (Marcello Mastroianni). The value added to these myths is Beauty, intended as a formal perfection behind which a decaying body is hidden: like the nouvelle cuisine dishes prepared by Ugo, Marcello is elegant and refined; he chooses the Chinese room for his sexual performances; hung in the refrigerating room, his corpse occupies the same space of a beef carcass. Michel's classical culture — his Latin mottos (Vanitas Vanitatum), Shakespearean quotes (the Amlet's monologue with the beef's head instead of the skull) — is impotent in front of the indigestion. Wearing a pink jumper and lattice gloves, Michel's whispers try to tame the organic noises that are soon replaced by a piano refrain. The leitmotiv is taken from a melody whose notes accompanied Philippe's childhood: the regression has just begun.
Amongst the varied responses to the film (including Bunuel's "an hedonistic monument"), Pasolini's focuses on the representation within space of these four bodies, "caught up in a synthesis of daily and regular habits that characterize the four bodies depriving them of our comprehension, fastening them in the ontological hallucinatory corporeal existence."
1 After all, the same hallucination is found in the Baconian naked bodies of Last Tango in Paris, considered by Cahiers du Cinema along with La Grande Bouffe and La Maman et la Putain as being part of a trilogy on corporeal abjection. Paul's sperm (Last Tango in Paris), Gilberte's menstrual blood (La Maman et la Putain), and the excrements of Ferreri's quartet constitute a secret part of something existing only as a threshold between inside and outside. A kind of sheath moved by alternated urges in dialectical relation between empty (sex) and full (food) that words are not always able to sublimate. There is neither seduction in Ferreri's excretions nor a critical purpose: they are mere organic functions. The perturbation realm is reached through the representation of the "non-familiar" as the "familiar," the internal body as the outside, the shit as the skin. The four, divided faces of the same alienated male, are almost always dressed, but we can hear their wombs' voices. Only Andrea is filmed naked, as a projection of a primeval and non-historical sexuality, covered in blue that, being the absence's color, is everpresent in the nocturnal external views of the villa. The male sexuality, reduced to impotence (Marcello), to indifference (Michel), or to regression (Philippe), appears then as the consequence of the feminization of the body, warped in the "confusion" between mouth and vagina: to eat not in order to nurture the organism, but to be possessed and fecundated in a sort of deadly fermentation.
Between the bathroom (intestine) and the dining room (stomach), where the quartet is overwhelmed by (in)digestion, we do not see any intermediary spaces/rooms, nor between bedroom and kitchen. The abandoned garden, after having provoked Marcelo's death and hosted Philippe's death, is open to straw dogs attracted by the smell and ready to devour the exceeding flesh. As Baudrillard wrote: "The waste challenges reality and signifies opulence, of which waste is the psychological, sociological and economical scheme." 2 Unlike the waste left on the dishes, these wastes represent an alterity: they do not bear any sign belonging to the human body; Philippe's body lies amongst the other carcasses as one of them. When ordering to throw out the flesh, Andrea opens up the skin of the house/belly, transferring the rotten from the inside to the outside.
When the body is a balloon whose breaking point is ignored, reality and fiction are merged like a roast beef and a pudding in a sick intestine: the Chinese ambassador talking with Philippe at the beginning is a "true" Chinese passing by chance near the set (the villa of rue Boileau is now the Vietnamese embassy). The food is really eaten by the actors during the shooting following the chronological order of the narrative.
Ferreri questions the uncertainty of the border between reality and fiction right in the beginning of the film when Ugo, commenting on the photographer's picture of the turkey, utters: "It's so beautiful that it seems fake."
Reality tending to the simulacrum, as we can see again in Peter Greenaway's homage to La Grande Bouffe, The Cook, the Thief, His Wife and His Lover (1989), where the British director reflects upon the rite of an ancestral urge like hunger, castrated by a set of codes and rules polluting the aesthetic categories, transforming the monstrosity into beauty. What is missing from Greenaway's glacial humor is the desperate smell of death and most importantly the void that permeates Ferreri's film.
1. Cinema Nuovo, no. 231, August-September 1974.
2. Jean Baudrillard, The Consumerist Society: Myths and Structures (London: Sage Press, 1998).
May 2008 | Issue 60
Copyright © 2008 by The Celluloid Liberation Front
The Celluloid Liberation Front
The aim of the following lines is to explain the defection from my proper name in favour of a multiple name (Celluloid Liberation Front); such defection is in my opinion an essential move in order to free my actions from the dissuasive strategies of the dominant cultural codes.
It is not a subversive proposition but a historical necessity since the epoch of the kings' names is superseded by the (current) epoch of the Hollywood stars' names whose outcome is the simulacrum, which is by definition self-referential.
If the proposition is not subversive, it is likely that the practices aimed at its attainment will have to be subversive. We have to be able to conceive history deprived of proper names, history made of persons not of names, of humanity not of men. After all, identity is something that defines itself in relation with something different than the self, in modern times is measured in relation with the institutional domain of the state. Today we are witnessing the de-institutionalization (which is the proliferation of mutant institutions) of power therefore the single identity is not apt to this new multifaceted situation anymore. The multiple name, does not deny subjectivity . . . on the contrary it acknowledges its manifoldness.
Rather than identity, we should talk about a constellation of identities that, facing the pervading cultural invasion, grants itself the possibility of assuming different roles within the same scenario, thus catching the enemy unprepared. If in the past it was possible to express oneself via a single identity, it was because the communication mode was mainly vis-à-vis, one to one. The digitalization of communication implies that the (varied) agents of communication define the communicative space, which presents several poles superseding the traditional dichotomy producer-consumer.
Since I am a source of information, I can continuously modify the cultural space surrounding me, interacting with multiple interlocutors who will accordingly interpret my signifying inputs.
There are new communicative possibilities. To assume the multiple name is to access the different spheres of communication, hence diversifying the cultural struggle tactics. The proper name is the heirloom of a centralized society that no longer exists.
I want to communicate, not to be communicated!
Almost all the current cultural production is nothing but (and could not be otherwise) intertextuality, a synthesis of different cultural products, and it would be pretentious to claim to be the Author of something. We cannot say we are the authors of anything because we are the authors of everything. I have not used my proper name, but I did use my multiple name that acknowledges the cultural background — which is of a collective nature — influencing my cultural contribution to history.
The dominant system imposed me a proper name which I expropriated reclaiming my identity back in the form of . . . Celluloid Liberation Front . . .
ALSO: More film reviews
