Visions of Death:
“Dr. Gross, Monkey Brains & Everything Else That Isn’t Real”
By: Group U2
·
Dana Smith
·
Bowdee Nolin
·
Jon Youse
·
Kelly Bergman
·
Tom Love
· David Page
Death is a topic that affects us all. Eventually, we are all going to experience it. Naturally, something that affects every person in such a dramatic way is going to generate a great amount of interest. Death has been studied and analyzed in many different fashions throughout the ages and because we have yet to find a way to experience death and then talk about what actually happens, the curiosity remains. Many ideas about what happens when someone dies have been advanced through various books and films. The Faces of Death series is a film series that addresses the many ways that one might die. The film series started in 1979 with the original Faces of Death and the first five offerings in the series were written and directed by John Schwartz. Dr. Frances B. Gross, a pathologist, serves as a narrator for the film. The basic idea of the series is an exploration of the many ways in which one might die. These many ways are called the “faces of death.” While human death is the main topic, the film does show footage and address the treatment of animals when they are killed, so that humans might profit whether that be through the production of food or certain types of clothing. This paper analyzes the original Faces of Death based on its narrative aspects, some of the questions it raises, which genre this series fits in and how it compares to other material in that genre, and finally we will offer our criticism of the film series. Before we get to far into the analyzation of this film, we need to mention a few key points that one must keep in mind when considering this series.
In his book Introduction to Documentary Bill Nichols said when speaking of documentaries, “We believe what we see at our own risk.” This is important to mention because part of the validity of the argument that a documentary builds lies in the eye of the viewer. If the viewer does not believe what they are seeing is real, then the documentary looses some of its persuasive influence. A filmmaker can counteract the affects of having a poorly constructed argument by manipulating the technologies that are now available to make images that might not be authentic appear to be authentic. These are important points to make early in our discussion of Faces of Death because of the controversy that the series has caused. This series was/is controversial because many people who have viewed this film thought that all of the images were real. Some of the images in this film are real, but many are reenactments or just representations of what may have happened.
Faces of Death is a documentary of social representation. It offers those who watch it a new perspective of an issue that is common to us all. Documentaries of social representation are quite different from other genres such as comedy or adventure because its goal is to increase our understanding of a certain issue through the exploration of that issue. While this style of documentary may offer us a new view of an issue that is common to all of us, that view is heavily biased because it is the view that the filmmaker has chosen to present to us.
Faces of Death opens with a surgeon in a hospital performing open heart surgery. From here the viewer is quickly transported to a morgue that is full of cadavers and we witness an autopsy being performed. The series of shots in the morgue allow the viewer to witness the opening of the cranium with a bone saw and the removal of the cadaver’s brains and internal organs. At this point we hear the voice of Dr. Frances B. Gross as he begins to discuss a dream that has plagued him and how this dream has pushed him to gain a deeper understanding of death. As he is talking, we follow him from room to room in a complex that is supposed to be representative of a local doctors office.
As Dr. Gross is talking he informs the viewer that they will be a witness to what he has discovered and they will also serve as the jury to what his discoveries mean. According to Dr. Gross, each step we take on the journey will lead towards the different “faces of death” and it will broaden our understanding of our own mortality and will leave us with a new perspective about death.
At this point it, is important to note a few interesting things about the film. Dr. Gross’ commentary is serving as the “voice of God” as he guides us from image to image. Additionally, anyone viewing this film who has had any education in the area of film study will notice that the participatory mode is being utilized because Dr. Gross is narrating the film, actually appears in the film, and served as a creative consultant during the entire project.
After viewing Faces of Death, it appears that the filmmaker is making an argument for three apparent themes regarding death. Those themes are that an animal’s death at the hands of a human can be cruel and unnecessary, that we all wonder about death but most of us have little control over our actual death, and that our fascination with death leads us to take part in some interesting rituals in the hope that we can avoid death.
Coming back to the film narrative we find ourselves in the Amazon jungle. Here we see the death of several animals including insects, snakes, and a monkey. This clearly is the “face of death” that animals experience and the lesson here is clear. Those who are able to dominate due and the weaker are left to their fate.
The next “face of death” regarding animals is the one that we are shown on the farms and in the slaughterhouses across the Midwest. We see both cows and sheep being slaughtered in different ways. At this point, Dr. Gross mentions that if he had to kill these animals using these methods he would strongly consider becoming a vegetarian. At this point a bit of the filmmaker’s bias creeps in because statements like that can lead the viewer to think that this sort of death is cruel and maybe unnecessary.
Next, we see the famous monkey scene. This scene takes place in an exotic looking restaurant where belly dancers are part of the dining experience. As the camera moves around the room, we see the diners receive some wine and their “special dining implements.” Now we see the waiter bring a screaming monkey to the table and place it in a vice at the center of the table. The diners then crush the monkey’s skull with their “special dining implement.” This series of shots showing the monkey being brought to the table, killed, and having its brain eaten serve only to back the previous implication of the cruelty that an animal may experience when dying at the hands of a human.
Many of the following scenes take us to different places around the world, but they all involve an animal dying at the hands of a human. Some of the acts of violence committed against animals include the clubbing of seals, the shooting of sharks, and the skinning of alligators. With each series of shots, the argument built against the killing of animals, by humans, becomes more and more convincing.
After thoroughly covering some of the “faces of death” that animals encounter, the film takes on some of the “faces of death” that humans encounter. The first one covered is assassination and the footage used for this is the 1968 assassination of Jean Voisier a head of a French political party. This footage is used, but not much is done with this particular “face of death.” It should be noted that questions have been raised as to the authenticity of this footage.
Murder is the next “face of death” that is portrayed. The images used here are questionable as well. Many different camera angles are used with many quick cuts. This makes it difficult to tell whether the images used are indeed authentic or if they have been reenacted for the sake of the film
During this portion of the film, Dr. Gross is asking questions to “medical experts” off-screen and then having them answered on-screen. This portion of the film is eerie because of the background music and the poetry of Luther Eastman that is read. Dr. Gross becomes introspective here and shares that he often wonders how he’ll die, but concludes that he has little control over the decision.
At this point, the viewer is transported to a maximum-security prison to witness a death by execution. The contrast being drawn is obvious because these individuals on death row know exactly when and how they will die. Electrocution is the chosen method for the execution that we witness. Some question whether this footage is real or reenacted, but the message of this particular “face of death” is the fear that is obvious when one knows their end is near.
The next “faces of death” that we see involves different types of death that one encounters when taking part in cult rituals. A cult that is supposedly located just outside of San Francisco is shown sacrificing one of its members. Then, we see a snake handler who is supposed to be in the Kentucky hills. The message that we get from this sequence of shots is how enthralled we are with death and how some rituals are utilized with the hope of avoiding death.
Many other images of death are shown at this point, but they all serve to back up the “faces of death” that have already been shown. By this point in the film, the argument has already been made, and the deaths that are shown in the end appear to be a bit gratuitous.
The film closes with a shot of a woman giving birth. Dr. Gross is speaking about the things he has learned about death and mentions that life and death form a perfect circle and that experiencing death is part of life.
Now that we have looked at of Faces of Death from a narrative perspective lets analyze the film based on some of the questions it raises.
Faces of Death poses many questions as a documentary. Presenting scenes of death, their causes, locations and reasoning bring about several issues about the series. (1) Were the events staged and what impact does staging have on this film? (2) How did the narration affect the content and audience? (3) What was the purpose of the film’s overall content?
Due to the film’s content, it is difficult to view it and not question—is this real? Bordwell & Thompson (43) states “Still, both viewers and filmmakers regard some staging as legitimate in a documentary if the staging serves the larger purpose of presenting information.” Obviously, a movie such as Faces of Death would have to include some staged events, considering there isn’t always a camera available when death occurs or when a death is happened on unexpectedly.
For example, Faces of Death includes a scene where a spelunker has fallen into a cave and a friend has called for help. The help includes two men and a video camera. They go down to the fallen spelunker to find that the injuries sustained from the fall have taken his life. Knowing how emergency response teams work, I know that the scene would not have occurred in such a fashion. It was most definitely staged.
This brings up a point that filmmakers must address—what is realistic? If filmmakers want viewers to believe the event they are watching truly occurred at that time, they must research, prepare and perform the event as it would have happened. Otherwise, personal knowledge and experiences of the audience will have them believe that the event was staged. This brings about the filmmakers purpose and the extent to which the filmmaker wants to divulge how much was staged.
Faces of Death did include scenes that were not staged, but a majority of the scenes did not include the actual viewing of a human dieing. One particular non-staged scene was that of the Los Angeles County Coroners Office. The camera walks us through a room filled with cadavers, while the narrator discusses tragic deaths, autopsies, DNA sampling and the embalming process. Social actors are performing autopsies at the time of taping and the camera shows the audience the horrific way in which our bodies are cut, sliced, pulled and put back together again—all in effort to find reasoning behind death.
Whether the scene was staged or not, the narration helped to guide the video along and keep the viewers wondering what was going to be shown next. Faces of Death incorporates a voice-of-God commentary and although we never see the narrator talking he introduces himself as Dr. Frances B. Gross. We also learn that Dr. Gross is a pathologist. Whether the audience members choose to believe that Dr. Gross is truly a doctor and or a pathologist is strictly the decision of each individual viewer. But, by stating a name and profession, it set a standard of credibility for the narrator. It was necessary to do that because the narrator incorporated rhetorical comments to make viewers question certain causes of death and challenged them to consider their own deaths.
For example, one section of the film focused on animal hunters and the different types of them. Some hunters kill for pleasure while others hunt for food, as a means of population control or for monetary profit. While witnessing scenes of the four types of hunters, the narrator challenges us as viewers by making us consider what is ethically right and what is not. Why is it okay to kill animals for one reason, but not another? In the end, it’s all death anyway. Right?
Another example of the narrator’s role is the way in which he caused us to question our own death and to value each day we have because we do not know when it will occur. During the scene of the Los Angeles County Coroner’s Office the narrator comments that we don’t know when our time is up, so we should make the most of our life now. During a scene that shows a drowning victim being pulled from the water, the narrator discusses how we take life for granted and that stupidity and bad decision-making can prematurely cause death and does so daily.
By combining the images with the rhetorical and challenging narration, Faces of Death succeeded in attacking an issue that is always at the back of people’s minds but seldom discussed, pondered or confronted. This film explored many causes and types of death and portrayed to its viewers a compilation of what our world involves. As much as we, as a society, like to “sweep things under the rug,” Faces of Death pulled back that rug and addressed the issue of death head-on. Death is not always a pretty sight and often we are left wondering why. Death is not always ethical, but sometimes, who are we to say what’s ethical, especially to a starving man.
Now that we have looked at some of the narrative aspects of Faces of Death and analyzed the film based on some of the questions it raises, lets discuss which genre these films fit in and how they compare to other material in that genre.
In order to have a holistic analysis of these films, we must answer a few questions. What genre do these films fit into? What are the origins of the genre that the film comes from and what comparisons can be drawn?
To answer the first question as to what genre these films belong to, we must first define the genres. Bordwell and Thompson (42) state that the “documentary film purports to present factual information about the world outside the film.” The films appear in narrative form and present themselves as a compilation of film and video clips relating to the topic of death. Bordwell and Thompson (44) state that this is a common type of documentary. It is simple to assert that these films are documentary in form. Documentary films are open to all sorts of content, so is it possible to fit these films into this genre. To compare these films to Nanook of the North or A Thin Blue Line would not suffice in a scholarly attempt at an analysis of these films. We must look farther.
A unique approach to analyzing this film would be through the genre of horror films. Horror films are most recognizable by their effect on the audience. “The horror film aims to shock, disgust, repel – in short, to horrify (Bordwell and Thompson, 58).” The content of the Faces of Death films contains as has been described before as being grotesque or lurid and is a compilation of death scenes, suicide, homicide, execution, death by animal, or other accidents. These films also focus on the events surrounding death including cannibalism and autopsy. To mention, let alone show, the act during an autopsy where the neck is cut and the skin from the face is pulled back to the back of the head would serve all aspects of this genre. The problem with placing these films into this genre lies in the form. Horror films are primarily fictional in form and rise out of Hollywood filmmaking. Do these films fit along side Night of the Living Dead and Nosferatu? While the Faces of Death series contains many of the content elements of the horror film genre, it conventions do not follow the Hollywood style of fictional filmmaking.
This film does, however, show many cues as to having elements of fictional film. While it lacks the common narrative form of fictional films, it does show many scenes that the authenticity or credibility of the events is in question. Scenes such as an assassination of Jean Voisier, head of the Partie Socialist Populaire, in the first film of the series appear to be authentic. There is no grotesque display of blood, but rather a gunshot and a falling body. There is however a problem in locating such a person with an affiliation to a “Popular Socialist Party.” While the event appears to be real, the facts surrounding the event have either been changed or falsified. This creates some ambiguity to the reality that is being portrayed in the film. The two other people that are mentioned in the first film, Mike Lawrence and Mary Ellen Brighton, also are fairly ambiguous even though dates are given to their events. In the case of Mike Lawrence, there should have been some report in a major newspaper of a man who shot his family and then was killed by the police. We searched 3 major newspapers for this event for the five days following the event and found no evidence of it occurring. Mary Brighton’s apparent suicide also could not be confirmed by news sources. This exposition on the ambiguous nature of these films leads us to the sub-genre of documentary films, the mockumentary. Dave Post of Internet Movie Data base defines this genre as being “films that make humor or satire of the documentary films either in form or through the misuse of content.” Through the examples that we have provided, there are elements of this mockumentary style through the content portion by manipulating the scenes that are used, either through falsification or their juxtaposition. We must admit that these films do not fit firmly into this genre with films like Roger and Me or The Bunk Witch Project, but they certainly contain some of its characteristic conventions.
One final genre that is possible to fit these films into is another sub-genre of the documentary. “The shockumentary is a combination of the horror film with the documentary film,” states Dave Post of the Internet Movie database. The shockumentary’s goals are the same as the definition that Bordwell and Thompson give for the horror film genre in that the goal is to gross out and horrify the viewer, but also carries with it the conventions of the documentary film compilation style. This is possibly the genre that single-handedly contains the most content and form conventions that are encapsulated in the Faces of Death series. The most popularly known scene form these films is most likely the scene in which two couples sit down in an Indian restaurant for a traditional meal of monkey brains. The monkey is brought out and fixed to a contraption to contain it. The two men then senselessly bludgeons the monkey in the head until its skull falls off. This portion of the film is almost narrated as an ethnographical documentary while at the same time containing grotesquely violent imagery of a falsified or staged act of animal cruelty. This scene is the epitome of shockumentary style. This film series falls in line with its predecessors of the Mondo Cane series and Farewell Africa, in their exploitation of the grotesque imagery of death.
What function do these films serve? Many would argue that these films serve as to fulfill man’s lurid obsession with death. There are only two things that are sure in life: death and taxes. Everyone knows about taxes. Sociologically speaking, these films fill in as an outlet for the discourse on the subject of death. The filmmaker’s intentions may not have been such, but that is the function that they serve.
What are the origins of this genre? There are several directions in which this question can be taken. As we have seen in Un Chien Andalou, “the surrealist approach to art [film] has been to shock and disturb. (Sandrow, 3)” While these films differ certainly in terms of content and form, their goals have certainly been the same to use elements of shock to persuade or illustrate to the viewer to a point of view. We do not wish to place Faces of Death in the same category of avant-garde films, but we must admit that there may be some commonality in their origins.
The next logical connection that these films may have to a springing out of a genre may be from the horror genre. The thrill that people get out of being scared has made the horror genre as popular and profitable as it is. The more grotesque and real the films are the more controversial or popular they have been. The Faces of Death series has often been seen to be taboo, in that its content has been too real. At the time of its release this may have been true, but to the revisionist this is clearly a falsehood.
One final long shot at discovering the origins of these films may be the classroom films of the mid-1940s to the late 1970s. Ken Smith discusses these educational films in regards to their effects on mental health and effect on the students in his book Mental Hygiene: Classroom films 1945 - 1970. He gives many examples of the reality-based films of the times and how shock value was added to persuade students to act in a certain manner. It is possible that these shockumentaries are a natural progression from these educational films. Many people can remember seeing the effects of careless diving and the visually graphic depictions of accidents in their driver’s education course.
The Faces of Death series is an offshoot of the “Mondo” series of films that took its name from the original film in that series, Mondo Cane (1963). The Nichols text describes films in this genre as a “cabaret of curiosities” and “cinema of attractions” (Nichols 87). Those films were supposed anthropological documentaries that highlighted rituals, customs, and events from all over the world. These films are like a freak show captured on celluloid. The “Mondo” movies had some scenes of death, but it also had many scenes of nudity and sexual taboos as well as weird and strange customs and rituals. This genre engages the viewer by giving them a voyeuristic look into other cultures and situations that they have never been exposed to before. The Faces of Death series focused strictly on the taboo subject of death and took it to a different level. The real footage of stunts gone wrong and civil unrest is inter-cut with other faked scenes of death.
The fake events are somewhat convincing, but obviously fake. The scenes look like they were inspired by Fangoria magazine. One such scene shows a man being drawn and quartered. The camera shows the man being tied to four horses by his hands and feet, but then cuts away to a long shot before the body quartered. This is done to cover the fact that it is only a prop dummy that is quartered. Another fake scene involves a magician who attempts an escape act and fails. He is bound in a straight jacket and laid on a plank with a spiked weight suspended above his head. The object of the act is for the magician to escape before a candle burns through the rope holding the weight. The camera cuts away this time to a close-up of a dummy head just as weight falls and crushes the dummy head.
There is an underlying element of black comedy in the film. A trademark of the genre is the snide, cynical narration from the “doctor”. This cynical look at these freakish events harkens back to Land Without Bread. The same debasing commentary is present, with the “doctor” pointing out the foibles and inconsistencies of human nature in much the same way the narrator spoke of the Hurdanos in Land Without Bread. The narrator, the “doctor”, tries to present and explain the scenes in an even-handed, matter-of-fact way, but when combined with the faked scenes of death it drolly presents a dark humor. The film can almost be taken at face value, for many people believe that the scenes they are viewing are completely real. Just as viewers of Land Without Bread must have believed that it was an actual travelogue. But when you scratch beneath the surface of Faces of Death IV, the same approach to the genre can be seen.
The only real scenes of death are the shorter clips that are news or home video coverage of accidents, civil unrest and stupid human tricks. The footage believed to be real appears to be the type of footage shown on television now in shows like Real TV, COPS, or any of Fox’s World’s Deadliest/Most Amazing Videos shows. For an example of the real clips in the film, there is a scene of a jet crash at a German air show and the resulting damage that was captured on home video. Another scene shows a racing boat speeding along a lake at 200 M.P.H. and crashing. And then there are those scenes of stupid human tricks, which are basically dangerous stunts that went bad. In one scene a man on roller skates is being pulled behind a speeding motorcycle and he lets go in order to purposely hit a target on a brick wall. In the following scene a strongman attempts to hold a fully loaded pickup truck on his chest and he is injured when the blocks supporting the vehicle give way. There are also scenes of rioting and beatings by authorities in Latin American, third world and Asian countries that would have to be from some sort of journalistic coverage of the events and conditions in those countries.
These videos, which were once considered taboo, can now be seen as fore bearers to what can be seen on network TV today. Scenes like those in these videos can be seen on modern reality TV programs and direct to cable/video programs. Many scenes follow police officers with hand-held cameras as they approach a crime scene in the style of a COPS-type TV show. Faces of Death I and IV demonstrate an influence on a wide range of modern programs like Fear Factor, Rescue 911 or even Survivor. Video store shelves are filled with the current descendents of this genre. With titles like TV’s Most Shocking Moments Uncensored, which covers everything from Pit Bull maulings to spring break partiers flashing or The Best of Backyard Wrestling, which contains many scenes of non-professional wrestling enthusiasts beating on each other in their backyards. Just as the Faces of Death series took the “Mondo” films content to another level, network television gives even more scenes of death and gore on a daily basis.
Nichols (on page 86) describes how the filmmaker takes a backseat when presenting these “reality” type films. His view is that the event being filmed is more important than the filmmaker, but I don’t believe this is the case with Faces of Death. Most of the scenes in the film are scripted and the filmmakers made specific choices about how to create and place these scenes within these films. In Faces of Death IV, a majority of the scenes involve tragic accidents or crime scenes and the filmmakers made a specific choice to make these staged events look like they were captured by a TV news crew or by a bystander with a camera. The cameras follow the subjects in a shaky, hand-held manner that implies a sense of reality and attempts to legitimize the footage that is captured. The entire flow of the film eases viewer from one scene to another, and shocking, taboo subject matter is the hook that keeps the viewer watching. In many instances the viewer may be disgusted y the disturbing subject matter, yet he cannot look away. The filmmaker knows that the voyeuristic tendencies of the viewers will keep them watching.
There can still be much discussion left on these films, but there genre and origins of their genres are somewhat skewed by the ambiguity that the films themselves possess.
Now that we have looked at some of the narrative aspects of Faces of Death, analyzed the film based on some of the questions it raises and discussed which genre these films fit in and how they compare to other material in that genre, lets mention some of the criticisms that we have with this film series.
This is an analysis of the fourth installment of the Faces of Death series. I have to admit that it was difficult to create a relationship with this particular text. The subject matter is disturbing and even more disturbing is that there are people that market and sell as well as enjoy watching this rubbish. I wouldn’t normally watch such things, but have in the past out of intellectual curiosity. After having watched these films it is easy to see there is nothing intellectually stimulating about them. For someone to call these movies a series of documentaries takes a lot of nerve.
If indeed I could, with a clear conscience, refer to this film as a documentary it would be in the style of an observational documentary. This movie sets out in the same fashion as the other films. However volume 4 features almost exclusively death scenes involving people, where the original featured many scenes of animal deaths. Volume 4 (as with the others) features clips of scenes showing people who are already dead, tragic accidents as they are occurring, and other random acts of carnage. Most of it is stock footage from camera crews on the scene after the deaths have already occurred. Footage that is shot during an accident resulting in death is not shot close enough to see the victims clearly. The only clips that show the victims up close as the events unfold are those incidents that are staged.
Some factors in the production of the film make it rather easy to tell which segments are staged and which ones are real. As I mentioned before, many of the incidents of real death are filmed after the fact or from less than ideal vantage points. Even after the victims have died it appears that the cameras are kept at a distance out of the way of authorities and rescue workers. Many times you will catch the camera breaking focus or zooming in and then back out revealing that the camera is a considerable distance away from the subject. The camera motion is very shaky and the quality is grainy, very much like footage being shot handheld on a 16mm or 8mm film camera. In many instances if there is a sound track to the scene it’s rough and somewhat noisy. However this is not the case in one of the earlier staged scenes. In the scene a mental patient has taken a nurse hostage then dispatches her brutally by stabbing her in the throat with a screwdriver. In this scene the cameraman seems to have priority position over the police officers. In a situation like this police should try to keep a cameraman from just barging into a sensitive situation. In this scene the cameraman goes in seemingly untouched. The footage is clean as if shot on video rather than film Then there are the sound effects. That’s right I said sound effects. It’s apparent that sound effects were dubbed in when they took the mental patient into custody, because as they accost him sound effects are dubbed in to indicate that they are punching him. No emergency vehicles in any of the staged instances have any really distinct markings, and the police and rescue uniforms are rather plain. I asked a friend that works as a special effects makeup artist, to critique the gore effects used in the staged scenes. He said he was ashamed of the lack of effort that was made, and that they should have tried to create at least somewhat realistic effects to create greater doubts as to which events are staged and which are not. Much of the footage in the staged scenes is much more crisp and clear. There are multiple vantage points making it seem likely that there are many cameras in use to record the footage. Stressing brevity in the length of the staged scenes would have made them a little more uniform so that they would have matched up better with the real clips. In some sequences inconsistencies in the footage are tell tale signs of staged footage. In one instance there is a scene where a man is training tigers and is attacked by one of them. When the tiger begins to savage him, he appears to be wearing a jacket and pants. The camera begins to pan and shake showing images of other cats with the sound effect of the other tigers growling and hissing (which does not match up with the motion of their mouths) dubbed in. They cut back to the man lying on the ground with his arm torn off. Now he is wearing a pair of blue coveralls. This is an example of how the filmmakers count on the ignorance of the viewer. Hopefully the viewer will be to busy anticipating the savage and gory images to notice the lack of consistency. During the staged scenes they actually take time to get reaction shots from bystanders as they witness the incident. They also leave time for the narrator to lead in with his commentary by shooting extraneous footage leading up to the gruesome events. There are many inconsistencies that can be pointed out when viewing the film if one just pays attention (or is somewhat educated). Or if they would just keep watching until the end of the credits they would see the disclaimer at the end that says that some of the scenes are merely recreations of “actual” events.
Another notable difference between volume Faces 4 and Faces1 is the introduction of a new narrator, “Dr.” Lewis Flellis. He is used in an attempt to make the film seem more ominous and eerie. His visual appearance at first is somewhat normal; he is an older man wearing a lab coat sitting behind a desk. As he begins to speak, his wide-eyed leering stare and dreary tone make him seem as if he is somewhat mentally unbalanced. They give a close up of his hands at one point, as he wrings them in a maniacal fashion to add to the dramatic tone of the film. He speaks of a colleague who committed suicide, because of his fear surrounding the uncertainty of his own death. He appears from time to time to talk to the viewers about death and some times to set up the next scene. The rest of the time he acts as the “voice of god,” or maybe more appropriately the voice of a madman. It’s easy to see what the filmmakers were trying to do, even though it was less than effective. They were trying to set a kind of macabre tone using this character. However, the result is laughable. The man does not come across well as either a maniac or as a medical professional. Rather he would be more believable as a pedophile.
Faces of Death 4 appears to be nothing more than a gratuitous display of blood and gore. No answers are given about the mysteries surrounding death, nor do the filmmakers address the frequency and rarity of certain kinds of deaths. They never warn of the dangers of certain acts, rather they just glorify the end consequence. No message of deterrence can be found during any of the accident sequences. What is the underlying purpose of this film (if any)? I don’t think there is any profound underlying theme to be found within the text. There really is no substance that could justify this presentation of such graphic images in such a context. The voice of Faces 4 speaks loudly of the desensitization of a certain percentage of society. It tells us that there are people out there that hunger for more bloodshed, gore, and carnage. When the viewers are no longer shocked enough by the gruesome images of Faces 1, they must seek out the rest of the volumes in the series to satisfy their voyeuristic type of bloodlust. The fact that there are at least eight different volumes in the entire series (so far) is proof of that. At least the first film seemed to be suggesting that death was an inevitable part of the circle of life by examining different types of deaths as well as different aspects of death before and after the fact.
The first movie in the series is honestly the closest to a real documentary that the entire series has to offer. Faces 4 does not present death in a respectable or humane fashion. Death deserves a certain amount of dignity and the way this film parades around it’s atrocious footage it denies the featured victims any dignity. The intention of the film at this point is to try to be bloodier and more disturbing than the previous volumes. They are merely there to satisfy those who don’t get enough gore in the bloodiest of fictional horror films. I would not refer to this movie as a documentary by any means; I see them as more of a depraved form of entertainment closer in that respect to hardcore pornography and fetish films.
The Faces of Death film series was certainly a pioneering film series. The film got its roots from films such as the “Mondo” films. The films do contain a lot of gratuitous violence and staged events. However, the gratuitous violence and staged events did allow the film series did accomplish two major things. The first thing the film series accomplished is that it did help bring death and the study of death to the foreground in the entertainment industry. By bringing death to the foreground more people are willing to look at death and face it as a reality. Another way of stating this would be to say that this film series, despite its gratuitous violence and staged events, did help to dymystify death and some of the events that are associated with it by giving us a glimpse of them. The second thing that this film series accomplished was laying the groundwork for such real life dramas like Fear Factor, Rescue 911, and TV’s Most Shocking Moments Uncensored that are now common installments on many television stations programming guides. Without these films we may not have these television shows today.
Bibliography
Curci, Loris Shock Masters of the Cinema Fantasma Books1996
Bordwell and Thompson Film Art
Internet Movie Database, http://us.imdb.com
Kuenzli, Rudolf Dada and Surrealist Film 2001
Losman’s Lair of Horror, http://www.losman.com/fodframe.htm
Matthews, J.H. Surrealism and Film Univ of Michigan 1971
Nichols, Bill. Introduction to Documentary. Indiana University Press, 2001.
Sandrow, Nahma Surrealism: Theater, Arts, Ideas iUniverse.com 2001
Smith, Ken Mental Hygiene: Classroom Films 1945-1970 Blast Books 1999
Post, Dave Personal Correspondacne Internet Movie Database Associate