The Anarchist Cookbook (2002)

Sadly Over-hyped

Funny, strange, confrontational and subversive, this is one of the most interesting experiences you'll have at the cinema this year.

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

This film is very, very loosely connected with the book "The Anarchist Cookbook," a collection of do-it-yourself explosives, weapons and other violent tools which has since been disavowed by its author. Aside from featuring the book, the movie has absolutely no connection to it.The movie does connect to the life of college dropout Puck (Devon Gummersall), an intelligent anarchist who spends his days living in a commune of like-minded folks among them: Karla (Gina Philips), a man hating feminist, Johnny Red (John Savage) a peaceful old hippie and Double-D (Steve Van Wormer), Puck's dimwitted best friend. Aside from protesting "oppressive" government actions, everything is relatively calm on the commune as they wait for the revolution, that is until the appearance of Johnny Black (Dylan Bruno) a violent nihilist who dismisses their peaceful ways. Things start to spiral out of control as Johnny Black convinces the collective to take a more severe approach to anarchy.For a movie about questioning conventions, the script is pretty conventional. In fact, it's wholly unoriginal. Puck starts out as a lethargic, idealistic layabout who after facing the folly of his lifestyle alters his flaws and somewhat adjusts to adult life. This exact story seems to be lifted from 1998's "SLC Punk!" and while "SLC" delivered scathing satire, "Cookbook" only gives an occasional wink to entrenched hypocrisies. Additionally the pace of the story is very schizophrenic with some scenes being unbearably slow and others whizzing by. Maddening director choices like this completely fumbles the central point. Once the film closes by condemning violence in all its forms, it feels like putting a bandaid on a tumor.A movie that involves such a predictable character arch needs to be supplied with decent acting on the part of the lead, and though Devon Gummersall tries his best, he never seems to get his footing on the character. The supporting cast doesn't fair any better. Karla becomes obnoxious, John Savage seems to phone it in and the character of Double-D is nothing more than a caricature out of place with the presumably "developing characters".Jordan Susman made a lukewarm entrance into the movie industry winning a second place prize in 1997 for his short film "Sitting in Limbo" at the Montreal Film Festival. "The Anarchist Cookbook," released five years later has shown little improvement. Some scenes seem to have been shot by different types of cameras and lighting for no stylistic reason other than clear budget restraints. The editing is sloppy and everything seems to just not mesh at all.There is one bright light in the form of Dylan Bruno. Bruno manages to portray menace with such understated glee that he balances intelligence, cunning and meat-headed violence pretty well. Unfortunately even his character is a shadow of what could have been."The Anarchist Cookbook" is an ill-conceived mess. Neither funny or dramatically engrossing, it serves as a toothless and forgetful expose on a subculture that deserves more credit. Neither emotionally striking or politically resonant this film about anarchy simply lacks anarchistic spirit.http://theyservepopcorninhell.blogspot.com/

The "Anarchists Cookbook"? I downloaded the real Anarchist Cookbook from a BBS, bulletin board system (Pre-internet "websites") when I was in my teens; and let me tell you one thing - there is nothing anarchistic in this script, he rips off a "Chic-filet" style joint in the beginning - like that takes a lack of authoritarian fear. Okay, so I only watched the first nine minutes while making something to eat - but it did the trick; I turned it off. I don't even have the words. I don't claim to be an anarchist in any sense of the word. I just implore anyone out there looking into the "modern" anarchist lifestyle to fore go this piece of trash and pick up a little book known as "Days Of War, Nights Of Love" - it's the closest thing to a "cookbook" on the lifestyle anyone will ever need.Essentially, it's like saying that "Empire Records" was an accurate representation of mid-90's sub-culture - though in its defense it had decent acting and a fairly believable script.P.S. To all those who relate this to SLC punk - PLEASE!!! At least that was a period piece with relative social constructs.

There is a trend in American movies of late to try to make the audience feel superior to the people on the screen, or to just make them feel superior to everyone in society in general. It's a Nietzsche thing, and you're either on the bus or not.The brilliance of this film (and I do mean brilliant), is that it dares to ridicule the very people that should be its core audience. Unsuspecting viewers who think they are oh-so-cool because they're watching the Anarchist Cookbook (oooh...scary...hide it from the parents), must be aghast to find out that the film is an indictment of their childish mischief.Fight Club was all about making the viewer feel cool. This film deconstructs that feeling of cool. And it paid the price for it (judging by the ratings it has received.) This is a movie for thinking people. Not people who just think they're cool. In fact, that's what the movie is about: the difference between wanting to be cool and wanting to think for oneself. Brilliant.

This film represents what excellent movie-making is all about: the journey of a character to self-discovery. I can think of few films with so extreme of journey.In the beginning there is Puck. He is a self-proclaimed anarchist who thinks he knows it all. And the film wittily begins as an anarchist romp. The scenes have a disjointed feel to them, as it ping-pongs around from a satire of the Freddie Prinz Jr. oevre, to examinations of characters and their ideas of freedom.This wolrd is shaken up by the arrival of Johnny Black, the first person to arrive on the screen who actually knows what he wants. While the others talk, J Black does. And in the process, he earns the respect (no matter how begrudging) of the rest.And Puck is caught in between. The kid who acted like he knew everything, must now confront his complete lack of knowledge: about the world, about his friends, and about himself.Without revealing the brilliant twists at the end, allow me to say that this film explores trust, ideology, and friendship in a way that is funny and poignant. It's a shame more people did not see this minor masterpiece.