Skip to main content

Strange Darling is a Charmingly Intuitive, Subversive, and Stunning Thriller

Strange Darling is a genuinely clever movie. It’s also a movie very impressed with its own cleverness, in a manner that evokes the somewhat obnoxious vibes of Quentin Tarantino where it is very concerned with the audience being impressed by it. At the same time, it does impress, if not quite as much as it wants to, but enough still. Part of this is due to its structure that writer-director JT Mollner presents non-linearly, so as to allow for a sense of mystery and constantly reshaping contexts. But it also comes out of the film’s looks and technical aesthetics that are unusually rich and vivid. It’s quite a stunningly colourful for how grisly it can get.
Mollner begins the movie -after a Texas Chainsaw Massacre-style opening text detailing the manhunt for a prolific serial killer from Colorado to Oregon, that like in that movie appears not to be real- he begins where his idea began, with the image of a woman running in slow-motion, injured and bleeding, from a man pursuing her with a gun. Realizing the cliché of the Final Girl, he wanted to expand on it. And so in this, we’re introduced to the nameless Lady (Willa Fitzgerald) running for her life from an aggressive man called the Demon (Kyle Gallner), in the third chapter of a six chapter narrative detailing the progression of a one-night stand through to a vicious cat-and-mouse game through rural Oregon. Each chapter is played out of order, save for the last, certain details obscured so the audience can be led by their assumptions as to the larger story -assumptions that Mollner ultimately takes great delight in re-contextualizing and subverting.
And it makes for a strong storytelling conceit, with early appearing chapters showing the results of beats that haven’t been set up yet. As the Demon hunts the Lady through an isolated home he steps over a dead body bleeding out. Based on the evidence of the scene we can guess what happened, but Mollner sets little hints that our perception may not be trustworthy. When we meet the Lady running for her life she is blonde, but when we see her in the first chapter meeting the Demon for their arranged tryst she has red hair. And it’s in this chapter too that Mollner first pulls the rug out on our expectations, revealing the nature of a particular interaction to be entirely different than it appears, priming the audience to be ready for several twists in the disordered progression of the story ahead. There does come a point where the device is used just a little too frequently that you start to expect the subversions -especially the biggest one, which isn’t as unique as Mollner thinks; but the calculated nature of the reveals is quite thrilling -the way that each chapter hints just enough while still being sufficient on its own terms where it fits in the more conventional narrative.
What also keeps the energy up though is the film’s visual language, bolstered by its crisp 35 mm film stock and its grounded yet saturated imagery that makes a movie set in the modern day look and feel like a grindhouse horror film from the 70s. And one of the most interesting facts about this movie, is not only that it is shot on 35 mm, but that its cinematographer is -of all people- actor Giovanni Ribisi. Plenty of actors have made the leap to director, writer, producer -but it is rare to hear of one switching gears to so technical a discipline as cinematography. What’s even more astounding is he’s actually quite good. His shooting is dynamic and perfectly attuned for the genre, the camera is used really effectively as a storytelling device to conceal information and heighten suspense -such as when it slowly follows the Demon through the house shooting at boxes and crates in various rooms, the audience knowing the Lady is hiding in one of them. There’s the very Reservoir Dogs-like illustration of one violent moment (“Love Hurts” rather than “Stuck in the Middle with You” being the ironic song of choice), as well as some very smart sustained takes that open up the geography and build a sense of urgent tension. Ribisi and Mollner accentuate mood through vivid lighting choices and an emphasis on stark colours, especially in the chronologically early chapters, that make the movie almost lush in contrast to its subject matter. And the way this device is used in the long final shot is incredibly visually and thematically compelling. It’s some stunning work.
Fitzgerald does a lot to carry the movie as well, with a tough, versatile performance that matches the unpredictability of the narrative. There are some very curious aspects of her personality that come up particularly in the first chapter that she plays with a provocative charm. Gallner is good as well, displaying a fascinating mixture of deep terror and bashful innocence as his role in the story too is shaped in unconventional ways. Both characters are mystifying, and even with a flurry of reveals and misdirects as the movie goes along, they maintain a compelling ambiguity up to their very last scenes. Barbara Hershey and Ed Begley Jr. also appear, as the isolated elderly hippie couple whose home becomes a major scene of violence.
Mollner establishes himself here as a director of some talent, though his script isn’t as sharp as its structure. His tack for misdirect does lose some lustre eventually, and the final scenes don’t much succeed in the suspense they try to build based on the numbness by then of the story’s body count. It’s a good thing the movie is short, at ninety-six minutes, because it wouldn’t be able to sustain itself at all much longer -certainly not at the momentum it tries to maintain. And throughout the film, it’s worth noting the dialogue feels off -the communication between both parties is rather unnatural and it doesn’t register as a conscious choice. There are definitely bits of socio-political ephemera too that feels written by someone who spends too much time online and perhaps in less reputable circles. A couple times sexism is invoked in a manner that suggests you’re not meant to take it seriously, and while I won’t say its intended as an edgy statement it comes off as weak writing nonetheless.
But Strange Darling does earn some of its too-cool ego, in large part due to that nifty presentation that knows how to utilize its device for real engagement and suspense, and for the vibrant and considered look of the film -Ribisi knows what he’s doing, he should be cinematographer on more movies. It’s hard to make this kind of a crime thriller feel unique, but Strange Darling succeeds at that while also being a decent pulpy throwback.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...
Post a Comment
Read more

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....
1 comment
Read more

Back to the Feature: New York, New York (1977)

New York, New York  is a two hour forty minute musical movie largely about a toxic relationship and I understand why it was Martin Scorsese’s first big flop. Some have blamed its poor reception on the kind of movie it was, of a style and tone Scorsese wasn’t known for, but I find that hard to believe. Even after only five films, he’d proven himself an extremely versatile director, and Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore  found an audience. Sure this jazz musical love letter to New York City was following up Taxi Driver and its’ far more cynical take on the city, but then it’s also ‘from the director of Taxi Driver ’ which itself was a big hit. Was it a matter of public appetite for musicals, or mere word of mouth and early critical reception that dissuaded viewers? Irrespective of that, I was stunned to discover this movie was the origin of the titular song, which I’d assumed was much older (it’s definitely got the sound of something that might have come out of the Jazz sce...
Post a Comment
Read more