KRR: So, What the Fuck is Going on in 'The Lobster'??

 

I'm a simple movie man. I've never taken a film class. I still don't know what a grip does. I like my movies with popcorn and a Coke. I like good movies. I don't like bad movies. To me, it doesn't matter how they're made. They can be artsy. They can be studio blockbusters. It doesn't matter. I love Honey Boy and Avengers: Endgame for entirely different reasons, but equally nonetheless. That being said, there is one crucial place I diverge from a typical movie viewer: I don't watch movie trailers.

If I like the actors in a movie, if I like the production companies that made the movie, if I like the director, if I like the movie tagline, basically if I like any part of the film's set-up, then I'm in. That's why The Lobster has been on my watchlist for so long. Rachel Weisz, Colin Farrell, John C. Reilly, Olivia Colman in an A24 production about a world where you have 45 days to find a partner or you'll be turned into an animal - say no more. I'm in. 

The problem this approach presents is that not all movies that have good actors, directors, production companies, etc. are good. In fact, the vast majority of movies are bad. But I'd rather go into a bad movie blind than cross off a good movie because of a bad trailer. More so, I'd rather go into any movie blind than see the entire movie in the trailer, which tends to happen more and more these days. And with all of that being said, here's the trailer for The Lobster, one of the most well-made, not good (or bad?) movies I've ever watched.

-SPOILERS AHEAD-

In case you're still unclear on what this movie is about after watching that trailer, allow me to expand upon it. The Lobster takes place in an alternate universe's Great Britain, where single citizens must find a partner within 45 days or they will be turned into an animal. They spend those 45 days at the Hotel, a cult-like living arrangement that doubles as an end-of-life facility and a matchmaker, where they must abide by very strange rules, such as: no masturbation, no playing tennis, and letting the maid give you a daily lap dance. Failure to comply with these rules results in bodily mutilation. While at the Hotel they go hunting in the Woods for Loners, single folks who have decided to buck the law and hide in the forest. For every Loner a Hotel-goer is able to tranquilize, an extra day is added to their stay at the Hotel. If and when a Hotel-goer meets their match, the new couple gets to spend a few weeks of "closely monitored" time together, after which - if they are still happy together - they are able to move to the City. The City is for couples only. The police see to that.

Now, if that sounds convoluted or if that doesn't entirely make sense to you, don't worry, it doesn't make sense to me either. In fact, most of the movie doesn't make sense.

The Lobster follows the story of a middle-aged architect named David. After his partner of eleven years and one month leaves him suddenly for another man, David embarks on his 45 day journey to find love at the Hotel or else be turned into a lobster. Yeah, yeah, I know. It's an absurd premise. But the movie only gets more absurd along the way. After realizing the Hotel isn't really for him (honestly, who would it be for?), David decides to run away and join the Loners in the Woods, where he finds out the Loners also have a super strange set of rules: no kissing, no flirting, no falling in love. Failure to comply with these rules also results in bodily mutilation. Once among the Loners, David begins to feel strange looooove feelings for Rachel Weisz's unnamed character. And thus, the rest of the film's conflict is set up nicely. If David falls in love, he risks mutilation. If David gets caught in a hunt, he risks mutilation. It's basically a lose-lose situation. And while that's a longwinded explanation, that is also, in short, The Lobster.

Three very approachable bachelors.

I want to begin with the things that work in this movie, because I know once I get going about what doesn't work I'm going to ramble until the final bell. So, here's what works: The acting is pretty good. Olivia Colman and John C. Reilly are hysterical in this movie. Rachel Weisz and Colin Farrell are believable and compelling. And everyone else hits their mark. Pretty good there. The cinematography is also pretty good. Besides the opening scene, the only two scenes that stand out from a cinematic perspective are the slow-motion hunting scene and the attempted suicide scene. So, pretty good marks there too. The music in this movie is really good (we've upgraded from "pretty good")! It's an orchestral horror movie score, and a particularly jarring one at that, but it fits the mood of the movie better than one might expect. There are also a few little things that I always like to see in movies, like animals for instance. This movie has lots of animals. Bonus points there.

Yet the best thing about The Lobster is the wonderfully strange atmosphere it's able to capture. The Lobster is really a romcom masquerading as a dark dystopian drama, which makes it equal parts funny and disturbing. If you asked Boots Riley to direct an episode of Black Mirror written by Kafka, it would probably turn out something like this movie. It's just that strange. The one scene that captures this best is early in the film when John C. Reilly's character is confronted by the Hotel Manager, played by Olivia Colman, with the accusation that he was masturbating in his room. It doesn't take more than a second before he confesses, upon which his right arm is wrangled by hotel staff and his hand is forced into a toaster. They toast his hand as punishment. They don't even ask if he uses his right hand to masturbate. They just toast it. And the craziest part is that you don't know if it's supposed to be funny! (I laughed. I fucking died laughing. So that's where I come down on that question.)

I'm left-handed if anyone asks.

It's the dark and comedic moments that make this movie as good as it is, which is to say... good and not good. So, let's get to the reasons this movie could be considered not good. First of all, everyone talks like a prepubescent thirteen-year old asking someone out. As in, they only speak in nervous, complete simple sentences, most of which are devoid of any real emotion. It's completely bizarre. Here are a few examples:

• "I'm going to go hunting for truffles. They are delicious and quite rare."
• "I always swallow after fellatio and I've got absolutely no problem with anal sex if that's your thing. My ex-husband always used to say I had the most beautiful thighs he'd ever seen, but let's not talk about him."
• "I hope she dies right away. On second thought, I hope she suffers quite a bit before she dies. I just hope her pathetic screams can't be heard from my room, because I was thinking of having a lie down, and I need peace and quiet."

Anyway, very strange and very, very monotonous. Another thing I don't like about this movie is that it uses narration by Rachel Weisz as a crutch. As a general rule, I don't think narrators serve movies very well. I'll make exceptions depending on the circumstance, but there are so many movies that have a narrator because they don't know how to tell their story otherwise. It's the difference between Goodfellas and Vice. One has a narrator that works with the plot; the other has one that's dictating the plot. (For no goddamn reason too. What the fuck Vice.) The Lobster plays that dangerous game, straddling the line between over-reliance on Weisz's narration and using it an acceptable amount. In the end, I see no convincing reason why the movie needs her narration, other than to get every dollar out of Rachel Weisz. Which, I suppose, is a semi-legitimate reason.

The only other major problem with this movie (besides the fact that Siri has more emotion when she speaks than any of the characters and the aforementioned hand-grilling) is that quite literally NONE of the movie makes sense. Allow me to explain.

So, people are turned into animals if they can't find a partner within 45 days right? Right. As bizarre as people being turned into animals sounds, I don't have a problem with that premise. I do, however, have a problem with the fact that none of the "outside world" is built-up whatsoever. For example, we see two college-aged girls in the Hotel. But they're the only really young folks there. Why is it just them there? At what age must people have a partner by? Coming straight out of your teenage years? That's asking a bit much, right? Here's another problem. In one of the best lines of the movie, the Hotel Manager says, "If you encounter any problems you cannot resolve yourselves, you will be assigned children. That usually helps. A lot." A brilliant line. Very funny. And later we do see one couple assigned a young girl, so clearly they were having some problems. But it begs the question: where do children come from?? Not like, when a man loves a woman, but like logistically where the fuck do children come from in this world?? Are they just born and given over to the Powers That Be to be reassigned to struggling couples? Do couples get to keep their own children? I don't understand. Here's another question. Is it like this all over the world? We see an area labeled "Transformation Room" and based on the dialogue of the movie, the transformation from people to animals is more scientific than it is magical. So, are there rooms like the one in the Hotel all over Great Britain? Hell, are there more Hotels all over the world? And if so, how many? We know there's a whole world out there. They speak in French. They speak of Germany. Is it like this everywhere? The beauty of Children of Men is that we know the dystopia in Britain is more or less self-contained and that the normal world is out there, if only one can get there. But is it like that in The Lobster? Who knows. Lastly, if this is how the whole world works, well... why??? It isn't a natural process. The 45 days is a totally arbitrary number, seeing as how you can get more days for tranquilizing Loners. Does the government decide the time limit before one can be turned into an animal? And if so, are there places where you can't be turned into an animal against your will? Could there be political dissidents seeking the safer shores of a more lenient government? Are all governments forcing citizens to become animals? Do some areas have greater access to transformation rooms, like is currently the case with abortion clinics, or a better comparison in this situation - the death penalty? The premise is fantastic, if not quite bizarre and terrifying, but the questions it prompts just about eclipse the rest of the movie, especially later in the film when you see more of the Woods and the City. 

The Lobster is an utterly peculiar piece of art, but a fine one at that. If not for the touching and subtle reflections of human affection, particularly towards the end, I'm afraid it would drown in its own strangeness. It narrowly avoids that fate by being so well made. And while that doesn't make it good, I guess that doesn't make it bad either. It just might be one of those movies you want to see the trailer for before you jump in. Because this movie is anything but simple.

A most bizarre and beautiful couple.

The Lobster KRR: 7.5/10