IMDb RATING
5.6/10
6.9K
YOUR RATING
A short continuously looping animation of six grotesque human figures vomiting.A short continuously looping animation of six grotesque human figures vomiting.A short continuously looping animation of six grotesque human figures vomiting.
- Director
Featured reviews
So nine people have seen this film?
Seeing as the film was essentially a temporary piece of installation art, a loop of film projected onto a sculpture as part of an exhibition back in 1966, I have a very genuine interest in talking to those people - they must have some interesting stories to tell.
Seeing as the film was essentially a temporary piece of installation art, a loop of film projected onto a sculpture as part of an exhibition back in 1966, I have a very genuine interest in talking to those people - they must have some interesting stories to tell.
Okay, the thing is, this isn't a movie you can really rate on a site like this because a few things need to be taken into account:
1) It was a statue. Some of this is meant to be seen in 3D. 2) It's non-narrative. Even for Lynch, there's no real way to approach it, only "experience it". Which in the case of seeing it in real life, would be vastly interesting, but through the medium of the television it's only slightly so. Think about it like seeing a screensaver picture of the Eiffel Tower instead of being there. You can still appreciate it's magnificence, but you still haven't seen it. 3) It was an experiment. An award winning experiment, but still an experiment.
So for that, it's at least interesting. It honestly makes me want to see the actual set up to get a better idea of what all the various forms helped do for each other (animation, projection, sculpture, painting, etc.). But as a filmed medium, it's just something to sit and watch a while, nod your head in acceptance, and move on.
Still, I'd check it out. The idea behind it is inventive enough that maybe it'll open up more ideas for like experiments or further experiments.
--PolarisDiB
1) It was a statue. Some of this is meant to be seen in 3D. 2) It's non-narrative. Even for Lynch, there's no real way to approach it, only "experience it". Which in the case of seeing it in real life, would be vastly interesting, but through the medium of the television it's only slightly so. Think about it like seeing a screensaver picture of the Eiffel Tower instead of being there. You can still appreciate it's magnificence, but you still haven't seen it. 3) It was an experiment. An award winning experiment, but still an experiment.
So for that, it's at least interesting. It honestly makes me want to see the actual set up to get a better idea of what all the various forms helped do for each other (animation, projection, sculpture, painting, etc.). But as a filmed medium, it's just something to sit and watch a while, nod your head in acceptance, and move on.
Still, I'd check it out. The idea behind it is inventive enough that maybe it'll open up more ideas for like experiments or further experiments.
--PolarisDiB
This first film from David Lynch is not really a film at all. It is better to think of it as a moving painting. Its origins bear this out. Lynch was working on a picture while studying at the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts when he felt a 'little wind' and wished that the painting could move. This set him to work on creating an animated composition which became Six Men Getting Sick.
It consists of a screen with three sculptures built into its top left corner. These three figures are casts of Lynch himself. This screen then has an animation projected onto it. The animation adds a further three figures. It connects the stomachs to the heads. They fill up, hands appear over the distressed heads, the word 'Sick' flashes up and the heads catch fire and vomit. All of this is accompanied by a repetitive siren wail.
Because the image is projected onto a sculpture it's fair to say that this is really a 3D art installation rather than a film. When it was shown at an art competition it was repeated on a continual loop. On DVD this is reduced to six cycles. The repetition does make sense though as it allows you to see different things each time. It certainly indicates what an original artist Lynch was even at this early stage.
It consists of a screen with three sculptures built into its top left corner. These three figures are casts of Lynch himself. This screen then has an animation projected onto it. The animation adds a further three figures. It connects the stomachs to the heads. They fill up, hands appear over the distressed heads, the word 'Sick' flashes up and the heads catch fire and vomit. All of this is accompanied by a repetitive siren wail.
Because the image is projected onto a sculpture it's fair to say that this is really a 3D art installation rather than a film. When it was shown at an art competition it was repeated on a continual loop. On DVD this is reduced to six cycles. The repetition does make sense though as it allows you to see different things each time. It certainly indicates what an original artist Lynch was even at this early stage.
Lynch explains on the DVD that he was inspired to make a moving painting and that is just what he did. As per usual with Lynch, there is no explanation for what is going on (actually, with this short, there doesn't even seem to be a reason for what's going on) but it is somehow beautiful in its repetition.
WHEN WE SAW this recently thanx to our good friends at TURNER CLASSIC MOVIES we were quite surprised: A) That there really was such a film with such a title, B) That an outfit like TCM actually did televise such, C) That we watched it and finally D) That we are doing a review.
IN MANY WAYS the very brief tidbit of what can only be referred to as limited (very limited) animation. In some respects it appears to be a sort of intentional throwback to the very earliest animation to be committed to film. In our mind, that means the short (3 + minute) titled HUMOROUS PHASES OF FUNNY FACES (Stuart Bracton/Vitagraph, 1906).
IN SOME AREAS, the cartoon succeeds in doing this as an homage to both the artist, as well as to the art-form as well. It is in the beginnings of animation in this embryonic stage and form that started both artist and producer on the road to the shorts and full length features that we take for granted.
IN SHORT, without HUMOROUS FACES, there'd be no FANTASIA.
ON THE OTHER hand, we get the distinct impression that the cartoonist and the producer really did want to gross out the audience and induce gastro-intestinal maladies. This would seem to be superfluous as we don't learn anything that we don't already know and have all experienced for ourselves.
SO SORRY TO report to Animator/Director/Producer Mr. David Lynch, that no one was edified in the extended display of vomiting, puking, wreching, hurling and heaving; nor by displays of dysentery, diarrhea, the runs or the scutters.
WELL SCHULTZ, DO you think anyone's shocked?
IN MANY WAYS the very brief tidbit of what can only be referred to as limited (very limited) animation. In some respects it appears to be a sort of intentional throwback to the very earliest animation to be committed to film. In our mind, that means the short (3 + minute) titled HUMOROUS PHASES OF FUNNY FACES (Stuart Bracton/Vitagraph, 1906).
IN SOME AREAS, the cartoon succeeds in doing this as an homage to both the artist, as well as to the art-form as well. It is in the beginnings of animation in this embryonic stage and form that started both artist and producer on the road to the shorts and full length features that we take for granted.
IN SHORT, without HUMOROUS FACES, there'd be no FANTASIA.
ON THE OTHER hand, we get the distinct impression that the cartoonist and the producer really did want to gross out the audience and induce gastro-intestinal maladies. This would seem to be superfluous as we don't learn anything that we don't already know and have all experienced for ourselves.
SO SORRY TO report to Animator/Director/Producer Mr. David Lynch, that no one was edified in the extended display of vomiting, puking, wreching, hurling and heaving; nor by displays of dysentery, diarrhea, the runs or the scutters.
WELL SCHULTZ, DO you think anyone's shocked?
Did you know
- ConnectionsEdited into The Short Films of David Lynch (2002)
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- Six Men Getting Sick (Six Times)
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $200 (estimated)
- Runtime4 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.33 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
