This short film is incredibly Lynchian. It's purely a signature of style, and I mean that in the most positive way possible. However, I can't help but wonder, if this short came from anyone else who lacked the renown which Lynch has, would it be viewed as anything more than a peculiar piece that you pass by after five minutes? It's good in its eerie, dream-like quality, truly, but I'm torn as to whether this is noteworthy solely because of what it is in style or simply because of who made it--content aside. I suppose I'm at a stalemate of neutrality on this one. Draw your own conclusions, and I hope you enjoy, either way!
109 Reviews
Annoying Orange video but directed by David Lynch
Kitsfi24 January 2020
Perfectly weird. Perfectly Lynch.
phxjc21 January 2020
Monkey Puzzle Tree
southdavid23 January 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Produced a few years ago, but released in January 2020, by Netflix, to mark David Lynch's birthday, "What Did Jack Do?" is a typically bizarre, stylish film Noir . . . parody, I suppose, that clocks in at around 17 minutes but sticks in the memory long after.
A Detective (David Lynch) sits down opposite Jack Cruz (playing himself) and begins a loose interrogation about a murder, in the confines of a train station café. The interrogation takes the form of a number of cliché's, almost like non-sequiturs, before Cruz bursts into song and then goes on the run. Oh, And Cruz is a monkey. . .
Cruz responds to Lynch's accusations via a human mouth that is (usually crudely) pasted over the monkey's actual mouth, occasionally though, it works really well, and the head movements match the mouth. Major credit to whomever picked and edited the film out of the monkey in action.
My relationship with Lynch is varied. I love some of his films, but couldn't make it through the most recent season of "Twin Peaks". I think I like it when the surreal is penned in slightly by some confines of logic. "What Did Jack Do?" starts very loose, there are long pauses between the back and forth and the lines are, as I said, often unconnected. It feels like two spies trying code phrases on each other looking for the right match. It did get better though, as we learned more about the crime Jack is accused of and eventually it won me over and I was smiling along with it by the end.
This is not going to do anything for you, if you don't know what you're getting yourself into. However, if you like Lynch, this isn't much of a time commitment for a decent reward.
A Detective (David Lynch) sits down opposite Jack Cruz (playing himself) and begins a loose interrogation about a murder, in the confines of a train station café. The interrogation takes the form of a number of cliché's, almost like non-sequiturs, before Cruz bursts into song and then goes on the run. Oh, And Cruz is a monkey. . .
Cruz responds to Lynch's accusations via a human mouth that is (usually crudely) pasted over the monkey's actual mouth, occasionally though, it works really well, and the head movements match the mouth. Major credit to whomever picked and edited the film out of the monkey in action.
My relationship with Lynch is varied. I love some of his films, but couldn't make it through the most recent season of "Twin Peaks". I think I like it when the surreal is penned in slightly by some confines of logic. "What Did Jack Do?" starts very loose, there are long pauses between the back and forth and the lines are, as I said, often unconnected. It feels like two spies trying code phrases on each other looking for the right match. It did get better though, as we learned more about the crime Jack is accused of and eventually it won me over and I was smiling along with it by the end.
This is not going to do anything for you, if you don't know what you're getting yourself into. However, if you like Lynch, this isn't much of a time commitment for a decent reward.
Another David Lynch Puzzle
munchere-260-5987992 February 2020
I loved Twin Peaks. Full of odd mystery. So I saw this was a David Lynch film and knew I was in for the odd. I'm not sure what to make of it. That was probably his intention. But one thing I noticed but haven't seen talked about was that the dialogue was a string of cliches. Makes me wonder why - what meaning is he conveying by that. I was glad it was short because it was strange and I couldn't figure out what he was doing with it. He loved to put out puzzles. And I hate it when I feel that I'm not up to the challenge.
Strange For Cinema, Safe For Lynch
AW_McGOWAN30 November 2020
Standing next to most films, "What Did Jack Do?" is utterly absurd. But alongside David Lynch's work, it is actually rather tame.
This short movie from the notoriously surreal auteur premiered in 2017 at Paris' Fondation Cartier pour l'Art Contemporain. It then arrived at Netflix in early 2020, making it Lynch's first original contribution to the streaming site.
At seventeen minutes long, "What Did Jack Do?" has a cast of four. Lynch plays a detective and Emily Stolfe a waitress. Meanwhile, a capuchin monkey named Jack Cruz takes the titular role, and a chicken named Toototabon is also credited as herself. Oddly enough, the monkey gets most of the lines, as the plot focuses on Lynch's character interrogating the creature during a murder investigation.
The dialogue between Lynch and his primate co-star is the kind of witty sharp stuff that we've come to expect out of his this unique writer/director. The only difference is that, this time, half the conversation comes from the mouth of an exotic animal, who cusses, jests, and delivers impassioned soliloquies against Lynch's steadfastly hard-boiled law man. Late in the film, Jack even sings a cut-away musical number.
Of course, it is not actually Jack speaking or singing these lines, but some uncredited voice actor. To visually pull this off, a human mouth is digitally pasted onto Jack's unassuming face. Does it look believable? Not quite. In fact, it looks no better than a Snapchat filter. However, when we're watching a capuchin monkey defend himself against criminal accusations with no explanation, we're embracing the uncanny enough to easily accept such visual inconsistencies.
Otherwise, "What Did Jack Do?" is aesthetically simple. It's mostly crosscutting mid-shots between Jack and the Detective talking across a table. Cinematographer Scott Andrew Ressler filmed in black and white with hazy edges to seemingly emulate classic film noir.
After all, Lynch clearly pokes fun at the noir style with this short. The script could very well be a scene from a genuine crime drama, but when one of the characters is of a different species, the whole thing becomes a gag. With hilarious outcome, it demonstrates how over-the-top some movie dialogue can be, as the prototypical detective retains a straight demeanor, coolly dragging on his cigarette while listening to a monkey talk about life, love, and loss.
Again, it is a strikingly weird piece of cinema, but coming from the man behind "Eraserhead," "Twin Peaks," and "Mullholand Drive," "What Did Jack Do?" could be far more esoteric than it is. The mere fact that we can follow this short film's manifest content proves that it is a conservative-leaning Lynch project.
Then again, my interpretation could be completely wrong. Lynch might've not had noir on his mind at all here. Alternatively, he might be making a statement about language, evolution, society, the id, or any other aspect of humanity.
Or, he might just be having some fun with a camera and a monkey.
Either way, we are left laughing.
This short movie from the notoriously surreal auteur premiered in 2017 at Paris' Fondation Cartier pour l'Art Contemporain. It then arrived at Netflix in early 2020, making it Lynch's first original contribution to the streaming site.
At seventeen minutes long, "What Did Jack Do?" has a cast of four. Lynch plays a detective and Emily Stolfe a waitress. Meanwhile, a capuchin monkey named Jack Cruz takes the titular role, and a chicken named Toototabon is also credited as herself. Oddly enough, the monkey gets most of the lines, as the plot focuses on Lynch's character interrogating the creature during a murder investigation.
The dialogue between Lynch and his primate co-star is the kind of witty sharp stuff that we've come to expect out of his this unique writer/director. The only difference is that, this time, half the conversation comes from the mouth of an exotic animal, who cusses, jests, and delivers impassioned soliloquies against Lynch's steadfastly hard-boiled law man. Late in the film, Jack even sings a cut-away musical number.
Of course, it is not actually Jack speaking or singing these lines, but some uncredited voice actor. To visually pull this off, a human mouth is digitally pasted onto Jack's unassuming face. Does it look believable? Not quite. In fact, it looks no better than a Snapchat filter. However, when we're watching a capuchin monkey defend himself against criminal accusations with no explanation, we're embracing the uncanny enough to easily accept such visual inconsistencies.
Otherwise, "What Did Jack Do?" is aesthetically simple. It's mostly crosscutting mid-shots between Jack and the Detective talking across a table. Cinematographer Scott Andrew Ressler filmed in black and white with hazy edges to seemingly emulate classic film noir.
After all, Lynch clearly pokes fun at the noir style with this short. The script could very well be a scene from a genuine crime drama, but when one of the characters is of a different species, the whole thing becomes a gag. With hilarious outcome, it demonstrates how over-the-top some movie dialogue can be, as the prototypical detective retains a straight demeanor, coolly dragging on his cigarette while listening to a monkey talk about life, love, and loss.
Again, it is a strikingly weird piece of cinema, but coming from the man behind "Eraserhead," "Twin Peaks," and "Mullholand Drive," "What Did Jack Do?" could be far more esoteric than it is. The mere fact that we can follow this short film's manifest content proves that it is a conservative-leaning Lynch project.
Then again, my interpretation could be completely wrong. Lynch might've not had noir on his mind at all here. Alternatively, he might be making a statement about language, evolution, society, the id, or any other aspect of humanity.
Or, he might just be having some fun with a camera and a monkey.
Either way, we are left laughing.
The monkey has something to hide.
garethcrook7 February 2020
I don't usually review short films, but this is written by, directed by and starring David Lynch, so I'll make an exception. Not only that, it features Lynch, interviewing a talking monkey in a train station, what's not to love! The monkey, Jack, is in trouble, tied up in a surreal inquisition, questioning his movements and his innocence. The monkey's clearly caught up in something, hiding behind a tirade of proverbial phrases. Then he gets up and sings, then a chicken appears and Lynch chases the monkey with a gun. Not a clue what the intension is, but it kept me entertained for 17 minutes.
good satire
mjoyceh26 January 2020
I loved this short film. It is very creative. Maybe I am reading too much into things, but I see this film as a satire on the hackneyed state of the English language. Lynch is making fun of the way many people speak. He is also indirectly criticizing the way many screenwriters write. His basic premise: Even monkeys can be trained to speak movie dialogue, because the dialogue in so many films is filled with cliches.
ELIZA?
trgz31 January 2020
Not sure to give it anything more than a 6 as the dialogue comes across as the sort of conversation you'd have with a natural language program (written with Tom Waits in mind). There is a story, but it does feel clunky, and there is that end. I'd still recommend watching it though as it very 'Lynch'.
Must be a sick game.
brian-kenyon28 January 2020
At 17 minutes, anybody can watch this...but I feel it's a game because everybody thinks they can devote 17 minutes of their life to this but as you watch it you realize that 17 minutes is a REALLY long time and it's a game to see if you can hold out until the end. Wow.
Amazing
Ziglet_mir16 February 2020
Not much to it, but the absurdity combines oddly well with the dark style and 1940's dialogue.
bob the moo25 August 2020
In a train station booth, a cop interviews a murder suspect. The cop is David Lynch and the suspect is a monkey. They smoke and talk in dialogue that often doesn't make sense but yet somehow holds together. It is essentially the type of film that you expect it to be if you've seen anything from David Lynch - and it is the type of film that will annoy you if you haven't seen his work, or if you dislike him.
I do not mean that to come over to suggest that those that 'get it' are better than those that don't like it - not at all, mainly because there is nothing here to 'get'. Rather, if you like his offbeat style and tone, then this is a pleasing little short because of how it enjoys itself by being that way. The old 1940's style to the look is nice, but it is the dialogue that engaged and amused; at times it is too silly to stand, but it holds together well and provides just enough frame for the absurdity not to collapse the film inwards. There isn't more to it than that; no great narrative or commentary, just David Lynch doing what he enjoys and producing the sort of oddity that I like from him.
I do not mean that to come over to suggest that those that 'get it' are better than those that don't like it - not at all, mainly because there is nothing here to 'get'. Rather, if you like his offbeat style and tone, then this is a pleasing little short because of how it enjoys itself by being that way. The old 1940's style to the look is nice, but it is the dialogue that engaged and amused; at times it is too silly to stand, but it holds together well and provides just enough frame for the absurdity not to collapse the film inwards. There isn't more to it than that; no great narrative or commentary, just David Lynch doing what he enjoys and producing the sort of oddity that I like from him.
By the time it was over I was a changed man.
mrlacey15 February 2020
...
samradcliffe29 January 2020
Nothing fresh
lidiamartinezprado22 April 2020
I like the concept, the construction, the image...
But I think this is terrible. I consider myself a fan of his work, truth is I understand his isolation as an artist, what could come out from that, I like his persona and his way of doing things his way.
But I'm dissapointed. He is not good at editing, his shots take longer or shorter than necessary, always. He has no rithm. His voice is wonderful and looks too, but he's not good actor in terms of doing something more deep or with some emotion. Chosing to do the voice of the monkey creates a very weird conversation between two people who talk the same way. It doesn't look like a conversation in fact, seems like he is reading all the text in front of all class in school. So exagerated and well pronounced (he's always talked that way and I love it, but he needs more emotion here).
Not weird, just badly edited and badly voiced. It could have been more fun...
But I'm dissapointed. He is not good at editing, his shots take longer or shorter than necessary, always. He has no rithm. His voice is wonderful and looks too, but he's not good actor in terms of doing something more deep or with some emotion. Chosing to do the voice of the monkey creates a very weird conversation between two people who talk the same way. It doesn't look like a conversation in fact, seems like he is reading all the text in front of all class in school. So exagerated and well pronounced (he's always talked that way and I love it, but he needs more emotion here).
Not weird, just badly edited and badly voiced. It could have been more fun...
toototabon!
carlsonj-429 January 2020
He sure did a lot
Horst_In_Translation15 March 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Netflix' "What Did Jack Do?" is an American black-and-white film from 2017 that runs for 17 minutes and the main reason people have watched it and are still watching it is that the writer and director here is David Lynch. He is also one of the actors. Actually, almost the only (human) actor. Nothing too extraordinary though as he has acted a lot, also in recent years, and is definitely nobody who really always stays behind the camera in his movies. Anyway, this one here is as bizarre as it gets. Lynch interviews a crime suspect from beginning to end almost and the only interruptions arise from the presence of a waitress and a chicken. This definitely had a great film noir touch to it and I agree with the other reviewer(s) who said this is very Lynch. It certainly is. Also how the questions and the answers (or the questions and the counter-questions) rarely fit together and make sense. The Christmas and Easter references are the best example. But just too of many. Do not expect a coherent, spot-on interrogation here. This is bigger than the both of us, mate. The contents are also in a way where you maybe do not watch this with your young ones because here and there it gets a bitg explicit. Not in terms of the crime and murder this is about, but in terms of the little monkey telling us about his sexual activities with the woman who he struggled with, but also with his true love that by the way is the chicken we see at the end. I will spare you the name, but you can read that one in the cast list, just like the monkey's that is definitely easier to pronounce. Early on, the monkey does not say something and it was pretty hilarious of a reaction to Lynch's (character's) questions, but of course they could not keep going like this for over a quarter of an hour, so the monkey starts talking like a human eventually. Actually, this film totally would have worked with human characters too instead of the animals. They are very much humanized in here. Towards the end, it gets a bit more clear as the talk makes some sense and the monkey answers (even if in a strange way nonetheless) his interrogator's questions before it escalates a little bit and the action continues outside where we don't see the characters. But we don't have to in order for this film to stay a success. Also nice animation here with the monkey's mouth. If there is anything to criticize, it is not that, but just that you can see that the rest of his face/body moves in slow motion. Definitely not a negative deal-breaker though. The only time you can see that the mouth you see does not actually belong to the ape is towards the very end and also just on one occasion. It's alright. It's not a great film, but the absurdity of it all offers enough entertainment value for under 20 minutes and it is also a pretty essential film in terms of the amount of characters (mostly two) and locations (i.e. only one). I have seen many short films from the last years by Lynch and I am not sure if there was only one I enjoyed as much as this one here. Positively surprised for sure. So it is even a good watch for those like myself who are not the greatest David Lynch films. He shows us that he definitely still has it. Go watch!
Well....
GreyHunter2 February 2020
I would say my reaction to this short was that it was...okay. Either as a satire or parody, it didn't break much, if any, new comic ground. Or even evoke a chuckle, really.
I'd call myself a fan of Lynch, though not a superfan. I enjoy most of his work but don't really consider this a particularly good example. One major problem I did have with it was that he did a bad job editing it in places, especially in the unnecessarily long pauses between the backs-and-forths in the dialogue. It was just annoying. There were a couple places toward the end where they were appropriate to suggest classic noir self-reflection, but for most of the early running time, these pauses just held on a little too long to work in a professionally-edited piece.
Also, the integration of the mouth with the monkey was very well-done...except during the musical number, where it became distractingly obvious.
I'd call myself a fan of Lynch, though not a superfan. I enjoy most of his work but don't really consider this a particularly good example. One major problem I did have with it was that he did a bad job editing it in places, especially in the unnecessarily long pauses between the backs-and-forths in the dialogue. It was just annoying. There were a couple places toward the end where they were appropriate to suggest classic noir self-reflection, but for most of the early running time, these pauses just held on a little too long to work in a professionally-edited piece.
Also, the integration of the mouth with the monkey was very well-done...except during the musical number, where it became distractingly obvious.
Lynchianesque.
Amyth474 February 2020
Postmodern stuff
javvvors23 January 2020
I love every minute out of that short. Why? Let me explain.
It gives us a simple story, a cop who questions a bad guy who did something bad, seems familiar? That's because it's meant to be like that! Lynch is exposing that cliche dialogue scene, which is used in every crime movie. This quick scene uses absurd to critique the language of cinema and give us some good laughs.
Of course there are people who don't like his humor, but I'd heard they've been seen with chickens.
Of course there are people who don't like his humor, but I'd heard they've been seen with chickens.
Hilarious
BigJimNoFool19 April 2020
The emperor has no clothes
victorherm5425 January 2020
Lynch once again proving what a hack he is. Either that or he is just performing some kind of trollish social experiment where he sees how low he can set the bar while still having a bunch of lemmings sing his praises about what a brilliant genius he is.
Mind blowing
alicepepperpot24 January 2020
I'm not sure what i just watched. I'm not sure if i liked it or not. I'm not sure I'm going to trust my brother when he tells me what to watch on Netflix ever again. However i feel a bit like something very important happened in my life in the past 17 minutes.
What Did Jack Do?
forthemovies24 January 2022
A detective interrogates a monkey to try to find answers to an unsolved investigation.
What Did Jack Do is an interesting, comical short film with a strange narrative. The visual cinematography for the film was done well and was reminiscent of a 1930s detective film. The performance from David Lynch was great. David Lynch brought a lot of enthusiasm to his character. The dialogue between the characters was odd but humorous which made the short film enjoyable.
What Did Jack Do is an interesting, comical short film with a strange narrative. The visual cinematography for the film was done well and was reminiscent of a 1930s detective film. The performance from David Lynch was great. David Lynch brought a lot of enthusiasm to his character. The dialogue between the characters was odd but humorous which made the short film enjoyable.
WTF
grhodeside25 January 2020
Laughing at this pointless waste of celluloid, not with it. This is the offspring of a kindergardener's rambling, made up short story & a Fellini plot on LSD. I guess some people can read a gum wrapper & contemplate the secrets of the universe, but this short is not esoteric, not avant garde, not deep.....it's just dumb. Someone needs to say the Emporer is not wearing any clothes.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
