On Thursday night, I had the house to myself and decided to stream a movie from Netflix. I somewhat randomly picked a foreign film called “Dogtooth” knowing very little about it. In other words, I went in completely blind minus the cover art and the tiny 2 sentence description on Netflix instant streaming. (I chose it because it was foreign, had a good rating and the cover art looked interesting.) I believe this is the way everyone should see “Dogtooth”. (So please don’t read on if you haven’t seen it.)
Wow. I was in for a surprise. This movie captivated me. I love indie films and foreign films, and tend to stay away from big Hollywood because I find most of them boring and predictable. But I have never seen anything like “Dogtooth”. It’s one of the those movies you can’t stop thinking about when it’s over. After stewing on it Thursday night and Friday morning, I realized I had to discuss it with someone. It’s just so very different from most movies. It’s weird without being weird just for the sake of being weird. And I decided I had to watch it again so I watched it again last night. (I watched it alone both times.)
Let me start by saying I am by no means a movie reviewer, and I don’t really know how to talk about, or analyze movies. (My comments are usually limited to: “It was really, really good!” or “It was really, really, REALLY good!” but I don’t know how to say WHY it was good.) And let me also say I am writing this post quickly – without really trying to be a good writer. I’m not doing an actual blog post here. I’m wanting a forum to discuss this absolutely stunning movie. I want to bounce my thoughts and interpretations off someone – ANYONE – who has seen the film. I want to discuss it. And I have questions.
I went online last night trying to find discussions about the film and found a couple of online forums but they haven’t been updated in a year or more. Apparently, all the discussions happened when the film came out in 2009-2010 and was nominated for Best Foreign Language Film at the Academy Awards in 2011. So I couldn’t find a recent or active discussion forum. Also, much of what I want to discuss was not discussed on these forums. But I did find some interesting comments…which made me want to discuss the film even more. I asked my husband to watch it so I would have someone to discuss it with (and because he has a minor in film and knows how to analyze film and discuss it) but I don’t think he’s going to watch it anytime soon, and I really don’t want to wait. I also asked my mom to watch it but I don’t know if that will happen anytime soon, either. I’ve got a one-track mind and I want to discuss it now.
I have seen this movie described as a “black comedy” and I guess there isn’t a better category for it, but I did not laugh out loud at all. I personally did not find it funny. Although there are a few parts that were somewhat amusing (like the “Bruce” scene, and the opening scene of deciding to play the game of endurance with the water tap). I found the deadpan expressions and the dialogue intriguing and somewhat amusing. I don’t know how to categorize this movie. But that doesn’t matter. It was GENIUS. I am awe-struck by its brilliance. I believe it deserves all the accolades it has received. But I will also say that this movie isn’t for everyone. And there are plenty of people who hated it or simply didn’t “get it”. (Insert judgmental comments about these people here. LOL.)
Let me also note: DO NOT READ THIS POST IF YOU HAVEN’T SEEN THE FILM! Spoiler Alert!
Okay, here goes:
1. One of the big questions the film raises for me is the whole nature versus nurture controversy. (And a main reason I found it so compelling.) Which aspects of our behavior and values are learned and which are instinctive? I would think incest would be instinctively felt as wrong or unnatural. It seems to me that “son” doesn’t feel this way. But maybe elder daughter does, as she is obviously very uncomfortable with having sex with brother, and seems negatively impacted by it. She seems to know something isn’t right but doesn’t know how to interpret those feelings so she just “acts out” and this seems a major factor in her downward spiral. What do you think?
2. Did the “other” brother ever exist? What do you think? At first, I thought he might have existed, and he left/escaped, and that was one reason the parents became so controlling. And also because the children seemed to actually really believe in him. But then I realized they believe everything their parents tell them without question, so that really wasn’t a good enough reason to say the brother did exist. And it would make sense the parents would make up another sibling to indoctrinate and instill fear. What do you think? Did he exist?
3. Just something I noticed: The only child who ever shows any sort of disbelief at anything happening around her is the eldest daughter (who ends up watching the VCR tapes and trying to leave the compound). There are two incidents were she talks about not believing someone and accuses that person of lying; and this happens before she watches the two movies (which seems to be the trigger to her leaving). Both times this is with Christina; she doesn’t believe the headband sparkles and she doesn’t believe her about the hair gel. Neither of the other two children ever show any signs of questioning what they are told. I just thought this was an interesting observation considering she is the one who ends up trying to escape. I only noticed this after watching the movie twice, and thinking about it for a couple of days.
4. This movie brings up questions of our natural human impulses for freedom, and natural state of curiosity. Why don’t the children seem more curious about the outside world? Why don’t they seem more driven to the desire for freedom? Is it because the parents have done such a solid job of indoctrination and fear? Or is it an error/issue in the filmmaking? The director seemed to think of everything and leave no holes so I don’t think it was an error in filmmaking.
5. Why would the parents want the children to think the mom will give birth to the dog? One thought I had: the reason would be to squelch the children’s curiosity. If everything was derived from the compound and parents, it would prevent further questions about what is “out there”. On the other hand, the children know supplies come from outside the compound. So why not a dog? What do you think?
6. What about the fish? Why did the dad put the fish in the pool? For the same reason (above) about the dog? The fish just appear? And that helps squelch curiosity? But what about the fact that “meat” is brought in from outside? (There is a scene at the dinner table where the mother says they are running low on “meat” and asks the father to bring some home.)
7. I find the scene where the two daughters breathe in the chemical (to pass out) to be very disturbing. Were you disturbed? How did you interpret that scene? I wasn’t sure what to make of it.
8. It seems the children were competitive with each other because the parents were instilling that sense of competition, but why? For their own amusement? To keep the children always trying harder to listen and be rewarded? It reminded me a lot of the way primary school teachers use reward and punishment to mold behavior. The stickers would be an example of this.
9. I read an interview with the director who stated that Christina is tempted to take advantage of the situation and the children. I found this aspect of the movie one of the most interesting and brilliant. I could see this really happening. But why wouldn’t the parents have been more careful in overseeing Christina’s influence? They seem to have thought about everything else ahead of time. I guess the filmmaker needed Christina’s influence to advance the plot. So maybe that is the only reason why, but if so, it is a weakness in the film because I think the father would have better insured nothing like that would have happened. But maybe not. The parents are just human and we make errors and mistakes.
10. Taking the labels off the water bottles: Genius! Loved this little detail. Then, upon second viewing, I noticed none of the products (foods, hygiene products, cleaning products) had labels; a great little detail!
11. I read this online somewhere and had to share because I didn’t catch this myself. When Christina asks the son about whether he dreams, he says he does. But his dream is very limited (“Mom fell into the pool”) because his experiences are so very limited. Of course! I wouldn’t have caught that. Another reason I say there is a lot in the movie. It’s smart, and you get more out of it if you pay close attention. Love that.
12. One of my favorite scenes in the movie is when the younger daughter is cutting the feet and parts off her Barbie and screaming. Just loved it. I can’t tell you why. I kept re-winding and watching that again and again. This actress did a phenomenal job. Although, all the acting was superb. One of the best strengths of the film. Loved the deadpan mannerisms and the way they talk. Amusing. What did you think?
13. I read online someone asking why the parents listened to music using headphones while having sex. Someone suggested it was to show how not-connected, or separated, the parents were from each other and the sexual act — to make it less passionate. But I don’t agree. The parents actually seemed quite bonded to one another and that was displayed in many scenes. They also seemed to have quite an active sex life, and were shown kissing while having sex during the headphone scene. (Whereas in comparison, sex scenes with Christina and the siblings never showed kissing.) I think the headphones were simply to keep the children from hearing their music. If you notice, music never plays in the home for the family to listen to, except the Frank Sinatra record (“grandfather”) and when the children play their own music (guitar/piano), or when the father sings. So I think the headphones were merely because the parents wanted to listen to music during their lovemaking but didn’t want the children to over hear it. This interpretation can also be backed by the scene when mother listens to headphones in her room alone during the day – again wanting to enjoy music but not wanting the children to overhear it. What do you think? It seems the parents allowed certain outside influences for themselves (music, porn videos) that they didn’t allow for their children.
13.5. The scene where the father drives a few feet outside the compound to pick up the toy airplane. Loved that. Perfect. The parents thought of everything, it seems, to keep the ruse going.
14. The family members have no names! I really didn’t catch that the first time and only really realized it after reading some online discussions. Yet, Christina has a name. And the dog (“Rex”) has a name. Another example of the brilliance of the film. Which leads me to…
15. My favorite scene in the entire film: The “Bruce” scene. The daughter has recently seen the movies “Rocky” and “Jaws” (via’s Christina’s VCR tapes) and this has completely affected/impacted her (and leads to her spiraling out of control and her confusion). She realizes the power of people having names, having seen the interactions in the movies. And she tells her sister that she wants to be called “Bruce” (the name of the Shark in “Jaws”) and says “Every time you say ‘Bruce’, I’ll turn”. And then they spontaneously start practicing. “Bruce” youngest daughter says, and the eldest turns and looks. “Bruce” she says again. Then she gets up and they continue this. I love this scene for some reason. It is amusing, sad, and sweet. It is a good example of how tender, close and connected the two sisters are, but it also shows how affected they have been from being raised this way. Bravo to the director!
16. What was that game the mother was playing with the children being blindfolded and moving toward the mother as she called out numbers? Any ideas? The numbers were translated in the subtitles like degrees and minutes, like: 2′ then 3’15″ then 3′ 45″ then 4’30″. What was that? The numbers part of it confused me.
17. The record scene with the father interpreting the Frank Sinatra song was actually quite sweet albeit disturbing. I mean what the father was doing was disturbing and wrong (lying). But the looks on the mother and children’s faces was touching and sweet. They seemed to be really enjoying it and the words. And we saw a sense of closeness and family which was probably what the parents were trying to achieve with their entire ruse. And then the dancing afterwards was endearing. These children were really infantilized – which is wrong – but their sweet nature was often still intact because of this captivity.
18. Licking. The scene toward the end when the younger daughter is licking the dad was disturbing to me. More disturbing than a lot of the other scenes. But licking seemed to have become a form of currency in this family after Christina’s influence. Another example of how these behaviors are learned, and they don’t realize how abnormal they are without context of outside influences.
19. Why does the mother slap the eldest daughter when she says she is going to get the next plane that falls into the yard, with the comment that “whoever deserves it will get it”? Is this just another example of the physical violence the parents use to keep the children in line?
20. The planes that fall out of the sky and are really toy-sized. Another wonderful detail of how the parents lied to keep up the ruse and squelch curiosity of the outside world. Brilliant.
21. Why does a bandage appear on the younger daughter’s arm after the son gets cut by the eldest daughter? The bandage is in the same place on her arm as it is on her brother’s arm. Did the younger daughter do this to empathize with her brother?
22. I read in an online discussion that the porn clip (on the TV, parents watching) was gratuitous sex in the film. I whole heartedly disagree. I think it absolutely had to be there. It showed us these parents are not prudes and gives us some insight into the parents. What did you think?
23. Some people online were asking why the parents didn’t use the daughters in the first place to meet the sexual needs of the son. Someone suggested to avoid pregnancy. I disagree. I believe the parents knew incest is wrong and were trying to avoid it going there. I think the very fact they brought Christina shows their wanting to avoid the son’s urges possibly causing problems (like incest). But in the end, the fear of outside influence was worse to them than incest. (Shocking.) I think it shows just how far they were willing to go to avoid outside influence. But they probably only did this as a last resort. Something else that is noteworthy regarding this: the parents try to meet the sexual needs of the son but never think to address the sexual needs of their daughters.
24. The scene with the parents mouthing words to each other (toward the end): I assumed this was to avoid the children overhearing. Thought it was a powerful scene. But did notice something I can’t explain. Subtitles are showing the mother saying they need to replace Christina yet she isn’t mouthing words – she is licking the father’s ear. What do you make of this? She isn’t talking, she is licking, yet the subtitles show these words….maybe the subtitle timing was off? Or was this purposeful?
25. BIG QUESTION MARK. Toward the beginning of the film, we are listening to the father giving lessons to the children on tape recordings (while we are seeing two of the children in a water fight). The father is giving some Geometry problem, then asks about fish, and then says (and I quote): “If for any reason we are still awake at 11pm, what kind of procedure do we follow?” What was that? It seems there is nothing in this film that is meaningless….and I have no clue what that was about….? What do you think?
26. The kids wear a lot of white clothing in the film. This is something I noticed more upon the second viewing (when I wasn’t so closely reading the subtitles). I haven’t heard anyone mention this but I’m pretty certain it was intentional on the part of the director. I think it helps the audience see them as innocent. (Since white is often associated with innocence.) What do you think? Did you notice this too? Also the kids are in their underwear and bathing suits a lot which I think is supposed to help the audience see them as more child-like since little children often run around in their underwear and bathing suits.
27. Why does the son crawl into bed? Is this in the film just to show us how child-like the children are? (Even though they look to be late teens and early 20s.)
28. MY OTHER BIG QUESTION MARK: After the cat incident, the father is on his cell phone at work talking to the mom who is at home about the incident. They are plotting what to do. Then he says (and again, I quote): “The temperature will rise and the wind will drop. 5 or 6 degrees.” What in the heck does this mean? And again, I’m feeling it has meaning because everything seems to….yet I don’t know how to interpret this. What do you think?
29. The heads of the actors were frequently cut off in the scenes (along with other body parts). I didn’t notice this during the first viewing. But read about it later and realized this was a technique the director used to help the audience detach from the characters, and give the film the atmosphere he was going for. I read later a lot about the mise-en-scene of the film and can appreciate it even more now – because a lot went into giving it the atmosphere it had, and giving the audience the feeling we got watching it. More to make me feel the film was brilliant, and the director as genius.
30. The ending was perfect. I couldn’t think of a better ending for this film. The long take on the trunk. The questions you are left to ponder. The metaphor of her being possibly stuck in the truck – maybe never escaping? – just like she was stuck in the home. The fact that her lack of knowledge was still inhibiting her even in her escape. There was a lot of discussion online about the ending, and I’ve come to terms with accepting this ending as it is. I am okay with not knowing and having it end like this. I can’t imagine it ending any better way. What did you think?
Well, that’s it. I’m anxious for a discussion about this film. Please comment and let’s discuss!
And let me also note that the director, Yorgos Lanthimos, was born in 1973. He’s the same age as both me and my husband – so of course, that makes him a Gen X’er. Love people from Generation X.
–Gen X Gemini



















