Julien Donkey-Boy

I wasn't sure how this film was going to appear when I finally saw it. I felt "gummo" was a great film, and didn't see exactly how this was going to compare. "Julien" actually seemed to surpass in reality. It was in no way a mainstream film, but on the other hand, it was not too "artsy" to be understandable. It kept my attention the entire time. I was intrigued not only by the film techniques but by the story it told. The characters were outstanding considering nothing was scripted. I thought the end of the film was very offensive when watching it, but thinking back on it now, it was handled very well and the movie was telling a story. All actors were very believable, and Svengy did a magnificent job. I think my favorite part in the film was the scene in the thrift store. I was also very happy to notice Will Oldham in the party scene and then see a thank you to him in the credits. If "gummo" intrigued you, this film will also.

As people see things, things see us. This extremely disturbing film about a man/boy with schizophrenia struggling through life with his twisted and mentally abusive dad, his sister who is pregnant with his baby, and his abused brother, is terrifyingly weird. With a film in which a boy is brutally smashed in the head with a stone and choked to death, a nun masturbates on the floor, and a armless man plays the drums, it is completely obvious that this film will only appeal to certain people. This film is freakish, but not in as good a way as GUMMO was. With all this being said, while the film was a hellish and emotional picture that is not for the mainstream(to say the least), I would never ever want to really see it again. This was just too much. It made me feel unclean in a way much deeper tan GUMMO. I felt my mind was permanently warped. I never want to even think about this film ever again. Thinking about it makes me feel nauseous. The images and the characters and the actions of them have gotten to me and Of course, this was probably Harmony Korine's intention. Many viewers won't feel the images they are seeing are necessary to for the to see. It is kind of a freak show in a way. It isn't so much the content that is bad. There are many events in the film that just feel wrong. Take for instance the scene where Julien attempts to sell skating shoes he made. He attempts to sell them to a boy who does not listen to what he has to say about his purportedly useless invention and instead swears and yells at him, telling him in exaggerated form that the shoes will kill people and that he wouldn't pay any money for them. The scene has no purpose other than to seemingly be insulting and depressing to the viewer who has already had their fair share of depressing events throughout the film. And yet it is done in such a way that is very lifelike and very realistic in terms of how the scene is constructed, but it seems so weird to want to film this sort of behavior. It has also been well known that for this film project, Harmony recorded real people's reactions of some of the strange behavior with hidden cameras. This adds genuine realism to the film along with the nasty stuff, as if it didn't have enough. It's a tough film to sit through. I think it's a good film, but I don't recommend it for fear that people will think I'm a sicko for thinking they will like it.

Much like European directors Thomas Vinterberg, Lars Von Trier, Jean Luc Goddard, and Werner Herzog (who plays the father!), young American director Harmony Korine is not content to just produce a product. This is film as art. This is film as statement. This is film as reality. It is not escapism-quite the contrary; "Julien" offers nothing in the way of fantasy (other than it's a 'film' and therefore not 'real'). Rather, it injects the viewer into the nervous system of an American most would pretend doesn't exist. It follows a moment in time for Julien, a mentally deranged young man, and his family as they trudge through their mundane, yet disturbed lives. Opening with Julien apparently murdering a young boy in the woods, the viewer is immediately tuned in to just how disturbed he is. From here, the film gives a 'fly on the wall' view of his family; an exasperated father (Herzog), abusive out of his own failures-both personal and familial. A classically driven brother who, through amatuer wrestling, tries to impress daddy-to no avail. Rounding the unit out is his sister (Chloe Sevigny), a ray of light (albeit tainted) within the molassas thick dispair. As the film progresses, we get bits and pieces of a family in sharp decline; the madness isn't all Juliens' that's for sure. Information is given in fits and starts, like bad dreams in still shots. Being a so called 'Dogme' film, "Julien Donkey Boy" has a voyueristic bent, akin to watching a home movie you found on the street. This feeling is only heightened by the seemingly improvised acting (I say 'seemingly' because it can't be ALL impov; forget what you've heard "Julien" DOES have a plot, just not a conventional one). Obviously, "Julien Donkey Boy" is not for everybody, just as "Fitzcarraldo" is not for everyone. I personally found this film compelling. This is the way some people actually live- someone you know, maybe even yourself, and that's why this film works. If I have any criticism, it's not of "Julien" per se, but the fact that all of Korine's films have dealt with teenagers, therefore probably making it easier for some to dismiss his work as merely 'fringe'.

Do not expect to be entertained, and do not expect to be overwhelmed by the aesthetic of this film. Julien Donkey Boy is no more beautiful than its subject. Harmony Korine, in directing and writing this film, has done exactly what he set out to do - he has created a concentrated dose of family life with schizophrenia. In saying that the experience is concentrated, what I mean is that the film uses exaggeration rather liberally in order to condense its somewhat impossibly defined subject matter. Although there are certainly interwoven story arcs for the main characters, there is no central plot, no linearity, no unfragmented reality. The film itself, therefore, is just a little unhinged.

One of my older sisters was schizophrenic. You would have to condense a couple decades worth of her psychotic episodes into a couple of hours to get anywhere near the level of constant distress that is depicted in this film. I most closely related to the character of Pearl, Julien's pregnant sister, but recognized aspects of my own family in all of the characters. What I am trying to say is that there is certainly some truth to what this movie says and the archetypal characters portrayed, its truth may be hard to recognize if you haven't lived through it.

Living with a schizophrenic will bring out and amplify your own nature - and if you are open to it, you will be a better person. It is also, however, fairly easy to allow the experience to overwhelm you. People who have never been exposed to schizophrenia in any but a superficial way will find most of the film's characters and vignettes very difficult to believe. I am pretty sure Korine knew this going in.

Korine has portrayed schizophrenia in a sensitive and truthful, but nevertheless utterly disturbing and somewhat unrealistically condensed way. Every directorial decision is meant to create a sense of realism. The method is very effective, and the film is essentially successful. Julien intentionally and clearly positions its audience as voyeurs, using hand-held photography almost exclusively and allowing character- development (the bulk of the film) to dictate the pace and rhythm of every scene. All of the acting is superb, and although there are very few feel-good moments in this film, it may be somewhat cathartic for folks like me, and somewhat (painfully) enlightening for those who grew up in less dysfunctional, or more-traditionally dysfunctional, families.

Let me tell you a little about art. Art tells you about yourself. When you react negatively and declare that a movie is garbage this says something about your aesthetics. It is one of the grandest illusions there ever was to blame someone or something else for your own reaction. That is what hell is: you torturing yourself. The intention of the artist is so often attacked, as if the man really just picked up a piece of trash and called it 'art'. Art is not a conscious conclusion. And if it is your interpretation that it is a piece of trash labeled 'art', then you must think art is exactly what it is not, a cold rational fact. As if it were a crime to find beauty in anything and everything there is. And as if there should be a rational reason for it to be such. Give yourself a break and allow yourself to experience something other than your cold hard rationality. Reason is predictable. The fun of the game is that don't know the outcome.