In my mind there have been a lot of science fiction films that have surprised us with moments, or even sustained periods of head-warping originality and even, delight. Of course for every one of these there's 20 films that are pure drek and nonsense. So many are cliché-o-matic films in which an assembly of tropes in a sequence substitute for plot.
With all the hype I hoped, and looked forward to Gravity being a good film, my disappointment was great, so much terrible, false and unprofessional sentimentality oozing through so many mistakes(and for a film with the pretense of realism, that's a crime) that no amount of special effects wizardry could redeem it. Yes it had some good moments, but basically, Gravity was a big let-down.
On the other hand, I had heard little hype for UNDER THE SKIN, yes I'm a Scarlet Johansen admirer, but I just had a bad feeling. A friend virtually had to put a gun to my head to watch it. Wow, what a novel delightful, sexy, but in a strange way and frightening(in the good sense)science fiction film, the scary feeling stayed with me for days -can't shake it-. I basically look at all the good science fiction films -the ones that have science fiction originality- with affection -whether I loved them or not. The films that break the mold and are inspiration to film-makers for generations are the rare headliners. In this category over the last 50 years (yeah,I'm getting older)I've included two films. 2001 A Space Odyssey and the first of the ALIEN movies (no surprise in either). I'm ready, for the first time in three decades to add a third title to the list UNDER THE SKIN. It's a film which like Space Odyssey chooses deliberately to present you with radical new scenes on which plot turns, without explanation, and the mystery is all the more powerful for it, the story is both very simple, and immeasurably complex. In science fiction I can't think of many presidents. Perhaps a very low budget film I remember seeing many decades ago at the Waverly when passing through New York - LIQUID SKY, a $300,000 low-budget indie cult picture, left me with some of the same feelings. There's a link in story (aliens and sex and consuming humans). In LIQUID SKY it was surprising good fun and often original with a heavy dose of tongue in cheek. One would not think that a movie could get away with the same themes if they were dealt with straight up. However, there is not a trace of trendy, or any kind of, irony in UNDER THE SKIN. The confidence of the director in allowing themselves do this this picture, without the fear of slipping into ridicule is something. That producers and financiers would have backed such a vision is almost unbelievable, one is inclined to think it was almost an accident. Credibility often comes down to directorial and (truth be told) producers confidence in a vision. An interfering producer telling a talented director (note: most directors are traffic cops, real talent among them is rare and producers who can tell the difference are rare too, getting both on the same team is quite something). The other thing that powerful credibility and effectiveness comes down to, besides a confident director who is unafraid of bold vision) is detail. Here UNDER THE SKIN excels, the photography and editing is of an elegance rarely seen in contemporary films. I will write more about this picture- but to do so is to get into details that would be major spoilers. So I'll hold off...
With all the hype I hoped, and looked forward to Gravity being a good film, my disappointment was great, so much terrible, false and unprofessional sentimentality oozing through so many mistakes(and for a film with the pretense of realism, that's a crime) that no amount of special effects wizardry could redeem it. Yes it had some good moments, but basically, Gravity was a big let-down.
On the other hand, I had heard little hype for UNDER THE SKIN, yes I'm a Scarlet Johansen admirer, but I just had a bad feeling. A friend virtually had to put a gun to my head to watch it. Wow, what a novel delightful, sexy, but in a strange way and frightening(in the good sense)science fiction film, the scary feeling stayed with me for days -can't shake it-. I basically look at all the good science fiction films -the ones that have science fiction originality- with affection -whether I loved them or not. The films that break the mold and are inspiration to film-makers for generations are the rare headliners. In this category over the last 50 years (yeah,I'm getting older)I've included two films. 2001 A Space Odyssey and the first of the ALIEN movies (no surprise in either). I'm ready, for the first time in three decades to add a third title to the list UNDER THE SKIN. It's a film which like Space Odyssey chooses deliberately to present you with radical new scenes on which plot turns, without explanation, and the mystery is all the more powerful for it, the story is both very simple, and immeasurably complex. In science fiction I can't think of many presidents. Perhaps a very low budget film I remember seeing many decades ago at the Waverly when passing through New York - LIQUID SKY, a $300,000 low-budget indie cult picture, left me with some of the same feelings. There's a link in story (aliens and sex and consuming humans). In LIQUID SKY it was surprising good fun and often original with a heavy dose of tongue in cheek. One would not think that a movie could get away with the same themes if they were dealt with straight up. However, there is not a trace of trendy, or any kind of, irony in UNDER THE SKIN. The confidence of the director in allowing themselves do this this picture, without the fear of slipping into ridicule is something. That producers and financiers would have backed such a vision is almost unbelievable, one is inclined to think it was almost an accident. Credibility often comes down to directorial and (truth be told) producers confidence in a vision. An interfering producer telling a talented director (note: most directors are traffic cops, real talent among them is rare and producers who can tell the difference are rare too, getting both on the same team is quite something). The other thing that powerful credibility and effectiveness comes down to, besides a confident director who is unafraid of bold vision) is detail. Here UNDER THE SKIN excels, the photography and editing is of an elegance rarely seen in contemporary films. I will write more about this picture- but to do so is to get into details that would be major spoilers. So I'll hold off...
Tell Your Friends