'Flux Gourmet' is an experimental arthouse film by Peter Strickland which follows the story of a musical trio within an institute of performative culinary arts. The trio (and 'The Director', played by Gwendoline Christie) go through many trials, eventually culminating in what I would describe as an underbaked final scene.
Personally, I particularly enjoyed the acting of Gwendoline Christie and Asa Butterfield. I found they brought an intensity and realism to their performances that lifted what was otherwise a confusing and underwhelming plotline.
The improvisation scenes in particular (scattered around the film, between takes of the characters performing sonic bakery and over-extended descriptions of one character's digestive issues) stood out to me as invigorating and unexpected; I would have preferred the film explored these further, as I thought the most character development and curated scriptwriting was in these sections.
Ideas of religious sacrifice, exploring the taboo and rebirth are explored through a crude lens which though at times is funny and visually stunning often feels like an attempt for Strickland, the director, to force shock-cinema down the throats of its audience. I thought this was the case particularly in the colonoscopy scenes and 'fecal shock' scenes. it seems as though Strickland, whilst wanting to break the boundaries of cinema, delivered plot twists that rendered even these scenes unnecessary to the greater message of the film.
This underwhelming, confusing plot style is repeated once again in the ending, where Sarah Dee's character is 'cannibalised' for the sake of art. And yet, she isn't. She's alive, in the audience. Or during Stone's 'diagnosis' scene: the extended scenes of him bent over the toilet, or of his colonoscopy and more feel as though they have no place in narrative contemplation once it is revealed he suffers from Celiac disease, and is essentially completely fine (This scene also feels oddly comedic, emphasising the feeling of a potentially interesting plot point being flushed down the toilet).
It feels as though there is no finale and no development to these characters, and no threats to their status quo. What is the purpose of a film that makes its audience leave asking "What was the point?"
One commending factor of this film throughout is the excellent cinematography and lighting; I felt captivated in every scene, even if the events on screen were less than interesting plot-wise. I found that the emphasis on blues and reds created a visually memorable palette that I am personally greatly inspired by for my own work.
Overall, I would rate this film 2.5/5. It seems unsure of what it actually wants to convey to the audience, if anything.
Comments