A brief history of food fights in the movies | Little White Lies

A brief his­to­ry of food fights in the movies

07 Aug 2018

Words by Georgina Guthrie

Two women, one in a sequined red dress gesturing, the other holding fruit, in a kitchen setting with alcohol on the table.
Two women, one in a sequined red dress gesturing, the other holding fruit, in a kitchen setting with alcohol on the table.
This messy, invari­ably enter­tain­ing cin­e­mat­ic sta­ple can rep­re­sent anar­chy, revenge and sex­u­al release.

Desert of choice for Amer­i­cans every­where, the pie is a beloved icon of home cook­ing: half pas­try, half fruit with a sprin­kling sug­ar, it’s a thing to be cher­ished, lov­ing­ly set on a win­dowsill to cool or smoth­ered in whipped cream and imme­di­ate­ly devoured. A pie should nev­er, ever be thrown at some­one – unless it’s for good reason.

Pieing – the act of chuck­ing a pie in someone’s face – is tra­di­tion­al­ly done with a crust­less vari­ety filled with cream, although shav­ing foam packed into a tin­foil tray may be used as a sub­sti­tute. The goal is to humil­i­ate the vic­tim and amuse the audi­ence, except when a polit­i­cal fig­ure is involved, in which case the attack moves into the realm of protest: an unso­licit­ed pie to the face is a pun­ish­able crim­i­nal offence.

Pieing has long been a main­stay of Amer­i­can slap­stick. The ear­li­est exam­ple record on film is Essanay Stu­dios’ 1909 silent com­e­dy Mr Flip, in which a sex­u­al­ly harassed wait­ress final­ly smash­es a pie in Ben Turpin’s face as just pun­ish­ment for his unso­licit­ed grop­ings. Twelve years lat­er, com­e­dy duo Lau­rel and Hardy set the bench­mark with a care­ful­ly chore­o­graphed 3000-strong pie fight for their slap­stick splat­ter­fest The Bat­tle of the Cen­tu­ry. The fight esca­lates after a pas­try chef slips on a banana peel and artic­u­lates his frus­tra­tion in the best pos­si­ble way.

Pieing has since gone on to become a stock com­e­dy punch­line. It makes for whole­some fam­i­ly view­ing, but it fast became some­thing of a cliché, a warm up act to a full-blown food fight, which has the poten­tial to say more than a sim­ple pie ever could.

Take John Lan­dis’ Ani­mal House, which fol­lows a group of bawdy, social­ly-inept stu­dents in a bat­tle against the college’s most pres­ti­gious fra­ter­ni­ty. Blu­to (John Belushi) sits down to lunch with the jocks, fills his mouth with ice cream, punch­es his swollen cheeks and pro­ceeds to spray the con­tents over his fel­low din­ers. He then yells those two words and the hall explodes into chaos. This food fight is a swift and effec­tive expres­sion of con­tempt for con­for­mi­ty – a sim­ple pie in the face would have been too per­son­al, and much too silly.

Food can also be a weapon. In Dan­ny DeVito’s Matil­da, the oppressed chil­dren of Miss Trunchbull’s school rise up and humil­i­ate their tor­men­tor using their lunch. And in Alan Parker’s pro­hi­bi­tion gang­ster film Bugsy Mal­one, the cream in the splurge guns’ was nev­er intend­ed for eat­ing, it was a genius alter­na­tive to bul­lets in the director’s bid to secur­ing the film its child-friend­ly rating.

At the oth­er end of the scale, an under­stat­ed food fight in 1931’s The Pub­lic Ene­my is a les­son in sim­plic­i­ty: Kit­ty (Mae Clarke) receives a grape­fruit half to the face when she tells James Cagney’s Tom he can’t drink alco­hol with his break­fast. His retal­i­a­tion is so sharp and so unrea­son­able that it sur­pass­es Lau­rel and Hardy’s pie fight in terms of emo­tion­al impact: a humil­i­at­ed Kit­ty left alone at the table makes for sober viewing.

Mov­ing into the realm of sex­u­al metaphor, the two female pro­tag­o­nists of Jon Avnet’s Fried Green Toma­toes throw and smear flour, ripe black­ber­ries and choco­late over each oth­er in a reck­less food fight which effec­tive­ly stands in for illic­it sex­u­al con­tact. This food fight is at once both an act of sub­ver­sion and con­for­mi­ty as their desire finds expres­sion in an uncon­ven­tion­al, yet cul­tur­al­ly accept­able act.

Food fights have become a famil­iar sta­ple of Amer­i­can cin­e­ma. But in com­mu­nist Europe, where food was scarce and wastage frowned upon, film­ing one had the poten­tial to become an act of rebel­lion dan­ger­ous enough to see the film banned, or worse, a film­ing ban for the direc­tor themselves.

Vera Chytilová, a key fig­ure in the Czech New Wave, direct­ed her 1966 film Daisies under a strict social­ist régime. Not that she con­forms to her nation’s fru­gal ide­olo­gies: her fifth fea­ture tells the sto­ry of two dan­ger­ous­ly bored pals who blaze through a series of abstract sce­nar­ios, play­ful­ly trash­ing their envi­ron­ment to cre­ate chop­py visu­al exper­i­ments. They final­ly break into a state ban­quet hall, dis­cov­er a table laden with food and pro­ceed to rip, smash, chuck and gob­ble every­thing in sight.

Unsur­pris­ing­ly, the film’s waste­ful indul­gence irked the but­toned-up author­i­ties, who banned it for its depic­tion of food wastage and gen­er­al non­con­for­mi­ty. The pun­ish­ment was sharp – not only was the film itself pro­hib­it­ed, but Chytilová was for­bid­den from mak­ing films in her native coun­try for almost a decade.

Mov­ing deep­er into art­house ter­ri­to­ry – and about as far away from a whole­some pie fight as you can get – is Yugosla­vian direc­tor Dušan Makavejev’s Sweet Movie. Already exiled from his home coun­try fol­low­ing his con­tro­ver­sial fourth fea­ture WR: Mys­ter­ies of the Organ­ism, his fifth was imme­di­ate­ly banned and remains barred, or heav­i­ly cut, in many coun­tries to this day.

In this stom­ach-churn­ing feast, a table of din­ers sink into ungoverned chaos, smash­ing food, spit­ting it out and lit­er­al­ly regur­gi­tat­ing it onto the table. The shock is the point: Sweet Movie aims to push ideas about cre­ative and indi­vid­ual free­dom to their lim­its. As Makave­jev lat­er claimed in a 1975 inter­view with film crit­ic Roger Ebert: That’s what I’d like my films to do – to bring peo­ple to see in them­selves things they might oth­er­wise nev­er accept.”

Food fights have the pow­er to amuse, humil­i­ate, relieve ten­sion, or – in cer­tain cul­tur­al envi­ron­ments – evolve into a potent artis­tic or polit­i­cal­ly-charged state­ment. Even a sim­ple pie, when thrown in the face of the right per­son, in just the right way, can com­mu­ni­cate a mes­sage far more effec­tive­ly than words ever could. As Stan Lau­rel once put it: It wasn’t just that we threw hun­dreds of pies. That wouldn’t have been very fun­ny… we went at it, strange as it may sound, psy­cho­log­i­cal­ly. We made every one of the pies count.”

You might like

Accessibility Settings

Text

Applies the Open Dyslexic font, designed to improve readability for individuals with dyslexia.

Applies a more readable font throughout the website, improving readability.

Underlines links throughout the website, making them easier to distinguish.

Adjusts the font size for improved readability.

Visuals

Reduces animations and disables autoplaying videos across the website, reducing distractions and improving focus.

Reduces the colour saturation throughout the website to create a more soothing visual experience.

Increases the contrast of elements on the website, making text and interface elements easier to distinguish.