I love this film. I think you miss one thing when you say you find the concept repetitive because the thing I find so fascinating is that the men are so different in their attraction. You have men who want sex. You have a man that seem to really fall in love with her. You have elderly men (on the bus) who have no illusions of seducing her but who still feel the need to talk to her. You have the predator. You have the disfigured man who is probably just longing for a human touch and to feel wanted. But the ironic thing is that they just can't resist to reach out to an attractive woman even though...she's just a shell. Whatever they put into this interaction is all inside their own heads. It is based on human longing, on frustration, on a need to dominate, in a need to feel wanted, to feel companionship... They are trying to fill this void with this attractive image that is just empty. It's actually quite sad and at times rather touching to see this loneliness in different shapes. So, to me this film actually has something under the skin and it made me think about what makes men tick and how it is quite different than if the roles had been opposite: an alien in a mans skin trying to attract women. Maybe this is why "she" go after men? They are simply easier to attract. You can have these things in mind if you decide to give it a rewatch. This was over 5 years ago after all.
Many of the scenes in the movie, including when she picks up men (besides the disfigured man) were apparently filmed in public with hidden cameras. If they liked the interactions they would ask the men to use the footage and move forward with their other scenes. I thought that was a really interesting way of filming and really changed the way I looked at those scenes.
I think Maggie that you’ve grown a lot as a reviewer over time. I also know your opinions and tastes have shifted somewhat. I remember when you redid your review for Eyes Wide Shut. I would love for you to reconsider this film. I’m genuinely surprised you didn’t once mention the Mica Levi score which I think is the key that makes the film work. As well, yeah I agree with most that this is a gender study and all that but I think it’s about far more than just that. I think more than anything it is about the paradoxical away our bodies allow us to interact with the world. At once it allows us to connect with others on the physical plain and in that way connect spiritually as well. It connects us to the earth and to humanity. But at the same time the body acts as a barrier, something which can be exploited and allow one to exploit others. That’s the gist of my interpretation but still I think there’s a lot more to look at in this film. So I implore you to reconsider this film.
You watched the movie looking for a particular message and left disappointed when you didn't find it. You need to enter the experience unbiased. That's the problem with most critics today.
The one haunting scene that sticks with me to this day is the most chilling scene I may have ever experienced in cinema, and that is the scene on the beach with the baby. It had some Blaise Pascal vibes: “The eternal silence of these infinite spaces frightens me.”
the film is much more than this review states. The "very little characterization" doesn't make any sense. The imagery was amazing. The movie is deeper than you have so far been able to apprehend.
I was fortunate enough to have read and enjoyed the book before there was any suggestion of it being made into a film. I viewed the film as a sort of visual art project based on the book. I appreciate that films should generally be stand alone works but the experience of having read the book still added layers of interpretation and pleasure to the movie experience. For me the most important emotional thing I got the book was the change of perspective that Isserly (Scarlett Johansson's character) experiences. Early on in the book she seems to see Scotland as a place she must endure in order to farm humans for meat. Later in the book she grows to prefer (a cold, wet) Scotland to home. This touched me to the degree that it became part of my mindfulness practice - attempting however unskillfully to accept the beauty and joy of a wet Monday morning. This theme was not carried explicitly into the plot of the movie but I think you can see it in the craft of the film makers making a "horror" film that looks and sounds so beautiful.
I must politely disagree with some of your observations. While your interpretation is as valid as anyone's (and correct inasmuch as it's one of the film's many layers), there is much more going on under the skin, so to speak. At the surface level, there is a literal, concrete meaning to the story and each of the purely symbolic-seeming scenes (the opening, the black floor that swallows the men), but the explanatory material was omitted to create a more dreamlike experience. The film is also radically subjective from the alien's POV, which invites the audience to experience further layers of meaning through a fresh set of eyes. Like many other commenters have pointed out, I think you would benefit from at least another viewing, while being open to the possibilities of multiple subtexts. For example, why assume that it is the protagonist who is consuming the men? Could this be a job she is doing, a tour of duty? What about the woman from whom she takes the clothing in the beginning? Why does she look so much like the main character? Why does she cry? How could the deformed man, in some way, actually be like the protagonist? Why, after meeting him, does she not only let him go, but run away from her duties and attempt to become human? Is she hiding from the motorcycle guy? Why does her mask, in the final scene, move its eyes and seem to look into her as she also looks into it? There is so very much going on in this film. For me, it is a very rich experience. Every time I see it, I get something new out of it.
EVERY SINGLE REVIEW or comment I’ve seen about this movie is overwhelmingly positive(though a few I saw thought it was just ok, but I’ve seen NONE that said it was bad), which is something I haven’t seen in probably over a decade as someone who has to ALWAYS look at reviews before committing to watch a new movie for hours of my precious time… This movie totally flew under my radar when it was released(never heard a thing about it even with Scarlet Johansson!), but I’ll def be checking this one out!!!
I really liked the movie. I didn't really care about as a gender study. For me the most interesting part was that it makes you empathise with a quite freaky alien. I liked the stripped back dialogue. The score is incredible and I thought the ending was pretty phenomenal and ironic
I am very glad I found this channel, this is a great analysis, you earned my sub. I personally loved this film, I think you are missing something but not talking about the score - it added a connective tissue that, for me, really gave the movie an enticing, meditative quality. I also found the film to be a great examination of alienation and predation, but I agree it wasn't the most profound film ever.
Totally stumbled across this last night and having no idea what to expect, I was impressed. I'm not as plugged into what's happening with movies as I used to be but I was stunned something like this happened in the last 10 years, much less with a big star in it. Surprised you didn't mention the music at all as that to me was the most interesting part. I'm willing to cut a movie a lot of slack when it's based on a novel I haven't read (and will likely....probably even definitely...never read)...maybe it was true to the tone of the book. Anyway, I think I got a little more out of this than you did, but always respect your opinion.
Then it dawns on you: “Of course, I’m God. I am consciousness. I am imagining myself. I am whatever I conceive myself to be because there is nothing outside my endless Mind.”
Interesting take. I loved this film, and I happen to see it as more of a stripped back, visual horror experience with these gender themes in the background. I don't think the gender study is the 100% point; I think it's also about culture clash; quite literally an alien being dropped off in our world and trying to understand these abstract ideas of beauty and love and sex. I think it's comparable to Nymphomaniac because of these themes, and whereas that film was super dialog-heavy and not subtle in the least, this one has a more enigmatic and poetic voice.
I agree with you 100%. Everything you said, you took from my mouth and thoughts. It's a movie all about concept with no substance. Also, what a disgusting ending. No one wins in this film, not the protagonist, the potential lover, or the viewer.
Why does so much independent cinema always seem to fall down this path. All style with no substance. I'm sensing a trend with a24 films and stuff like neon demon and velvet buzzsaw. I'm not a fan of art house cinema generally, which this movie seemed to lean into. Movies should have a cohesive narrative first, before focusing entirely on an interesting premise or compelling cinematography/style. They are movies after all and not paintings. I think there's an argument to be had if artsy films should even be considered films at all, rather being some type of other medium entirely. The genre kind of feels like this kind of pseudo intellectualism and snobbery that appeals to some people, but it just feels hollow to me and ultimately incredibly pretentious with an air of faux depth. I couldn't help but make a lot of parallels to the David Bowie movie: than man who fell to earth. It certainly felt like it was inspired by it at least, and like that movie I felt under the skin suffered from a lot of the same issues. Kubrick comes to mind because love or hate his films he at least had a narrative to go along with any deeper meaning or symbolic threads he was weaving into his films. I kind of feel for Scarlett here to be honest, because she's obviously trying to explore more creative projects and challenge her acting skills, but she isn't seeming to have much luck outside of the mainstream stuff. I think she's way more talented and capable than one might think, deserving of more interesting roles. So, it's a pity she hasn't gotten better films to star in. Her English accent for example in this film felt pretty seamless and natural, and accents usually feel very fake when put on by non-native speakers. I think this interview she did sort of explains why the film is how it is. ruclips.net/video/daz32KlPD0s/видео.html&ab_channel=DP%2F30%3ATheOralHistoryOfHollywood In the interview she says how most of the film wasn't scripted how it ended up in the film, and they just figured stuff out as they filmed it, and that really shows, especially as Scarlett's character runs off at the end it just feels very messy, disjointed and confused, but I guess you can always explain criticisms like that away as; oh that's intended because her character is confused in the story. While I agree sometimes improvisation can work out really well, I don't think this level of unpreparedness really served the film. While no one can always agree with each other's opinions all the time, I've found your reviews are consistently to the point and honest. I feel a lot of reviewers surrendered to the aura of this film and weren't entirely objective. Anyway you've gained a sub.
Would your perception of Under The Skin change if you had viewed the film in a crowded theater, where three-fourths of the audience walked out? For me, this was a character study of a strange film and an unsuspecting audience...definitely not a popcorn movie. I'm somewhat surprised you aren't impressed with UTS, as you have mentioned Mulholland Drive and Orson Welles' The Trial, among others that don't follow the standard structure of beginning, middle, and end.
I saw this with my (late) wife, who was a fan of neither sci-fi nor art cinema. She didn't have much to say about it, but when she asked me what it was about the only thing I could come up with was: "cinematography". ;)
Your insight is brilliant and your interpretation of her perspective is exactly how she experiences the world. The loneliness and ennui of UTS is highly transparent and the work will forge its own emersed influence of void-ness unto you but there's something else beyond this void. I wouldn't say I disagree about the 'gender study' concept but I can't verily agree. Just to draw out your insight as to what I'm thinking. It's true that this work attempts to explore a concept but it's not exploring one concept but two, or at least it doesn't explore one but exhaust the one by means of the other. Two examples; sex scene & restaurant scene. I can't exactly remember but soon after she departs from the man with the disfigured facial structure (after she reconciles that she can experience as a human) she either goes to eat or goes to meet the man she attempts to have sex with. Whichever the order I think this is where the exhaustion is, in earlier scenes we noticed this potential of experiencing or being-human. Particularly woman. In each scene the attempt is failed to do something uniquely human (this in that only humans eat and fuck purely for pleasure and not only for the otherwise). This is where the gender study sees its enigma, or the exploration of the concept elapses. An alien can't, inherently, experience or be-human. This is where its abysmal forging begins to flourish or end. So either her experience of being-woman were an illusion, or, the presence that a human inherently is able to forge on another being caused her to experience something which she couldn't herself have experienced otherwise. This interpretation is slightly assailable but this is what I've found so sublime about the work.
I thought it was cool and creepy. The dude in the bike was spooky. My interpretation is the film scratches at an old fear. The succubus but with more details that leave you with more questions then answers. I like that it's mysterious and plays with emotional conections. It reminds me of having a passing conversation but the strangers involved revealed something that was unsettling. Like talking to someone you'll never see again but yet you wonder what caused this person to be this way and what happens to them now and how you feel or interpret them is also revealing about yourself. Creepy.
(Spoilers all the way) I normally agree with your reviews, but I really feel you missed something vital in this film. I haven’t been able to stop thinking about the heartbreaking final moments for months now. Very few films come along like this. Many reviewers offer the simplistic view that it is purely about objectification of women. That is undeniably a part of the underlying theme, but it’s not until the female meets the disfigured man that we discover it is about more than that. If it’s purely the superficiality of the treatment of feminine beauty that drives this picture, then why is it that the vulnerability of this male outcast is what presents a distorted mirror of herself? A fly trapped behind glass. The symbolism tells a story which the words do not. Scarlett portrays pages of script in a few expressions. Based on a book which never comes close to the alien of this film. It feels alien. It portrays alien without the vestiges of humanity that we cling to. It’s a tragedy. It’s visually stunning. I hated it as it ended and love it more each day that passes, and wish I could stop mourning the loss of the female’s futile existence. Like one of the insects she views that barely know life before it is extinguished. As it opens with the two females, dark against the white of perhaps an alien craft, it closes with the bad man, black against the whiteness of a Scottish mist. Staring ominously directly at us. He knows she is gone, will a new lure be created to act as bait for the conveyor of meat?
I think you missed a lot in this movie. It had a great story arc. You wanted dialogue from the main character but she couldn't... or even need to because men are visual sexually. Conversation isnt necessary. So much more you missed.
I have always been fond of the novel and the movie while different I think makes a fine and interesting companion piece to the book which I’d highly recommend reading by the way .
I was so disappointed after watching his first two films for the first time within the last week... I fell asleep tbh (although that could partly have to do with my uhh, chemical milieu).. I'm going to watch Zone of Interest soon; crossing my fingers
I hated the film. It just dropped you into events, left you with lots of questions, and explained little if anything. Who was the girl at the beginning that Scarlett undressed? Who is the motorcyclist? How is he connected to her? Why are they doing what they are doing? What was the point of this film? Was there a plot? Personally I think that if Scarlett Johannson hadn't starred in it, and hadn't done a nude scene, that no one would be talking about this film at all. After seeing it at the theatre, I suspected that the only reason she agreed to do the film was that she lost a bet.
I watched the trailer just now seemed like it could be really cool. After listening to this review I don't really want to watch it. I need to make a movie already and have you review it lol. Also could you review the Star Wars teaser?
Watch Lynch's "Eraserhead" and any Tarkovksy movie and re-watch "Under The Skin". I think your review while containing some good points misses the point on what the director was going for. Part of the problem is that many audiences are so used to Western styles of filmmaking. "Under The Skin" is an a expressionistic surreal film and more akin to the art work of Francis Bacon than a film. While I agree the film has flaws, I have not had a film burrow into my subconsciousness on that level since Lynch's ' "Mulholland Drive"
I made this comment without looking at more of your reviews. I stand corrected and apologize for assuming you did not watch a fair share of more experimental films. With watching more of your reviews, I do believe you are one of the best independent film reviewers who do video entries and really do put most fan boys to shame since you have such an amazing knowledge of classic pre-60s cinema for someone of your age.
Just watched Under the Skin and I agree with a lot of what you are saying. It was a great movie, but doesn't quite reach the heights of some of its influences. I adore Lynch and recently watched Tarkovsky's Solaris which I thought was amazing. I was kind of on the fence about Solaris until the very last scenes just blew my mind. I thought that Under the Skin's ending had a bit of a nice pay off as well. However, while the early parts of the film had shocking, great scenes like the one on the beach and the one where the two victims meet under water or whatever liquid it was, I felt that a lot of other content in the film didn't feel as interesting. I'm a bit surprised at how much of a polarizing film it seems to be and how many people say its completely devoid of substance and dead boring, I think that's being unfair.
When you mentioned "how disconnected we have become" I couldn't help but think of my daily journey to and from work on a train populated by iPhone addicts. Space sirens wouldn't lure any hapless would-be victims away in London... facebook and candy crush turned most of our number in to husks long ago ;D
It lacks a story. It would have been better as a short. Pacing was bad. Yes, the film comments on the importance of sexual attraction. But that's hardly poetic. Of course we as humans are physically attracted to beauty. Beauty is just natures signals of symmetry, health and fertility. The film tried too hard.
I like your review (just saw the movie 1st time...) except one topic. Limiting this movie to a "gender study" is missing a lot of aspects. We don't kow how rational those "aliens" are, e.g. about not being revealed, which observations they clumsily reflect as "human" e.g. using a female as bait (while actually not having any clue what a "female" is, not even in regards to reproduction) or what their own concepts are (none asides digesting humans alive in a collective jelly?). I'd rank "immigration" to be more dominant. The encounters with stereotypical huma males are intentional highlights of course: meeting average dudes all day get's boring (the movie shows us), so let's answer audience questions "but what if it meets this type of guy?" Lastly, we don't need extraterrestrials to find beings with traits as the "aliens" in this movie.
I really tried to like this movie, but I thought it was excruciating to sit through. Which is disappointing, because I usually love these kind of movies. And I agree with your review, it has an interesting premise and great visuals, but I thought the theme of the movie felt kind of hollow.
123rockfan Same here. I don't understand how this movie did so well. You give a garbage movie to art people and they hate it. Tell them it's an independent movie and they will find things to like about it. This woman even stated this movie has no plot. There could be an idependent movie about a turn trying to fly to mars in order to rescue his turd wife, and these art crazies will eat it up.
I watched this movie the first time last night and I was very much perplexed with it. I didn't know what to make of it. I was saying to my self, the hell am I watching? I watched the whole thing with patience and a few times I was tempted to shut the movie off. I watched it on Kanopy through the Roku and I was very confused about the whole movie. That's why I searched on RUclips to get some feedbacks and reviews to fully explain what the whole movie was about. I Thank You and few other for clearing this up. I guess in a nutshell the movie was about Self reflection on all of Humanity.
I kinda liked this movie. Fairly unique, but your criticisms are on point. I do see more than just a gender study though. I watched this after reading your review on Zero Theorem, which I am hoping to see this week. You do a good job on your videos. Keep up the good work. Check out Dead man 1996 if you haven't seen it...if you like Jarmusch movies. I'd love to hear your thoughts on it. Not many youtubers have reviewed it and I only saw in a few mos ago.
I love this film. I think you miss one thing when you say you find the concept repetitive because the thing I find so fascinating is that the men are so different in their attraction. You have men who want sex. You have a man that seem to really fall in love with her. You have elderly men (on the bus) who have no illusions of seducing her but who still feel the need to talk to her. You have the predator. You have the disfigured man who is probably just longing for a human touch and to feel wanted. But the ironic thing is that they just can't resist to reach out to an attractive woman even though...she's just a shell. Whatever they put into this interaction is all inside their own heads. It is based on human longing, on frustration, on a need to dominate, in a need to feel wanted, to feel companionship... They are trying to fill this void with this attractive image that is just empty. It's actually quite sad and at times rather touching to see this loneliness in different shapes. So, to me this film actually has something under the skin and it made me think about what makes men tick and how it is quite different than if the roles had been opposite: an alien in a mans skin trying to attract women. Maybe this is why "she" go after men? They are simply easier to attract.
You can have these things in mind if you decide to give it a rewatch. This was over 5 years ago after all.
I agree with you. I didn't feel this film repetitive, and i watched it recently.
A film should stand on its own merits, not subjective bs analysis 😅
@@dmunozkusterit's not bs though lol
Many of the scenes in the movie, including when she picks up men (besides the disfigured man) were apparently filmed in public with hidden cameras. If they liked the interactions they would ask the men to use the footage and move forward with their other scenes. I thought that was a really interesting way of filming and really changed the way I looked at those scenes.
Like Borat 1 and 2 or Bad Grandpa.
The lack of exposition in this film is its greatest strength, explaining anything that was happening would've made it worse
I think Maggie that you’ve grown a lot as a reviewer over time. I also know your opinions and tastes have shifted somewhat. I remember when you redid your review for Eyes Wide Shut. I would love for you to reconsider this film. I’m genuinely surprised you didn’t once mention the Mica Levi score which I think is the key that makes the film work.
As well, yeah I agree with most that this is a gender study and all that but I think it’s about far more than just that. I think more than anything it is about the paradoxical away our bodies allow us to interact with the world. At once it allows us to connect with others on the physical plain and in that way connect spiritually as well. It connects us to the earth and to humanity. But at the same time the body acts as a barrier, something which can be exploited and allow one to exploit others. That’s the gist of my interpretation but still I think there’s a lot more to look at in this film.
So I implore you to reconsider this film.
You watched the movie looking for a particular message and left disappointed when you didn't find it. You need to enter the experience unbiased. That's the problem with most critics today.
The one haunting scene that sticks with me to this day is the most chilling scene I may have ever experienced in cinema, and that is the scene on the beach with the baby. It had some Blaise Pascal vibes: “The eternal silence of these infinite spaces frightens me.”
the film is much more than this review states. The "very little characterization" doesn't make any sense. The imagery was amazing. The movie is deeper than you have so far been able to apprehend.
I was fortunate enough to have read and enjoyed the book before there was any suggestion of it being made into a film. I viewed the film as a sort of visual art project based on the book. I appreciate that films should generally be stand alone works but the experience of having read the book still added layers of interpretation and pleasure to the movie experience.
For me the most important emotional thing I got the book was the change of perspective that Isserly (Scarlett Johansson's character) experiences. Early on in the book she seems to see Scotland as a place she must endure in order to farm humans for meat. Later in the book she grows to prefer (a cold, wet) Scotland to home. This touched me to the degree that it became part of my mindfulness practice - attempting however unskillfully to accept the beauty and joy of a wet Monday morning. This theme was not carried explicitly into the plot of the movie but I think you can see it in the craft of the film makers making a "horror" film that looks and sounds so beautiful.
I must politely disagree with some of your observations. While your interpretation is as valid as anyone's (and correct inasmuch as it's one of the film's many layers), there is much more going on under the skin, so to speak. At the surface level, there is a literal, concrete meaning to the story and each of the purely symbolic-seeming scenes (the opening, the black floor that swallows the men), but the explanatory material was omitted to create a more dreamlike experience. The film is also radically subjective from the alien's POV, which invites the audience to experience further layers of meaning through a fresh set of eyes. Like many other commenters have pointed out, I think you would benefit from at least another viewing, while being open to the possibilities of multiple subtexts.
For example, why assume that it is the protagonist who is consuming the men? Could this be a job she is doing, a tour of duty? What about the woman from whom she takes the clothing in the beginning? Why does she look so much like the main character? Why does she cry? How could the deformed man, in some way, actually be like the protagonist? Why, after meeting him, does she not only let him go, but run away from her duties and attempt to become human? Is she hiding from the motorcycle guy? Why does her mask, in the final scene, move its eyes and seem to look into her as she also looks into it?
There is so very much going on in this film. For me, it is a very rich experience. Every time I see it, I get something new out of it.
I think you're so talented and that's contagious to me. Thank u.
This movie was really depressing made me think about a lot of stuff
EVERY SINGLE REVIEW or comment I’ve seen about this movie is overwhelmingly positive(though a few I saw thought it was just ok, but I’ve seen NONE that said it was bad), which is something I haven’t seen in probably over a decade as someone who has to ALWAYS look at reviews before committing to watch a new movie for hours of my precious time… This movie totally flew under my radar when it was released(never heard a thing about it even with Scarlet Johansson!), but I’ll def be checking this one out!!!
I really liked the movie. I didn't really care about as a gender study. For me the most interesting part was that it makes you empathise with a quite freaky alien. I liked the stripped back dialogue. The score is incredible and I thought the ending was pretty phenomenal and ironic
I am very glad I found this channel, this is a great analysis, you earned my sub.
I personally loved this film, I think you are missing something but not talking about the score - it added a connective tissue that, for me, really gave the movie an enticing, meditative quality.
I also found the film to be a great examination of alienation and predation, but I agree it wasn't the most profound film ever.
u call this analysis?
Totally stumbled across this last night and having no idea what to expect, I was impressed. I'm not as plugged into what's happening with movies as I used to be but I was stunned something like this happened in the last 10 years, much less with a big star in it. Surprised you didn't mention the music at all as that to me was the most interesting part. I'm willing to cut a movie a lot of slack when it's based on a novel I haven't read (and will likely....probably even definitely...never read)...maybe it was true to the tone of the book. Anyway, I think I got a little more out of this than you did, but always respect your opinion.
Then it dawns on you: “Of course, I’m God. I am consciousness. I am imagining myself. I am whatever I conceive myself to be because there is nothing outside my endless Mind.”
This movie felt so real to me.
Interesting take. I loved this film, and I happen to see it as more of a stripped back, visual horror experience with these gender themes in the background. I don't think the gender study is the 100% point; I think it's also about culture clash; quite literally an alien being dropped off in our world and trying to understand these abstract ideas of beauty and love and sex. I think it's comparable to Nymphomaniac because of these themes, and whereas that film was super dialog-heavy and not subtle in the least, this one has a more enigmatic and poetic voice.
I agree with you 100%. Everything you said, you took from my mouth and thoughts. It's a movie all about concept with no substance. Also, what a disgusting ending. No one wins in this film, not the protagonist, the potential lover, or the viewer.
Why does so much independent cinema always seem to fall down this path. All style with no substance. I'm sensing a trend with a24 films and stuff like neon demon and velvet buzzsaw. I'm not a fan of art house cinema generally, which this movie seemed to lean into. Movies should have a cohesive narrative first, before focusing entirely on an interesting premise or compelling cinematography/style. They are movies after all and not paintings. I think there's an argument to be had if artsy films should even be considered films at all, rather being some type of other medium entirely. The genre kind of feels like this kind of pseudo intellectualism and snobbery that appeals to some people, but it just feels hollow to me and ultimately incredibly pretentious with an air of faux depth.
I couldn't help but make a lot of parallels to the David Bowie movie: than man who fell to earth. It certainly felt like it was inspired by it at least, and like that movie I felt under the skin suffered from a lot of the same issues.
Kubrick comes to mind because love or hate his films he at least had a narrative to go along with any deeper meaning or symbolic threads he was weaving into his films.
I kind of feel for Scarlett here to be honest, because she's obviously trying to explore more creative projects and challenge her acting skills, but she isn't seeming to have much luck outside of the mainstream stuff. I think she's way more talented and capable than one might think, deserving of more interesting roles. So, it's a pity she hasn't gotten better films to star in. Her English accent for example in this film felt pretty seamless and natural, and accents usually feel very fake when put on by non-native speakers. I think this interview she did sort of explains why the film is how it is. ruclips.net/video/daz32KlPD0s/видео.html&ab_channel=DP%2F30%3ATheOralHistoryOfHollywood
In the interview she says how most of the film wasn't scripted how it ended up in the film, and they just figured stuff out as they filmed it, and that really shows, especially as Scarlett's character runs off at the end it just feels very messy, disjointed and confused, but I guess you can always explain criticisms like that away as; oh that's intended because her character is confused in the story. While I agree sometimes improvisation can work out really well, I don't think this level of unpreparedness really served the film.
While no one can always agree with each other's opinions all the time, I've found your reviews are consistently to the point and honest. I feel a lot of reviewers surrendered to the aura of this film and weren't entirely objective. Anyway you've gained a sub.
Would your perception of Under The Skin change if you had viewed the film in a crowded theater, where three-fourths of the audience walked out? For me, this was a character study of a strange film and an unsuspecting audience...definitely not a popcorn movie.
I'm somewhat surprised you aren't impressed with UTS, as you have mentioned Mulholland Drive and Orson Welles' The Trial, among others that don't follow the standard structure of beginning, middle, and end.
under the skin is my favorite contemporary film. it's right up there with punch-drunk love, dogtooth, black swan and royal tenenbaums.
I saw this with my (late) wife, who was a fan of neither sci-fi nor art cinema. She didn't have much to say about it, but when she asked me what it was about the only thing I could come up with was: "cinematography". ;)
The novel provides the background. Spoiler.
She is an alien and they eat humans.
Your insight is brilliant and your interpretation of her perspective is exactly how she experiences the world. The loneliness and ennui of UTS is highly transparent and the work will forge its own emersed influence of void-ness unto you but there's something else beyond this void. I wouldn't say I disagree about the 'gender study' concept but I can't verily agree. Just to draw out your insight as to what I'm thinking. It's true that this work attempts to explore a concept but it's not exploring one concept but two, or at least it doesn't explore one but exhaust the one by means of the other. Two examples; sex scene & restaurant scene. I can't exactly remember but soon after she departs from the man with the disfigured facial structure (after she reconciles that she can experience as a human) she either goes to eat or goes to meet the man she attempts to have sex with. Whichever the order I think this is where the exhaustion is, in earlier scenes we noticed this potential of experiencing or being-human. Particularly woman. In each scene the attempt is failed to do something uniquely human (this in that only humans eat and fuck purely for pleasure and not only for the otherwise). This is where the gender study sees its enigma, or the exploration of the concept elapses. An alien can't, inherently, experience or be-human. This is where its abysmal forging begins to flourish or end. So either her experience of being-woman were an illusion, or, the presence that a human inherently is able to forge on another being caused her to experience something which she couldn't herself have experienced otherwise. This interpretation is slightly assailable but this is what I've found so sublime about the work.
+Cheis Topher Thank you. Well said. :)
I thought it was cool and creepy. The dude in the bike was spooky. My interpretation is the film scratches at an old fear. The succubus but with more details that leave you with more questions then answers. I like that it's mysterious and plays with emotional conections. It reminds me of having a passing conversation but the strangers involved revealed something that was unsettling. Like talking to someone you'll never see again but yet you wonder what caused this person to be this way and what happens to them now and how you feel or interpret them is also revealing about yourself. Creepy.
(Spoilers all the way) I normally agree with your reviews, but I really feel you missed something vital in this film. I haven’t been able to stop thinking about the heartbreaking final moments for months now. Very few films come along like this.
Many reviewers offer the simplistic view that it is purely about objectification of women. That is undeniably a part of the underlying theme, but it’s not until the female meets the disfigured man that we discover it is about more than that. If it’s purely the superficiality of the treatment of feminine beauty that drives this picture, then why is it that the vulnerability of this male outcast is what presents a distorted mirror of herself? A fly trapped behind glass.
The symbolism tells a story which the words do not. Scarlett portrays pages of script in a few expressions.
Based on a book which never comes close to the alien of this film. It feels alien. It portrays alien without the vestiges of humanity that we cling to.
It’s a tragedy. It’s visually stunning. I hated it as it ended and love it more each day that passes, and wish I could stop mourning the loss of the female’s futile existence. Like one of the insects she views that barely know life before it is extinguished.
As it opens with the two females, dark against the white of perhaps an alien craft, it closes with the bad man, black against the whiteness of a Scottish mist. Staring ominously directly at us. He knows she is gone, will a new lure be created to act as bait for the conveyor of meat?
I liked this movie more than I did Lucy lol
I think you missed a lot in this movie. It had a great story arc. You wanted dialogue from the main character but she couldn't... or even need to because men are visual sexually. Conversation isnt necessary.
So much more you missed.
I have always been fond of the novel and the movie while different I think makes a fine and interesting companion piece to the book which I’d highly recommend reading by the way .
I was so disappointed after watching his first two films for the first time within the last week... I fell asleep tbh (although that could partly have to do with my uhh, chemical milieu)..
I'm going to watch Zone of Interest soon; crossing my fingers
Try watching it stoned. This film is a trip. Simples.
the director learned under kubrick
I saw that film...very creepy. One question: Who was the girl she was taking the clothes off of at the beginning of the film?
"This movie is very kinda stripped down." Good one.
I hated the film. It just dropped you into events, left you with lots of questions, and explained little if anything. Who was the girl at the beginning that Scarlett undressed? Who is the motorcyclist? How is he connected to her? Why are they doing what they are doing? What was the point of this film? Was there a plot? Personally I think that if Scarlett Johannson hadn't starred in it, and hadn't done a nude scene, that no one would be talking about this film at all. After seeing it at the theatre, I suspected that the only reason she agreed to do the film was that she lost a bet.
I watched the trailer just now seemed like it could be really cool. After listening to this review I don't really want to watch it. I need to make a movie already and have you review it lol. Also could you review the Star Wars teaser?
Watch Lynch's "Eraserhead" and any Tarkovksy movie and re-watch "Under The Skin". I think your review while containing some good points misses the point on what the director was going for. Part of the problem is that many audiences are so used to Western styles of filmmaking. "Under The Skin" is an a expressionistic surreal film and more akin to the art work of Francis Bacon than a film. While I agree the film has flaws, I have not had a film burrow into my subconsciousness on that level since Lynch's ' "Mulholland Drive"
I've seen Eraserhead. I understand the point of Under the Skin. Personally, I don't think it has anywhere near the depth of Eraserhead.
I made this comment without looking at more of your reviews. I stand corrected and apologize for assuming you did not watch a fair share of more experimental films. With watching more of your reviews, I do believe you are one of the best independent film reviewers who do video entries and really do put most fan boys to shame since you have such an amazing knowledge of classic pre-60s cinema for someone of your age.
Kirk Colton Thank you so much. Yes, I spent a lot of time in my youth studying early cinema. It has always fascinated me.
deepfocuslens I agree with Kirk - special request on some Tarkovsky reviews. I recommend Stalker.
Just watched Under the Skin and I agree with a lot of what you are saying. It was a great movie, but doesn't quite reach the heights of some of its influences. I adore Lynch and recently watched Tarkovsky's Solaris which I thought was amazing. I was kind of on the fence about Solaris until the very last scenes just blew my mind. I thought that Under the Skin's ending had a bit of a nice pay off as well. However, while the early parts of the film had shocking, great scenes like the one on the beach and the one where the two victims meet under water or whatever liquid it was, I felt that a lot of other content in the film didn't feel as interesting. I'm a bit surprised at how much of a polarizing film it seems to be and how many people say its completely devoid of substance and dead boring, I think that's being unfair.
When you mentioned "how disconnected we have become" I couldn't help but think of my daily journey to and from work on a train populated by iPhone addicts. Space sirens wouldn't lure any hapless would-be victims away in London... facebook and candy crush turned most of our number in to husks long ago ;D
Your first words SPOILED the whole movie.
It lacks a story. It would have been better as a short. Pacing was bad. Yes, the film comments on the importance of sexual attraction. But that's hardly poetic. Of course we as humans are physically attracted to beauty. Beauty is just natures signals of symmetry, health and fertility. The film tried too hard.
I like your review (just saw the movie 1st time...) except one topic. Limiting this movie to a "gender study" is missing a lot of aspects. We don't kow how rational those "aliens" are, e.g. about not being revealed, which observations they clumsily reflect as "human" e.g. using a female as bait (while actually not having any clue what a "female" is, not even in regards to reproduction) or what their own concepts are (none asides digesting humans alive in a collective jelly?). I'd rank "immigration" to be more dominant. The encounters with stereotypical huma males are intentional highlights of course: meeting average dudes all day get's boring (the movie shows us), so let's answer audience questions "but what if it meets this type of guy?" Lastly, we don't need extraterrestrials to find beings with traits as the "aliens" in this movie.
I hated this movie. I thought it was one of the most boring things I’ve ever seen.
You should enfatize in "normie" stuff, its not a film for everyone, the movie is very slow paced, should've been a short film....
I really tried to like this movie, but I thought it was excruciating to sit through. Which is disappointing, because I usually love these kind of movies. And I agree with your review, it has an interesting premise and great visuals, but I thought the theme of the movie felt kind of hollow.
123rockfan Same here. I don't understand how this movie did so well. You give a garbage movie to art people and they hate it. Tell them it's an independent movie and they will find things to like about it. This woman even stated this movie has no plot. There could be an idependent movie about a turn trying to fly to mars in order to rescue his turd wife, and these art crazies will eat it up.
Ryan Ramos I'd actually consider myself an "art crazy" lmao.
I watched this movie the first time last night and I was very much perplexed with it. I didn't know what to make of it. I was saying to my self, the hell am I watching? I watched the whole thing with patience and a few times I was tempted to shut the movie off. I watched it on Kanopy through the Roku and I was very confused about the whole movie. That's why I searched on RUclips to get some feedbacks and reviews to fully explain what the whole movie was about. I Thank You and few other for clearing this up. I guess in a nutshell the movie was about Self reflection on all of Humanity.
Yow u nailed it. I agree so much. Wish you'd review Beyond the black rainbow
I kinda liked this movie. Fairly unique, but your criticisms are on point. I do see more than just a gender study though. I watched this after reading your review on Zero Theorem, which I am hoping to see this week. You do a good job on your videos. Keep up the good work. Check out Dead man 1996 if you haven't seen it...if you like Jarmusch movies. I'd love to hear your thoughts on it. Not many youtubers have reviewed it and I only saw in a few mos ago.
You're so beautiful
Thank you. :)
She's just here to harvest your meat, don't fall for it.
"Most women wouldn't know a good film if they gave birth to it". I can't argue with that in your case(!)