Man Bites Dog (1992)

A film crew follows a ruthless thief and heartless killer as he goes about his daily routine. But complications set in when the film crew lose their objectivity and begin lending a hand.

Directors:

Rémy Belvaux, André Bonzel

Writers:

Rémy Belvaux (story), Rémy Belvaux (screenplay)

Stars:

Benoît Poelvoorde, Jacqueline Poelvoorde-Pappaert, Nelly Pappaert

6 wins & 5 nominations.

Cast

Cast overview, first billed only:
Benoît Poelvoorde	...	Ben
Jacqueline Poelvoorde-Pappaert	...	Ben's Mother (as Jacqueline Poelvoorde Pappaert)
Nelly Pappaert	...	Ben's Grandmother
Hector Pappaert	...	Ben's Grandfather
Jenny Drye	...	Jenny
Malou Madou	...	Malou
Willy Vandenbroeck	...	Boby
Rachel Deman	...	Mamie Tromblon
André Laime	...	Bed-ridden Old Man
Édith Le Merdy	...	Nurse (as Edith Lemerdy)
Sylviane Godé	...	Rape Victim (Martine)
Zoltan Tobolik	...	Rape Victim's Husband
Valérie Parent	...	Valerie
Alexandra Fandango	...	Kalifa
Olivier Cotica	...	Benichou

Storyline

A camera crew follows a serial killer/thief around as he exercises his craft. He expounds on art, music, nature, society, and life as he offs mailmen, pensioners, and random people. Slowly he begins involving the camera crew in his activities, and they begin wondering if what they're doing is such a good idea, particularly when the killer kills a rival and the rival's brother sends a threatening letter.

---

Plot Keywords:

dark humor | extreme violence | penis | mockumentary | male frontal nudity | 

---

Taglines:

A Killer Comedy

---

Genres:

Comedy | Crime | Drama

---

Motion Picture Rating (MPAA)

Rated NC-17 for strong graphic violence

Details

Country:

Belgium

Language:

French

Release Date:

15 January 1993 (USA)

Also Known As:

Man Bites Dog

Filming Locations:

Brussels, Brussels-Capital, Belgium

Box Office

Budget:

BEF 1,000,000 (estimated)

Gross USA:

$205,569

Company Credits

Production Co:

Les Artistes Anonymes

Technical Specs

Runtime:

95 min 92 min (edited)

Sound Mix:

Mono

Color:

Black and White

Aspect Ratio:

1.66 : 1

Did You Know?

Trivia

According to an essay André wrote, Ben's family didn't know anything about the plot of the film. Ben's mother and grandparents thought they were filming raw footage of Ben, and had no idea that the footage was going to be used in a film in which Ben is a serial killer. Ben's mother was shocked to see her son behind bars, when she comes to visit him in prison.

---

Goofs

When Ben plays the piano, his hands play out of sync with the music.

---

Quotes

Ben: If you kill a whale, you get Greenpeace and Jacques Cousteau on your back, but wipe out sardines and you get a canning subsidy!

---

Connections

Referenced in Random Acts of Violence (2012)

User Reviews

In defense

This movie is a piece of art: shocking and disturbing, while at the same time funny as hell in a raw "should-I-be-laughing-or-should-I-be-ashamed" kind of way.

It gives an insight in the very realistically portrayed life of Ben, a serial killer with an impressionable charisma.

Most people who commented on this film either love it or hate it. The division seems mostly geographical though: most Americans can't seem to understand the tongue-in- cheekness of this movie.

Probably it has to do with the fake-documentary nature of the movie, which is clearly western-european. Anyone who has ever seen American documentaries knows they have a different pace and way of treating images. Those who are used to belgian/french/ dutch/german documentaries will recognise the style of the so-called "intimate" documentaries.

The pivotal point is the moment a relationship develops "beyond" the documentary relationship of the filmmakers and their subject (they take Ben's money to finish the movie).

When watching this movie, try to imagine that this *could* be a real movie:

documentaries about terrorists, drugdealers, and even mercenaries (the closest thing to an actual serial killer) have been made, and some of them were very close to their subject.

It is *not* a "black comedy" in the classical sense of the word; more like a "Clockwork Orange" for the nineties. Where "A Clockwork Orange" bathed in the design of the seventies, this movie bathes in the "larger-than-life" invasiveness of modern-day reality-tv-style television. Anyone who has seen shows like "cops" or "Big Brother" will know what I'm talking about. It asks the big documentary question: in how far does the observed change the observer? It makes a statement, not about violence, but about the observer of violence. The way it is portrayed shows the art of the (very low-budget) crew: it grips your guts without fancy effects or gory protrayal of gore: it shows fear, despair and psychological emptyness, by showing emotions! This should be recommended viewing (and debating) to anyone making documentary films.