Connect with us

Editorials

‘Man Bites Dog’: The Controversial Mockumentary is Still a Disturbing Masterpiece 30 Years Later

Published

on

It can be said that our fascination with serial killers began long before the term was even coined, with famous murderers like Gilles Garnier and Jack the Ripper paving the way for more recent monsters like Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Bundy. It seems like we only get more obsessed with these deranged killers as time goes on, which is what motivated a trio of Belgian filmmakers to get together nearly 30 years ago and produce one of the most daring and controversial mockumentaries ever with Man Bites Dog.

Originally titled C’est Arrivé Près de Chez Vous (which translates to “It Happened Near Your Home”), Man Bites Dog is the infamous brainchild of Rémy Belvaux, André Bonzel and Benoît Poelvoorde. Presented as a fly-on-the-wall documentary about a charming serial killer played by Poelvoorde himself, the film follows “Ben” as he carries out his sociopathic urges on everyone and everything, engaging in multiple murders, pretentious monologues and ultimately compelling the documentary crew to also take part in his sick antics.

In some ways, this so-called “black comedy” can be described as the Spinal Tap of horror, parodying classic documentary tropes as Ben goes about his gruesome day-to-day business while also accompanying innocent interactions with his loving family. The crew even loses sound technicians much like the band kept losing drummers in Rob Reiner’s classic, and there’s no denying the inherent humor behind Ben’s irrational hatred of postmen. However, this comedic façade soon gives way to some of the most violent and disturbing imagery ever put on film, ultimately leading to a bleak finale that wouldn’t feel out of place in a Found-Footage production.

Man Bites Dog obviously generated quite a bit of controversy during its original release, being banned in Sweden and Ireland after a successful premiere in Cannes and receiving the dreaded NC-17 rating in America. Even the film’s poster wasn’t safe from scrutiny, with the original artwork (which depicted Ben shooting at an unseen victim) being altered to feature blood-splattered dentures instead of a baby’s pacifier. Of course, what several of critics and enraged audience members didn’t get at the time is that most of the picture’s horrific subject matter isn’t actually gratuitous, with most of these terrible acts serving an important narrative purpose.

Not exactly Discovery Channel material.

The whole point of this grueling experience is to put audience members in the documentary crew’s shoes, asking us exactly how much horror we’re willing to put up with in order to be entertained. Ben’s unprovoked murder sprees and general disregard for the human condition become so intense that it feels like the directors are actively trying to keep us from enjoying the movie as it assaults our senses, especially once the filmmakers themselves descend into depravity as murderous lackeys. By making viewers uncomfortable, Man Bites Dog expertly questions our fascination with the macabre and makes us wonder at what point should we stop having fun with all the extreme violence and start running for our lives.

Gore and disturbing imagery in film may have reached grisly new heights since the 1990s, with audiences being subjected to everything from the Saw franchise to A Serbian Film, but Man Bites Dog somehow feels much more visceral than any traditional horror flick due of its commitment to realism. Everything from the convincing documentary presentation to the nonchalant comments about murder (like Ben insisting that it’s more profitable to kill the elderly since they have more money saved up) makes you believe that these terrible events could have happened near you, much like the original title ominously suggests.

Of course, what really ties everything together is Benoit’s genuinely unnerving performance as one of the all-time best (or maybe worst) cinematic psychopaths. Ben’s soft-spoken charms and artsy demeanor clash with his intimidating presence, resulting in extremely intense scenarios like an awkward family dinner where everyone is just anxiously waiting for another one of their host’s monstrous outbursts.

The rest of the cast is also generally relatable if not always likable, with the ensemble being mostly comprised of the filmmakers themselves alongside their own extended families. They even use their real names in the credits, lending further believability to an already-convincing project. This makes things even more chilling once the documentary crew decides to partake in their subject’s nasty habits, becoming monsters themselves during their attempts to observe one.

One of Ben’s cruelest moments.

The gritty photography also helps to hammer home the film’s brutal realism, with the hard shadows and lack of color making the Belgian setting look hopeless and dreary as Ben goes about his nihilistic shenanigans. I particularly appreciate how the deaths themselves are never romanticized or even stylized like you might see in a Slasher flick, with the filmmakers always choosing to depict them as sudden and messy, making the entire experience feel like one excruciatingly long snuff film.

Looking back on productions like Cannibal Holocaust and The Legend of Boggy Creek, it’s clear that Man Bites Dog didn’t invent the horror mockumentary, but I’d argue that it almost certainly perfected it. From watching an old lady be killed by a scream-induced heart-attack to receiving in-depth advice on how to properly weigh down a corpse so it won’t float after being dumped, there’s no denying that the film’s disturbing dive into a psychotic frame of mind will stick with you long after the credits roll.

That’s why it’s no surprise that the movie directly influenced future mockumentaries like Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon, What We Do in the Shadows and even Joe Lynch’s underrated contribution to Adi Shankar’s Bootleg Universe. Hell, even the legendary Blair Witch Project owes a huge debt to Belvaux, Bonzel and Poelvoorde, with that film featuring its own low-budget documentary crew that becomes fatally involved with their subject.

Even thirty years later, it’s hard to recommend Man Bites Dog to general audiences due to its uncompromising depictions of murder and sexual assault, but the film has an undeniable place in horror history as proof that the most effective scares are the ones that hit close to home. It may not be an easy watch, and I certainly don’t revisit it all that often, but I still feel that hardcore horror fans should give the movie a chance. Despite all the graphic death and cruelty, the film’s exploration of sensationalist media and the potential monster that lurks inside all of us is what really makes it a disturbing masterpiece.

Born Brazilian, raised Canadian, Luiz is a writer and Film student that spends most of his time watching movies and subsequently complaining about them.

Editorials

Finding Faith and Violence in ‘The Book of Eli’ 14 Years Later

Published

on

Having grown up in a religious family, Christian movie night was something that happened a lot more often than I care to admit. However, back when I was a teenager, my parents showed up one night with an unusually cool-looking DVD of a movie that had been recommended to them by a church leader. Curious to see what new kind of evangelical propaganda my parents had rented this time, I proceeded to watch the film with them expecting a heavy-handed snoozefest.

To my surprise, I was a few minutes in when Denzel Washington proceeded to dismember a band of cannibal raiders when I realized that this was in fact a real movie. My mom was horrified by the flick’s extreme violence and dark subject matter, but I instantly became a fan of the Hughes Brothers’ faith-based 2010 thriller, The Book of Eli. And with the film’s atomic apocalypse having apparently taken place in 2024, I think this is the perfect time to dive into why this grim parable might also be entertaining for horror fans.

Originally penned by gaming journalist and The Walking Dead: The Game co-writer Gary Whitta, the spec script for The Book of Eli was already making waves back in 2007 when it appeared on the coveted Blacklist. It wasn’t long before Columbia and Warner Bros. snatched up the rights to the project, hiring From Hell directors Albert and Allen Hughes while also garnering attention from industry heavyweights like Denzel Washington and Gary Oldman.

After a series of revisions by Anthony Peckham meant to make the story more consumer-friendly, the picture was finally released in January of 2010, with the finished film following Denzel as a mysterious wanderer making his way across a post-apocalyptic America while protecting a sacred book. Along the way, he encounters a run-down settlement controlled by Bill Carnegie (Gary Oldman), a man desperate to get his hands on Eli’s book so he can motivate his underlings to expand his empire. Unwilling to let this power fall into the wrong hands, Eli embarks on a dangerous journey that will test the limits of his faith.


SO WHY IS IT WORTH WATCHING?

Judging by the film’s box-office success, mainstream audiences appear to have enjoyed the Hughes’ bleak vision of a future where everything went wrong, but critics were left divided by the flick’s trope-heavy narrative and unapologetic religious elements. And while I’ll be the first to admit that The Book of Eli isn’t particularly subtle or original, I appreciate the film’s earnest execution of familiar ideas.

For starters, I’d like to address the religious elephant in the room, as I understand the hesitation that some folks (myself included) might have about watching something that sounds like Christian propaganda. Faith does indeed play a huge part in the narrative here, but I’d argue that the film is more about the power of stories than a specific religion. The entire point of Oldman’s character is that he needs a unifying narrative that he can take advantage of in order to manipulate others, while Eli ultimately chooses to deliver his gift to a community of scholars. In fact, the movie even makes a point of placing the Bible in between equally culturally important books like the Torah and Quran, which I think is pretty poignant for a flick inspired by exploitation cinema.

Sure, the film has its fair share of logical inconsistencies (ranging from the extent of Eli’s Daredevil superpowers to his impossibly small Braille Bible), but I think the film more than makes up for these nitpicks with a genuine passion for classic post-apocalyptic cinema. Several critics accused the film of being a knockoff of superior productions, but I’d argue that both Whitta and the Hughes knowingly crafted a loving pastiche of genre influences like Mad Max and A Boy and His Dog.

Lastly, it’s no surprise that the cast here absolutely kicks ass. Denzel plays the title role of a stoic badass perfectly (going so far as to train with Bruce Lee’s protégée in order to perform his own stunts) while Oldman effortlessly assumes a surprisingly subdued yet incredibly intimidating persona. Even Mila Kunis is remarkably charming here, though I wish the script had taken the time to develop these secondary characters a little further. And hey, did I mention that Tom Waits is in this?


AND WHAT MAKES IT HORROR ADJACENT?

Denzel’s very first interaction with another human being in this movie results in a gory fight scene culminating in a face-off against a masked brute wielding a chainsaw (which he presumably uses to butcher travelers before eating them), so I think it’s safe to say that this dog-eat-dog vision of America will likely appeal to horror fans.

From diseased cannibals to hyper-violent motorcycle gangs roaming the wasteland, there’s plenty of disturbing R-rated material here – which is even more impressive when you remember that this story revolves around the bible. And while there are a few too many references to sexual assault for my taste, even if it does make sense in-universe, the flick does a great job of immersing you in this post-nuclear nightmare.

The excessively depressing color palette and obvious green screen effects may take some viewers out of the experience, but the beat-up and lived-in sets and costume design do their best to bring this dead world to life – which might just be the scariest part of the experience.

Ultimately, I believe your enjoyment of The Book of Eli will largely depend on how willing you are to overlook some ham-fisted biblical references in order to enjoy some brutal post-apocalyptic shenanigans. And while I can’t really blame folks who’d rather not deal with that, I think it would be a shame to miss out on a genuinely engaging thrill-ride because of one minor detail.

With that in mind, I’m incredibly curious to see what Whitta and the Hughes Brothers have planned for the upcoming prequel series starring John Boyega


There’s no understating the importance of a balanced media diet, and since bloody and disgusting entertainment isn’t exclusive to the horror genre, we’ve come up with Horror Adjacent – a recurring column where we recommend non-horror movies that horror fans might enjoy.

Continue Reading