co_oldman It should surprise no one who has seen Sweet Movie that the film divides opinion. Precisely when the viewer's delight at the film's irreverent humour and carnivalesque whimsy threatens to overcome his sense of revulsion he is besieged with scenes of disgusting debauchery or stock footage of mass graves. The entire film is a deliberate affront to or subversion of cinematic conventions and societal norms. Familiar images, symbols, and scenes are smeared with excrement or defiled with incongruous sexual and violent overtones. An advertisement for chocolate becomes pornography, lovemaking an opportunity for murder, and the sacred blasphemous.The brilliance of Sweet Movie lies in its unrestrained creativity and its ability to induce paroxysms of laughter. It is the perfect antidote to the solemnity, melodrama, and mawkishness of popular cinema. Few directors possess the genius to conjure up a sugar boat or chocolate bath and even fewer the effrontery to incorporate these images into a film, particularly in the peculiar and outrageous manner that Makavajev does. Sweet Movie was destined to be censored or banned from the moment its conceit gave birth to a film. Indeed, Polish authorities found Anna Prucnal's (Anna Planeta) participation in the film so objectionable that they prohibited her from entering her country of birth for several years! The film centers around a few set pieces whose utter originality and depravity make them unforgettable. To avoid revealing too much about the film, I shall discuss one. The scene of the feasting orgy, at which the actress Carole Laure was so appalled she quit the production, is one of the most disgusting in the history of cinema. I consider this an achievement. The food and drink consumed at a feast is summarily expelled, vomited, or excreted at, on, or nearby the feasting table. A second childishness inexplicably possesses the revelers leading to incontinence, babbling, and egregious misbehaviour. Each excess is mimicked or met with an even greater one. The scene culminates in a few miscreants depositing their own faeces on platters and parading them around the warehouse to the merriment of all present. Sweet Movie is thus a film one can taste, smell, and feel. The film is besides so well-seen that the viewer, for better or for worse, cannot un-see it.Sweet Movie is not merely the expression of a chaotic explosion of creativity devoid of any meaning. Makavajev has messages for the viewer notwithstanding his extremely oblique way of communicating them. Capitalism, supposedly a superior economic system to communism, is represented as equally decadent and depraved, no less violent or deadly. The film is also an ironic indictment of the excesses of the free love movement, the feasting orgy a manifestation of the most hyperbolic and grotesque caricatures of its members. Our visceral shock at their licentious and intemperate behaviour exposes our moral hypocrisy for our shock is scarcely greater when presented with evidence of mass murder. Deplorable conduct and outright criminality, moreover, when presented in a pleasant manner, by way of a beauty pageant, for instance, or perpetrated by a person whom society has arbitrarily judged as reputable, such as an extremely wealthy man, is met with disbelief or entirely excused.Sweet Movie dredges up parts of our psyche that we wish we didn't have or pretend we don't and unflinchingly, even joyously, captures them on film. If the resulting concoction is sweet, it is cloying and disgusting. I consider it a masterpiece, a must-see for fans of art cinema and the bizarre.

Neil Welch Back in the days when I was a sapling - by which I mean I was still developing and the sap was constantly on the rise - I was always up for a good Art film. This was because it was the late 60s, and it was a good bet that I would find something in an Art film which wasn't easily available elsewhere, namely moving images of naked women. The endless quest for naked women, though not yet extinguished, has abated somewhat over the years, and I am now better able to assess Art films without such matters obscuring my judgement. And my conclusion is as follows: some of them are, indeed, art, but many of them represent their maker following a particular vision which is not necessarily obviously apparent to the audience. I am not a deep person, obscure visions do not suddenly reveal themselves in clarity to me, and Art films therefore frequently strike me as pretentious rubbish.Dusan Makavejev has certainly been among the trailblazers of personal visions, and that is the case here. I do not have the vaguest idea what he is trying to convey in this strange, almost plot-free collection of sequences, many of which seem calculated to make the audience challenge their conceptions of what can be considered acceptable viewing. The extraordinarily beautiful Carol Laure goes through a series of increasingly odd experiences until she ends up pleasuring herself while writhing around stark naked in liquid chocolate in a sequence which surprised me at how explicit it was, particularly for 1974, and especially given that it was intended for public exhibition. And this was one of the the "normal" bits. Murder, war crimes, borderline paedophilia, and bodily waste all feature as one continues trying to a) keep one's dinner down and b) figure out what it all means.I'm no wiser, but I am sure that it's not entertainment.

doped_hate_machine One of the best movies ever made. Subversion at its best. Destruction of American cinema. Thanks Makavejev and Muhuel. Great job. Highly recommended for a mind altering cinematic experience. People with blocked minds and lovers of American commercial cinema beware. This is not some high end Mission impossible with plastic gadgets and special effects. This is not a story with a plot and stupid narration. This is the real thing folks. Watch it if you dare to. Go for it. Enjoy. Highly recommended to open minds and understand the power of cinema. Also other makavejev's movies like mysteries of the organism. Expect the unexpected. To make a movie like this you have to be like a mad scientist.

erostew I gave this movie a 6 out of 10. Not because I'm sure that it merits that score but because I'm not sure that it doesn't. Then I decided not to score it at all. I didn't hate it but I didn't love it either. So "no score" wins for now.Be forewarned that there are some very disturbing scenes. This is a movie that would never be made today because of some of the pedophilic imagery. And I admit to having a weak enough stomache that I had to fast-forward through some of the scenes involving feces, urine and vomit.If you can get past that I am quite sure that there is a message in there somewhere. Except when I think it's a piece of crap, that is. The trouble is that I can almost get what it's saying but I can't quite make the leap. Possibly it would have been easier to understand closer to the time it was filmed.I am pretty sure that it is a simultaneous indictment of both the former Eastern Bloc and the West. You can feel the filmmaker's hatred of the Soviet system and his disappointment with the West. Or not. Maybe I have that completely wrong! It comes down to one basic fact. It left me thinking.I didn't really like it and I don't think I entirely respect it either. Nonetheless I came away from this cinematic enigma with something. I just don't know if that something is worth having :) However I don't regret the time I spent watching it.My advice is just to watch it for yourself. The reviewers that call it "brilliant" are probably just poor self-deluded victims of their own pretensions. The ones that call it crap or garbage are probably at least honest about their feelings but they likely didn't even try to understand. Make up your own mind.