|
Post by wilcinema on Sept 7, 2018 17:55:31 GMT
Many were surprised by the success of The Babadook a few years ago. I loved it, others disliked it or outright hated it, many found it interesting and the debut of a promising filmmaker. When The Nightingale was announced as a competition title for the Venice Film Festival, I was very hyped up to see what Jennifer Kent had to offer. The revenge thriller about a woman searching for retaliation in 19th-century Tasmania sounded like the perfect follow-up recipe to what had been the horror movie of the year in 2015. Well, The Nightingale does not disappoint.
When the lights went dark in the theater and the movie began, the sounds of the Australian bush immediately surrounded me. It's a movie that counts a lot on sound and pure image, as you would expect from an Australian movie set in 1825. The cinematography is beautiful, at one time ethereal and muscular; it portrays the Tasmanian bush almost making it a character itself, with its fields and its tall trees. In this context are the characters of an extremely gritty revenge tale. Following one of the most viscerally and scarily violent scenes in recent memory, the lead character, Clare, played with divine feminist ferocity by Aisling Franciosi, embarks on a tough journey into the outback, accompanied by the entrancing Baykali Ganambarr, searching for the English officials that did the atrocious deed. What I loved about this movie is that it told the story of three countries (Australia, Ireland and England) in 130 minutes. Australia's birth in blood is laid out with disturbing powerfulness, as is the sleazy recklessness of the English. Therefore, the journey into the bush is like a voyage through the history of the 18th and the 19th century.
You can feel that Jennifer Kent is feverish in her writing and direction, which is why she sometimes missteps. Some of the characters are not entirely convincing (namely Sam Claflin's arrogant English officer) and not all the resolutions in the third act fully give the viewer the long-awaited payoff. Notwithstanding, The Nightingale remains a beautiful movie whose cinematic and thematic urgency will leave viewers with lot to think about.
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Sept 7, 2018 22:15:28 GMT
Thanks for the writeup! I didn't even finish "The Babadook" but I'm genuinely looking forward to this film. The reports about the insane brutality of the violence here make me curious and cautious - I'm all in for filmmakers creating an unflinching landscape of violence but I hope Kent doesn't overstep it here because there is a fine line between compelling cinematic brutality and self-indulgent miserabilism. Hopefully this film doesn't cross it in the wrong direction because I have really high hopes for it!
|
|
|
Post by wilcinema on Sept 9, 2018 7:12:54 GMT
Thanks for the writeup! I didn't even finish "The Babadook" but I'm genuinely looking forward to this film. The reports about the insane brutality of the violence here make me curious and cautious - I'm all in for filmmakers creating an unflinching landscape of violence but I hope Kent doesn't overstep it here because there is a fine line between compelling cinematic brutality and self-indulgent miserabilism. Hopefully this film doesn't cross it in the wrong direction because I have really high hopes for it! There is at least one act of brutality that feels rather gratuitous, and again, it's not a perfect movie so there are problems in the third act, but I feel like most of it was nailed.
|
|
|
Post by DeepArcher on Aug 18, 2019 5:59:40 GMT
I wasn't a fan of The Babadook, but Jennifer Kent's follow-up is a far, far cry from her indie horror breakout hit. And even so, The Nightingale feels like the much more terrifying film. To say that Kent holds nothing back would be putting it mildly. The major scene in the first act is among the most cruelly graphic things I've ever seen, and it's perhaps all the more unsettling that we almost feel as if we can't look away from the atrocities. The Nightingale goes on to play out a bit like an Australian riff on The Revenant, but somehow a thousand times more disturbing. Confronting the incredibly dark and violent history of her own country, Kent is hellbent on providing a fully unflinching take on the extreme violence of Australia's colonial history, at times with a commitment to honesty that almost takes it too far in its excess. The villain, a stereotypical British lieutenant who commits the most despicable act thinkable in literally any given situation, could have been much more interesting, but at least now I know who Sam Claflin is. The powerful duo of protagonists more than make up for it -- two characters who are united by their tragic pasts but also don't let it define them.
Revenge narratives are often so difficult for me to be taken with considering I'm sort of fundamentally opposed to the entire principle of revenge, but in the case of The Nightingale it's hard not to feel the acts of vengeance carried out by those protagonists aren't absolutely justifiable if not outright necessary. And even still, we are denied an easy satisfaction or sense of catharsis, because that's just the world we live in. The cinematography by the hand of Radek Ladczuk finds beauty in all the atrocity, with some stunning and hauntingly fantastical imagery often reminiscent of illustrations in a children's horror book ... it's otherworldly stuff. It's a film of enchantment, but above all, it's a film to fuel you with anger: a propulsive, visceral, uncompromising bare-knuckled brawl through hell. It's easily the most disturbing thing I've seen in a theater since You Were Never Really Here, and that fact alone should go a long way in stating how adept so many female filmmakers are at harshly revealing the very worst evils of men.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2019 13:23:32 GMT
I wasn't a fan of The Babadook, but Jennifer Kent's follow-up is a far, far cry from her indie horror breakout hit. And even so, The Nightingale feels like the much more terrifying film. To say that Kent holds nothing back would be putting it mildly. The major scene in the first act is among the most cruelly graphic things I've ever seen, and it's perhaps all the more unsettling that we almost feel as if we can't look away from the atrocities. The Nightingale goes on to play out a bit like an Australian riff on The Revenant, but somehow a thousand times more disturbing. Confronting the incredibly dark and violent history of her own country, Kent is hellbent on providing a fully unflinching take on the extreme violence of Australia's colonial history, at times with a commitment to honesty that almost takes it too far in its excess. The villain, a stereotypical British lieutenant who commits the most despicable act thinkable in literally any given situation, could have been much more interesting, but at least now I know who Sam Claflin is. The powerful duo of protagonists more than make up for it -- two characters who are united by their tragic pasts but also don't let it define them. Revenge narratives are often so difficult for me to be taken with considering I'm sort of fundamentally opposed to the entire principle of revenge, but in the case of The Nightingale it's hard not to feel the acts of vengeance carried out by those protagonists aren't absolutely justifiable if not outright necessary. And even still, we are denied an easy satisfaction or sense of catharsis, because that's just the world we live in. The cinematography by the hand of Radek Ladczuk finds beauty in all the atrocity, with some stunning and hauntingly fantastical imagery often reminiscent of illustrations in a children's horror book ... it's otherworldly stuff. It's a film of enchantment, but above all, it's a film to fuel with you anger: a propulsive, visceral, uncompromising bare-knuckled brawl through hell. It's easily the most disturbing thing I've seen in a theater since You Were Never Really Here, and that fact alone should go a long way in stating how adept so many female filmmakers are at harshly revealing the very worst evils of men. I'm bookmarking this review to come back to after I've seen the film - I really want to go into this blind.
|
|
|
Post by DeepArcher on Aug 18, 2019 13:48:19 GMT
I wasn't a fan of The Babadook, but Jennifer Kent's follow-up is a far, far cry from her indie horror breakout hit. And even so, The Nightingale feels like the much more terrifying film. To say that Kent holds nothing back would be putting it mildly. The major scene in the first act is among the most cruelly graphic things I've ever seen, and it's perhaps all the more unsettling that we almost feel as if we can't look away from the atrocities. The Nightingale goes on to play out a bit like an Australian riff on The Revenant, but somehow a thousand times more disturbing. Confronting the incredibly dark and violent history of her own country, Kent is hellbent on providing a fully unflinching take on the extreme violence of Australia's colonial history, at times with a commitment to honesty that almost takes it too far in its excess. The villain, a stereotypical British lieutenant who commits the most despicable act thinkable in literally any given situation, could have been much more interesting, but at least now I know who Sam Claflin is. The powerful duo of protagonists more than make up for it -- two characters who are united by their tragic pasts but also don't let it define them. Revenge narratives are often so difficult for me to be taken with considering I'm sort of fundamentally opposed to the entire principle of revenge, but in the case of The Nightingale it's hard not to feel the acts of vengeance carried out by those protagonists aren't absolutely justifiable if not outright necessary. And even still, we are denied an easy satisfaction or sense of catharsis, because that's just the world we live in. The cinematography by the hand of Radek Ladczuk finds beauty in all the atrocity, with some stunning and hauntingly fantastical imagery often reminiscent of illustrations in a children's horror book ... it's otherworldly stuff. It's a film of enchantment, but above all, it's a film to fuel with you anger: a propulsive, visceral, uncompromising bare-knuckled brawl through hell. It's easily the most disturbing thing I've seen in a theater since You Were Never Really Here, and that fact alone should go a long way in stating how adept so many female filmmakers are at harshly revealing the very worst evils of men. I'm bookmarking this review to come back to after I've seen the film - I really want to go into this blind. Hope you like it!
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Nov 3, 2019 3:06:49 GMT
6/10, or 7? Not easy to rate, bc there's some greatness to the filmmaking - how uncompromising and haunting it is at times, evoking Bergman too (Virgin Spring, Shame) which is the highest of praise - I liked the drab color palette, the sharp cutting, close-ups, enclosing sound design. But this didn't have to be over 2 hours and it feels longer... especially in this case the ending matters, and that's crucially where it drops off - there's a bunched succession of awkward scenes and halfway emotional notes.
Effective performances, but not so remarkable - a grieved and bothered Franciosi, likable "sidekick" Ganambarr though he seemed very modern at first, and Claflin who plays despicable to wildly stressed-out degrees. So, a very punishing somewhat impressive follow-up to Jennifer Kent's great, better The Babadook. Interesting how both the second efforts from Kent and Eggers went for the boxed aspect ratio and really "audience unfriendly" stuff. Kent's is ambitious and topical - the historical context, racial atrocities, subjugated female roles, etc. But the Eggers is my psychological jam with the better perfs - I shouldn't even be comparing the two, I know!
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Nov 3, 2019 3:56:39 GMT
Wow, it occurs to me I didn’t write my thoughts on this!
To call it “not an easy watch” is a definite understatement; this is the hellbound love child of The Revenant and I Spit On Your Grave. And indeed, I feel like a male filmmaker would’ve been keelhauled for portraying a film with multiple acts of male-on-female violence, much of it sexual. But nevertheless, Jennifer Kent’s unflinching direction and its two captivating lead performances really make this tale of primal vengeance a must-watch.
Aisling Franciosi’s performance is flinty, powerful—she drives the film with her single-minded fury and thirst for revenge. It’s a true star-caliber performance of meteoric power. (I think Kent actually one-upped Inarritu in treating her protagonist here as a horror movie villain at times.) But Franciosi isn’t alone; Baykali Ganambarr is revelatory and mesmerizing.
Honestly, if I had a complaint, it’s that I wish that the villains had more of the weight and teeth of The Revenant’s John Fitzgerald. Claflin’s Hawkins is a debauched rapist, but as detestable as he is, he just doesn’t have the same gravity and caliber as Hardy’s malignant ne’er-do-well.
It is a flawed film, make no mistake, but these flaws inform the piece rather than detract from it, and overall it’s one of the most powerful movies I've seen recently.
|
|
|
Post by Sharbs on Dec 2, 2019 6:23:49 GMT
at the time of viewing this a while back it was my favorite film of 2019 and I didn't write my thoughts either, yikes.
And to call this a "favorite" feels wrong, it's the toughest sit this side of The War Zone I've had to endure. We're given the sense of minute catharsis without completely trampling over the ideas this movie especially in the final act wants to convey. Franciosi is TERRIFIC. She plays this with furious gravitas that it's tough to watch her even in her quiet moments. - 10/10
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Dec 8, 2019 0:57:57 GMT
A genuinely powerful and haunting film. I could've absolutely done without the visions/nightmares but the rest of it is terrific. I think as a cinematic exploration of women's historically rough plight this holds a thousand times more value than your typical Hollywood preaching to the choir with Laura Dern delivering feminist speeches directly to camera or heavily makeup'd Charlize Theron doing the same thing via random zooms. The horrors of colonialism and true oppression are shown as unflinchingly as possible and that creates an experience of authenticity and real pain. I also loved how apart from maybe a couple of shots there's no aesthetization of nature - it's an intricate element of the story yet it's depicted in the way that serves it too, it's not prettified nor made ugly, it's just shown as an extension of the world Jennifer Kent is putting us in.
Aisling Franciosi gives one of the most incredible performances of the year. Shattering work, full of rage, pain, confusion and truth.
|
|
Javi
Badass
Posts: 1,530
Likes: 1,619
|
Post by Javi on Dec 8, 2019 1:25:45 GMT
6/10, or 7? Not easy to rate, bc there's some greatness to the filmmaking - how uncompromising and haunting it is at times, evoking Bergman too (Virgin Spring, Shame) which is the highest of praise - I liked the drab color palette, the sharp cutting, close-ups, enclosing sound design. But this didn't have to be over 2 hours and it feels longer... especially in this case the ending matters, and that's crucially where it drops off - there's a bunched succession of awkward scenes and halfway emotional notes. Effective performances, but not so remarkable - a grieved and bothered Franciosi, likable "sidekick" Ganambarr though he seemed very modern at first, and Claflin who plays despicable to wildly stressed-out degrees. So, a very punishing somewhat impressive follow-up to Jennifer Kent's great, better The Babadook. Interesting how both the second efforts from Kent and Eggers went for the boxed aspect ratio and really "audience unfriendly" stuff. Kent's is ambitious and topical - the historical context, racial atrocities, subjugated female roles, etc. But the Eggers is my psychological jam with the better perfs - I shouldn't even be comparing the two, I know! This is more or less where I fall except I'd rate it a bit lower - about a 5. Some amazing shots (Kent keeps you aware of the environment at all times) and the beginning shows promise. But it has a borderline pornographic devotion to violence and a vacuous approach to the subject. It's basically a feminist twist on the infinitely greater Australian classics of the 70s, with all their complexity cut out (in The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith there is no one to root for, that's how unnerving it is). This is a basic revenge story with a moral twist at the end... mostly didn't work for me. Don't really understand the praise for Franciosi either... imo she adds nothing to the script; her take on the character is as literal as it gets (sad one scene, revengeful the next, etc). The least said about the downright embarrassing horror scenes (taken straight out of American Horror Story), the better. The Babadook had wit, smarts, great creative fun and a terrific lead performance at its center... this is a huge comedown imo.
|
|
avnermoriarti
Badass
Friends say I’ve changed. They’re right.
Posts: 2,376
Likes: 1,265
|
Post by avnermoriarti on Dec 8, 2019 4:28:05 GMT
I actually find quite difficult were to stand on this movie, this is something I posted before:
For what it seems a simple revenge tale, The Nightingale left me thinking a lot, especially for who is doing it and how. There's one scene between Hawkins ( Sam Cafflin ) and the kid Eddie ( Charlie Shotwell ), is a quick enchange of lines after Hawkins did something terrible, but was enough to encompase better than any other what this film is about, a film concerned with male sadistic entitlement and one short scene, with enough ambiguity displays how in the present things are more or less the same in that regard, is a toxic system that is passed on over and over again... if only the rest of the film had that kind of equilibrium.
This film is a mess for what it looks like such a linear story, and twists and turns that instead of keep things moving forward, reverse them, but the again, even in those moments, our heroine, Clare ( engagedly played by Aisling Franciosi ) has moments to think of the awful things she went throught and then reflect on what she did, there's even room for regret, hers is a complicated charater and Kent takes her by hand every step of the way. Unfortunately I don't think the rest of the characters are as lucky in terms of characterisation, I think Kent uses incredibly exaggerated versions of characters as a way to enter the story and make an impact, we have VILLAINS ( with one exception, Jago and his punishment ) and Billy, a crucial character who becomes an allied of our heroine, is reduced to a simple tool because... the movie had to end at some point.
The last section introduces ideas that weren't need, kills the trascending nature of the final images, using once again the Sorrow song and this time has no impact. This is a particular violent film, in the past, restrictions serve the imagination of the creators and to have a more active participation of the viewer but this film is the antithesis of that, Jennifer Kent, for whatever her reasons are, has no reservations in the depiction of atrocious acts, she simply shows them and I don't know what purpose has to be so explicit, it's definitely not gratituous, maybe is her insistence that those who refuse to acknowledge unfavorable aspects of our history are doomed to repeat them.
|
|
|
Post by Johnny_Hellzapoppin on Dec 16, 2019 19:10:33 GMT
The cartoonish villain performances drag this down a little and I have some issues with the third act, and the way the revenge angle ultimately played out, but ultimately I thought this was a great film, with a very fine central performance.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Dec 16, 2019 20:51:22 GMT
The cartoonish villain performances drag this down a little There came a point in the movie where Sam Claflin commits horrible act after horrible act that I couldn't help but think of Krombopoulos Michael: "Oh boy, here I go killin' again."
|
|
|
Post by Pavan on Dec 26, 2019 13:49:09 GMT
A violent and disturbing film. Almost cruel at the start that it's actually tough to watch but it plays a song and weirdly makes you feel warm at the end kinda like what the protagonist feels. A revenge tale that depicts violence on woman and colonial oppression unflinchingly but there comes a point where i felt it was wandering aimlessly for a while when i was rooting for her to take revenge but then director Kent took a realistic approach instead of a cinematic ending which i quite liked. Aisling Franciosi is terrific- 7.5/10
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Dec 26, 2019 18:38:37 GMT
Was really excited for this when I first heard about it and saw the trailer, but I more or less echo the sentiments of the naysayers in this thread. For how disturbing that rape scene was, it did feel a bit cheapened by the one-dimensionality of the villains. I appreciated Billy's story, even though it skewed too close to Guiding Miss Daisy) and was largely a reiteration on the anti-colonialist themes in last year's Sweet Country but with a rape-revenge bent (have I mentioned that rape/revenge is my least favorite subgenre). What works best about it was Baykali Ganambarr's beautiful and soulful performance, and I'm not saying having the story revolve around him instead of Franciosci would have made it vastly better, but I'm sure I would have liked it more and it also would have sidestepped the film's iffy optics of contrasting a white female's sexual assault with the decimation of an entire culture and enslavement of its people.
And it might have just been the hype, but Fransciosci let me down too. It's a demanding role but also a really simplistic one that operates at one note for most of the runtime. Can't deny her effort or her intensity, I just wish she had been able to channel that devastatingly raw emotion in service of something more complex, and, well good. Looking forward to seeing what she does next.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2020 8:07:24 GMT
Imagine how great this could've been if Cormac McCarthy wrote it
Honestly just not as good as most of the stuff it's borrowing from, and it doesn't come across as authentic as I feel like it's trying to. Still a decently engaging watch overall, and I did like the cinematography.
|
|
Pasquale
Full Member
Posts: 535
Likes: 225
|
Post by Pasquale on Feb 8, 2020 23:25:08 GMT
|
|
|
Post by jakesully on Feb 11, 2021 2:09:30 GMT
bump
Finally got around to seeing Jennifer Kent's follow up to The Babadook (which I loved btw) and this did not disappoint! I was on the edge of my seat the entire time and the lead actress was sensational in this (as were the rest of the cast). Sam Clafin's character may be the biggest cunt / vile / evil character in the last few years.
Honestly, I had no problem with the run time and look forward to whatever Jennifer Kent does next
solid 8/10
|
|