Strange, and it has some interesting bits, but it's dull and nonsensically plotted. Gerard Depardieu and Marcello Mastroinanni make asses of themselves, and Gail Lawrence, better known under her porn name, Abigail Clayton, is naked for about 50% of the film. Depardieu plays a boy toy in New York City. One day his friend, played by Mastroianni, is walking along the beach when he discovers the corpse of King Kong, whose orphaned baby he gets Depardieu to adopt. The themes involve the ever-changing gender roles, and this could have been very interesting. Unfortunately, it has no real plot to speak of, and it just meanders from weird scene to weird scene. Sometimes, the visuals are quite haunting, especially when the characters are on the beach with the New York cityscape towering over them and the giant ape corpse dominating the bottom of the frame. 5/10.
10 Reviews
Cool atmosphere
jnatch18 April 2021
What film involves a beach in New York City, apes and a very famous New York landmark? Yeah, well Planet of the Apes does, but I mean Ciao Maschio.
This is a pretty bad film, there is no story to explain, the relationships between the characters are sometimes puzzling, the occurrences are sometimes impossible and the people's reactions unreal. Then comes the acting, the very, very bad acting.
But if you love films set in New York City and just like a calm atmospheric and weird film set in parts of New York you don't often see then you can't miss this.
The entire film takes place among a few block radius in a residential neighborhood just a few blocks north of the World Trade Center. It seems to be shot in a hurry as many scenes could have used another take or two. I wonder if they had all the necessary permits of if it was, umm "guerilla" filmmaking. It seems like they may have shot it all on a few Sunday or Holiday mornings as you never see another soul walking the streets during any scenes.
But here is the most fascinating part. This was shot, I assume in 1977, and at the time they were building landfill or extending that part of Manhattan out into the East River to create a man-made neighborhood on which they would build expensive condos. But at this brief point in history it was a vast beach, it was all sand. It was blocked by a weak fence with a warning sign but they ignored it and several scenes, long scenes, take place on this yet -to-be-finished landfill area just under the Twin Towers. It is actually quite beautiful and I doubt another film exists that would show this. In fact I doubt you could even find an old newsreel type video on youtube that might show this.
For that reason alone i would recommend this.
This is a pretty bad film, there is no story to explain, the relationships between the characters are sometimes puzzling, the occurrences are sometimes impossible and the people's reactions unreal. Then comes the acting, the very, very bad acting.
But if you love films set in New York City and just like a calm atmospheric and weird film set in parts of New York you don't often see then you can't miss this.
The entire film takes place among a few block radius in a residential neighborhood just a few blocks north of the World Trade Center. It seems to be shot in a hurry as many scenes could have used another take or two. I wonder if they had all the necessary permits of if it was, umm "guerilla" filmmaking. It seems like they may have shot it all on a few Sunday or Holiday mornings as you never see another soul walking the streets during any scenes.
But here is the most fascinating part. This was shot, I assume in 1977, and at the time they were building landfill or extending that part of Manhattan out into the East River to create a man-made neighborhood on which they would build expensive condos. But at this brief point in history it was a vast beach, it was all sand. It was blocked by a weak fence with a warning sign but they ignored it and several scenes, long scenes, take place on this yet -to-be-finished landfill area just under the Twin Towers. It is actually quite beautiful and I doubt another film exists that would show this. In fact I doubt you could even find an old newsreel type video on youtube that might show this.
For that reason alone i would recommend this.
Bye Bye Monkey
MartinTeller12 January 2012
an oddly desolate New York overrun by rats, Gerard Depardieu works at a Roman history wax museum, gets "raped" by a feminist performance art troupe, pals around with a sexually frustrated Marcello Mastroianni ("I have some kind of monster between my legs!"), seduces the elderly hostess of a dinner party in front of the guests, and discovers the corpse of King Kong on the beach, who is clutching an infant monkey that he then adopts. A stencil on Depardieu's wall asks "Why?!" and that's a good question. Although composed of several interesting elements (some of which recall Ferreri's earlier THE SEED OF MAN) it doesn't gel into any cohesive whole. The best I can do at putting it together is to say it's an absurdist treatise on the decline of civilization, but not all the pieces seem to fit. It's an exercise in non-sequitur, and that's not a form I enjoy very much unless it's done very light-heartedly. There are amusing moments but the overall tempo is too sluggish. Also, the performances aren't very good except for Depardieu and Mastroianni, and even they don't appear to understand what they're doing. Sometimes Ferreri's idiosyncrasies add up to something really exciting, but here it's a near miss.
Gerard Depardieu And A Monkey
Crap_Connoisseur29 April 2006
Marco Ferreri directed some of the most unusual films of the 1970s - from the castration love story "La Derniere Femme", to the gluttony fuelled orgy of "La Grande Bouffe". Bye Bye Monkey might not match those films for quality or shock value, but it most definitely surpasses them in the weirdness stakes.
Bye Bye Monkey is a rare exercise in cinematic existentialism that does not drown in its own pretence. In fact, the film's greatest achievement is that it somehow manages to be entertaining despite having a plot which basically involves Gerard Depardieu walking around with a monkey. There are, of course, detours from this central premise and they are just as perplexing. Ferreri offers a Roman wax museum subplot, feminist dancers interested in experiencing rape, a massive gorilla corpse/sculpture and a love scene between a young Depardieu and a then 65 year old Geraldine Fitzgerald. Did I mention that Gerard Depardieu incessantly blows a whistle throughout the film?
I'm really not sure what the film's deeper meaning is intended to be, assuming that it has one at all. Bye Bye Monkey contains so many ideas and passes comment on so many issues that I gave up trying to interpret them all. However, Ferreri's favourite theme of emasculation is unmissable in everything from the dancer rapists, to Luigi's sexual frustration and the birth registrar's comments on dressing Cornelius in girl's clothing. The film is never weighed down by its philosophy and there is just as much enjoyment to be had from the surreal imagery as from the film's ambiguous subtext.
Gerard Depardieu was doing his best work in the 1970s and he turns in another muscular performance as Lafayette. I can not imagine another major actor who would accept this role in the first place, let alone approach it with the conviction that Gerard does. Marcello Mastroianni is also great as Luigi, as is Geraldine Fitzgerald in her most controversial role. However, it is James Coco who almost manages to steal the show with his outrageously over the top performance as Mr Flaxman. As good as the actors are, this remains Ferreri's show and his direction is as stylish as ever.
Bye Bye Monkey is a real oddity of the 1970s. Ferreri was a truly unique director and this may be his most individual, if not most convincing, work.
Bye Bye Monkey is a rare exercise in cinematic existentialism that does not drown in its own pretence. In fact, the film's greatest achievement is that it somehow manages to be entertaining despite having a plot which basically involves Gerard Depardieu walking around with a monkey. There are, of course, detours from this central premise and they are just as perplexing. Ferreri offers a Roman wax museum subplot, feminist dancers interested in experiencing rape, a massive gorilla corpse/sculpture and a love scene between a young Depardieu and a then 65 year old Geraldine Fitzgerald. Did I mention that Gerard Depardieu incessantly blows a whistle throughout the film?
I'm really not sure what the film's deeper meaning is intended to be, assuming that it has one at all. Bye Bye Monkey contains so many ideas and passes comment on so many issues that I gave up trying to interpret them all. However, Ferreri's favourite theme of emasculation is unmissable in everything from the dancer rapists, to Luigi's sexual frustration and the birth registrar's comments on dressing Cornelius in girl's clothing. The film is never weighed down by its philosophy and there is just as much enjoyment to be had from the surreal imagery as from the film's ambiguous subtext.
Gerard Depardieu was doing his best work in the 1970s and he turns in another muscular performance as Lafayette. I can not imagine another major actor who would accept this role in the first place, let alone approach it with the conviction that Gerard does. Marcello Mastroianni is also great as Luigi, as is Geraldine Fitzgerald in her most controversial role. However, it is James Coco who almost manages to steal the show with his outrageously over the top performance as Mr Flaxman. As good as the actors are, this remains Ferreri's show and his direction is as stylish as ever.
Bye Bye Monkey is a real oddity of the 1970s. Ferreri was a truly unique director and this may be his most individual, if not most convincing, work.
Disturbing apocalyptic vision
Mikew30014 June 2002
This is not a real movie in terms of a story but rather a collection of impressions about the life of a lonely guy living somewhere in a future New York slum during an apocalyptic virus wave that caused the death of thousands of people. He's surviving by taking bizarre jobs for a living, and finally he's finding a small monkey as a buddy.
The whole atmosphere is disturbing and sinister, but the "story" is a bit lame sometimes. The photography is stunning and occasionally reminds of the famous apocalyptic paintings of Hieronimus Bosch to the shadowy impressions of Enrico de Chirico. A really disturbing, surreal French movie featuring a young Gerard Depardieu.
The whole atmosphere is disturbing and sinister, but the "story" is a bit lame sometimes. The photography is stunning and occasionally reminds of the famous apocalyptic paintings of Hieronimus Bosch to the shadowy impressions of Enrico de Chirico. A really disturbing, surreal French movie featuring a young Gerard Depardieu.
A perfect example of 1970s foreign movies
HotToastyRag2 August 2019
You know how foreign movies have the reputation for being extremely weird and full of naked people? Well, if you've ever seen a foreign movie from the 1970s, you know why. They're weird! Everybody takes their clothes off!
In Bye Bye Monkey, a bunch of disconnected stories are all joined together. And everyone takes their clothes off. An independent girls' theater troupe discusses whether or not it's possible for a man to be raped, then decides to put the question to the test. James Coco makes wax replicas of Ancient Rome, then decides to make the faces likenesses of American presidents. Geraldine Fitzgerald longs for love she's never experienced. And finally, Gérard Depardieu finds a baby monkey on the beach and adopts him. Marcello Mastroianni tags along in various scenes, but it's not really clear why, and Abigail Clayton falls in love with Gérard, even though he's never without his pet monkey and constantly blows through a metal whistle when he breathes. Yes, he's gorgeous, but nothing in this movie makes sense.
In an inarguably adorable scene, Gérard tries to leave the baby monkey in the park and walk away. The monkey shrieks and runs after him, then climbs up his body to nestle in the crook of his arm. In the next scene, Gérard gives the monkey a little bed, and you can see the animal smiling. That's about as cute as it gets. The rest of the movie is either weird or upsetting, but if you really like 1970s foreign movies or have never seen one, this is a perfect example. Ironically, the entire movie is spoken in English, and Gérard speaks more English in this movie than he did in Green Card!
Kiddy Warning: Obviously, you have control over your own children. However, due to nudity, graphic sex scenes, and an upsetting scene involving an animal, I wouldn't let my kids watch it.
In Bye Bye Monkey, a bunch of disconnected stories are all joined together. And everyone takes their clothes off. An independent girls' theater troupe discusses whether or not it's possible for a man to be raped, then decides to put the question to the test. James Coco makes wax replicas of Ancient Rome, then decides to make the faces likenesses of American presidents. Geraldine Fitzgerald longs for love she's never experienced. And finally, Gérard Depardieu finds a baby monkey on the beach and adopts him. Marcello Mastroianni tags along in various scenes, but it's not really clear why, and Abigail Clayton falls in love with Gérard, even though he's never without his pet monkey and constantly blows through a metal whistle when he breathes. Yes, he's gorgeous, but nothing in this movie makes sense.
In an inarguably adorable scene, Gérard tries to leave the baby monkey in the park and walk away. The monkey shrieks and runs after him, then climbs up his body to nestle in the crook of his arm. In the next scene, Gérard gives the monkey a little bed, and you can see the animal smiling. That's about as cute as it gets. The rest of the movie is either weird or upsetting, but if you really like 1970s foreign movies or have never seen one, this is a perfect example. Ironically, the entire movie is spoken in English, and Gérard speaks more English in this movie than he did in Green Card!
Kiddy Warning: Obviously, you have control over your own children. However, due to nudity, graphic sex scenes, and an upsetting scene involving an animal, I wouldn't let my kids watch it.
Creepy and outdated?
brucetwo-215 January 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I watched this film last week, through Netflix. I ended up doing a lot of fast-forwarding after the first few minutes. I usually like experimental films that take risks, but this does not hang together for me at all. It was bad!
After viewing it, I checked out one of the Leonard Maltin books--they rate it as BOMB. --OK--There are some Maltin "Bombs" that I've actually liked, but this one doesn't hang together. The acting is OK I guess--but the dialog and characters are so silly and unconvincing in their actions and motivations that it all just put me off.
First objection--one of the exceedingly creepy feminist dancers hits Depardieu on the head with a Coke bottle and it breaks into pieces as it knocks him out--COKE BOTTLES DO NOT SHATTER! These bottles are thick and heavy--and they certainly were when this film was made, in 1978. Depardieu's character would have had a fractured skull in any version of "real" life. Right away the viewer thinks that this is a fakey movie.
And then the most sympathetic of the feminist dancers suddenly strips off her clothes and has sex with Gerard in front of everyone else, while he is allegedly unconscious. And then they become lovers and start living together, except that the other dancers start wearing pregnancy costumes under their leotards and then the "girlfriend" becomes pregnant.
Talk about (out)dated!--The feminist dancers are like someone's weird understanding of the "women's lib" literature of years earlier--circa 1968-1970, and the actresses in this movie are years too old to portray the characters they are supposed to be. The ending of this film--what happens to the "monkey" is so bad and amateurish on every level that I'll skip it here--I've seen more convincing special effects in grade school film projects.
--Is this a horror movie or a Roger Corman Drive-In flick? The nuttiness of this film reminds me of another "Bomb" of several years earlier--MYRA BRECKENRIDGE-- wherein stodgy, clueless Hollywood people tried to make a "hip" movie for a younger generation.
Not sure who or why this Monkey film was made--but it never hits the target. Mastrioni and Depardieu are really wasted here, and James Coco's artificial exaggerated style of Broadway acting is always hard to take on film unless there is a convincing reason for it. If you want to watch strange movies, you'd probably do better to check out the "Psychotronic Guide" or something similar.
After viewing it, I checked out one of the Leonard Maltin books--they rate it as BOMB. --OK--There are some Maltin "Bombs" that I've actually liked, but this one doesn't hang together. The acting is OK I guess--but the dialog and characters are so silly and unconvincing in their actions and motivations that it all just put me off.
First objection--one of the exceedingly creepy feminist dancers hits Depardieu on the head with a Coke bottle and it breaks into pieces as it knocks him out--COKE BOTTLES DO NOT SHATTER! These bottles are thick and heavy--and they certainly were when this film was made, in 1978. Depardieu's character would have had a fractured skull in any version of "real" life. Right away the viewer thinks that this is a fakey movie.
And then the most sympathetic of the feminist dancers suddenly strips off her clothes and has sex with Gerard in front of everyone else, while he is allegedly unconscious. And then they become lovers and start living together, except that the other dancers start wearing pregnancy costumes under their leotards and then the "girlfriend" becomes pregnant.
Talk about (out)dated!--The feminist dancers are like someone's weird understanding of the "women's lib" literature of years earlier--circa 1968-1970, and the actresses in this movie are years too old to portray the characters they are supposed to be. The ending of this film--what happens to the "monkey" is so bad and amateurish on every level that I'll skip it here--I've seen more convincing special effects in grade school film projects.
--Is this a horror movie or a Roger Corman Drive-In flick? The nuttiness of this film reminds me of another "Bomb" of several years earlier--MYRA BRECKENRIDGE-- wherein stodgy, clueless Hollywood people tried to make a "hip" movie for a younger generation.
Not sure who or why this Monkey film was made--but it never hits the target. Mastrioni and Depardieu are really wasted here, and James Coco's artificial exaggerated style of Broadway acting is always hard to take on film unless there is a convincing reason for it. If you want to watch strange movies, you'd probably do better to check out the "Psychotronic Guide" or something similar.
Curious Imagery keeps this film entertaining.
nnad12 March 2000
Is it another world, or our world gone mad? Ferreri has quite an imagination, especially his use of juxtaposition: a rotting carcass of King Kong, a wax museum where James Coco reenacts parts of history, and an underground society where rats prevail. Depardieu, who's lines are badly dubbed, manages to get through this yarn uncomfortably gripping a chimp where he found beside the dead Kong. Mastroianni is always at his best, altho this time presenting a more cartoonish characterization. However, despite the exotic idiosyncrasies, this film can be rather dull at moments. Nevertheless, I enjoyed a large percentage of this movie, ad hominem the ambiguous finale which may help clarifies the film's bizarre symbolism. Watch this one on a rainy day.
Two hours of trifling nothingness
I_Ailurophile20 April 2024
The premise quite catches one's attention, as well as the attachment of esteemed actors, not to mention the fact that the title was received well at Cannes. As the film first begins one is perhaps indirectly reminded of other creative oddball works, like 1973's 'La grande bouffe' or 1982 bizarrerie 'Liquid sky,' and one carries high hopes for what filmmaker Marco Ferreri, and/or co-writers Gérard Brach and Rafael Azcona, might do with the concept at large or with the setting. However, as the length draws on, the idiosyncratic scene writing increasingly seems to be part of not a wildly inventive narrative, or a presentation with something big and important to say, but a tapestry of incohesive randomness that goes nowhere in particular and says nothing substantive. There are many kernels of ideas scattered throughout, kernels that could have been latched upon to shape 'Bye bye monkey' (also known as 'Rêve de singe' or 'Ciao maschio') into something significant and entertaining. What it feels like, instead, is scene after scene of Christopher Walken's infamous few lines in Martin Brest's 2003 misfire 'Gigli' - quizzical, baffling, and nonsensical. The difference is that despite its outward appearance the latter scene actually does make sense in context, whereas so far as I can determine, there's ultimately not truly anything to be gleaned from this.
There is no actor herein who does not suffer from that perplexing tenor, and between young Frenchman Gérard Depardieu - well before he would be accused in real life of sexually assaulting many women - and Italian icon Marco Mastroianni in his supporting part, I don't know who bears more of the brunt of it. The dialogue fails just as surely as the scene writing to produce anything enduring and meaningful, and no few instances of nudity rather just raise a skeptical eyebrow. I suppose we could commend the cast for embracing the inanity and bringing it to fruition, though I don't know why we would, and the same goes for Ferreri with his direction. The highest compliments I think this is likely to deserve are for its production design, art direction, costume design, hair, and makeup; the harshest criticism definitely belongs to Ferreri, Brach, and Azcona as writers, primarily for the lack of any cogency or real, discernible purpose, but also for passing, unnecessary expression of regressive social values (e.g., here a homophobic slur, there a flummoxing line of toxic paternalism and gender enforcement). In no time 'Bye bye monkey' becomes a picture that we continue to watch only out a sense of commitment, for it bears no strength of its own to hold our attention or drive engagement. As far as I'm concerned these two hours are a waste for any given viewer, and all the time, energy, and resources that were devoted to the production would have been better off going elsewhere; it's well made by contemporary standards, but so what?
I guess I'm glad for those who get more out of this movie than I do. I just don't know how they manage to do it. I sat with no foreknowledge or expectations but anticipated enjoying it in some measure; instead it was so dull and trifling, squandering any possible potential, that it put me to sleep. After I awoke and continued watching, I think continuing to sleep would have been the better use of my time. Whatever it is you want out of this flick, may you find it, but in my opinion you should really just watch something else in the first place.
There is no actor herein who does not suffer from that perplexing tenor, and between young Frenchman Gérard Depardieu - well before he would be accused in real life of sexually assaulting many women - and Italian icon Marco Mastroianni in his supporting part, I don't know who bears more of the brunt of it. The dialogue fails just as surely as the scene writing to produce anything enduring and meaningful, and no few instances of nudity rather just raise a skeptical eyebrow. I suppose we could commend the cast for embracing the inanity and bringing it to fruition, though I don't know why we would, and the same goes for Ferreri with his direction. The highest compliments I think this is likely to deserve are for its production design, art direction, costume design, hair, and makeup; the harshest criticism definitely belongs to Ferreri, Brach, and Azcona as writers, primarily for the lack of any cogency or real, discernible purpose, but also for passing, unnecessary expression of regressive social values (e.g., here a homophobic slur, there a flummoxing line of toxic paternalism and gender enforcement). In no time 'Bye bye monkey' becomes a picture that we continue to watch only out a sense of commitment, for it bears no strength of its own to hold our attention or drive engagement. As far as I'm concerned these two hours are a waste for any given viewer, and all the time, energy, and resources that were devoted to the production would have been better off going elsewhere; it's well made by contemporary standards, but so what?
I guess I'm glad for those who get more out of this movie than I do. I just don't know how they manage to do it. I sat with no foreknowledge or expectations but anticipated enjoying it in some measure; instead it was so dull and trifling, squandering any possible potential, that it put me to sleep. After I awoke and continued watching, I think continuing to sleep would have been the better use of my time. Whatever it is you want out of this flick, may you find it, but in my opinion you should really just watch something else in the first place.
Ape
BandSAboutMovies22 April 2023
Warning: Spoilers
Marco Ferreri is probably best known for his film La Grande Bouffe. Here, he sets a film in an end-of-the-world-feeling New York City, a place of only the strange and the rats, a place where Gerard Lafayette (Gérard Depardieu) lives in the basement of Andreas Flaxman's (James Coco) wax museum, which is all about the Roman Empire.
He also volunteers at an all-female theater group, which has Mimsy Farmer, Francesca De Sapio (The Godfather Part II) and Stefania Casini (Sara from Suspiria) as members. Their latest play is about how women could easily overpower men and rape them. To prove their theory, Gerard is knocked out with a bottle of Coke and Angelica (adult actress Abigail Clayton, billed as Gail Lawrence; she was in 7 Into Snowy, Sexworld and Alex de Renzy's Femmes de Sade. After going into legitimate movies, she played Rita in Maniac) volunteers to be the one to take him.
Meanwhile, in Battery Park, Gerard finds a baby monkey in the arms of a King Kong sculpture - or is it Kong, fallen from the Twin Towers? - and a group of eccentrics led by Luigi (Marcello Mastroianni). He takes his new simian child home but Andreas tells him that the baby will destroy his dreams. Angelica moves in as she's pregnant, possibly with their child of rape, but when he doesn't care about their child being born, she leaves and while the baby ape is alone, the rats eat him.
Gerard responds by breaking into the wax museum and causing a fire that kills both he and Andreas, while Angelica sits on the shore with her new child.
Ferreri wrote this with Gerard Brach (Wonderwall, Frantic, Repulsion, The Tenant) and Rafael Azcona. It has some interesting imagery - Kong washed up on the beach - but ultimately goes nowhere. Still, just the idea it was made is somewhat intriguing. Also, the baby is named for Cornelius from Beneath the Planet of the Apes.
He also volunteers at an all-female theater group, which has Mimsy Farmer, Francesca De Sapio (The Godfather Part II) and Stefania Casini (Sara from Suspiria) as members. Their latest play is about how women could easily overpower men and rape them. To prove their theory, Gerard is knocked out with a bottle of Coke and Angelica (adult actress Abigail Clayton, billed as Gail Lawrence; she was in 7 Into Snowy, Sexworld and Alex de Renzy's Femmes de Sade. After going into legitimate movies, she played Rita in Maniac) volunteers to be the one to take him.
Meanwhile, in Battery Park, Gerard finds a baby monkey in the arms of a King Kong sculpture - or is it Kong, fallen from the Twin Towers? - and a group of eccentrics led by Luigi (Marcello Mastroianni). He takes his new simian child home but Andreas tells him that the baby will destroy his dreams. Angelica moves in as she's pregnant, possibly with their child of rape, but when he doesn't care about their child being born, she leaves and while the baby ape is alone, the rats eat him.
Gerard responds by breaking into the wax museum and causing a fire that kills both he and Andreas, while Angelica sits on the shore with her new child.
Ferreri wrote this with Gerard Brach (Wonderwall, Frantic, Repulsion, The Tenant) and Rafael Azcona. It has some interesting imagery - Kong washed up on the beach - but ultimately goes nowhere. Still, just the idea it was made is somewhat intriguing. Also, the baby is named for Cornelius from Beneath the Planet of the Apes.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
