User reviews

I'm not sure how I got here, probably it being a Peter Strickland film. Who doesn't love that unnerving grainy tone he delivers. This though might push even me a little too far. It's weird. Obviously. The setting is the Sonic Catering Institute. A artistic workspace where a collective have gathered to work with a crank call receiving, pompously controlling, increasingly bizarrely dressed resident director and a somewhat submissive writer, photographer, documentarian with some gastric issues. It's not easy to nail down quite what everyone's purpose is. There's a lot of pretension. A lot of awkwardness. Nobody seems to like one another all that much as they do workshops, endure nightly dinners and sleep in grotty dorms. The collective in residency, made up of Elle, Billy (Asa Butterfield) and Lamina are an art troupe band. Using food as a device for performance art. It's as much about the sound though, with sound sources wired up through vats, pots and blenders, as Elle in the first performance writhes naked in what looks like blood. This is one of the more palatable expressions. I'd like to say it's interesting, well acted. That the narrative is compelling and the characters engaging. None of that is true. What I can say is I like slightly confounding art house indulgence and this ticks that box. It looks good too. Not every frame by any means, but there are several arresting scenes that grab your senses. A Strickland film is rarely an easy watch. He's a director intent on challenge and you'll have to work to enjoy this. If you like something that makes your brain wonder and whirl at what you're watching and why you're watching it though, then Flux Gourmet is worth a taste.

Peter Strickland is a mad man. If you are familiar with his work you'll know what I mean. His nuanced brand of vivid absurdism seems to have a tangible scent and taste to it, where every aspect is designed as sensory overload. This makes him a unique talent despite his overt influences - influences that stretch from giallo art house horror to early Lanthimos (even borrowing one of the Greek auteurs' main players, Ariane Labed for this latest effort). Velvet and satin textures dripping in ebullient color are the fetishistic clues that bring the viewer in on the subtle, often impenetrable themes that are at play. In the case of Flux Gourmet, what is most crucial is the investigation of psychological kinks which stoke the fires for artistic expression. Cronenberg also recently had something to say on the matter, only he used the body as an artistic vessel instead of the mind and its perversions. Though I admire Strickland's wicked little plots, I so frequently notice the fingerprints of others, plastered all over their shells, to where I have trouble appreciating them as original entities. Fortunately, there's always a certain aesthetic and thematic freshness exuding from the cinematography and writing that prevent them from becoming derivative.

Is Flux Gourmet a very dry straight faced joke about pretentious modern art?

Or is it a perfect example of pretentious modern art?

I'm tending towards the latter.

Recommended if you want a movie that takes the idea behind the baked beans scene in Blazing Saddles and stretches it to feature length. Otherwise, if you really must watch a Peter Strickland movie, find The Duke of Burgundy instead.

... but not in a predictable manner!

I've still not seen Berberian Sound Studio, but enjoyed Duke of Burgundy and In Fabric, so I was ready for this to be odd, and up there in the "quite like Greenaway" stakes.. As with him, the cinematography is good, and the actor commitment is mostly fine. I really could have done without the flatulent guy though... the sub-plot itself, the voiceover with matching hard-to-read subtitles (white on often-white scenes) and the actor himself were all irritating, IMHO.

Having said that, there's lots to like if you're into arthouse stuff and I'll look forward to whatever he does next...

Worth a look.

And this film comes down on the wrong side.

I'm OK with weird. I loved Strickland's In Fabric, and was hoping for something equally interesting. Unfortunately, he seems to have thought "I've already turned it up to eleven; what if I turn it up to thirteen?"

The plot, such as it is, revolves around a group of performance artists who indulge in sonic cookery, and who are granted a residence by someone who is as unhinged as they are (in case we miss this, her deranged nature is hammered home by her bizarre headwear. Especially in bed). There's also a sub-plot about flatulence (these may be the most sophisticated fart-gags ever committed to film, but they're still fart-gags) and a rectal examination that also turns into performance art.

Terrapins, a box with knobs on, a rather icky seduction, pretentious references to ancient Greek literature, latex cat-suits (everyone always travels with these, in case they need to indulge in a little burglary, don't they?)

The resultant mish-mash leaves one confused and deeply unsatisfied.

And I would've throttled the doctor MUCH earlier.

A spoof of performance art and foodies (crossed up) and totally hilarious. The actors play it straight which, unlike Christopher Short's films, made it even more funny to me. There were so many little things that made me giggle...their obsession with a flanger, the OTHER collective (and their name) and the way they stealth around, the patron's head wear, their confessions and dialogues with a flatulent writer and the silly French names for odd foods (that I don't know if they are real or not). Clearly the other reviewers who rated the film didn't get it or were expecting something else but I thought it was just grand.

The oddity of the pace and concept wares off about an hour in and feels like it marches on forever without much of a progress or change. Too much repetition, gags go on far too long & at six cycles with little new to add it feels like a bad sketch that drug on too long.

Yes, its strange. No, its not a horror comedy, at least not the sort most people mean when they use that term. It is funny, though, and pretty horrific. A brilliant and witty send up of avant-garde performance art, 70s Euro art films, the music business, 80s fashionistas and food snobbery.

It reminded me of Bunuel as it skewers and roasts bourgeois "culture" and (f)art. I've enjoyed all of Strickland's films that ive seen, and they all have humor in them, but this is easily the funniest.

Many reviewers on here seem to hate this because it makes no logical sense, doesn't explain things in wordy exposition and is improbable. I sometimes wonder just what it is people expect from cinema, and from films like this. Pretentious ? Sure it is, what creative endeavor worth your time isn't ? Do people really want their culture served up to them in easily digested pre-chewed lumps? Oh, i guess they do. Flux Gourmet, indeed.

Bizarre! I think that is the only word I can use to describe this peculiar piece of cinema. This quirkiest of stories is set in a school run by the pristinely attired "Jan Stevens" (Gwendoline Christie). Every year she invites a group to her exclusive school where they use a mix of actual ingredients as well as audio equipment and cooking techniques to create what I think they describe as an "alimentary performance". Nope - I didn't know what was going on either, but as this curious story develops we discover that this is only the half of it. The group of noise-makers is led by "Lamina" (Ariana Labed) with "Elle"(Fatma Mohamed) and the hugely fringed "Billy" (Asa Butterfield) and soon it becomes clear that the former has history with their host and the latter ends up sharing her bed... Nope, I still didn't really know what was supposed to be happening - especially when some device they were using on the sound mix was mysteriously kidnapped, only to end up in an exhibition jar in a bedroom from where they try to retrieve it. Add to this, another group who applied but did not win entry to the institution are trying to assassinate "Miss Stevens" and the whole thing becomes and remains odd. Surreal - even. Entertaining in spurts, yes - the characterisations once laid bare can be amusing but I found it too long. The eccentricities of the characters and the plot became too zany for me and by the end I was no longer entertained, but rather I felt disappointed. I will admit I am not great with films that leave all sense of reality at the front door - which this most certainly does, but I didn't hate it. Perhaps another watch on television might enlighten me further, but I cannot in all honesty recommend it to anyone unless you have an on/off relationship with this planet!

I wondered for a moment if I need to take this seriously. But no, this is Peter Stricklands parody to what Cronenberg did with Crimes of the Future...and other performance artists that take their art to a ridiculous, pretentious height. Making food, stimulating the senses, the taste and the smell, stimulating the gastrointestinal tract...is the new sex. Also, the performance art bits should have been comedy gold but they took the absurdity of it too seriously and you kinda went along...

Unfortunately, it's not such a great parody either. It's still too niche even if it should have worked since everybody eats and has bowel movements. It's still not accessible enough and it doesn't go all out with the parody aspect. Even though I think it should have.

Ha, his name is Billy Rubin! Haha. Okey.

"Weird" at the service of a higher cause I can roll with. "Weird" as a stand alone aesthetic usually leaves me cold.

"Flux Gourmet" is a gross and -- for me at least -- an even somewhat incomprehensible film about performance artists. I don't even know -- is "food sound art" even a thing, or was it meant to be a joke? Somewhere in this film is a satire about pretentious people, but it's buried under an off-putting preoccupation with the workings of human bowel systems. I've had a colonoscopy. I don't need to relive someone else's.

This is the kind of movie whose advertising features pull quotes from critics using words like "uproarious" and calling it equal parts brilliant horror and scathing comedy. I must have been watching an entirely different movie.

The best I can say about "Flux Gourmet" is that it has a bold and confident vision, and the director is clearly committed to it. But that's really part of the problem.

Grade: C-

This is perhaps the craziest and most incoherent piece of cinema I have ever watched. My first instinct is to recommend watching this movie on some kind or narcotic or psychedelic, but in forethought this movie almost convinced me I was already on one.

At first I thought it was just me, and that as a Canadian I didn't understand the humor. That maybe it was taylored for a British audience or something? But I've watched faulty towers, Mr. Bean, The Office and so forth... and that's not it.

The longer you watch, the less funny it gets. I can endure and even find some toilet humor funny, but this film was obsessed with repeating the same mindless jokes over and over again... and I must confess I couldn't make it to the very end. I had to turn it off before I developed a serious headache.

If you want to go on the wildest confusing and messed up ride of your life, skip the Iowaska and magic mushrooms and watch this.

Strickland never ceases to amaze, and his latest film, Flux Gourmet, does not disappoint. For all the ninnies crying it's "not horror" or "not a comedy", you need to not be so horribly rigid in your thinking, and stop with the low ratings because the film didn't meet your unrealistic expectations. Strickland is a unique filmmaker and his work is definitely not conventional.

Flux Gourmet is actually quite hilarious and highly entertaining. I've seen it twice already and will happily watch it again. The acting and the cinematography are all superb, and of course the soundtrack is fascinating as well. If this if your first Strickland film experience, then do check out his other work. Have fun!!!

Peter strickland is a unique director but this is a strange and at times disgusting film. Its charachters are mainly unlikeable but perhaps thats meant to be the case . Largely disappointing.

A sonic collective who can't decide on a name takes up a residency at an institute devoted to culinary and alimentary performance. The members Elle di Elle (Fatma Mohamed), Billy Rubin (Asa Butterfield) and Lamina Propria (Ariane Labed) are caught up in their own power struggles, only their dysfunctional dynamic is furthermore exacerbated when they've to answer to the institute's head, Jan Stevens (Gwendoline Christie). With the various rivalries unfolding, Stones, the Institute's 'dossierge' has to privately endure increasingly fraught stomach problems whilst documenting the collective's activities. Upon hearing of Stones's visits to the gastroenterologist, Dr Glock (Richard Bremmer), Elle coerces him into her performances in a desperate bid for authenticity. The reluctant Stones (Makis Papadimitriou) uts up with the collective's plans to use his condition for their art whilst Jan Stevens goes to war with Elle over creative differences.

"Flux Gourmet" originally started as a satire on artists and their complex relationship with the institutes that fund their work. To remain neutral and look at both perspectives offering both sympathy and ridicule. Whilst exploring the month-long residency of an art collective that deal with food, the film is interested in the idea of taboo and shock value in art, which in this context opened up the dark side of the stomach and the bowels. This eventually led to the story of a man in the institute suffering from very private and embarrassing stomach problems, the kind of problems many people suffer from, but are sometimes too embarrassed to mention even to a doctor. We've often feel frustrated with cinema's ignorance of allergies and intolerances, which are often portrayed as comedy, particularly when someone's face swells up from anaphylactic shock.

Though there are no allergies or anaphylactic shock in "Flux Gourmet", the film treats stomach problems responsibly, whilst still pushing the boundaries of taste wants to explore coeliac disease for 'Flux Gourmet' and treat all the symptoms methodically. At first, with all the mention of flatulence, the audience might think this is a comedy, but we soon realise that this is serious and we never hear a single fart throughout the film. All the deeply embarrassing problems are never shown. We only hear the character mention them in solemn voice-over, yet there's humour elsewhere with the gender and creative conflicts between band members and the institute. It's clear by the end of the film that having coeliac disease is not the end of the world for the character and people can easily adapt to it, that audiences will understand the disease more instead of thinking it's a 'fad' and thinking a coeliac sufferer won't have any stomach problems if he or she eats gluten.

Also, a lot of emphasis is on the fear prior to diagnosis. The influences for 'Flux Gourmet' are Robert Bresson's films with his solemn and almost religious voice-overs, Rob Reiner's 'Spinal Tap' for the rock n' roll clichés, the Viennese Aktionists for the corporeal shock value and Marcel Marceau for his mime work. The time and place are not specified in order to enhance the film's dream-like nature. Ultimately, through the use of performance art and avant-garde music, the film reveals a very human story about problems that people are often too embarrassed to talk about, but many of us can relate to regardless of how healthy or unhealthy our stomachs are. Within the seriousness, the film also presents a somewhat silly world exploring.creative conflict, rejection, power and the dilemmas facing both artists and their patrons.

Written by Gregory Mann.

It's pretentious, with a lame script that doesn't belong in any cinematic genre.

The poor actors are trying their best, cognitively, to create an atmosphere for which they obviously had no clear guidance.

There are great films in the style the director is trying to copy, unfortunately it lacks the depth to pull it off, resulting in a boring, dull, superficial little film.

He uses clichéd tricks in an attempt to shock the viewer and pretend to have an opinion.

Unfortunately, in the use of the means of expression, as all fine arts are, it is not enough to state or imply that you have an opinion, you must also be able to articulate it.

This film is too absurd. The concept is ridiculous. The story is farcical.

It beggars belief that groups would contend to go to this academy of the absurd.

I am sure there are many who will enjoy this but it is not my idea of fun or intellectual stimulation.

The Coeliac diagnosis and 'cure' were ridiculously absurd in the timeline.

The introduction of a ridiculous 'part'to change the sound profile was absurd. The fact that there are sponsors for such competitions is absurd. The fact that an endoscopy could feature as part of a gourmet experience is extremely absurd.

Maybe that is what the director intended. It all bypassed me.

You've got to be willing to be taken for a ride to enjoy this. It's a very conversational, very strange film. I think it's brilliant. I imagine it will make most folks uncomfortable.

For a movie that's listed as Horror, Comedy and drama it really isn't.

Art house nonsense is what it actually is.

I'm sure it will also get the listing of "understated" or "slow burn".

All these terms really mean is boring.

Dismissed.