Editorials
Uprooting the Czech Fairy Tale ‘Little Otík’ [Horrors Elsewhere]
Horrors Elsewhere is a recurring column that spotlights a variety of movies from all around the globe, particularly those not from the United States. Fears may not be universal, but one thing is for sure — a scream is understood, always and everywhere.
Stepsisters disfigure their feet so they fit into glass slippers. A witch fattens up children she intends to eat. A mermaid dies of a broken heart and turns into seafoam. Classic European fairy tales in their purest form are dark. Yet making the lot of them more presentable for broader audiences today is neither difficult nor unheard of. A real challenge would be scrubbing something like Otesánek, a Czech fairy tale and the basis for Jan Švankmajer’s 2000 film of the same name. This unique story about family is at its best when absolutely undiluted and outré.
Otesánek, also known as Little Otík and Greedy Guts, begins with Karel Horák (Jan Hartl) and Božena Horáková (Veronika Žilková) receiving unfortunate news at the doctor’s office. For medical reasons, the couple is unable to naturally conceive. Božena is distraught until her husband shows her something he found at their country house; a tree stump vaguely resembling a human baby. What Karel did not count on was Božena genuinely treating the stump as if it was a real baby. She even fakes a pregnancy for the next couple of months before going into “labor.” To Karel’s further surprise, the baby, later named Otík, has come to life and is hungry. Very hungry. As the Horáks struggle to sate their newborn’s voracious appetite, the neighbors’ prying daughter Alžbětka (Kristina Adamcová) looks to expose the truth about Otík.
From the very beginning, it is obvious Little Otík is going to be both heavy and surreal. As his wife has her heart broken back in the doctor’s office, Karel imagines women as well as himself lining up outside and buying babies from a vendor as if they were the fresh catch of the day. Along with infertility is a recurring reference to pedophilia. Alžbětka fears for her safety every time her elderly and licentious neighbor Mr. Žlábek (Zdeněk Kozák) comes around. Her panic manifests as a running visual gag; a hand emerges from Mr. Žlábek’s pants upon sight of Alžbětka.
Švankmajer’s film touches on serious topics not always openly discussed even by today’s standards. Little Otík might come across as a glib treatment of these subjects, but it is really the opposite. Švankmajer is doing here what traditional fairy tales did so well. Like in his other fantasy film Něco z Alenky, he uses extreme narrative devices — including over-the-top, stop-motion imagery — to emphasize the moral lessons and symbolism at hand. Suffice it to say, there was not a lot of coddling when these fairy tales originated. People in those days died young and the stakes were very high. Švankmajer echoes the same urgency and no doubt resorts to aggressive storytelling to avoid misinterpretation.
Even before Otík is born, the theme of hunger is present and forceful. Most importantly is Božena’s baby fever that was more severe than Karel realized. Otherwise he might have thought it misguided to show his wife a baby-shaped tree stump while in her fragile state. She instead goes the opposite direction and gets carried away, to put it lightly. As for Karel, he wants to please Božena even if it is at his and everyone else’s detriment. “That’s the way it turns out when you try to make someone happy.” This flippant statement is as close to an epiphany as Karel comes when recognizing the imbalance in his relationship. He goes all out to gladden Božena, yet she never considers his feelings all that much.
Alžbětka is as starved for someone to care about as Božena is. She is precocious, friendless, and thirsting for knowledge. She does not get along with children her age because she is smarter, and she is lonely because she is the only child in her apartment building. Alžbětka is almost always reading a book despite the fact her father František (Pavel Nový) is an ignorant man who does not like his daughter learning about anything he deems inappropriate. The truth of the matter is František cannot comprehend what Alžbětka studies or anything beyond a TV advertisement, so his natural reaction is to admonish and dismiss. Although he notably refrains when he finds his daughter with a book on fairy tales, something he likely thinks is more suitable for girls. Alžbětka naturally knows this and uses the book jacket to conceal what she really wants to read.
For Alžbětka and Božena, family comes first no matter what. Once Otík is born and his ravenous hankering for anything bigger than a breadbox comes to light, Božena buries her head in the sand and facilitates her son’s desires. Even when the family cat, the mail carrier, and a social worker are all gobbled up, Božena still refuses to do the right thing because she is consumed by her own hunger. Alžbětka adopts a similar behavior when she finds Otík in the basement after nosing around the Horáks’ business for so long. She knows he is dangerous but still wants to feed and protect him like a mother would. As for Alžbětka’s mother Paní (Jaroslava Kretschmerová), she overextends her maternal duties by locking herself and her family inside the apartment after so many mysterious disappearances occur in the building. Of course this is a far and less harmful cry from her daughter and Mrs. Horáková’s weirdly tender acts of motherhood.
As it was foretold Otík grows larger with every thing and person he eats. There is no stopping him. The theme of nature versus nurture is now overshadowed by a more pressing one; what happens when people defy fate and the natural order of life. Karel and Božena, both guilty of infantilism, challenge their biological shortcomings and suffer the consequences. The balance must be restored in the end, but the younger folks are not up to the task. Only the older and wise caretaker Mrs. Správcová (Dagmar Stříbrná) can do what must be done after watching everyone else fail. They say it takes a village to raise a child.
Little Otík stares sharply at the urges and cravings that swallow parts of society. Its oddball approach is not for everyone, but for the hungrier viewers who stay the gruesome course, they are rewarded with a metaphorical feast.
Editorials
Before ‘The Blair Witch Project’, ‘Alien Autopsy’ Showed How Real Found Footage Could Feel
The line separating artist from con man is a lot thinner than you might initially believe. While I think we can all agree that lying for the sake of profit is actively malicious behavior, isn’t it also true that the faux documentary aspect of The Blair Witch Project is half the reason why that film became such a cultural phenomenon? After all, if there’s one thing filmmakers have in common with stage magicians, it’s that misleading and misdirecting audiences is simply part of the job.
That’s why I’ve developed a habit of mostly ignoring the moral quandaries behind many of film and television’s biggest “hoaxes” in favor of appreciating the narrative elements that drive productions like Mermaids: The Body Found and even Animal Planet’s highly underrated The Cannibal in the Jungle. However, if there’s a definitive case of a highly publicized broadcast fooling the world into taking it seriously, it has to be Fox’s infamous 1995 TV special Alien Autopsy: Fact or Fiction.
It’s been over three decades since that eerie footage first haunted television screens right at the peak of the ’90s ufology craze, and in that time, the video has taken on a life of its own. From countless parodies and references in everything from The X-Files to Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater (as well as John Dower’s recently released tell-all documentary The Alien Autopsy Scandal, which I’d highly recommend to genre fans everywhere), there’s no denying the legacy of the Alien Autopsy video. However, I rarely see the tape discussed as what it truly is: a highly convincing found footage film directed by a passionate stage magician and brought to life by masterful practical effects work.
That’s why I’d like to invite readers to join me on a deep dive into one of the most infamous broadcasts of all time in an attempt to reevaluate the footage as a fascinating narrative experience rather than a complete hoax.
The TV Special That Convinced Millions It Was Real
Ray Santilli next to Extraterrestrial replica in ‘The Alien Autopsy Scandal’
For starters, regardless of whether or not you believe that there was in fact an extraterrestrial crash in Roswell during the summer of 1947 and that some form of autopsy was performed on the victims, the producers behind the black & white recordings, Ray Santilli and Gary Shoefield, insist that their video was a “restoration.” Though I’d argue that the proper word is “remake”of genuine footage that was too damaged to air on television. That’s why the duo went on to recruit filmmaker and eccentric magician Spyros Melaris and sculptor/monster designer John Humphreys to bring their version of the autopsy to life and sell it to the highest bidder.
This is where the story of the Alien Autopsy as a narrative experience really begins. Melaris claims that his approach to the faux recording consisted of striving for extreme period accuracy in both shooting equipment and setting while also planting subtle details that would initially seem like mistakes but could later be revealed to actually fit the time period. That being said, the filmmaker was under the impression that the short would be released for free as a PR stunt, with the team later producing and selling an informative documentary chronicling exactly how the footage was faked and commenting on how easy it is to manipulate public perception with a good old-fashioned magic trick.
This obviously isn’t how things went down, and that’s likely the reason why Melaris has since distanced himself from everyone else involved with the project. Yet, no amount of behind-the-scenes drama can undermine the genuine effort that went into making the short as impressive as it is. From the sourcing of real animal organs from a local butcher to make the organic part of the creature more lifelike to the highly detailed sculpt that made use of a hollowed-out underlayer that could be filled with fake blood and assorted viscera, there’s a reason why so many Hollywood specialists are still impressed with the artistry on display here.
Of course, the believability is only half the story, as I think that the best part of the autopsy is how Melaris builds on the existing tension by obscuring certain details and often embracing the chaos of what a real examination of extraterrestrial life could feel like. The camera often goes out of focus at just the right time to make certain effects hit even harder, and we can only speculate as to what the hazmat-suited doctors are gesticulating about during the operation. There’s a real air of mystery to the whole thing that almost makes it feel like a cosmically terrifying, cursed film containing forbidden knowledge that civilians were never meant to see.
So when Fox’s Fact or Fiction brings in the specialists to comment on the film and its otherworldly subject, it’s no surprise that we end up with one of the most memorable mockumentaries of all time – albeit one where the participants are unaware that the footage they’re commenting on is basically a large-scale practical joke. A joke that the network was obviously in on, as many participants claim that the TV special cut out significant portions where guests point out that they believe the footage to be an elaborate hoax.
The Lasting Impact of the Hoax Turned Cultural Event
Regardless, I remember going to bed terrified after watching reruns of the special and thinking about the respected pathologist who claimed that the body was almost certainly inhuman, with even effects maestro Stan Winston commenting on how difficult it would be to recreate some of these visuals through practical puppetry. That’s not even mentioning Jonathan Frakes’ dramatic hyping up of the disturbing imagery as if he was talking about the tape from The Ring, with his spooky demeanor here likely being responsible for his later role as the host of Beyond Belief: Fact or Fiction a few years later.
Personally, I’d argue that the Alien Autopsy phenomenon had just as much of an impact on me as a horror fan as The Blair Witch Project, a film that was almost certainly influenced by the success of this immensely popular hoax (to the point where they even produced their own TV special commenting on Heather’s found footage). Even if Fox didn’t intend to produce a narrative feature about the aftermath of the Roswell crash, the end product still holds up remarkably well as a highly entertaining mockumentary exploring the idea that we may not be alone in the universe.
While neither Santilli nor the rest of the production team has ever commented on this, I also think it’s very likely that the idea of a faux Alien Autopsy could have been influenced by Dean Alioto’s The McPherson Tape/UFO Abduction. I’ve already written about how this granddaddy of found footage was co-opted by rogue ufologists who began selling bootlegs of the tape at conventions as if it were real evidence of a close encounter, so it’s not that much of a stretch to imagine that Santilli and company could have heard about this phenomenon and been inspired to come up with their own highly profitable hoax.
At the end of the day, it’s unlikely that the Alien Autopsy film is recreating any real footage from Roswell, but I can still appreciate the short and the accompanying television event as a standalone horror story that still influences the way we see found footage to this very day.
After all, the possibility that something could be real is often much scarier than finding out for sure – and that’s why I think Alien Autopsy: Fact or Fiction is still worth revisiting three decades down the line.
You must be logged in to post a comment.