‘The Lobster’ Is a Brilliant Movie About Getting Turned into an Animal Because You’re Single – VICE

5 months ago Comments Off on ‘The Lobster’ Is a Brilliant Movie About Getting Turned into an Animal Because You’re Single – VICE

crafted to defy easy classification,
The Lobster is the superbly
original English-language debut by Greek writer-director Yorgos Lanthimos (
Alps). Smuggling in elements of science-fiction, chase thriller, and
ultra-deadpan comedy, the 2015 Cannes jury favorite is a disquieting riff on the absurdities of
romantic relationships.

first hint of its off-kilter style arrives in the form of Colin Farrell, who
eschews his familiar brand of muscled, glint-eyed swagger to melt into the role
of protagonist David, a paunchy sadsack freshly ditched by his wife for another

the twisted dystopia conjured by Lanthimos, theres no time for David to
indulge in traditional reactions to such trauma—a period of soul-searching,
say, or bouts of rebound sex. Rather, in accordance with the strictly enforced
rules of the mysterious City, David is immediately transferred to a coastal
hotel populated by fellow singletons, all of whom are afforded 45 days from
arrival to partner up.

who fail are then transformed, by some magical, never-quite-revealed process,
into an animal of their choice, and left to fend for themselves in the ominous
nearby Forest. David, who arrives at the hotel with his brother—now a loyal
dog—in tow, opts to transmogrify into the titular crustacean.

method by which new guests arrive at the hotel is deliberately reminiscent of
countless prison flicks: New inmates are stripped, brusquely interrogated, and
processed. Here, however, as captured by the brilliant cinematographer Thimios
Bakatakis, these sad flesh bags have the bleak aura of subjects in a
Francis Bacon painting. Yet, whether shooting in jaundiced interiors or verdant,
autumnal exteriors, Bakatakis ensures that
The Lobster is never less
than beautiful to behold as he employs a series of painterly tableaux
intensified by patient, barely perceptible zoom-ins. The films
visual splendor functions in jarring contrast to the ugliness of the situations
faced by its characters.

guests are constantly monitored, treated like lab rats, and prohibited from
masturbating, presumably to increase their desperation to mate. As one poor sap
(a lisping John C. Reilly) discovers, the punishment for such transgression
involves the offending hand being plunged into a red-hot toaster. Activities
include mandatory attendance at
baroquely conceived yet joyless
song-and-dance sessions led by the hotels matronly manager
(Olivia Colman) and her rotund husband (Garry Mountaine); or, more
disturbingly, group outings to the Forest to hunt down Loners, a secret society
of hotel escapees that fetishizes singledom—”No sex, or flirting,” admonishes
their severe leader (Léa Seydoux)—as much as the City
endorses traditional domestic pairings.

this all sounds terribly depressing, it’s worth noting that
The Lobster is
also screamingly funny. Farrell gives a master class in deadpan comedy, while
the inherent absurdity of the set-up provides constant fodder for amusement.
There’s hope, too, in the form of the mysterious, Forest-based Short-Sighted
Woman (Rachel Weisz).

this week, I spoke to Weisz over the phone to discuss her attraction to the
project, her philosophical take on the film, and the difficulty of keeping a
straight face around Colin Farrell.

Had you seen Yorgos’s other films before working on
The Lobster? Were
you a fan of his work?

was. I actively sought him out a year before
The Lobster. I’d watched Dogtooth,
and I thought it was one of the most remarkable films I’d ever seen. I was
attached to an independent script that didn’t have a director, and I asked to
meet Yorgos. He agreed to do it, but the producer at the time thought he’d make
it too dark, so it didn’t work out. I said to him, “I long to work with you.”
In that meeting he said, “I’m writing something at the moment, so I’ll send it
to you when it’s done,” and that was
The Lobster.

performers in Lanthimos’s films all have a similar, idiosyncratic style,
including a slightly stilted manner of speech. Did it take a while to key into
that, and have all the actors on the same page?

would disagree with you. He would say it’s not stilted, and that most people’s
acting choices are too “big.” I think he’d call it minimalist. But everyone
sees the acting style differently. I’ve never heard “stilted” before. I’ve
heard “deadpan,” “monotone,” but you’re right: He did get everyone in the film
to act in that unified tone, which is just not as expressive as people normally
are when they act. How he did that, I have no idea! That’s the magic of an
auteur. He hypnotizes you.

the first half of the film, you’re offscreen, but before you appear, you have a
key role narrating the voiceover, describing David’s plight…

we went to record it, I said, “How do you want me to do it? Like anti-Terrence
Malick?,” and Yorgos said, “Exactly.” I love Terrence Malick, but he’s known
exceptionally lyrical voiceovers. We deliberately went
for something completely de-poeticized.

so, I found the voiceover urgent and passionate, and I was moved by that. I
felt your character brought a lot of heart to the film, which, as you say, is
extremely deadpan.

is the one person who has some genuine desire and heart. She falls in love with

it difficult to keep a straight face around Colin Farrell? He’s absolutely
hilarious here. He didn’t have to do anything except be onscreen to get me to
sometimes it was very hard. He was much better at being straight-faced than I
was. Sometimes I would just completely crack up, and they’d wait for me to
finish, and then we’d carry on.

film is dystopian and fanciful in its own way—turning people into animals, for
example—but to what extent did you see it as a comment on how real-life dating
has gone into territories that would have seemed surreal, say, 15 years ago?
I’m thinking of stuff like Tinder and Grindr.

saw it more as a comment on the way we’re all supposed to fit in boxes, and the
normalization of everything: of dating, of matters of the heart, these notions
of “a perfect couple.” The heart and soul are eccentric and problematic—they’re
not as simple as Agony Aunts [the UK
term for advice columnists] or dating sites lead you to believe.

was interesting to me that the film seemed not to be just a one-way satire of
how “traditional” heterosexual coupledom is lionized, but also how, in the form
of Léa Seydoux’s tyrannical Loner Leader, singledom can be fixated on to a
similar degree.

heteronormative culture, and there’s radical, queer culture, and counterculture—but
that can become very normative as well, right? Everyone can become normative.
The Loner Leader’s world is radical and revolutionary, rebelling against the
normative world, but it ultimately becomes just as regimented. That could be a
comment on a lot of things in our culture. I think it’s something that
frightens people who are part of queer culture; they’re worried that their
culture is being “normalized.”

found the film had a strange tone that I couldn’t put my finger on, but I
wouldn’t say it left me feeling uplifted. Do you see the film as downbeat or

I see it as a love story—two people who find love against all odds. It’s a very
intricate, rule-bound world, and these are two people trying to slip through
the rules, and find a human existence outside the constraints of “normal” life. The first half of the movie
sets up this world—it’s very funny and satirical—and then in the second half
mine and Colin’s characters are trying to peek through, to find a way out. It’s
incredibly romantic. Our characters are earnest, and quite innocent.

think it’s a film that questions [the idea of doing] anything original. How can you
even make an original film? We’re all set within bound patterns by our culture
and our conditioning, and it’s very hard to break free. We’re cloned and
brainwashed within our little world. Even films are brainwashed: There’s lots
of genre pictures. How do you break free of genre in your life? It asks those
questions. It’s about how you can be original, and I think it succeeds in being
an original film.

are obviously elements of sci-fi in
The Lobster. Are you a fan of the

I like about the film is that it’s science fiction without any spaceships—it’s
just planet earth with different rules. It’s low-tech, but high, high-concept,
which I like because it doesn’t cost any money! I respect that. The elegance of
it just comes from the organization of Yorgos’s imagination, not from building
vast sets.

it was all shot on location in Ireland?

we were all staying in that beautiful hotel. The area where we shot the Forest
had a tropical micro-climate, and it looked like it had been art-directed by
‘s art director, but it was just Mother Nature at work.

the second half of the film there’s lots of exterior scenes [in the Forest],
that feel pretty grueling. Were these scenes intense to film, physically and

loved it, I loved it, I loved it! I loved wearing no makeup and being in a
windbreaker, and having mud in my hair. That basically
was the makeup:
mud in your hair. I felt like a forest creature, which is what I was playing, I
guess. I found it really liberating sploshing around in the mud. I was happy as
a pig in shit.

Ashley Clark on

The Lobster is playing in theaters

‘The Lobster’ Is a Brilliant Movie About Getting Turned into an Animal Because You’re Single – VICE