Bread

In philosophy there is an age-old thought experiment which is designed to open discussion on the nature of morality (or ethics) – that of the loaf of bread. If a person steals a loaf of bread, is this always an immoral act and does it make them an immoral person? What if the person stole the bread to feed their starving family? Does that change the morality of the situation? Is the morality of the thief affected by the circumstance of the action taken?

Now, of course there is more than one answer to this question, which probably goes a long way to explaining the state of society today, and depending on whether you prefer to apply utilitarian, deontological or virtue ethics to the problem, you’re going to end up with wildly differing points of view. There is a reason that this thought experiment is one of the most famous and long-standing in the history of philosophy, and let’s just say we’re not going to get to the end of it here, however, writer/director Binendra Menon wants to open up this discussion one more time, and so we have Bread.

In his short seven-minute film, Menon visualises this exact philosophical problem and puts it on screen. There is nothing else to add to the story, no sidelines or alternate routes to go down, and no need for explicit characterisation or background – the shopkeeper sells the bread, the thief steals the bread, the policeman chases down the thief – job done. Except, that just in the closing moments of the film, Menon tacks on his own moral judgement to the scenario and fully commits to utilitarian ethics to press the point he wants to make, which is fair enough.

Bread is set in the dense forests of India, where a local trader has a stall at the side of a dirt road. Once the thief (Akhilan) has stolen the bread, right in front of the police-officer (Zain), a chase ensues and the two men race off into the trees, each fulfilling their one-dimensional role according to their social status. Almost the entire film is taken up by this chase sequence, with a few trips and spills along the way, and there is never any dialogue between the two main characters. Everything is expressed in ADR grunts and sighs which don’t quite match up with the visuals, and the entire plot and motivation of the film is completely contained within the thousands years old dilemma. When the two men fall into a pit they can’t get out of, and are injured, then a decision has to be made about which morality is stronger – that of the law, or that of humanity.

What does stand out from Menon’s film, away from the simplistic plot and one-note characterisation, is the cinematography. Captured by Menon himself, the tracking through the undergrowth and the keeping of the characters in the frame is all really well handled. The colour of the forest is luxuriant and Menon keeps everything crisp and clear as the two men run further into the dense green leaves. The expressions on the characters faces are always given to the viewer at explicit points, keeping us invested in their journey, and despite a lack of dialogue plenty of emotion is still transferred through the screen, especially in the closing shots.

While Bread may not have an awful lot to it, and really nothing to add to the centuries old debate, it is well made, well filmed and well produced. It’s not certain that the film says anything about living in today’s world, tackling a theme that almost everyone in history will have discussed at some point, but it does make its own decisions and its own conclusions and presents them with some visual style. Unfortunately, there’s not a lot to be gained from watching Bread, unless you want to use it in a first introductory lesson to basic philosophy to illustrate one of the oldest dilemmas in human history.