Annihilation (2018) -- Natalie Portman, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Oscar Isaac, Tessa Thompson, dir. Alex Garland, based on Jeff VanderMeer's book

Interesting if familiar story -- as a friend said on Twitter just now, regarding the reaction of the initial test audience, "Make it NOT the book."

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/annihilation-how-a-clash-between-producers-led-a-netflix-deal-1065465

I try not to judge a book by its cover but holy cow does David Ellison have severe jerkface

Oh, it's Larry's son. Say no more.

I like the logic of 'This film is too complex, let's dumb it down to be more like Geostorm, which was a big failure for us!'

I try not to judge a book by its cover but holy cow does David Ellison have severe jerkface

― Dan I., Friday, December 8, 2017 2:47 AM (two hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

https://cdn1.thr.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/scale_crop_768_433/2017/12/scott_rudin_and_david_ellison_-_split_-_getty_-_h_2017.jpg
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/54/Are_We_Not_Men_We_Are_Devo%21.jpg

holy shit

amazing

First I've heard of Geostorm.

tbf ...

https://tmhome.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Josh-Homme-near-death-meditation-w2.jpg

Annnnd new trailer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89OP78l9oF0

Interesting contrast to the first trailer!

Good interview w/Garland

http://collider.com/alex-garland-annihilation-interview/amp/

he's familiar with stalker but still thought annihilation was genuinely original?

Garland is not exactly a great interviewee is he... I feel somewhat deflated and standoffish now and I didn't even read the whole interview.

early reviews seem generally positive so far... I'm dialing up some cautious optimism and will try to catch it this weekend

this is going to be another one of those amazing sci-fi megabombs that lasts like 3 weeks in the theater isn't it

The poster and the font and Portman all make me think this is some kind of Phantom Menace sequel with M16s instead of lasers guns

Gotta say, that movie title sells itself in this moment in time.

Queen Amidala in "Stalker 2018"

Exactly

Queen Amidala’s double in Predator 2049: Return to Tatooine

Endor, that is

If the book is a combo of Roadside Picnic & Mountains of Madness, I’m curious how much of that will translate to the screen.

Would prefer Marble Madness

Saw this last night. I really liked it. It’s a verrrrrrrry loose adaptation but it does capture the general atmosphere of the book.

There’s a lot of stuff in here that is going to reward repeat viewings.

no uk cinema release wtf

wait waht

apparently this is being released only in the US, Canada, and China, with other rights already sold to Netflix

Man this guy loves Tarkovsky. Liberally rips off Stalker & Solaris in almost equal measure (mostly Stalker, but the final scene & the whole idea of being able/unable to love a simulacrum of your dead spouse- I mean give me a break). Still, you could do worse when ripping people off. I liked it a lot, and it had a fairly rowdy matinee audience totally gripped and silent, and there was no moaning or groaning when the credits rolled without a lot of questions answered or threads resolved. But having seen Solaris and Stalker, I'm not left with much to think about. Garland not only took the exact imagery of those films, sometimes down to specific shots (underwater seaweed just like the opening shot of Solaris), but all of the ideas are Tarkovsky's. So I'm not sure what to make of it, glad it's out there, it's very well made and paced and it's nice that there's more "intelligent" sci-fi out there that could be successful (posters and advertising and the shit title - i know it's based on a novel - made it look like some Hunger Games shit), but... what's the point if you've seen Solaris and Stalker?

In fairness the Stalker homage is baked into the book

yeah, along with the really lame title. again I liked the film, I like Garland a lot, but the similarities were overbearing and distracting and most importantly, left me with little to think about. But I just saw it a couple hours ago (ha!), so we'll see I suppose. Glad I got to see it in a theater, huge bummer about the distribution being so limited outside of North America. they got bad test audiences, because like I said, the crowd I saw it with was completely silent and gripped, and there wasn't one "oh COME ON!" when the credits came up. it's a very good film and I can only imagine how many people who have never seen a Tarkovsky movie will love this.

enjoyed this. makes up for that amy adams one

haha I agree. it’s far from perfect but Arrival was and is painfully overpraised.

This was fine trending to good. There were elements of the book I missed but the visual elements were pretty good, I liked the end also.

I do wish movies about people doing a mission of some kind would spend less time with those people being breathlessly grim.

this is going to be another one of those amazing sci-fi megabombs that lasts like 3 weeks in the theater isn't it

deep dive:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2018/02/26/annihilations-grim-box-office-fate-was-an-inevitable-tragedy/#247797134ed9

is it really looking that grim? there was a decent amount of people there when i saw it yesterday, wasn't just spillover from Black Panther

"a decent amount of people" only cuts it in 1974. opening smash or zilch.

but that was how Ex Machina was, total slow burn success. does Paramount really have that little confidence in it?

Ex Machina didn't have a star budget, I don't think

Right

I should read that Forbes article

Ex Machina was an A24 film, apples and oranges. Much lower budget, surely.

I think the book was a little too fresh in my mind and it hindered my ability to just let the film roll, so I really want to see it again

It's really its own thing. The thing I feel is a strength is that the major questions of the work aren't stated by characters, and when they are, they're not elaborated upon. That's going to be a weakness for any audience that needs themes spelled out.

I was in awe that the Southern Reach facility looked exactly the same from the outside as what I'd imagined when reading the book

My partner described this as “femme The Thing”

My favorite bit was the dance in the lighthouse with the double, which it turns out was indeed choreographed by a dancer.

that intrigued me, so here's the article I found after inevitably searching:
https://www.wmagazine.com/story/annihilation-natalie-portman-dance-final-scene

that was my least favorite part but only because the music was hurting my ears and I thought it went on just a little too long

My partner described this as “femme The Thing”.

Yes! I thought that the . . err . . . thing they encountered in the empty swimming pool was very "The Thing".

I kept thinking of lichens, and how they're symbiotic colonies of two different things (algae and fungi) living in balance. And they never say lichens in the film!

I was in awe that the Southern Reach facility looked exactly the same from the outside as what I'd imagined when reading the book

― mh, Monday, February 26, 2018

same!

x-post no but the colorful things that were growing all over the walls at the main station place they camped out at were pretty obviously lichens, right?

everything was a blend of organisms, really

kids can be (or not be) dipshits and shitheads too.

That's true! Though I thought most of her dipshit/shitheadness was directly related to her youth (she's meant to be like 18 or something right? That's the impression I got). Didn't think she was any less or more of a shithead than her two companions. She just had inexperience tacked onto it

22 or 23 they said in the film. I agree she seemed younger but the actress is 25 or 6 and all young people seem like fresh faced babes in arms to me. She showed a complete inability to learn from experience and a complete recklessness and willingness to put herself *and others* in mortal danger.

It was also clear that Lee was motivated by a desire to bring the truth to light, Jessie was an adrenaline junkie (like Joel, to be fair) motivated by a desire to get good looking pictures.

Seemed to me like she was pretty adrenaline averse for all but the car chase + last scene! That was her development. Can't deal with any of the pressure/reality of what she's getting herself into, to then going overboard on the other side and putting everyone in danger because of it. She was a kid who had ideas of war, but had yet to actually meet it in the flesh. A foil to the worn and weary Joel + Lee.

Like yeah, total idiot, but I do think most of her idiocy can be reduced to youthful naivete and inexperience which is an inescapable period of life. She just decided to bring her youthful naivete and inexperience to literal war. But you can blame a drunk and horny Joel for that. I blame him as much as her

it's clear that Joel, Tony and Bohai are dipshits and shitheads too. And that those are not all that they are.

yeah i get all that. but her complete failure to learn from experience - and what she does after lee's death - indicate to me that she ain't going to change.

I can't believe no one has commented on how hot Wagner Moura is in this thing

i saw him described as a cut-price (or second-rate or whatever) pedro pascal on a twitter comment about this movie and i had to put the phone down and take a walk

"Wagner Moura" is such a quintessentially Brazilian name.

i had to put the phone down and take a walk

Words to live by

I did for a moment think it was Pedro Pascal in the same that in 2002 it took a couple seconds studying Michael Pitt to realize he wasn't Leo DiCaprio, like, at all.

Thread has officially annihilated Annihilation!

deems i mentioned that structure not as something to emulate! just that it’s rare to see a movie these days that doesn’t in some way try for it. it is “effective” in that it’s a shortcut for activating a sense that something has happened, that we have witnessed a change occur

think we've had enough talk for a dedicated thread - CIVIL WAR (movie) - 2024, Alex Garland

I think, though, the movie undercuts itself somewhat. It wants to show the horrors of war, and the danger and the moral complexity of war reporting. But it also wants to show how exciting it is, and the last section is basically a thrill ride where it's totally clear who we are rooting for.

What do we think about Jessie? It seems to me that from the very start to the very end she is, without exception, a dipshit and a shithead.

― ledge, Monday, 29 April 2024 08:00 (fourteen hours ago) link

I don’t think this undercuts it — this is honest — again it’s a movie about the effects of extreme violence & how people become inured to it … this also includes a fascination with it

This thread has made me want to reread the trilogy.

Has anyone read any of VanderMeer's other work? I read Borne and Dead Astronauts and found them fascinating.

think, though, the movie undercuts itself somewhat. It wants to show the horrors of war, and the danger and the moral complexity of war reporting. But it also wants to show how exciting it is, a

I don't think it consciously shows how exciting it is. It's the nature of war films: to show the horror is to show its erotic qualities.

I agree she seemed younger but the actress is 25 or 6

― ledge

to 4

I don't think it consciously shows how exciting it is. It's the nature of war films: to show the horror is to show its erotic qualities.

― the talented mr pimply (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn)

jeez, idk, i was just thinking about all those old "men's adventure" magazines with nazis branding swastikas on naked young women and how completely and totally _anti-erotic_ they are

that's not to say that war films aren't erotic, it's just that it seems to be a distinctly male-gendered form of eroticism

for instance, wil hulsey's classic man's life cover "weasels ripped my flesh" is _very_ homoerotic imo

https://live.staticflickr.com/8730/16767482981_ef2a46e881_b.jpg

CAN WOMEN JUSTIFY THEIR NEED FOR EXTRAMARITAL RELATIONSHIPS?

Find out inside!

that's not to say that war films aren't erotic, it's just that it seems to be a distinctly male-gendered form of eroticism

of course

of course

― the talented mr pimply (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn)

not that a lot of us lesbians (myself included) aren't in our own way _quite_ fond of smart military women. war films just tend not to present women in the same way that they present men.

I don’t see mention of it yet - and I didn’t read the books - but I thought the movie had some very strong Buddhism influence and message going on?

Annihilation itself was the - badly translated - term for Nirvana in the Victorian era.

I don’t think the movie is just going from point A to B, I think it’s about impermanence, self-discovery and enlightenment. There’s this alien force that is blending everything known in the universe together and it’s either terrifying or comforting depending on your state of mind. It’s been years since I last saw it but iirc there’s the woman who accepts it and immediatly turns into a flower statue, the video of Portman’s husband sitting in a meditative state blasted by light. Then she goes on to fight her ego.

Idk I might need to rewatch it, but I remember the Buddhist overtones were very on the nose.

Oh gosh we're conflating two different films now. Who knows where this could go... to its own thread perhaps?

Oh we have one. Okay sorry

Lol I was thinking about the similarities though.. band of intrepid good guys entering a zone of danger where nothing makes sense

Welp sorry carry on lol