Annihilation

I was captivated by the trailer the other day, I'm not so impressed with the film in the end, but it's still a decent genre film with an excellent idea. Four female scientists, each specialized in something different, go to explore a new area where the laws of nature don't apply and where no one has ever come back alive. It's great idea, but I felt it didn't get as much space as it could have. The film is unnecessarily hampered by flashbacks that aren't very entertaining and it shows in the pacing. There's a great scene with a white crocodile and a mutant bear that wreaks havoc in a cabin and there's one excellent gore scene with a ripped jaw, that really had me going crazy with joy. The final philosophical half hour didn't impress me that much and I found the finale quite confusing. I would definitely add more mutated animals and anything from nature in general to make it more satisfying. The film is definitely worth recommending for the idea, the visuals and the bear, though it’s not great. 70%. (03/18/2018)

Damsels in distress slightly differently. Sophisticated chamber slow (you will feel it is twice as long; but it's not a complaint) second-rate movie, where, however, everyone behaves logically and appropriately in given situations and which takes the same from Strugacky as from Things and Arrival. But surprisingly little of VanderMeer's original. On the one hand, the scenes are both captivating and disturbing, atmosphere is dense. On the other hand, it is supposed to be a hardcore sci-fi movie that is rich in interpretation and that has dimension overlap. And I am not at all sure whether it is justified and or whether the movie is just pretending to be that way or if it is just banal. In any case, (not only) for these reasons, it will make you wonder about staff, that´s fur sure. The movie will not get out of your head as soon as you see closing credits. (03/12/2018)

Perhaps only someone who has never lost someone dear to them can say that the flashbacks full of the strongest emotions and the most burning regrets did not perform their role perfectly, or even became boring. It is precisely in these flashbacks that Natalie Portman proves herself to be a treasure and the most correct choice for the main role. Her sincere tears or focused expression took me through the world that Alex Garland gives home to all his obvious or inconspicuous inspirations (Arrival, Aliens, Prometheus, or The Fountain), but never gets caught up in inspiration. Every time, she skates out of the situation originally and before you say lighthouse, she begins to create that new classic, which the reactions of strangers spoke of somewhat surprisingly, whether due to visuals, genre shots, or punchlines. The only thing that saddens me – and the creators are innocent in this – is the fact that we could only pick up Annihilation on Netflix. Rob Hardy's camera and the unending surprises from the new world were also made for the European silver screen. (03/13/2018)

The less sense there is, the stronger the fate, or how not even a mutated extraterrestrial ecosystem isn’t enough for someone to act with some sense with their protozoan intelligence, isn’t it, Marceloo? But on the other hand, I wouldn’t take Annihilation as a deeply philosophical work, either – the fact that anyone can get frustrated because of that is funny. Portman and four more scientists, about whom a lot can be written (though certainly not that the director has made them likeable) go to investigate a Zone… and they find pretty much what the trailer promised, although there is less survival and mutated creatures than expected. Then it nicely goes to a highly atmospheric and wordless mind-fuck, but there’s nothing unpredictable about it, either. In a Nolan film, Nataly would have spoken a lot in the end and that would be it. I really enjoyed Annihilation, it’s visually excellent, the special effects are engaging and here and there it pushes the mind into a nicely dark direction. But I have a soft spot for sci-fi premises like this, in any media, and I’m really interested in the book version now. But I don’t think this film is that awesome, really; my expectations were perhaps a little higher. (03/12/2018)

It pays to put off seeing some films until the effects of the PR massage have worn off and the wave of reviews and screams on social networks and databases has dissipated. One can then approach those films largely free of the ballast of responses and expectations. Annihilation is a case of a work that not only benefits from the viewer having a clear and open mind, but to a significant extent absolutely requires it. This is not a sci-fi movie that takes pride in its scientific credibility, but rather in pure wonderment drawn from new worlds and forms in which it urges viewers to immerse themselves. The appearance of fauna and flora here can evoke the apocalyptic and environmental visions of Hayao Miyazaki. Except unlike those visions’ ecological logic of cause and effect, and thus the effort to move from parasitism to symbiosis, the world of Annihilation has no logic, meaning or goal. Its only principle is assimilation and transformation through growth. Garland introduces motifs of loss and self-destruction into his loose adaptation of the original novel of the same name and concurrently adds in the backbone of a possible interpretation of the entire narrative as metaphors for the turbulent dynamics of a relationship between two people and their complicated path back to each other, whereas it is an unavoidable fact that the end of a journey cannot be the same as the beginning. Thanks to its intentionally enigmatic nature, however, Annihilation works best as an expedition to another world that is extraordinarily captivating due to its grotesque monstrousness, unsettling volatility and spectral beauty. In today’s deluge of blockbusters heading out to new planets that remain pleasantly conventional, Garland has succeeded in bringing an element of fascinated wonder back to film. (09/25/2020)