The thing I remember most about Yorgos Lanthimos The Killing of a Sacred Deerhttps://letterboxd.com/film/thekillingofasacreddeer/ 2016 was how uncomfortable it made me feel. This wasnt so much to do with the story or characters. Rather it had everything to do with these shots of seemingly everyday objects and activities that were intermittently spread throughout the film. Armpit hair. A dude eating spaghetti. Slicing a fish at the kitchen counter. Harmless by themselves right? No actually. The reason these things were so uncomfortable was because they were given focus. Isolated. Just because. For no apparent reason. https://www..com/watch?v=WlF1CfHQZE Kei Oyamahttps://anilist.co/staff/119865/KeiOyamas HAND SOAP operates on much the same principle. Its a 16minute animated short available for free on Vimeohttps://vimeo.com/294716994 that was wellreceived when it did the film festival circuit on release. Its about an acneridden boy and his dysfunctional family. Structurally the short consists of a series of vignettes that give the audience a very uneasy glimpse into this very abnormal family and their interactions. 420https://i.ur.com/m5nQAjy.png The entire film is designed to make you feel as uncomfortable as possible. This is chiefly and most effectively done via the aesthetic design. The art has this grainy quality that is in a constant state of flux. It makes frequent use of closeups and extreme closeups. The subject of these closeups are blemished faces and highly textured fingers and everyday objects. Much like Killing of a Sacred Deer things that are familiar and quotidian are thereby rendered foreign and grotesque through this extreme focus. The human body then the self and especially the adolescent self is the vehicle that drives this ugliness. Its body horror without the horror. Per the prominent role fingers play not to mention the films title theres a special emphasis on touch. For example theres this visual motif where hands hesitantly reach out towards doorknobs. Its executed well enough to make even the most stonefaced viewer squeamish. This all ties into the notion of affect film theory which basically examines how cinema vicariously stimulates the audiences senses. And whilst touch reigns supreme in HAND SOAP its not alone. The sparing sound effects theres next to no dialogue the soft howling of the wind the squeaking of a faucet are equally visceral and disconcerting. 330https://i.ur.com/oB7uRxh.png 330https://i.ur.com/rwccZ9L.png Its all very on the nose although this isnt necessarily a bad thing. The shenanigans the family get up to are equally blunt. However towards the films end theres this really weird segment weirder than the rest of the short anyhow. I could have done without it. Although you can kind of understand the idea behind it its bizarre to the point that it breaks the tension thats been suffocating you for the previous ten minutes. As a snapshot detailing the ugliness and sensitivity of adolescence HAND SOAP somewhat succeeds. As an experiment in sensuous and affective cinema it absolutely succeeds. Lets be clear: HAND SOAP is not a pleasurable viewing experience by any stretch of the imagination. But its definitely an experience.