Obviously not Herzog's best, but still definitely worth watching. The theme is classic Herzog-- I doubt that any other filmmaker would have considered cattle auctioneering world championships worth their celluloid. At 44 minutes, this isn't really a major work, but as usual Herzog is able to communicate to his audience what it was that drew him to the unique subject. Like Herzog says, there's something "fascinating and frightening" about what these auctioneers do; it's almost like music or "art" but what purpose does it serve? Cattle gets sold as quickly as humanly possible. If the subject doesn't drive you away, give this a try. Technically, it's quite basic, but the Herzog magic is there.
13 Reviews
obviously repetitive, but it has its moments, primarily as an act of rhythmic poetry
Quinoa19842 June 2007
They talk so fast that you need ears like a super-hawk to really decipher what they're getting at, but it's this speed at going about selling goods that interest Werner Herzog so much. He's said in interviews that it's almost like "the poetry of capitalism", as these high-stakes auctioneers, selling off cattle within a matter of seconds, are in a unique little world unto themselves and their small audience, mostly full of small town yokels and Amish. This doesn't make his documentary on them particularly exceptional, however, as it's a little too long and a little much without a lot of human interest; we don't know who most of these ultra-fast talkers are. It is, however, quite funny at times to see them go this fast, perhaps in a sort of detached way (then again, how can one who's never been to a cattle auction know anything about what it's like to see mouths go at a mile a minute).
It's great to see when he's interviewing one guy and he starts explaining how he auctions, and at first in regular speed soon as a sort of reflex goes off into his ultra-fast speaking voice. I also liked getting into the groove of the competition, as it were, seeing how despite it being still at lighting speed with numbers and calls it can be understood which ones are the slower ones. Although Herzog fares a lot better using the auctioneer in his fiction film Stroszek- Scott McKain is the one featured in the scene where Stroszek's items are sold off in an immediacy that is purely staggering and, as it's so unexpected following the pace of that film, is one of the most hilarious scenes of the 70s in cinema- it's a fine little portrait of a group that is somewhat representative of the fun that's missing in more run of the mill acts of commerce. You're not going to see this kind of auction at an art gallery in midtown New York, only in a Herzog film.
It's great to see when he's interviewing one guy and he starts explaining how he auctions, and at first in regular speed soon as a sort of reflex goes off into his ultra-fast speaking voice. I also liked getting into the groove of the competition, as it were, seeing how despite it being still at lighting speed with numbers and calls it can be understood which ones are the slower ones. Although Herzog fares a lot better using the auctioneer in his fiction film Stroszek- Scott McKain is the one featured in the scene where Stroszek's items are sold off in an immediacy that is purely staggering and, as it's so unexpected following the pace of that film, is one of the most hilarious scenes of the 70s in cinema- it's a fine little portrait of a group that is somewhat representative of the fun that's missing in more run of the mill acts of commerce. You're not going to see this kind of auction at an art gallery in midtown New York, only in a Herzog film.
The music of a man talking fast
dbborroughs5 May 2008
For the most part any documentary that Werner Herzog has made results in you seeing something in a new light, even if you don't like the subject. There is always a reason behind anything he has taken a look at. The subject here is auctioneers. I wouldn't have thought twice about a film about men who sell live stock for a living, however having seen a good number of Herzogs films I decided to give this one a shot as well. What fascinates the director is the sounds the men use. It seems to be more music or singing rather than talking;the words becoming a poetry thanks to the cadences. Its a weird sensation. Granted the magic goes away when the film ends and you watch auctioneers at work away from the film, however during the 44 minutes the film runs you are in the hands of a master who makes you believe that music and poetry is something other than what you think it is. Definitely worth a look.
Clarity through unclarity
nikevapor1614 November 2011
I watched this in a creative writing class in order to gain inspiration to expand into more experimental writing. I'm not sure it served that purpose, but the documentary does have a very experimental and ballsy feel to it. A documentary about auctioneers is a hard sell, but the true meaning (at least what I got out of it) is pretty excellent, that being communication and art is everywhere. The flow and process of talking at such speeds seems pointless(I honestly had no idea what the auctioneers were saying most of the time), but at the same time the judges and crowd are all giving feedback, and even judging how effectively they were selling the livestock, mainly based on rate of speech. At the same time, it was all about clarity. And I think that is what Herzog was going for. Unconventional, yet understandable.
7/10
7/10
Comic documentary
Leofwine_draca10 June 2015
Werner Herzog's obsession with small-town America continues in HOW MUCH WOOD WOULD A WOODCHUCK CHUCK?, a short documentary that's filmed during the world speed-talking auctioneer championships in the USA. While there are a few digressions involving the Amish (always a welcome subject for cinema), for the most part this is a static documentary in which the auteur sets his camera up and leaves it filming various contenders, all of them trying their best to out speed-talk the competition.
I was first introduced to this kind of speed-talking in Herzog's follow-up film STROSZEK, and it's amazing to listen to. Watching the contenders practising and talking about their backgrounds adds to the experience. Some may find the lengthy competition scenes a little wearying due to their similarity, but I was never less than amused by listening to these guys doing something I could only dream of.
I was first introduced to this kind of speed-talking in Herzog's follow-up film STROSZEK, and it's amazing to listen to. Watching the contenders practising and talking about their backgrounds adds to the experience. Some may find the lengthy competition scenes a little wearying due to their similarity, but I was never less than amused by listening to these guys doing something I could only dream of.
Bang!...zzz...Bang!: learning the Herzog way.
alice liddell29 September 1999
Rather tiresome Herzog documentary, in which he performs his usual variation on Brechtian alienation by providing his audience with space to think, and then hitting them over the head anyway. The subject matter is the 1976 Cattle Auctioneering World Championships, wherein a bunch of rednecks speedyodel at cows. Herzog would use this phenomenon with great dramatic power in his similarly bludgeoning treatise on America, STROZZEK, but without a fictional framework, the subject becomes monotonous and irritating.
Herzog sees these auctioneers as a major site of American capitalism. Unlike other World Championships, where a skilled jury honour the most successful, this competition is strictly business, the jurors voting for the man they'd most like to represent them. Herzog compares this to the Amish community - enemies of capitalism - in whose town the event takes place. This is an easy jibe, and one that ignores the possible intolerance and repression that can breed in such close-knit groups.
The film is full of such contentiousness. Herzog is a last bastion of righteous modernism in a prevaricating post-modernist age of crisis, confusion and doubt. All his films are made with a firm point of view, offering an unproblematic alternative, but his attacks on convention and tyranny can be rather tyrannical themselves. Herzog appropriates everything. Take, for example, the issue of voices. He interviews competitors. They speak in English, but he talks for them, over them, in German, speaking for them. If the subtitles (another level!) are anything to go by, he's also translating them without due precision, and subtleties of meaning are lost. If his English isn't good enough, it's a mark of his arrogance that he thinks this doesn't matter.
Herzog points out that there is a strange musicality to the auctioneering. He then makes us endure the art for over 20 minutes, presumably to give us time to ruminate over it. So we do. Sometimes it sounds like yodelling, at others babbling dictators, at others raving evangelists. We think about how this 'new' language (both verbal and body) developed, and note the disparity between its local specificity, almost ethnicity, and its centrality to an international capitalism. We may even note the link between the auctioneers and the cattle they're selling, in the businessmans' minds.
All this will probably come to you after two minutes, but Herzog refuses to stop, piling on these yokels whose meagre curiosity value has long since waned. Can you imagine - 20 minutes of cattle moving from one pen to another, buyers whooping, and this insane, ghastly yodelspeak ringing through your ears like a trapped bluebottle. Then - then! - after you've been given time to make up your own mind, Herzog comes along and tells you what he thinks anyway! And guess what? It's exactly the same as what you'd figured out for yourself! Arrrrgh!
(The film has one value though. Canadians really do speak as SOUTH PARK suggested. Which, when you think aboot it, is unfortunate.)
Herzog sees these auctioneers as a major site of American capitalism. Unlike other World Championships, where a skilled jury honour the most successful, this competition is strictly business, the jurors voting for the man they'd most like to represent them. Herzog compares this to the Amish community - enemies of capitalism - in whose town the event takes place. This is an easy jibe, and one that ignores the possible intolerance and repression that can breed in such close-knit groups.
The film is full of such contentiousness. Herzog is a last bastion of righteous modernism in a prevaricating post-modernist age of crisis, confusion and doubt. All his films are made with a firm point of view, offering an unproblematic alternative, but his attacks on convention and tyranny can be rather tyrannical themselves. Herzog appropriates everything. Take, for example, the issue of voices. He interviews competitors. They speak in English, but he talks for them, over them, in German, speaking for them. If the subtitles (another level!) are anything to go by, he's also translating them without due precision, and subtleties of meaning are lost. If his English isn't good enough, it's a mark of his arrogance that he thinks this doesn't matter.
Herzog points out that there is a strange musicality to the auctioneering. He then makes us endure the art for over 20 minutes, presumably to give us time to ruminate over it. So we do. Sometimes it sounds like yodelling, at others babbling dictators, at others raving evangelists. We think about how this 'new' language (both verbal and body) developed, and note the disparity between its local specificity, almost ethnicity, and its centrality to an international capitalism. We may even note the link between the auctioneers and the cattle they're selling, in the businessmans' minds.
All this will probably come to you after two minutes, but Herzog refuses to stop, piling on these yokels whose meagre curiosity value has long since waned. Can you imagine - 20 minutes of cattle moving from one pen to another, buyers whooping, and this insane, ghastly yodelspeak ringing through your ears like a trapped bluebottle. Then - then! - after you've been given time to make up your own mind, Herzog comes along and tells you what he thinks anyway! And guess what? It's exactly the same as what you'd figured out for yourself! Arrrrgh!
(The film has one value though. Canadians really do speak as SOUTH PARK suggested. Which, when you think aboot it, is unfortunate.)
46 truly fascinating minutes
I_Ailurophile13 August 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Who but Werner Herzog could turn his lens to an idiosyncrasy of culture, superficially amusing, and for the simple fact of his examination alter how we perceive the subject? The filmmaker has demonstrated over his career a panache for detached, dispassionate examination of all the complexity of humanity, with an ingrained propensity toward critique (whether underhanded or overt) of modern civilization and socioeconomic policy. True, one could look to remarks that Herzog makes in his narration about this feature's focus, his thoughts on the topic, but for a viewer who has taken any meaningful time to wholly engage with the man's pictures, a particular impression naturally emerges even before we press "play." 'How much wood would a woodchuck chuck?' is first and foremost an exploration of language - the very specific and peculiar lexicon, syntax, and rhythm of auctioneering as we know it as borne from English in the United States and Canada. To a lesser extent, as the spotlighted setting overlaps with Pennsylvania Dutch territory, we get some reflection on the dialect developed among the Amish community over effectively two centuries of insularity. Yet these two components are not unrelated, and for as plainly fascinating as the depiction is on the face of it, the truth of the movie runs deeper. This is where hard analysis comes into play for the attentive audience, and where the tone arguably shifts.
Both the fast-talking blitz of auctioneering and Pennsylvania Dutch find their roots in recognizable languages (English and German, respectively), yet sufficiently diverge from their origins that they are almost completely indecipherable to those who are not highly experienced. Neither language has fundamentally changed, not in the almost 50 years since 'How much wood would a woodchuck chuck?' premiered and certainly not in all the time since the languages first developed. More to the point, however, one can ascertain that both have a distinct relationship to capitalism and modern society: Pennsylvania Dutch exists among a segment of the population that actively rejects progress and change in society over time. The special speech of auctioneering, in contrast, is inextricably linked to the inhumanity and swiftness of capitalism, and its tendency toward disposability. The unique entertainment one may fleetingly derive from witnessing this oddity is an entertainment that is inextricably linked to capitalism as a system of economics. For this, the subject becomes all the more absorbing, but also queerly unsettling.
And there's still more to glean from watching this. As Herzog himself remarks, the competition spotlighted in this documentary is over very quickly, because the rate of speech is so rapid that each competitor requires less than five minutes to illustrate their oral skills. Appropriately, 'How much wood would a woodchuck chuck?' is astonishingly quick, and pointedly straightforward - yet no less rich for the fact of it. Meanwhile, echoing the sprawling contagion of early American colonialism and the vastness of the landscapes it touched, the awards ceremony we see takes place not on the same grounds as the auction, but one hour away - longer than this film. The very structure of Herzog's picture, and of the gatherings it portrays, is in a way tied to the core subject matter. And it's therefore difficult not to begin to think like Herzog, and see 'How much wood would a woodchuck chuck?' as, ultimately, an exploration of culture that was not preexisting and later affected by capitalism and modern society, but which is emphatically a product of it - exclusively, inherently, tightly, inseparably, ruefully woven together.
These 46 minutes are utterly fascinating in and of themselves, and ever more so in accordance with what one may read into them. They are, meanwhile, characterized by exquisite direction, editing, and cinematography, and all the definite hallmarks of a master filmmaker. As direct as this is, there's a faultlessness and finesse to it in terms of both film-making and "storytelling" that is mesmerizing. And even for all that, it's such a vivid viewing experience that words don't fully do it justice - you just have to watch it for yourself. 'How much wood would a woodchuck chuck?' is a documentary like no other I've seen, and earns my highest and most enthusiastic recommendation for all comers.
Both the fast-talking blitz of auctioneering and Pennsylvania Dutch find their roots in recognizable languages (English and German, respectively), yet sufficiently diverge from their origins that they are almost completely indecipherable to those who are not highly experienced. Neither language has fundamentally changed, not in the almost 50 years since 'How much wood would a woodchuck chuck?' premiered and certainly not in all the time since the languages first developed. More to the point, however, one can ascertain that both have a distinct relationship to capitalism and modern society: Pennsylvania Dutch exists among a segment of the population that actively rejects progress and change in society over time. The special speech of auctioneering, in contrast, is inextricably linked to the inhumanity and swiftness of capitalism, and its tendency toward disposability. The unique entertainment one may fleetingly derive from witnessing this oddity is an entertainment that is inextricably linked to capitalism as a system of economics. For this, the subject becomes all the more absorbing, but also queerly unsettling.
And there's still more to glean from watching this. As Herzog himself remarks, the competition spotlighted in this documentary is over very quickly, because the rate of speech is so rapid that each competitor requires less than five minutes to illustrate their oral skills. Appropriately, 'How much wood would a woodchuck chuck?' is astonishingly quick, and pointedly straightforward - yet no less rich for the fact of it. Meanwhile, echoing the sprawling contagion of early American colonialism and the vastness of the landscapes it touched, the awards ceremony we see takes place not on the same grounds as the auction, but one hour away - longer than this film. The very structure of Herzog's picture, and of the gatherings it portrays, is in a way tied to the core subject matter. And it's therefore difficult not to begin to think like Herzog, and see 'How much wood would a woodchuck chuck?' as, ultimately, an exploration of culture that was not preexisting and later affected by capitalism and modern society, but which is emphatically a product of it - exclusively, inherently, tightly, inseparably, ruefully woven together.
These 46 minutes are utterly fascinating in and of themselves, and ever more so in accordance with what one may read into them. They are, meanwhile, characterized by exquisite direction, editing, and cinematography, and all the definite hallmarks of a master filmmaker. As direct as this is, there's a faultlessness and finesse to it in terms of both film-making and "storytelling" that is mesmerizing. And even for all that, it's such a vivid viewing experience that words don't fully do it justice - you just have to watch it for yourself. 'How much wood would a woodchuck chuck?' is a documentary like no other I've seen, and earns my highest and most enthusiastic recommendation for all comers.
This should have been a lot shorter...
planktonrules21 January 2012
Apparently, Werner Herzog was very fascinated with the vocal skills and cadence needed to be a livestock auctioneer. Here, he and his crew attend the livestock auctioneer world championship and seem to record EVERYTHING. While this might have been interesting for 10-15 minutes, at 45 minutes it was a bit of a chore to stick with this one. Just how many fast-talking auctioneers do you need to hear before boredom sets in--I don't know for sure, but Herzog more than surpassed that. Had the film had more back story and information about the participants themselves, the film probably would have sustained my attention longer. In addition, a few little vignettes could have been expanded--such as Herzog and the Quakers trying to communicate in German together. I am no expert on German language, but I could tell that the two languages had diverged considerably over the centuries and I wish this segment had been a bit longer. Or, perhaps he and his folks could have interviewed some of the members of the audience or the auctioneers' families. All I know is that it just felt way over-long.
One Almost Curl
tedg27 April 2007
I had to shake my head in wonder for 45 minutes. This has to be one of the most bizarrely motivated documentaries I have ever seen. It documents an auctioneer's contest. And believe me, we have to sit through the whole routines of every contestant, a death march of blather.
Its not that he's making fun of this American "institution." He really is fascinated by this and had the winner here appear in "Bruno S," in a fabricated part. And he has on numerous times commented on how he finds this hypnotizing. The interesting part of the film is not in the film; that's amazingly boring. Its in the wonder of why this German filmmaker, this sometimes genius who had by then made one of the best two dozen films in history, this risktaker, this idealist why he would spend his time and ours on this. If it were 45 minutes of dirt and clouds, I might understand, but this?
There are a few transcendental moments that he's caught, The context is in Amish country, and he had a crew, so before we begin the contest proper, he shows us some of these people. Now that's the Herzog we know and love. Some of these faces are worth cherishing, especially the women: and one little girl, so cleanly groomed, with hair so perfectly and carefully combed back in an ultramodest style. Except, except for one twist that you know requires an artist to create and wear. A whole life of creativity in that one movement on a patient cherub's head.
Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.
Its not that he's making fun of this American "institution." He really is fascinated by this and had the winner here appear in "Bruno S," in a fabricated part. And he has on numerous times commented on how he finds this hypnotizing. The interesting part of the film is not in the film; that's amazingly boring. Its in the wonder of why this German filmmaker, this sometimes genius who had by then made one of the best two dozen films in history, this risktaker, this idealist why he would spend his time and ours on this. If it were 45 minutes of dirt and clouds, I might understand, but this?
There are a few transcendental moments that he's caught, The context is in Amish country, and he had a crew, so before we begin the contest proper, he shows us some of these people. Now that's the Herzog we know and love. Some of these faces are worth cherishing, especially the women: and one little girl, so cleanly groomed, with hair so perfectly and carefully combed back in an ultramodest style. Except, except for one twist that you know requires an artist to create and wear. A whole life of creativity in that one movement on a patient cherub's head.
Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.
Lo-fi Herzog documentary that is a bit limited overall
Red-Barracuda22 April 2015
How Much Wood Would a Woodchuck Chuck? is a typically strange documentary from German film-maker Werner Herzog. His films practically always focus on the fringes of society. Strange characters and unusual topics abound. This film is no different. It takes place at the 1976 World Championship of Livestock Auctioneering held in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. In this contest contestants compete to see who can talk the fastest, as they auction a succession of cattle at super-fast speeds.
This is a very basic film not only in terms of technique but also with regard to content. It really is not about the people themselves but solely about the fast talking, the way it sounds, the way it has a certain rhythm. To an average listener these people speak a mystifying language that sounds like comical nonsense. It's funny because no one finds it funny – everybody at the show takes it completely at face value and completely normal and clearly understand this bizarre and seemingly unintelligible form of communication. As is normal for him, Herzog does not make fun of his documentary subjects and, in this case, simply observes. It's quite funny up to a point but overlong and repetitive given that the vast majority of it is simply a succession of auctioneers talking at high speed. The lack of material makes it almost quite an abstract documentary, one which is not so much about informing the viewer and more about engaging their senses. How much this will work for you is entirely down to what extent you get into the rhythms of these fast talking auctioneers. I personally found it amusing up to a point but a bit tedious at the same time.
This is a very basic film not only in terms of technique but also with regard to content. It really is not about the people themselves but solely about the fast talking, the way it sounds, the way it has a certain rhythm. To an average listener these people speak a mystifying language that sounds like comical nonsense. It's funny because no one finds it funny – everybody at the show takes it completely at face value and completely normal and clearly understand this bizarre and seemingly unintelligible form of communication. As is normal for him, Herzog does not make fun of his documentary subjects and, in this case, simply observes. It's quite funny up to a point but overlong and repetitive given that the vast majority of it is simply a succession of auctioneers talking at high speed. The lack of material makes it almost quite an abstract documentary, one which is not so much about informing the viewer and more about engaging their senses. How much this will work for you is entirely down to what extent you get into the rhythms of these fast talking auctioneers. I personally found it amusing up to a point but a bit tedious at the same time.
Woodchuck Bites off more than It can Chew
st-shot22 November 2007
Werner Herzog paints himself into a corner with this overlong (44 minutes) documentary about an auctioneer's competition at a major Midwestern fair. By focusing only on this topic it moves from fascinating to interesting to boring in less time than it would to auction a couple of heifers. The film diverts and becomes disjointed when it abruptly switches to a montage of the local Amish population accompanied by the strains of Country Road. Then its back to the competition for over fifteen minutes of auctioning. It is an ordeal.
We can all benefit from Werner Herzog's fascination and keen interest in the world at large. His topics tend toward the odd and esoteric and their are moments in his films, both fiction and documentary, where you get the feeling your both learning at the same time. There is no condescension just interest in finding something out. In Woodchuck, however he seems more like a tourist than documentary film maker. As part of a larger film, say on the entire fair, it would have made a valuable contribution (as well as the Amish angle) but alone it wears out its welcome in under fifteen minutes.
We can all benefit from Werner Herzog's fascination and keen interest in the world at large. His topics tend toward the odd and esoteric and their are moments in his films, both fiction and documentary, where you get the feeling your both learning at the same time. There is no condescension just interest in finding something out. In Woodchuck, however he seems more like a tourist than documentary film maker. As part of a larger film, say on the entire fair, it would have made a valuable contribution (as well as the Amish angle) but alone it wears out its welcome in under fifteen minutes.
Woodchuck
Michael_Elliott29 February 2008
How Much Wood Would a Woodchuck Chuck (1976)
** (out of 4)
Werner Herzog documentary about cattle auctioneers is rather strange to say the least. We really don't learn anything about the actual auctioneers except how they got into the business. It seems Herzog's main interest is just listening to them speak their fast talk and asking them what it means when they say it slowed down.
I've seen quite a few of Herzog's documentaries and this one isn't the best but he has many great ones out there.
You can buy this film from Herzog's website.
** (out of 4)
Werner Herzog documentary about cattle auctioneers is rather strange to say the least. We really don't learn anything about the actual auctioneers except how they got into the business. It seems Herzog's main interest is just listening to them speak their fast talk and asking them what it means when they say it slowed down.
I've seen quite a few of Herzog's documentaries and this one isn't the best but he has many great ones out there.
You can buy this film from Herzog's website.
Like watching a woodchuck chuck wood
Horst_In_Translation16 May 2015
Warning: Spoilers
This is a 45-minute documentary from almost 40 years ago teaching us that there is actually such a thing as cattle auctioneering world championships in the United States. In the first half, director Werner Herzog (in his 30s here) interviews some of the participants with his unique voice, while in the second half we just get to witness the "art". I have to say, even if this had only half the length of a normal documentary/movie, I felt it began to drag quickly. The subject is certainly very unique and specific, maybe too specific to make an interesting watch, at least for me. Herzog reused some of the stars of this documentary in his follow-up movie "Stroszek" afterward. They all wear cowboy hats and almost all of them have mustaches, except the new world champion, one of the youngest participants judging by his looks. Herzog very well could have been one of the participants as well. The language is almost exclusively English, don't be fooled by the information here on IMDb. All in all, probably one of Herzog's weakest. Not recommended.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
