Have you run into anything that helps you understand what the heck the director was going for with this movie. It’s almost Lynchian in its ambiguity and strangeness. I have to admit I was glued to the screen because it was fascinatingly inscrutable.
Oops, I only just saw this lol sorry.
I mean, if it’s “Possession” we’re talking about, I covered it pretty well in that column what the director was going through. A divorce, the need for control, feeling like you have to keep the facade of a perfect family going. But outside of that? Not particularly, especially in regards to plot. I understand that the idea of the doppleganger was finding the better versions of both of themselves - whether made by hand or the teacher at the school - in order to raise their child, but that didn’t make it any clearer, or better, for what it’s worth.
Frankly, I was so offended that I wasted time watching it, despite how fascinating it was in light of its awfulness, that I really didn’t want to look much deeper into it beyond what was necessary in order to write that piece lmao
1 Like
Yeah, your article definitely helped give me the context/inspiration, but there are so many moments that really defy understanding on first viewing, I would be fascinated to read/listen to somebody try to wrangle with them. That point about the doppelgangers is interesting. I was definitely seeing it as idealized versions, especially with the teacher being so well put together and such a natural homemaker/caregiver, representing what Mark would hope for in his wife.
It was definitely harrowing and difficult, but I can’t hate a movie that gives me a truly singular experience. I had never seen anything like it. There’s also a sense of humor there that kept it from being 100% dour/depraved (I’m referring in particular to the Heinrich character). I really wouldn’t blame anybody for hating it though.
Polygon did a decent write up recently:
1 Like
Awesome! Will check this out
1 Like