Director Luca Guadagnino (of Call My By Your Name fame) definitely tries to do the latter. His version of Dario Argento's stylish 1977 horror film Suspiria is sprawling (nearly 3 hours long), more narratively complex and boasts top notch production values.
It also has the advantage of not one but two riveting Tilda Swinton performances to feast on, ironically the most compelling of which is under heavy prosthetic make-up as an elderly German man.
And yet, at least upon first viewing, I'm not sure his version entirely worked for me. I didn't go in with outsized expectations, but I did go in as a huge fan of the original film. That film's loose plot was never its selling point. The joy of the original was its propulsive pace and virtuoso style. It's gore was gorgeous, its color palette sublime.
Guadagnino goes in a totally different direction with mixed results. His pacing is slower, his film's look is drab and dreary. It's much more of a body horror film that a blood and guts chiller. He also tries valiantly to make a more structured plot and justification for the bizarre goings on in the film, and I think that is where it started to lose me.
The movie is about a mysterious dance company based in late '70s Berlin (the politics of which form a backdrop for the film and a subtext I don't fully comprehend). Pretty much from the get-go the audience is let in on the fact that it's run by a witches coven seeking a new sacrificial lamb, who dutifully arrives in the coquettish form of Dakota Johnson.
Johnson, for the most part, delivers the same not-as-shy-as-I-look performance she gave in the movie that made her a star, Fifty Shades of Grey, and I'm not sure I liked it. It's not that the 1977 Suspiria's lead (Jessica Harper, who gets a small but pivotal role in this remake) was particularly complex either, but this version would be well served by a lead with more character, especially as a contrast to the delightfully over the top witches.
She does give a very credible physical performance though, and the dance sequences here are often breathtaking, even sublime. This is part of what makes this movie so maddening.
There are moments where there is real existential dread, and others that are genuinely terrifying -- like a bravura centerpiece scene where a dancer's body is contorted horrifically against her will -- but then there are stretches that are either tedious or just plain silly, and since the movie has nary a sense of humor (save for a couple shots here and there), it can feel self-important to a fault.
And I am not sure what this film is trying to say. It's definitely not trying to be an audience pleasing thrill ride like the latest Halloween movie. But it's unclear to me what impact its supposed to have. Yes, it's tense and creepy and when it was over I felt like I'd been through the ringer, but the intent of the film felt murkier to me than Darren Aronofsky's much-maligned Mother!, which shares some DNA with this movie.
What I am left with was an undeniable sensory experience -- with some indelible sequences and images -- but also a sense that I've witnesses something shallow and gimmicky. For instance, the Swinton dual role amounts to little more than a stunt, it serves no narrative purpose. The film's gross out scenes, of which there are many, lack the elaborate grace of Argento's -- so they just make you vaguely nauseous, and then you move on.
There's also anachronistic music cues featuring Thom Yorke, and subplots galore that pile on top of each other but don't resonate when all is said and done.
And yet, I still may be willing to revise my opinion about this movie. It's too well-made to dismiss out of a hand as a purely bad film. It's just a maddening one.
No comments:
Post a Comment