I can't tell if what I watched was something so beautiful and abstract that my feeble little mind just couldn't comprehend it or if it was so far up its own ass that it truly means nothing and it's just a shiny turd impersonating art. My reaction after having sat through the long, two-and-a-half-hour sludge is the latter. However, as I was eavesdropping on other reactions leaving the theater, it might just be me. But I'll get to that later. Suspiria, which is extremely lacking in plot, is about a dance company in Berlin. It's run by the intense and intimidating Madame Blanc (Tilda Swinton) and a bunch of other snotty old German women. Susie (Dakota Johnson) arrives in Berlin for an audition into the company. After blowing them away with her abilities, she's welcomed in and immediately put center stage. But, there's something sinister brewing within the company, something even the dancers aren't aware of. All of the ladies running it... are witches. One girl, Patricia (Chloe Grace-Moretz), has managed to escape, telling only what she's discovered to her therapist, Dr. Josef Klemperer (also Tilda Swinton in some seriously cool old-guy makeup). He first dismisses her as insane, but when she goes missing, winds up investigating her claims himself. The rest of the movie... well... there's not much left of a plot to be able to discuss. What I've already described is about the first fifteen minutes or so. The rest is Susie trying to fit in, Dr. Klemperer looking into claims very slowly, Madame Blanc and the rest of the older ladies acting strange and filling Susie's mind as she sleeps with very disturbing dreams, constantly talking about how 'ready' she is for their plan, and a bunch of other nonsensical "plot" elements.
Director Luca Guadagnino, who helmed last year's Call Me By Your Name brings his rising brand of pretension back to the big screen and gives us a movie that will ultimately be a love-it or hate-it type of film. It's a very slow journey that when it finally gets to the climax, it's more of a WTF moment than a "holy shit" moment. It's a strange and bizarre film that isn't really out to please the viewer, but to get the viewer to "interpret" their own meaning from the film. This can work in some movies, but generally there needs to be something to latch onto. There are sub-plots (especially with the doctor) that don't go anywhere and make no sense. Almost all, if not all, of the characters are without substance. It feels like a bunch of independent scenes stitched together to try and form some sort of cohesive film, but never actually accomplishes the feat. Guadagnino keeps his audience at arm's length, not really letting them into what's actually going on, and trying to set up a mystery that doesn't ever really come full circle, but is supposed to be full of dark themes and underlying motifs that he doesn't really care if the viewer understands or not. It's like one big, messy inside joke that's never explained... or funny. I looked at a comparison of this film and the original, and I guess you could say this Suspiria is more of an "homage" to the original than a straight up remake. The characters are named the same, but are inherently different. The story both takes place in a dance company run by witches, but the plot plays out completely different. And if you're actually a fan of the original, you may be completely blown away by the ending, or furiously enraged. After watching this version, I still don't know if I never, ever want to see the original, or if I want to see it more now.
The movie has no real audience it's trying to attract. It plays out almost like an arthouse hoax. Guadagnino, I'm sure, had a vision of what he wanted this movie to represent and symbolize, but he never lets the audience in on this vision. So when the ending plays out as bonkers as it does, we're supposed to get the full reveal of what was going on, but there's so much unexplained subtext that the movie falls flat and feels like an utter mess. Everywhere you look the film is being described as a horror, suspense, mystery, fantasy film but it really never falls into any of those parameters. It's not scary. The mystery doesn't unfold enough for the viewer to follow and figure it out. There's some grotesque moments, but never enough to illicit any suspense. And it's a fantasy only in trying to figure out how this movie is going to appeal to any viewer - other than the ones who watch something "artsy" and claim it's good because they "just know art". It has the appearance of substance without actually having any. The movie is at least an hour too long and it's almost painstaking to sit through even for the most 'cerebral' viewer.
On the other hand-- I'm also willing to put forth that maybe the movie just wasn't meant for me. Clearly, there's a huge (attempted) feminist message running throughout the film that may or may not have been fully understood by the standard white male (as I am). There's a true (and even slightly clever) "fuck you" to the patriarchy and a lot of people are going to be turned off by just that. I don't mind movies like that, in fact I wish there were more. I just wish this message hadn't been so muddled in its delivery. It's clear Guadagnino is trying to make this statement in just his casting alone. The movie is almost entirely female, with a few male actors peppered throughout, but even the lead male character is portrayed by a female under several layers of impressive makeup. So, maybe the movie just wasn't made to speak to ME. Just like that painting at an art museum that I just don't get - it's not meant to speak to me. It doesn't make it any less of a piece of art just because its intended viewer isn't a thirty-year-old white dude. But, it's also unclear if the movie is so confusing and messy that I've just willed up this explanation because it has the pretense that it's smarter than I am. And for that I will say that maybe the movie isn't bad per se, but it might just not have been my cup of tea.
I heard a handful of people walking out of the theater saying how much they loved the movie. However, the direct quote is "I loved it... I don't know why I loved it... but I loved it." So, it might actually be an artistic mirage after all. Or maybe I'm just not the guy to tell you if it was a good film or not. This is one of the few instances that I'm not going to tell whether you should see it or avoid it. Just understand that the marketing for this movie is wholly different than the film itself. You're going to have your own strong opinions of the film and there's really no guiding you with this one. But, if you do see it, and you pick up a lot more than I did, feel free to fill me in on what I might've missed or misunderstood because what I saw was an attempted artistic masterpiece that's nothing more than an optical illusion.
(Also - no clue how to grade this movie, so I'm going slightly higher than my instinct because it might just be smarter than me.)
C-
No comments:
Post a Comment