Skip to main content

Room Two-Fourteen! Gotta be seen!

The Neon Demon
(2016)

(SPOILERS) I found the first hour of The Neon Demon mesmerising, an elliptical, synth-driven fever dream and tonal cousin to Beyond the Black Rainbow, ostensibly charting the seductive and destructive path to success in the superficial world of modelling but possibly being about something very much more than that. By the end, however, it had diminished somewhat in my estimation, its cool, retro poise reframed by the most OTT, Grand Guignol, head-on charge. I was left with a shrug, rather than the rapt sense of having been fed through a wringer of revelation. And that’s even with Nicolas Winding Refn’s film being over-ripe for interpretation, so loaded with subtext it’s tantamount to a conspiracy theorist’s wet dream.


I suppose the full-on left turn the picture takes shouldn’t have been a surprise. Refn is as wilfully perverse a filmmaker as his fellow countryman Lars von Trier, but whereas I find von Trier’s work consistently unpalatable, in the vomiting-up-eyeballs sense, Refn’s a different kettle of strange fish, a wilful warper of genre and expectation, one who lacks the true, innate, sublime weirdness of a David Lynch, but for all that creates transfixing, immersive environments that seem to pull back the hood on unnerving and inherently arcane people, characters, landscapes and realms. I saw it rather snobbily suggested that Only Once Forgives was a litmus test for fans of Drive, sorting those who mistake its relatively commercial furrow from true Refn-ites. Such a view would apply to The Neon Demon and then some, in that case.


It’s possible that the last 20 minutes will send you running for the (Hollywood) hills, but the most extreme necrophile scene in a mainstream movie since Bad Timing (I’m guessing on that, actually, as I don’t make a habit of seeking them out) and a slow-mo, post-cannibalistic sexy shower, followed by self-immolation via a pair of scissors on the set of a bad Pirelli calendar photo shoot because “I need to get her out of me” come across as escalation in aid of shock value, rather than adding anything we haven’t already absorbed thematically. So the industry feeds on its own, sucking up the young and innocent and spewing them out in a tangle of body parts. So it’s a hotbed of exploitation. Colour me unfazed.


On the other hand, is Jena Malone a refashioned, less jingle-jangle Jimmy Savile (perhaps surprisingly embodied in the otherwise dismal latest “season” of Sherlock; surprisingly, since Steven Moffat isn’t exactly known for his keen sense of the topical, unless it’s through cringe-making pop culture references). This aspect - intertwining the fashion industry with occult acts and iconography – makes The Neon Demon more arresting, demanding of attention, but the full-blooded excess at the end rather blunts the incrementally more unsettling dis-ease of the world Jesse finds herself in and quickly comes to adopt. It’s the suggestive versus the in the face.


The former is there long before Keanu references the “Real Lolita shit” in Room 214; Christina Hendricks’ agent has no qualms about signing an underage girl (“Honey, people believe what they are told”) and the procedure for facilitating this is well-rehearsed. Anyone familiar with the gist of Pizzagate (“Fake News” or otherwise, in which case it simply joins the fake news touted by daily the mainstream media) would find it easy to draw parallels with a movie where the ingénue is asked “Are you food or sex?” and her allure is referred to in terms of “Who wants sour milk when you can get fresh meat?The Neon Demon looks as if it is going a very specific way prior to the third act’s overkill, that Elle will wrest the mantle of vehement bitch from those she threatened and who despise her; instead, the model who can “keep her down” is the one who thrives on plastic surgery, so hollowed out and corrupted that she is readily fuelled/topped up by the raw essence of youth.


Refn has selected his cast eclectically. Elle Fanning (Jesse), replacing a scheduling-conflicted Carey Mulligan, has the kind of detached, porcelain mask of a younger Nicole Kidman, such that her transformation from naïf takes little suspension of disbelief (of course, there’s the question of how much she really is that in the first place, and how much it’s calculated; why are her parents out of the picture, and what are we to make of comments such as “I’m not as helpless as I look” and “I am dangerous”?)


Jena Malone (Ruby), a fantastic actress, essays the sympathetic/predatory guide turned scorned Lady Bathory with aplomb, while Abbey Lee (Sarah) is a revelation as the soulless, synthetic automaton who will do whatever it takes to stay in the game (Lee hails from the catwalk world, so has probably seen a thing or two). If Bella Heathcote is less impactful, that’s the intent of the part. Together, they make three witches (or points on a triangle), luring a Macbeth to her destruction.


And there’s strong support from Keanu Reeves in The Gift mode (Sam Raimi’s one) as a psychopathic hotelier and Alessandro Nivola (Robert Sarno), effortlessly confident as a fashionista who cuts short Karl Gusman’s protestations at being attracted to what’s inside Elle rather than without, although not so much that he’ll consume her (“I think if she wasn’t beautiful, that you wouldn’t even have stopped to look”), and Dexter’s Desmond Harrington (Jack) looking every inch the delusional, coked-up photographer (let’s hope he didn’t go method). There is, of course, a direct link between the adulated movers of the fashion and film worlds, both of whom will have a starlet begging to compromise herself under the banner of art (particularly European-flavoured art).


The star, though, is Refn’s distended, oppressively womb-like world, cosseted by Cliff Martinez’ pulsing score. Natasha Braier’s cinematography is of a piece with Refn’s previous form for intensely saturated hues, indicating that he’s very much leading his collaborators by the hand. Martinez said the first half of the movie was a Valley of the Dolls-style melodrama and the second half a Texas Chainsaw Massacre-style horror. I can certainly see the former, the latter somewhat less so, except in the most obvious narrative cue.


In some respects, it’s closer to The Wicker Man; Jesse becomes an offering, sustenance in maintaining a corrupted system (Sarah’s cachet is revitalised by consumption of her victim’s essence, Jack being struck by her the way he and Sarno were by Jesse earlier), Ruby’s skyclad rites following the burial of their victim (at this point, I considered the picture might be revealing itself as really all about her, but it is much about Sarah, particularly in her responses to the rise of Jesse and how precisely it impugns her own worth).


But going back to the cryptic and occult under- and overtones, there are the references to The Shining (Room 214, red rum, the menstrual tide), the Giger-esque first photo shoot by Jack (at least, it reminded me of his cover for Debbie Harry’s solo album, rather than Baphomet). Mirrors and pyramids, and swastikas, abound, and those who have a field day suggesting Kubrick devoted his career to exposing the Illuminati will surely see The Neon Demon picking up where he left off.


Being one for conspiratorial fare, I was unimpressed by a highly prurient Vigilant Citizen piece on the picture’s possible themes, clearly basing its view of “an indulgent celebration from people who revel in darkness” on its distaste for the content rather than attending to what it’s saying; you’d have to be incredibly blinkered to come away with that message (“It actually attempts to make everything cool, trendy and fashionable”: really? Anyone reacting to it that way is probably is looking to get sectioned. Or go spirit cooking). It’s mostly that Refn, being an unmalleable, crazy Dane, doesn’t feel the need to lead his narratives by the nose with Hollywood Moral Framing 101. It’s still pretty unmistakable who’s bad here, though.


All of which is well and good, but I must admit I was hoping for something either more off-kilter or more enigmatic. Perhaps Refn’s bluntness shouldn’t have surprised me, but it certainly didn’t altogether satisfy, and is preceded by a section where I began to feel a slight ponderous tone setting up shop. Nevertheless, if you have the stomach, this is a strange, bewitching movie, one that is fascinating and though-provoking for all its flaws. It’s also a strong runner-up to Zoolander 2 in the list of 2016 modelling movies that culminate with diabolical human sacrifices.



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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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…

Dude, you're embarrassing me in front of the wizards.

Avengers: Infinity War (2018)
(SPOILERS) The cliffhanger sequel, as a phenomenon, is a relatively recent thing. Sure, we kind of saw it with The Empire Strikes Back – one of those "old" movies Peter Parker is so fond of – a consequence of George Lucas deliberately borrowing from the Republic serials of old, but he had no guarantee of being able to complete his trilogy; it was really Back to the Future that began the trend, and promptly drew a line under it for another decade. In more recent years, really starting with The MatrixThe Lord of the Rings stands apart as, post-Weinstein's involvement, fashioned that way from the ground up – shooting the second and third instalments back-to-back has become a thing, both more cost effective and ensuring audiences don’t have to endure an interminable wait for their anticipation to be sated. The flipside of not taking this path is an Allegiant, where greed gets the better of a studio (split a novel into two movie parts assuming a…

I don't like bugs. You can't hear them, you can't see them and you can't feel them, then suddenly you're dead.

Blake's 7 2.7: Killer

Robert Holmes’ first of four scripts for the series, and like last season’s Mission to Destiny there are some fairly atypical elements and attitudes to the main crew (although the A/B storylines present a familiar approach and each is fairly equal in importance for a change). It was filmed second, which makes it the most out of place episode in the run (and explains why the crew are wearing outfits – they must have put them in the wash – from a good few episodes past and why Blake’s hair has grown since last week).
The most obvious thing to note from Holmes’ approach is that he makes Blake a Doctor-substitute. Suddenly he’s full of smart suggestions and shrewd guesses about the threat that’s wiping out the base, basically leaving a top-level virologist looking clueless and indebted to his genius insights. If you can get past this (and it did have me groaning) there’s much enjoyment to be had from the episode, not least from the two main guest actors.

An initiative test. How simply marvellous!

You Must Be Joking! (1965)
A time before a Michael Winner film was a de facto cinematic blot on the landscape is now scarcely conceivable. His output, post- (or thereabouts) Death Wish (“a pleasant romp”) is so roundly derided that it’s easy to forget that the once-and-only dining columnist and raconteur was once a bright (well…) young thing of the ‘60s, riding the wave of excitement (most likely highly cynically) and innovation in British cinema. His best-known efforts from this period are a series of movies with Oliver Reed – including the one with the elephant – and tend to represent the director in his pleasant romp period, before he attacked genres with all the precision and artistic integrity of a blunt penknife. You Must Be Joking! comes from that era, its director’s ninth feature, straddling the gap between Ealing and the Swinging ‘60s; coarser, cruder comedies would soon become the order of the day, the mild ribaldry of Carry On pitching into bawdy flesh-fests. You Must Be Joki…

Like an antelope in the headlights.

Black Panther (2018)
(SPOILERS) Like last year’s Wonder Woman, the hype for what it represents has quickly become conflated with Black Panther’s perceived quality. Can 92% and 97% of critics respectively really not be wrong, per Rotten Tomatoes, or are they – Armond White aside – afraid that finding fault in either will make open them to charges of being politically regressive, insufficiently woke or all-round, ever-so-slightly objectionable? As with Wonder Woman, Black Panther’s very existence means something special, but little about the movie itself actually is. Not the acting, not the directing, and definitely not the over-emphatic, laboured screenplay. As such, the picture is a passable two-plus hours’ entertainment, but under-finessed enough that one could easily mistake it for an early entry in the Marvel cycle, rather than arriving when they’re hard-pressed to put a serious foot wrong.

Luck isn’t a superpower... And it isn't cinematic!

Deadpool 2 (2018)
(SPOILERS) Perhaps it’s because I was lukewarm on the original, but Deadpool 2 mercifully disproves the typical consequence of the "more is more" approach to making a sequel. By rights, it should plummet into the pitfall of ever more excess to diminishing returns, yet for the most part it doesn't.  Maybe that’s in part due to it still being a relatively modest undertaking, budget-wise, and also a result of being very self-aware – like duh, you might say, that’s its raison d'être – of its own positioning and expectation as a sequel; it resolutely fails to teeter over the precipice of burn out or insufferable smugness. It helps that it's frequently very funny – for the most part not in the exhaustingly repetitive fashion of its predecessor – but I think the key ingredient is that it finds sufficient room in its mirthful melee for plot and character, in order to proffer tone and contrast.

Ain't nobody likes the Middle East, buddy. There's nothing here to like.

Body of Lies (2008)
(SPOILERS) Sir Ridders stubs out his cigar in the CIA-assisted War on Terror, with predictably gormless results. Body of Lies' one saving grace is that it wasn't a hit, although that more reflects its membership of a burgeoning club where no degree of Hollywood propaganda on the "just fight" (with just a smidgeon enough doubt cast to make it seem balanced at a sideways glance) was persuading the public that they wanted the official fiction further fictionalised.

I didn't kill her. I just relocated her.

The Discovery (2017)
(SPOILERS) The Discovery assembles not wholly dissimilar science-goes-metaphysical themes and ideas to Douglas Trumbull's ill-fated 1983 Brainstorm, revolving around research into consciousness and the revelation of its continuance after death. Perhaps the biggest discovery, though, is that it’s directed and co-written by the spawn of Malcom McDowell and Mary Steenburgen (the latter cameos) – Charlie McDowell – of hitherto negligible credits but now wading into deep philosophical waters and even, with collaborator Justin Lader, offering a twist of sorts.

He mobilised the English language and sent it into battle.

Darkest Hour (2017)
(SPOILERS) Watching Joe Wright’s return to the rarefied plane of prestige – and heritage to boot – filmmaking following the execrable folly of the panned Pan, I was struck by the difference an engaged director, one who cares about his characters, makes to material. Only last week, Ridley Scott’s serviceable All the Money in the World made for a pointed illustration of strong material in the hands of someone with no such investment, unless they’re androids. Wright’s dedication to a relatable Winston Churchill ensures that, for the first hour-plus, Darkest Hour is a first-rate affair, a piece of myth-making that barely puts a foot wrong. It has that much in common with Wright’s earlier Word War II tale, Atonement. But then, like Atonement, it comes unstuck.

How many galoshes died to make that little number?

Looney Tunes: Back in Action (2003)
(SPOILERS) Looney Tunes: Back in Action proved a far from joyful experience for director Joe Dante, who referred to the production as the longest year-and-a-half of his life. He had to deal with a studio that – insanely – didn’t know their most beloved characters and didn’t know what they wanted, except that they didn’t like what they saw. Nevertheless, despite Dante’s personal dissatisfaction with the finished picture, there’s much to enjoy in his “anti-Space Jam”. Undoubtedly, at times his criticism that it’s “the kind of movie that I don’t like” is valid, moving as it does so hyperactively that its already gone on to the next thing by the time you’ve realised you don’t like what you’re seeing at any given moment. But the flipside of this downside is, there’s more than enough of the movie Dante was trying to make, where you do like what you’re seeing.

Dante commented of Larry Doyle’s screenplay (as interviewed in Joe Dante, edited by Nil Baskar and G…