Author Topic: Under The Skin  (Read 7879 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Jeremy Blackman

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 11259
  • Respect: +1505
Re: Under The Skin
« Reply #45 on: October 27, 2015, 09:53:26 AM »
+3
Much has been said, and I'm very late to the party, so I'll keep this brief.

I feel like Under the Skin was a missed opportunity. With some adjustments — which are well within Glazer's ability — this could have been one of the greatest films ever made. On balance it's still pretty great, but I'm frustrated.

So many images from this movie are still haunting me and will probably remain vivid in my memory for years. Absolutely mindblowing stuff. However... probably 20% of the running time needs to be cut. The mundane scenes are just not compelling enough, and it even occurred to me in the moment how much worse they would be upon rewatch. Those parts aim for Kubrick and fall quite short.
"Hunger is the purest sin"

Drenk

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1110
  • Respect: +606
Re: Under The Skin
« Reply #46 on: October 27, 2015, 11:46:03 AM »
+1
I'd be more severe than Jeremy. The movie feels to me like a failed experimentation. The first scenes present almost no variation. No reality. Or maybe that's what Glazer wants. If an alien were coming in England to steal something from men, it would probably as boring as it depicted. But I think that fiction, in order to provoke a realistic feeling —of course, I'm just talking about what I feel by making this universal—, needs to bring something extraordinary.

I dislike the movie, but I'm also haunted by some moments. But I don't appreciate the movie more because of these moments. It just makes me wonder about a movie that simply isn't the movie Glazer intended to make.
I'm so many people.

Gold Trumpet

  • The Master of Three Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 5800
  • Respect: +181
Re: Under The Skin
« Reply #47 on: October 27, 2015, 12:21:18 PM »
0
I dislike the movie, but I'm also haunted by some moments. But I don't appreciate the movie more because of these moments. It just makes me wonder about a movie that simply isn't the movie Glazer intended to make.

I dislike the movie as well but some images do haunt me. Still. The images that do haunt me feel like cheap scenes that would haunt any viewer in almost any context because the idea is disturbing enough. Spoiler but i'm thinking about when the husband drowns trying to rescue his wife and the baby is left for dead. I felt like that was more taking advantage of something than anything.


Alexandro

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1769
  • Respect: +504
Re: Under The Skin
« Reply #48 on: October 28, 2015, 01:17:07 AM »
0
I rewatched it two weeks ago and felt the opposite. Liked it more, got into the whole sexual odyssey with more resonance.
Loved her performance.

 

DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy