Killing Sheep is Difficult

If anything lost me, it was this dog mask...

Killer of Sheep (1979) is an American drama film by Charles Burnett about a man dealing with his jaded working-class life and family.  It is critically praised all across the board and is considered a huge breakthrough in African American film.  It's also a difficult film.

This isn't to say that the film is difficult to understand; I knew what was going on for the most part and I did not get lost very often.  It also is not difficult due gut-twisting scenes of violence and other immoralities; there are virtually none of those (unless the parts in the meat factory count).  It is a difficult film because it is difficult to pay attention to.  Why is that?

I think it has to do with the way the narrative is laid out.  Generally speaking, traditional American story-telling in films (or in any media) is told in a linear sense, with a clear beginning, middle and end, and with a very obvious protagonist, antagonist and conflict of interest.  The audience does not get that kind of story here.

Killer of Sheep's story is told in the fashion of traditional African tribal legends and fables, such as the Igbo people's stories found in the novel Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe.  Often with these types of stories, there is a vague overarching plot with varying subplots.  These subplots are told in an episodic, non-linear fashion, and the point of view often switches from character to character, making identifying a definite protagonist a bit tricky.  The "episodes" don't really end, either; they tend to leave off on open-ended notes, but often are not actually finished.  (This could be so that the next orator can add his or her own sort of "ending", with hopes of continuing an oral narrative chain.)  There is also a heavier emphasis on the characters' actions, as opposed to the traditional American stories, where the emphasis is on the characters' reactions.

Telling the story this way may be the film trying to juxtapose African Americans' livelihoods and their heritage.  It is a neat way of looking at narrative in general, but it may be hard to invest in if it breaks every rule of story-telling that the audience grew up with.