Under The Skin (2013) Blu-ray review

Nearly every ardent film aficionado understands that cinema is highly subjective, with most pictures garnering an equal number of supporters and detractors. Sometimes, half the fun in seeing a new movie is the post-viewing discussion that breaks out among friends over what did and didn’t work. Few films, though, can divide audiences more rapidly than art house movies. Where some viewers key in on subtleties and nuance, others see a pretentious mess that could bore a person to death. You don’t run across many people who have a “meh” reaction to something intrinsically artistic – either they love it and praise it endlessly, or they hate it and can’t spew enough vitriol. One such film that has recently divided filmgoers is writer/director Jonathan Glazer’s Under the Skin (2013). Adapted from the 2000 novel of the same name, which was written by Michel Faber, it’s the tale of an interstellar succubus that travels to Earth for the purpose of luring in lonely men and denuding their bones of flesh via an… unusual method. It has been met with stirring acclaim – it currently holds an 87% “fresh” rating on Rotten Tomatoes - though there seems to be an equal number of critics who found it to be a pointless exercise of languid cinema. While at a cursory glance it may be easy to see where they’re coming from, the fact is Glazer’s film is purposely unconventional and a bit obtuse, requiring much deeper thought if viewers want to gain knowledge of its true nature. Nothing is overtly spelled out; it’s all in the subtext.

An alien (Scarlett Johansson) arrives on Earth to take the place of her predecessor, who has died under unknown circumstances. What these two “women” share are attractive features that would interest most hot-blooded men, which is essential to their purpose. Johansson (her character is never named) drives the streets of Scotland at night, attempting to pick up on single, unattached men who are more than eager to follow her back to her flat. Once inside the austere, blackened tomb where she resides the men strip down and follow her sultry figure across the room before being enveloped by a viscous liquid that preserves them alive, yet slowly softens their skin before sucking the flesh from their bones. It is not a pleasant way to go, even when you consider their final view of her curvaceous backside. She views humans from an objective perspective, with little regard for their lives and emotions; she is merely a tool here to do a job.

Her nightly endeavors hit a snag when she meets a young, deformed man (Adam Pearson, who looks not unlike the legendary Elephant Man, Joseph Merrick) who is shy and unaccustomed to attention from such a beauty. His grotesque exterior belies the gentle person under the skin, and, so, she begins to learn there is more to humans than just their outward appearance. She decides to let him go. Her experience with this young man changes her perception of not only those around her, but herself; of the body she inhabits. This leads her on a journey of self-reflection and stark realization; a trial through which she attempts to assimilate within the human world, experimenting with food and relationships and sex; things which were once so foreign to her. Constantly shadowed by a male of her species, one who maintains a constant vigil over her affairs and cleans up any messes, she is eventually resigned to the fact that despite her best efforts, she will never enjoy the pleasures our world has to offer.

Plot is secondary here; the story is more concerned with capturing the existential journey an alien takes when confronted with the possibility of becoming something more than what it is. Much like the people around her, viewers are kept at a distance, merely observing her actions without becoming deeply involved. Her purpose on Earth is only vaguely defined – we don’t exactly know why she’s seducing and liquefying these men. So much of the film is left open to interpretation that viewers with a short attention span (i.e., sadly, most of the younger generation) will probably check out early on without considering the messages being conveyed. The title has a double meaning, as it not only refers to there being something more under the skin of Johansson’s character, but also of the film’s depth. A reasonable comparison might be the work of David Lynch (though this film never reaches those lofty heights) because without a deeper evaluation of what’s being shown it would be all too easy to casually dismiss it as artsy, theoretical garbage.

It’s hard to believe any man wouldn’t jump into a vehicle if propositioned by Johansson, but many of the men she preys upon are either uninterested or oblivious to her intentions. If some of the reactions seem rather candid and genuine, that’s because they are. Many of her nightly escapades were shot using hidden consumer-grade cameras mounted in a van, with the actress calling out random men on the street that were only told of the ruse after the shots were completed. It’s a subtle touch that adds an extra layer of realism. Even many of the film’s characters (none of whom are given screen names) were portrayed by untrained actors. The aforementioned young man with severe facial disfigurement? That’s his real face, and his casting is testament to the realism Glazer attempted to achieve. The alien “cleaner” who shadows Johansson’s every move isn’t an actor at all, but a world-class motorcycle racer. The role required someone who could drive at high speeds on slick roads, and rather than use a stunt double Glazer simply hired Jeremy McWilliams, an Irish professional racer, to don the helmet. As a result of these casting decisions, and the fact that most have very little dialogue, the film’s veracity is greatly heightened.

A good film can almost always be elevated by a great score, and the work done here by Mica Levi, aka Micachu (of Micachu & The Shapes), is exemplary. Droning bass lines are punctuated by bursts of Fox string sounds, a technique that has been used for decades to heighten tension and emotion. The score incorporates elements of electronic and acoustic instruments, giving the entire affair an appropriately alien feel. Levi’s leitmotif used during the film’s sequences of seduction is mysterious and sexy, like a lure that emanates from within and puts these men into autopilot. The atonal compositions are hypnotic, easily lulling viewers into a trance. It’s certainly one of the best film scores of the year thus far.

Despite a dearth of major activity, I never found myself bored while watching the film. Sure, Glazer lets himself veer into Terrence Malick territory at times, with long, sweeping wide shots that linger in a fixed position for lengthy periods of time. Thankfully, the Scottish landscape where they shot is so gorgeous that few will be bothered by witnessing its consistent beauty. If some find the film to be cold, well, that was intentional. This is a cold world to an alien being – it’s even cold to those who aren’t alien - and it succeeds in never allowing viewers to feel much comfort. Under the Skin is a stoic reflection of humanity through the lens of the ultimate foreign body. Some of Glazer’s directorial decisions are rather puzzling - with many questions left entirely unanswered - but for those who enjoy films that aren’t wrapped up in a neat package by the time credits begin rolling this is a cerebral experience that feels satisfactory. It may not be perfect, but it certainly is unique in a sea of homogenized cinema.

Viewers must keep in mind that the film’s 1.85:1 1080p image was produced using a variety of cameras, and so the results are going to vary from scene to scene. The color palette veers toward steely, blue hues with saturation stripped down in other colors. The muted aesthetic was intentional, as was the decision to shroud most of the film in a state of near-darkness. Black levels are inky and deep, aside from a few cases where contrast was boosted on purpose, rendering them a bit hazy. The nightly encounters with men on the street were captured using GoPro-style cameras, and they look about as reasonable as can be expected – grainy, not very detailed, and like a home video. Although much of what we see is bleak, the Scottish vistas look simply gorgeous and haunting. This might be far from what Blu-ray aficionados consider “reference quality”, but it is no doubt presented just as accurately as Glazer and his collaborators intended.

A great deal of the English DTS-HD MA 5.1 surround sound track rests on the compositions of Levi because there isn’t a lot of dialogue to be heard. When characters are speaking, it is presented cleanly and balanced, though good luck making out what half the Scots here are saying. Those brogues are thick as a brick. The most boisterous moments come when Johansson enters a nightclub, with bass thumping and the sound of patrons echoing all around. Otherwise, the track comes to life only when Levi’s score is slowly working its magic to immerse listeners. Rears come to life for added ambiance, but this is a very minimal sound design that keeps viewers focused more on the images on screen and less on what they’re hearing. Subtitles are included in English SDH and Spanish.

The back cover sells the supplements a bit short, claiming to hold only one featurette. That one featurette is actually several shorter pieces that together form a nice making-of that runs over 40 minutes, focusing on camera, casting, editing, locations, music, poster design, production design, script, sound, and VFX. An insert containing a code for digital Ultraviolet HD download is included in the package.

Men In Suits (2013)

Movie monsters have been a staple of genre films going all the way back to the beginnings of cinema. Many of us carry fond memories of a childhood spent glued to the television set, watching Godzilla (or some other menacing beast) smash through miniature sets much to our unbridled delight. But what many people may forget is that there is a person inside that suit – drowning in sweat, muscles aching with every movement – and he (or she) is responsible for bringing the creatures we hold so dear to life. In some ways, it’s a testament to the actor’s performance that viewers can so easily forget an anthropomorphic beast would be lifeless if not for the performance of that person inside. Thankfully, Men in Suits (2013) has come along to remind fans that not only is there a captain inside that rubber ship, but being that person is a demanding job, one that requires an incredible amount of stamina, strength, and the ability to emote without saying a word. It is an ambitious love letter to a timeless craft, speedily covering decades of ground in a scant 93-minute run time.

There are a number of well-known suit actors interviewed here, including Doug Jones, Tom Woodruff Jr., Brian Steele, Douglas Tait, Bob Burns, Van Snowden, and Haruo Nakajima. One thing all of these actors agree on is that being a suit actor is a demanding job that often doesn’t receive the accolades it deserves. Jones in particular seems to be very passionate regarding the “suit actor vs. screen actor” debate, noting that sometimes he felt like he was “treated like a prop” on set, rather than getting the respect a non-suit actor might have received. Many of the performers also agree that a lean body is best, as suit work is an additive process much like prosthetics, and keeping in shape requires rigorous exercise and incredible stamina. For example, Brian Steele’s costume for “Wink” in Guillermo del Toro’s Hellboy 2: The Golden Army (2008) weighed over 100 lbs., and he was required to perform – at the same peak level - for up to 12 hours a day. You have to be conditioned to endure this kind of abuse because if the suit actor calls it quits, shooting stops. It’s that simple. Steele said he would ride his bike to set every day – a 40 kM trek – to maintain his physical prowess. Jones, too, admits the work can wring you dry, but he also jokes that if he were to drop dead in a rubber suit on a del Toro picture he’d “die a happy man.”

With so many monsters and actors to cover, no one creature is focused on for too long, but the film does devote a sizeable chunk to cinema’s King of the Monsters: Godzilla. Actor Haruo Nakajima, who is still spry at the ripe age of 84, recalls the original suit he wore for Gojira (1954) weighed over 200 lbs. and was so reinforced and stiff he could leave it standing upright once he exited the back. It was not uncommon for a cup of sweat to be drained from the suit at the end of each day. Luckily, for the sequels the suit’s weight was cut by more than half, which allowed for Godzilla to battle Toho’s stable of kaiju more effectively. Nakajima proved so adept at maneuvering (however he could) inside a suit that he went on to be cast as many other top monsters – Varan, Rodan, Baragon – and he was also brought on to the cast of Ultraman so that, while performing, he could train the other suit actors who had little to no experience.

Many of the film’s history lessons are provided by the endless encyclopedia of creature features himself: Bob Burns. He knows this stuff inside and out, schooling viewers on everything from naming all of the top actors who performed in Hollywood’s gorillasploitation movies, to describing his own work as an actor and how the suits he manned were constructed. Of course, he’s got all the goods to show off on camera, too. Numerous film clips are shown to provide context to the pictures discussed, and no single film is too heavily covered. Remember, the goal here is to educate fans on the actors inside the suits. So don’t be surprised when Star Wars only gets a passing mention before the film moves on to other things. If I had any complaint at all here, it would be that the film can be a bit schizophrenic at times, trying to blaze through almost a century of cinematic history. It’s not small feat, and the film largely succeeds at covering the major bases, but the frenzied nature will oftentimes leave you wanting a little more on certain subjects.

Steele mentions that suit actors started to get a little nervous around 1993, when Jurassic Park dominated the marketplace and showed how far computer-generated images had come. It was a bit of a dark period, and even when studios were hiring actors for suit work it was usually for superficial reasons – tall actors, built actors, etc. They weren’t hiring actors who had a history of delivering rich, nuanced performances that the roles called for. Seizing the opportunity, Steele started Creature Boy, essentially a union for suit actors. If a production is looking for a specific type of actor to play a role, they can turn to his company and receive a number of qualified recommendations. As suit technology has improved, many films have reverted to using the tried and true man-in-suit method to have something tangible on-screen. Even the prevalence of motion-capture technology still requires that an actor inhabit the role, which can only means Steele and his contemporaries will be in business as long as they’re still making movies.

Speaking of his contemporaries, the film’s wraparound (and occasional intercuts) have us following actor Douglas Tait as he prepares to don a demonic creature suit for a role in Joe Lynch’s still-unreleased Knights of Badassdom. By allowing viewers to see Tait acting in various stages of his suit’s completion, the film allows for a better understanding of the design and acting process behind his work. Getting an early feel for the suit allows him to determine what muscles he’ll have to focus on building up to make sure his body is up to par (get on those forearms, Doug!). Tait describes his thought process along the way, cluing us in on how advancements in technology have made his job moderately easier… but at the end of the day he’s still sweating his ass off in a 100+lb. suit for hours at a time. The enthusiasm for his craft is infectious, though, rarely showing him without a smile every step of the way. It goes a long way to show that the men inside these suits are the same kids we used to be - only now with a profound appreciation for the work that it requires. After watching Men in Suits, I’d be surprised if anyone else didn’t feel the same.

Only God Forgives (2013)

I just got through watching Only God Forgives, director Nicolas Winding Refn's hotly anticipated follow-up to Drive, which happened to be my favorite film of 2011. And my brain is swirling in a neon-drenched pool of deep thoughts. Drive 2, this sure as fuck was not. That may be why so many critics and filmgoers alike have been bashing the film. It reportedly was met with a chorus of boos when it debuted at Cannes, although I also hear it got a standing ovation at the same time so that proves nothing. Then, when I went to rent it on VUDU tonight I see that it only has 1 1/2 stars. I don't let this kind of negativity dissuade me because every film is a subjective experience. I'm sure Refn's earlier film Valhalla Rising would have been universally skewered had it followed up Drive. Coincidentally enough, some reviews have compared Valhalla to Only God Forgives due to a deliberate pacing coupled with a lack of on-screen dialogue.

It's true. Ryan Gosling only has 22 lines in the film, but his words aren't important here. Not so much as his actions, at least. There's a ton of symbolism at play here, more than I could have ever hoped to catch the first time around. The film's plot sees Gosling, at the behest of his domineering, belittling mother, seeking revenge against a Thai cop, Chang (also known as the Angel of Vengeance), who is responsible for his brother's death. He doesn't seem eager to carry out this act of retribution, though, because his brother died at the hands of the man whose daughter he raped and killed. Not exactly grounds for a sympathy revenge kill. But Gosling's mom, played here by a particularly venomous Kristin Scott Thomas, is a stone-cold woman who uses her sons as instruments for her drug empire. Gosling's character, Julian, has got some real deep-seeded mommy issues. This is Oedipus complex to the max, with plenty of Freudian symbolism here to keep psychology buffs busy.

Refn places the onus more on the film's mis-en-scene than he does the actual writing of the scenes. So many of the shots look like stylized neon paintings come to life. This is where the film likely lost many viewers - people are often turned off when they face a challenge at the movies. I'm not saying this is true of all filmgoers, but the vast majority of Joe Six Packs couldn't hope to get through this and not proclaim it a piece of shit once the credits began rolling. This is cerebral cinema, though it could be easily dismissed as pretentious garbage by those who refuse to seek deeper meaning in the films they watch. Refn is not one to shoot something because it looks pretty (but it does); there's always something else bubbling just beneath the surface. As evidenced with Valhalla Rising, he can make a nearly-silent film compelling through the use of symbolism, quality acting, and imagery. Only God Forgives is steeped in allegory, perhaps moreso than any of his films yet.

While this is ostensibly a vehicle for Ryan Gosling, the real star of the show is Chang, played here by Vithaya Pansringarm, who also does all of his own singing. The dude is a real double threat. Chang seems to represent "God" in the film; all of his actions are the work of a man who judges men before meting out their just punishment. Then, afterwards, he loves to sing karaoke. Gosling and his family are "dirty". They run a drug ring in Chang's town. Julian's brother, Billy, beats and rapes a 16-year-old girl at the beginning. His mother is a manipulative whore who runs the drug ring with her sons. Hell, even Julian, despite being an outsider within his own family, has dirty hands. The only difference being that Julian wants his hands to be clean, but he's powerless as long as his mother is in the picture. Enter Chang. It would truly take an academic paper to dissect every nuance here and explain its meaning, but suffice it to say that Chang is God here, and as the film's title suggests, he is the only one who can absolve Julian of his crimes. Really, there's some powerful stuff going on in this picture.

Just as in Drive, the film's other star is unseen - that would be composer Cliff Martinez, who has managed to possibly top his work on that previous film. Similar to his work on Drive the score here is hypnotic, lulling viewers into a state of complacency that often winds up being shattered by a burst of on-screen ultra-violence. I've been listening to it intermittently for the better part of two weeks now and it's certainly one of the best film scores this year. In particular, his cue during Chang & Julian's big fight is a gothic synth nightmare that elevates the scene tremendously. Also highlighting the score: Chang's karaoke! Now, I don't have a clue what he's saying because I don't speak Thai, but there's something charming about his voice. He has a good singing cadence. Really, though, this is one of the best soundtracks of the year. Ominous, foreboding, electric.... Martinez is quickly becoming one of my favorite composers.

Only God Forgives is a challenging film. If you enjoy that sort of thing, then it comes highly recommended. Sometimes I think that people will dismiss a smart film as boring crap for no other reason than they couldn't understand it. These are the same people who would just as easily dismiss a true classic of cinema like David Lynch's  Mulholland Dr., a film that I consider to be one of the all-time greats. Initial viewings of this film are probably going to leave even the most ardent cinephiles scratching their head. Give it time. Let the film soak in. Consider the deeper meaning behind it all. The words and images you see on screen hold the key to unlocking its true nature. Subsequent viewings will yield these rewards. Movies are not all made to be equal, with some requiring much more effort on the part of the audience than simply showing up. Only God Forgives may seem like a shallow pool of neon sludge, however, that is just the surface layer. We can always go deeper.

ETA: Re-watched this for a second time because I had it on the mind all night. Yep, definitely my favorite film of the year. Everything works for me, on every level. Understanding what the film is going for, and what to look for, makes it such a clearer picture. And, man, that fucking score!