Strange Darling (2023)
Unsophisticated subversion.
Presentation:
The film oddly begins announcing it is shot on 35mm film with some backstory loosely based on true events. For fans of images with character, they will likely adore the halated film look with soft focus and anamorphic astigmatism. Modern artificial lighting gives a pop of style to a few scenes but the majority feels organically lit to ground the universe. I would argue this direction helped the film, as it made it feel more substantial, a much needed boost to the questionable writing of the piece. It is told in 6 non-linear parts, similar to Memento, but I would argue the plot is more entertaining for younger audiences. Normally for films that are not portrayed in chronological order, the assumption is that the story is not interesting enough on its own to be told standardly. However, I actually think the sequencing elevated the premise. The performance from the female lead is quite essential for this film and she exceeds expectations. The film impressively presents itself as an artistic indie film with some neat split diopter, slow motion and color fading effects.
Analysis:
There is clear message with this film, similar to Gone Girl, the film illustrates society’s bias in favor of a woman’s innocence and natural accusation on man. Women are innocent until proven guilty and men are guilty until proven innocent. I suppose it will be of note to critics that the writer/director of the film is a man. The message is that women can take advantage of societal perceptions that woman are victims and can abuse it for their own gains. A resistance against feminism and the MeToo movement - some on the left will likely even argue the ideas are dangerous. I disagree, from other films like Anatomy of a Fall have demonstrated, female empowerment can be bolstered by illustrating their capacity regardless of malice. The only problem I have is the writing. For the majority of the film, the dialogue is crude with the conversation between the male and female police officers unbearable. Their explicit dialogue alone encapsulates a comolete Sparknotes synopsis of this film, which for some will immediately take you out of the experience. It could feel lecturing, but I don’t think it's that egregious considering how many films on Netflix have a left leaning message. I maintain that the message is still fresh, as even if you disagree with the premise it still presents interesting new ideas. I think male and female audiences alike will enjoy the film, it is certainly adjacent to Gone Girl, but I don’t think it is better (Chili disagrees). The problem is that the film’s script is flimsy and the plot armor too strong causing frustration in the wrong ways. Events like this could never happen to such an extent in the modern age, which is probably why the film felt the need to mislead the audience of its fake authenticity based on no true story at all. By betraying the audience with a false pretense, it severely undermines the credibility of its message of a collective bias. Perhaps the only reason we assumed the man was the killer is because the director explicitly credited him as the demon from the beginning and presented him as such? I think it was unnecessary and would have been just as good without the smoke and mirrors.
Conclusion:
This a reasonably executed film that takes itself seriously. It overreaches its artistic merit and impact, gatekept by poor writing. I would even argue it’s quite a shallow film that many audiences will enjoy regardless. There are quite a few overly-done twists similar to what Korean films aim to implement but with western sensibilities instead. Unfortunately, the best moments of the film are when no one is speaking. A fresh thriller but a jarring mismatch of skillful presentation and unsophisticated dialogue.
Recommendations
Watch a movie recap instead.