Skip to content

Take a Delightfully Unusual Highway Journey with a Donkey in ‘EO’ – Rolling Stone

Jerzy Skolimowski’s EO, a winding misadventure a couple of sweet-tempered donkey, inarguably qualifies as an animal’s-eye view of all that is heat and merciless, comical and arbitrary about human nature. And of the world of animals, which might be so lovely and terrifying directly. It is just like different, extra sobering films about animals, on this method — I am pondering of latest documentaries like Andrea Arnold’s dairy farm chronicle Cowor Victor Kossakovsky’s black-and-white, ethically produced gundaa couple of mom pig — solely EO, being a piece of fiction, has the benefit of caprice and fabrication. It is a film dedicated to its personal sense of play, very similar to EO himself, who opens the story taking part in useless throughout a circus act and earns rapturous applause for his efficiency by him. All of that is captured in fitful, effervescent photographs, a stylistic freedom that dominates the film from finish to finish. It is dreamy, harsh, humorous, confronting. The temper of the movie swings and pivots like some gleefully disruptive dance sample. One second, EO is being cherished on by his coach Kasandra (Sandra Drzymalska), whom he trusts sufficient to overtly mourn after they’re finally separated from one another. The subsequent, he is being harassed by her boss. Quickly after that, he is being mobbed by activists demanding that he be let out. Then comes the price of that freedom. The wheels of this film are all the time turning.

Skolimowski, a veteran of the Polish New Wave, is as much as no good and revealing on the probability. EO can’t be pinned down. Human whim overdetermines however does not wholly outline EO’s life as Skolimowski imagines it, which is obvious within the film’s twisted, at instances farcical angle towards the ritual of trigger and impact. A well-intentioned drunk at a leisure soccer recreation units EO unfastened with the cry “Anarchy guidelines!”, just for EO to seek out himself bludgeoned practically to dying by disgruntled members of the opposing group. A misty, moonlit forest at evening is out of the blue awash in roaming inexperienced lasers, like one thing out of a diamond heist film, just for pictures to ring out, and for EO to stare into the eyes of a stricken wolf that whimpers pathetically because it dies. It is not all unhealthy. A lot of EO Veers extra towards the delightfully unusual; I have never talked about a scene of sluggish seduction, starring Isabelle Huppert (who really exhibits up out of nowhere), that begins together with her crashing plates and different household heirlooms to the bottom and ends, shockingly, with a kiss.

There is a politics for us to glean from these moments — ditto to a scene, set in a gasoline station parking zone, of a jovial truck driver plying a younger immigrant lady with meals earlier than cracking open a beer and saying, to her horror, “And now intercourse?” And to a whirling, lovely shot of a wind turbine that is capped off by a useless chicken falling from the sky. EO Tempts us to cut back its worldview all the way down to the chaos and battle of humanity and its harmful applied sciences, on the one hand, and the non secular integrity of animals, on the opposite. Actually the film makes its case on that entrance, strikingly so, by photographs that make a degree of tearing on the limits of the movie’s realism with scenes that show witty, beguiling, and shifting on the similar time. Skolimowski’s achievement is to style this story into a real fantasy, a street film too freewheeling to be contained to anybody area or concept. There’s as a lot room right here for satirical exaggeration as there’s for love. Love of animals above all, however of the prickly unpredictability of people, too, of which there are some good examples on show right here. As he makes his method from a circus in Poland — the place, maybe paradoxically, he’s cherished — to a slaughterhouse in Italy (the place he is not), EO meets kids who garland his neck with carrots like a king; present horses that appear all too conscious of the boundaries imposed on their freedom, even because the ever-expressive EO appears to eye that freedom with envy; people that wish to consign EO to a lifetime of burden, or render him right into a mere mascot, or each. The methods of labor and property guiding EO could also be, as far as people are involved, distant and transactional. However EO himself, together with his ever-alert gaze and vibrant expressions of him, may be very a lot alive, braying loudly with pleasure or concern, making sense of the world by eyes that appear to overlook nothing.


That gaze is the central axis on which EO delights and pivots. The film is all the time subjective, all the time involved with EO’s firsthands view of the proceedings. It is Skolimowski’s different method to that subjectivity that makes EO stand out. Typically the lensing delivers this world by a filter of hazy, exaggerated distortion, a sign that we’re seeing every thing by EO’s eyes. At different instances the film frees itself up from the literalism of a POV, however however strikes in the direction of the eminent risks or pleasures of a scene with the cautious curiosity that we affiliate with the titular donkey. The film’s central character was in reality performed by six completely different donkeys. However the expressive, open, alert face that we encounter all through the movie feels singular. We get to know this animal, or really feel like we do. We begin to really feel that we perceive its feelings, notably in its interactions with different animals. At a scene set in a horse steady, EO perks up when a pair of horses appear to develop agitated, resisting the efforts of their trainers. EO, frightened, runs off—knocking over a shelf of trophies within the course of. It is humorous. The comedy of EO is in its randomness. However so is the tragedy. Moments that play like punchlines do the double responsibility of constructing us each chortle and wince. When EO knocks over the trophies, we chortle on the crash-bang silliness of it, earlier than instantly coming to phrases with what we all know what have to be in retailer: An error like this could solely end in EO being shipped off some place else, to satisfy a destiny that we can’t predict.

Skolimowski has overtly spoken of his debt to Robert Bresson’s 1966 movie Au Hasard Balthazar —nonetheless probably the most well-known arthouse film a couple of donkey. Each movies culminate in violence, of a sort, and each movingly painting the love of a younger lady and her de ella trusted animal de ella. However Skolimowski’s challenge is much less anchored within the precise symbols of Christian religion (at the same time as its wry moments of human decadence might simply double as depictions of sin, as in Bresson’s film.) EO shares the excellence, with Bresson’s traditional, of being an extremely ethical film, solely much more playful in its method. Watching it, we’ve got to take a seat with the concept that we and the world we have constructed play a task within the fates of animals. We’ve got to take a seat with the concept that they understand us greater than we expect, and that we understand them, in flip, far lower than we all know. EO is a film concerning the pleasure and threat of that notion. That’s its ethical argument. Understanding EO’s place on the earth means studying to confront our personal.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *