Under the Skin (2014) dir. Jonathan Glazer

no thread for this divisive masterpiece?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoSWbyvdhHw

this is the first new film i'm excited about for a while

a grand statement on what it means to be a human being?
no, thanks

^^^probably liked the lego movie

Really looking forward to seeing this, but it doesn't seem to be showing anywhere local, dammit!

I saw it this morning. For the first half or so, I found myself wishing that I didn't know Glasgow, and didn't know about use of guerrilla filming. It took me out of the film too much - spotting locations and thinking about the mechanics of shooting it, and who was unsuspecting and who was not. But I got over that, as the film moved out of that phase. At least two unforgettable scenes, for me, and I want to go back and see it again very soon, maybe on a bigger screen than the one I saw it on today – I want it to overwhelm me more. But first I've got to rewatch both parts of Nymphomaniac. 2014 has started very well for me.

The trailer gives an excellent sense of the whole film, by the way. Those sounds are at the heart of it.

Am trying to think of other film-makers who got more progressively more avant-garde with with their first three features.

is "guerrilla filming" the big conceit here? wondering what makes this film "divisive."

I don't know. Often I only hear about films being divisive through articles saying their divisive. Apparently it got booed by some at Toronto, or something, and I did read today someone quoting someone in the Independent who called it a "laughably bad alien hitchhiker movie" back then. But I've not actually read anyone slag it off myself.

i'm only getting the term from number-none's original post ("divisive masterpiece").

I have found that review.

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/reviews/film-review-under-the-skin--even-scarlett-johansson-cant-save-jonathan-glazers-laughably-bad-alien-hitchhiker-movie-8796596.html

It is stupid and its point about the film ignoring ethnic minorities in Glasgow quite baffling.

Yeah, it's not just number-none saying that – it's a word that's been attached to the film in the media.

Ugh – "their divisive" = "they're divisive" above.

loved this! had been looking fwd to it for a long time, totally lived up to expectations

This looks interesting and I can't wait to enjoy it _and_ the Lego movie

I'd like to hear the opinion of someone who though Birth was bleh

I really liked Birth up until the neat tying-up at the end, so that's not me.

I liked Birth a lot, but have never understood the reverence for Sexy Beast, which I found to be basically a ridiculous farce. This new movie sounds really bad.

Sexy Beast was a good larf tho; never took it as more.

sexy beast is a pretty sweet flick, w/3 really great and vv different performances occupying the center. lots of ridiculousness there, true.

sexy beast was the first time i saw ian mcshane in anything and he was terrifying

yeah mcshane struck a good balance in the film of being utterly scary and perpetually bemused and coldly but fairly logical.

man i just don't know if I can credit this film with being not -awful

For the first half or so, I found myself wishing that I didn't know Glasgow

well i saw this yesterday in Glasgow, then afterwards walked round many of the locations seen in the film, and there was something very exciting and unusual abt this slippage between the screen and the real, for me.

loved this, slower, more abstract than i was expecting, but really haunting, and a film where you cld easily be ambushed by unexpected emotion. haven't seen glazer's other two movies, but here i admired his brass balls/confidence in treating the material in this way (as someone said to me, "the plot sounds just like Species")

Seeing this at the GFT tomorrow. Haven't been as excited for a film in a long while.

I loved this too, although I wonder if being a stranger in Glasgow gave it some added resonance for me. I did prefer the first half to the second half although that seems to be the case with 9 out of 10 films I see recently. And yeah, there were 2 or 3 scenes which blew me away.

Saw it for a second time today. I was able to relax more in the early scenes, but am even more convinced that it's the section from when she picks up the man with neurofibromatosis through to the sex scene that's the dizzyingly great peak of the film.

like is it a sad sack sex scene with canon in d playing or a pisstake of same, and either way how do you reconcile not seeing it as awful with considering yourself an adult

loved this

Are you calling me a child for liking that scene, thomp, or have I misunderstood your post?

this looks like complete trash, only skimmed the anthony lane profile of ScarJo+review of this in latest New Yorker and threw the magazine across the room.

I should say pretentious trash

but maybe I'm wrong, guess I'll never know...

This will be my favorite movie of the year but for the buttsex in Stranger by the Lake.

but have you seen nymphomaniac?

lots of sex to choose from

Top 3's gonna be pretty sexy.

(4?)

Stranger by the Lake, Under the Skin and Nymphomaniac actually are the best three new films I've seen this year.

Think I've reached my 2014 cock quota now.

Wait til you see the Godzilla reboot and why what made the hole in that skyscraper may surprise you.

stranger by the lake opens here tonight, am psyched for cinematic cock.

although i get the feeling there may be some walkouts by older folk who "went to see that new French movie"

I wonder if the theater is even aware that real! homosexual! fellatio! is happening on one of their screens.

The scotch-guarding will tip you off.

not sure why certain people are so eager to damn this sight unseen. Possibly they're just idiots

people who don't share your opinions are idiots

i'm damning it sight seen. that's because it's a really stupid movie

people who share my opinions are idiots

i get a whiff of glazer trying to do the whole french-cinema-of-extremity thing a decade late

wronger than ever

I found this kind of disappointing. V enjoyable in many places, but overall the same kind of long slow shots in lieu of much of anything new, that I'm getting a little bored of. I saw it in the same cinema I saw Upstream Color so I think that has affected my take on it slightly (had a similar reaction to that).

v scared of this

One of the few films I've been majorly excited about that actually exceeded my hopes - that opening sequence blew my mind and there's not a wasted frame after that.

beach scene was very tough to take. kinda stunned that someone called it "hilarious" upthread, unless that was supposed to be a joke.

Extremely tough, and also the most shockingly alien in perspective. Kicks the film into high gear.

has anyone else read the book? it's very very different but also good.

Same cinematographer for his 2020 Auschwitz film, some 6+ years in development. I fear that because nothing has been reported on summer 2019 production, that it'll be pushed to 2021...

The comparisons to Kubrick are more apt looking at the Glazer's whole ouvre, in the concerns (Kubrick also planned an Auschwitz film), stunt casting, framing, pacing, and intervals between films.

Yep I've read the book too - I'm glad I didn't see a lot of that stuff on screen actually. I'm impressed with Glazer planting the same seed in a different medium and letting it mutate. Strongest Kubrick influence perhaps.

Birth seems like his most Kubrickian, and best probably, don't know that I'm looking forward to him making an Auschwitz film tho

my first viewing of this, at the tail end of a multiplex run, was hysterical. to be clear it had run in multiplexes in scotland because it was filmed in glasgow and i guess there was "local interest". mass walkouts, people around me all asking what the fuck they'd come to, people accusing others in their party for having asked them to come to see it. the best was a boxer guy that i recognised from my own gym shouting how shite it was as he noisily left the auditorium.

i fucking love it.

you could barely concentrate on the film for all the noisy hilarity going on.

beach scene was very tough to take. kinda stunned that someone called it "hilarious" upthread, unless that was supposed to be a joke.

I’m not a film guy but even my dumb ass recognized this shit was transcendent.

What’s weird is that the beach scene didn’t disturb me as much as it did many others (although I also didn’t find it “hilarious”, wtf) but the scene of the guy watching the other guy get sucked out of his skin and then watching the empty skin float around in the void is one of the most disturbing nightmare images I’ve ever seen in a movie. I have a super vivid memory of watching it in the cinema and feeling paralyzed with dread.

yes. I also thought the scene with attempted sex was memorable, and the cake scene where the SJ character is looking at it and wondering, what the hell is this?

Seriously tempted to show this in the film club I'm doing.

do any women like this movie? just curious

cause like I can't imagine it being as big a hit/making as much of an impact with an actress less hot than The Scarjo, and that seems ironically problematic maybe? haven't figured it out yet, but I did like this movie

Well the big joke is that these dudes are willing to follow a woman who looks like scarjo into what looks like a crack den if they think they’re gonna get laid, though you could certainly argue maybe that would be true with any moderately attractive woman though making it her I think does make it funnier

My wife was def into this movie
Xp

It's not really a comedy though, is it? I don't think I laughed once during the whole thing, although, like I said, I really liked this movie! It's good, but I didn't laugh. Certainly never like "lol they're falling for her cause she's moderately attractive at least" cause I mean what's funny about that. That's just human nature. If you're a straight guy, haven't you ever fallen for someone super hot who actually talked to you for a little bit? And from the moment that started to happen, weren't you sorta on the clock to figure out whether this clearly hot person is worth being talked to by your obviously superior intellect? And should you feel ashamed about it if you decided she is? I never found a "big joke" in this movie, but it did make me feel ashamed of all the times I ever thought with my balls, and it did feel like some sort of feminist masterpiece that I'll probably always be under and never really understand.

this didn't seem comedic to me at all.

I've only seen it once but the motorcyclist seemed like some kind of alien handler who was ultimately in a position of control

stephanie zacharek liked it:

https://www.villagevoice.com/2014/04/02/under-the-skin-is-alluring-creepy-and-great/

the genius of the movie for me was its showing a view of human empathy from a completely outside perspective, thought it was moving

I know women who rate it pretty high, I obv can’t speak for their precise reasons but it takes on stuff like the male gaze and gendered power dynamics pretty explicitly.

Scarlett Johansson being in it obviously helped the movie get made & get seen, but I think it’s one of those cases where that also works artistically. There are obv many different layers and readings that can be brought to bear, but the larger context of viewers being aware of her as a giant movie star and international sex symbol is definitely at play in how the movie is operating and what its doing, imo

I mean I just thought it was funny that she led these dudes into this sketchy as fuck building and they blissfully went along. It’s funny because it’s ridiculous and yet totally believable.

Poll: Would you walk into black water for Scarlet Johanson?

Y
N

I've been to places that look like where she takes the men but I am from Glasgow ymmv if you have lived bougiely only

cause like I can't imagine it being as big a hit/making as much of an impact with an actress less hot than The Scarjo, and that seems ironically problematic maybe? haven't figured it out yet, but I did like this movie

― del griffith, Friday, September 6, 2019 8:59 PM (yesterday) bookmarkflaglink

it wasn't a hit, it made half its budget back. seems weird bc it made an impact, at least at the time, I've been meaning to check this out for 5+ years based on one perfect recommendation ("Under the Skin tho"). and shakey is right about Stranger Things ripping this off and doing it worse

alright well not a hit, but the reason we're all talking about it now.

and it's not really about Glasgow though is it? it's about men being taken in by attractive women no matter what hopeless environment they happen to find themselves in, and therein lies the trap.

What’s weird is that the beach scene didn’t disturb me as much as it did many others (although I also didn’t find it “hilarious”, wtf) but the scene of the guy watching the other guy get sucked out of his skin and then watching the empty skin float around in the void is one of the most disturbing nightmare images I’ve ever seen in a movie.

N, but I don't think it was just black water. The endless white/black plane of the "seduction" scenes (nods to THX 1138) would have left me limply curious. Maybe it related to the rundown tenement as the interior of the Tardis, but if taken as presented and not a visual metaphor, the victims have tunnel vision I've never experienced except under psychedelics. There's some trancranial magnetic stimulation (etc) going on.

Mild spoilers for book: In Faber's book, while the protagonist Isserley may use (artificial) feminine charms to keep the victims talking until she can confirm they won't be missed, there's no undressing, just a button in the dash that activates autoinjectors under the passenger seat. The cinematic version is far better.

TBF, the film retains very little from the book besides "female appearing alien develops misgivings about abducting male hitchhikers in Scotland for further processing". I like the "alien anthropologist goes native" thread of the film, and I don't think the book's focuses on class consciousness, backbreaking labor, or factory farming could have worked visually.

I liked this movie but haven't seen it since it was in cinemas. I read the book not long ago, impressive how they got from that to the movie but it's a great movie. I was actually going to watch it again last night but ran out of time. I'd forgotten the beach scene, think that would be hard to watch again.

I'm a woman btw

do any women like this movie? just curious

― del griffith, Saturday, September 7, 2019 12:58 AM (nine hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

It remains my favourite film of the decade.

― tangenttangent, Friday, September 6, 2019 7:56 PM (yesterday) bookmarkflaglink

I am a woman and I enjoyed this movie as well as the soundtrack.

https://news.avclub.com/watch-the-fall-a-nightmarish-new-short-from-under-th-1840036328

new glazer short

with mica levi score

I'm a massive Glazer fan but I thought this was a bit ehhh

same

Is it just the BBC who have it online for the UK still?

Yes, it's a BBC production.

Thanks. One of those rare times I'm frustrated as a TV non-licensee. Oh well, I'll wait until it appears somewhere, doesn't sound crucial viewing.

a man of principles!

Or a man of laziness!

Actually got the Opera browser's built-in VPN to work, so I'll watch it later on the US site, once darkness falls.

I agree that it's a bit something and nothing. There's some cool shots and it's decently unsettling, but I thought there was very little to it. Oh well.

I have a coworker who actively dislikes this one and complains about it being recommended to him as horror, but I think it’s very much in the ponderous genre subset and I get that it’s not for all

Do you mean Under The Skin? For clarity, I was talking about The Fall immediately above.

ahh, yeah. UtS

NEW GLAZER

Jonathan Glazer’s THE ZONE OF INTEREST. Coming soon. pic.twitter.com/PZJ3EFj6PS

— A24 (@A24) May 8, 2023

Mentioned in the Cannes thread. A little put off because Amis, but def interested