first and let me mention the fact that and in spite of it title ( « story » and in plural ) and there be only one kitchen story . a to whether isak die or not at the end and i be not so sure since and in one of the very last scene and his pipe be see lie on the table next to the two cup . on the dvd cover and there be a reference to tati . it claim that the film be « très drôle represent rappelle tati . » ( « very funny represent reminiscent of tati . » . the great jacques tati rely mainly on mime and silent deadpan attitude to achieve his comical effect and to offer his critically satiric view of his 1950 ’ s french « modern » society . of course « kitchen » do take place during the 1950 ’ s and it do offer some ( rather faint ) satirical reference to the absurdity of bureaucracy and there be some long moment be no word be uttered – but they be not really funny . be all these small detail enough to make « kitchen » a « tatiesque » movie . this be say and i have to admit that « kitchen » do deal with the sometimes false objectivity of scientific research versus the « truth » of human subjective emotion . generally speak and the movie be agonizingly slow and with nothing much happen with barely any « dramatic impulse » represent the involve part be the set up during the first 15 minute or so and and during the last half hour or so . indeed and the last segment be finally . interesting and moving . it might seem that it be a short subject and of less than an hour and unduly stretch to some 90 minute . now and about the set up ( a « scientific » observation on the behavior of single male in their kitchen ) represent at first it seem very promising – with the chart out of the coming and going of bachelor in their kitchen a a mean to determine what new invention would be most useful to come up with . but very quickly this premise turn out to be just a prologue and an « excuse » to introduce the real subject which be only fully develop towards the end and which be about loneliness and the invaluable bond of friendship . pity . i honestly want to like that movie . yes and it seem so promising when i hear about some of it unusual little « anecdote » which be indeed there and which i enjoy – such a the burning of a man ’ s nose hair ( instead of use scissors to cut it off ) and the « investment » of have a huge quantity of « valuable » black pepper stack away in a barn and the role reversal ( the observant become the observe ) and a man ’ s mouth emit sound from a radio program . and there be also a sick horse become the catalyst of half hidden human despair and the relative importance of right or leave side car driving in sweden and norway ( a reflection of the importance for each of these very close neighboring country to affirm it individuality . ) . be i the sole person who do not fully enjoy that film . do this necessarily mean that i be wrong . perhaps it ’ s almost generally praise « fine point » be and in fact and « too subtle » for me . perhaps . could my individual view on this movie ironically reflect the very essence of the film itself which would be the vital necessity to have the right to differ and to affirm one ’ s individuality and not to follow blindly society ’ s trend and opinion . each one of u have the right to have different personal view and not to be a slave of the demand of one ’ s bread win « dictatorial » demand represent often and we do have other alternative that would allow each one of u to be useful to our society while respect one ’ s inner principle . in short and be true to oneself – the way that in that film folke ( isak ’ s « scientific observer » ) end up by give up his job while prefer to stay in his new friend isak ’ s house and help his out with the task of his farm . and so and « vive la différence » and a the french say .