This Unnameable Little Broom (1985)

Loosely based on the Mesopotamian "Epic of Gilgamesh", here Gilgamesh is portrayed as a grotesque, Picasso-esque being who uses a tricycle to patrol his box-shaped kingdom that hovers above a dark abyss.

Directors:

Keith Griffiths (as K. Griffiths), Stephen Quay

Writers:

Keith Griffiths (as K. Griffiths), Stephen Quay

Storyline

A red-clothed puppet lives in a room with a missing wall. He rides a tricycle. Gadgets surround him. He eats dandelion tufts. A painting lies on a table in the middle of his room. He hides. A bird-man flies into the room curious about the vaguely erotic painting. Something in it moves: the bird-man looks closely, the painting clamps shut, he's ensnared. Trike-man emerges from hiding, frees a cricket from inside the table and throws the cricket into the night. He pulls a bolt of cloth through a hole in one wall, yard by yard. Trapped in the cloth is the bird-man, whose wings the trike-man clips; he cages the bird-man in his table and rides his trike maniacally around the cage.

---

Plot Keywords:

surrealism | stop motion | independent film | 

---

Genres:

Animation | Short | Fantasy

---

Certificate:

Not Rated

Details

Country:

UK

Language:

English

Release Date:

1985 (UK)

Also Known As:

The Epic of Gilgamesh

Company Credits

Production Co:

Koninck Studios

Technical Specs

Runtime:

11 min

Sound Mix:

Mono

Color:

Color

Aspect Ratio:

1.33 : 1

Did You Know?

Connections

Edited into Tales of the Brothers Quay (1987)

User Reviews

Peculiarly Familiar

This was originally meant to be a 52-minute film based on the Epic of Gilgamesh to involve live action, dance and animation. What we have now is a 11-minute film of the segment where Gilgamesh, setting up his traps, succeeds in trapping Enkidu with an elaborate table trap.

I think it's almost a given that if one knows the Quays one is also acquainted with Švankmajer. It may be my too strong inclination to project my own subjective theories onto things, but I think his influence looms over this one strongly. While a very interesting film (I don't think the brothers have ever done anything uninteresting), I think the more their films started to swerve to their unknown paths of (often) black-and-white chaos the better.

Not that this doesn't have that trademark sense of not only the surreal, nightmarish kind of dreaming, it already has that strong personal sense that makes one wonder whether these images have been taken from one's own subconscious. In their strangeness they are peculiarly familiar, and isn't that a sign of great art if anything? That we take the images as our own.

This is available on DVD, a collection of their short films, and the brothers did a few audio commentaries for it, this being one of them. They are, personally, as endearing, interesting, intelligent and witty as artists get. And artists they are, and I'm so glad to have them around.