Skip to main content

I'm sure that horse was once a weak and cowardly man just like you.

The Lobster
(2015)

(SPOILERS) A film for which the word “quirky” could have been designed. The Lobster fair old quivers with quirk, but unfortunately its idiosyncratic, deadpan satire of relationship mores isn’t entirely sustained across its two-hour length. And yet, despite its sometimes overpowering affectation powering a slender premise, the sort of thing that would probably make for a much better short film than a feature, I found Yorgos Lanthimos’ English language feature debut fitfully engrossing. That’s not to say it’s particularly clever or insightful – its points are really rather crude – but it has an infectiously pitch black sense of humour, and boasts Colin Farrell in particularly fine form.


Admittedly, I was half hoping for something more than its most obvious agenda, comprising an offbeat dissection of societal and personal attitudes to relationships as they encompass themes of conformity and expectation. At times, The Lobster comes self-consciously close to exclaiming “I’m mental, I am”, in danger of unravelling its entire conceit. Mostly, though, its wilful battiness tends to win out.


Farrell’s David, having been dumped for another man by his wife, is consigned to a hotel with a company of socially unacceptable singles, where he has 45 days to pair up or he will be transformed into an animal of his choice (the crustacean of the title). In order to successfully couple they must find a common characteristic or interest that marks them as a match, which leads to various ruses by way of attempting to hoodwink an intended and avoid a bestial demise.


None of the characters are named aside from David, so Ashley Jensen (of Extras; she’s suffered enough, having to regularly perform opposite Gervais) is the Biscuit Woman, while Jon C Reilly is the Lisping Man, Ben Whishaw the Limping Man, and Angeliki Papoulia the Heartless Woman. The latter is particularly adept at delaying transformation through success in regular hunting parties for loaners (for which they receive additional days suspending their sentence). She’s also central to one of the most malignantly amusing passages, as David attempts to “woo” her by pretending to be entirely unaffected and completely disinterested in the welfare of others.


Limping Man has, through the subterfuge of portraying the same malady as Nosebleed Woman (Jessica Barden), forestalled an animal fate, but things aren’t going very well between them so they have been given a daughter (in an example of how obvious the picture’s nudges can be, it is noted of problem relationships, “That usually helps a lot”). David kicks her, advising “Now you’ll have a limp and be more like your father”. Subsequently, the sequence where the Heartless Woman tests David’s resolve is much less funny.


The loners are just as bad, as one would expect from a system inviting polarities. They encourage masturbation but are punitive towards intimate fraternisation, and the unsubtle gags come thick and fast (or maybe that should be slow and congealed?); “We dance by ourselves. That’s why we only play electronic music” advises Léa Seydoux’s psycho leader.


Rachel Weisz’s Short Sighted Woman has something in common with David (short-sightedness), who has fled the hotel, and they embark on an illicit, covert relationship. The loners’ punishments include the bizarre (a hot boiled egg under the armpit) and the horrifically cruel, just like the hoteliers (where Lisping Man has his fingers jammed in a toaster). 


Particularly so is Short Sighted Woman’s fate, compounded by David’s lack of conviction when it comes to the crunch; is this a lesson in essential selfishness overriding any fanciful ideas of “meant to be”? Is that why David is the only named character, because he’s important only unto himself (his brother, now a dumb animal its easier to care for unconditionally, is also named)? Like us all (as evidenced by the Hotel Manager’s – Olivia Coleman – husband when faced with an ultimatum).


If that's the case, it’s a particularly grim sentiment, but while The Lobster is caustic and acute in places, in the lies we tell and the lies we’re told, its stylised wackiness also renders it rather glib. And it can’t be coincidental that its best moments are where it embraces its own twisted silliness rather than tries to massage its message (“There’s blood and biscuits everywhere”, observes Heartless Woman of the mess Biscuit Woman has made of the paving). Following the escape to the woods, it begins to plod, losing its antic energy and becoming merely diverting.


The performances are as key to Lanthimos’ tone as Thimios Bakatakis’ precise cinematography. Farrell is always at his best when playing against his star persona (which has rarely worked out well box office-wise anyway), and here he’s both physically unimposing (sporting a sizeable gut and spectacles) and exhibits that slightly desperate, slightly maudlin facility for humour that has served him so well in his pairings with Martin McDonagh.  


Lanthimos' film is ultimately stronger for its visual absurdity than its content, since he has tried to string together a series of jottings that leave it less than coherent. That’s partly why it would have made a better short; the further The Lobster extends itself, the less beguiling it becomes. It never quite collapses in on itself, but draws attention to its own thinness, in a way, say, Charlie Kauffman’s existential musings don’t (mainly because he has no shortage of angsty ruminations to cover). Good but no Thermidor, then. As for the poster design (the ones below). I wouldn’t go see that movie.





Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why would I turn into a filing cabinet?

Captain Marvel (2019)
(SPOILERS) All superhero movies are formulaic to a greater or lesser degree. Mostly greater. The key to an actually great one – or just a pretty good one – is making that a virtue, rather than something you’re conscious of limiting the whole exercise. The irony of the last two stand-alone MCU pictures is that, while attempting to bring somewhat down-the-line progressive cachet to the series, they’ve delivered rather pedestrian results. Of course, that didn’t dim Black Panther’s cultural cachet (and what do I know, swathes of people also profess to loving it), and Captain Marvel has hit half a billion in its first few days – it seems that, unless you’re poor unloved Ant-Man, an easy $1bn is the new $700m for the MCU – but neither’s protagonist really made that all-important iconic impact.

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

Can you float through the air when you smell a delicious pie?

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)
(SPOILERS) Ironically, given the source material, think I probably fell into the category of many who weren't overly disposed to give this big screen Spider-Man a go on the grounds that it was an animation. After all, if it wasn’t "good enough" for live-action, why should I give it my time? Not even Phil Lord and Christopher Miller's pedigree wholly persuaded me; they'd had their stumble of late, although admittedly in that live-action arena. As such, it was only the near-unanimous critics' approval that swayed me, suggesting I'd have been missing out. They – not always the most reliable arbiters of such populist fare, which made the vote of confidence all the more notable – were right. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is not only a first-rate Spider-Man movie, it's a fresh, playful and (perhaps) surprisingly heartfelt origins story.

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

As I heard my Sioux name being called over and over, I knew for the first time who I really was.

Dances with Wolves (1990)
(SPOILERS) Kevin Costner’s Oscar glory has become something of a punching bag for a certain brand of “white saviour” storytelling, so much so that it’s even crossed over seamlessly into the SF genre (Avatar). It’s also destined to be forever scorned for having the temerity to beat out Goodfellas for Best Picture at the 63rdAcademy Awards. I’m not going to buck the trend and suggest it was actually the right choice – I’d also have voted Ghost above Dances, maybe even The Godfather Part III – but it’s certainly the most “Oscar-friendly” one. The funny thing, on revisit, is that what stands out most isn’t its studiously earnest tone or frequent but well-intentioned clumsiness. No, it’s that its moments of greatest emotional weight – in what is, after all, intended to shine a light on the theft and destruction of Native American heritage – relate to its non-human characters.

Sorry I’m late. I was taking a crap.

The Sting (1973)
(SPOILERS) In any given list of the best things – not just movies – ever, Mark Kermode would include The Exorcist, so it wasn’t a surprise when William Friedkin’s film made an appearance in his Nine films that should have won Best Picture at the Oscars list last month. Of the nominees that year, I suspect he’s correct in his assessment (I don’t think I’ve seen A Touch of Class, so it would be unfair of me to dismiss it outright; if we’re simply talking best film of that year, though, The Exorcist isn’t even 1973’s best horror, that would be Don’t Look Now). He’s certainly not wrong that The Exorcistremains a superior work” to The Sting; the latter’s one of those films, like The Return of the King and The Departed, where the Academy rewarded the cast and crew too late. Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid is the masterpiece from George Roy Hill, Paul Newman and Robert Redford, not this flaccid trifle.

I don’t think you will see President Pierce again.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)
(SPOILERS) The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and other tall tales of the American frontier is the title of "the book" from which the Coen brothers' latest derives, and so announces itself as fiction up front as heavily as Fargo purported to be based on a true story. In the world of the portmanteau western – has there even been one before? – theme and content aren't really all that distinct from the more familiar horror collection, and as such, these six tales rely on sudden twists or reveals, most of them revolving around death. And inevitably with the anthology, some tall tales are stronger than other tall tales, the former dutifully taking up the slack.

Poor A. A. Milne. What a ghastly business.

Saving Mr. Banks (2013)
The absolutely true story of how P. L. Travers came to allow Walt Disney to adapt Mary Poppins, after 20 years’ persistent begging on the latter’s part. Except, of course, it isn’t true at all. Walt has worked his magic from beyond the grave over a fairly unremarkable tale of mutual disagreement. Which doesn’t really matter if the result is a decent movie that does something interesting or though-provoking by changing the facts… Which I’m not sure it does. But Saving Mr. Banks at least a half-decent movie, and one considerably buoyed by the performances of its lead actors.

Actually, Mr. Banks is buoyed by the performances of its entire cast. It’s the script that frequently lets the side down, laying it on thick when a lighter touch is needed, repeating its message to the point of nausea. And bloating it out not so neatly to the two-hour mark when the story could have been wrapped up quite nicely in a third less time. The title itself could perhaps be seen as rubbi…

Everything has its price, Avon.

Blake's 7 4.1: Rescue

Season Four, the season they didn’t expect to make. Which means there’s a certain amount of getting up to speed required in order for “status quo” stories to be told. If they choose to go that route. There’s no Liberator anymore as a starting point for stories; a situation the show hasn’t found itself in since Space Fall. So where do they go from here? Behind the scenes there’s no David Maloney either. Nor Terry Nation (I’d say that by this point that’s slightly less of an issue, but his three scripts for Season Three were among his best).

Do you read Sutter Cane?

In the Mouth of Madness (1994)
(SPOILERS) The concluding chapter of John Carpenter’s unofficial Apocalypse Trilogy (preceded by The Thing and Prince of Darkness) is also, sadly, his last great movie. Indeed, it stands apart in the qualitative wilderness that beset him during the ‘90s (not for want of output). Michael De Luca’s screenplay had been doing the rounds since the ‘80s, even turned down by Carpenter at one point, and it proves ideal fodder for the director, bringing out the best in him. Even cinematographer Gary K Kibbe seems inspired enough to rise to the occasion. It could do without the chugging rawk soundtrack, perhaps, but then, that was increasingly where Carpenter’s interests resided (as opposed to making decent movies).