Type in any movie or show to find where you can watch it, or type a person's name.

User Reviews for: The Lobster

benoliver999
7/10  8 years ago
A surreal sort-of sci-fi sort-of comedy, set initially in a hotel where single people must find a partner within a certain amount of time or be turned into an animal of their choice. Colin Farrell plays our protagonist, David, who chooses to be turned into a lobster should the need arise.

Lanthimos makes a damning indictment of the current state of relationships in society. Couples can only be together if they have something in common with each other, usually something fairly superficial like a limp, or a love of biscuits. Some go to the extent of faking a trait in order to be with someone. At times things get uncomfortable, at times very amusing.

What could be a powerful, emotional film gets set instead to a dreary, bland background. People talk in a strange, precise yet affected way. The setting is in a gorgeous part of Ireland but it’s grey and lifeless. It’s a really effective hook and it’s what makes The Lobster so unique.

My only criticism would be that it could have been a lot shorter. What is initially really interesting becomes frustrating in the last 20 minutes or so. The film seems to lose its edge, not quite knowing where to go. Lanthimos makes his point but refuses to roll the credits.

This doesn’t detract too much from the film though. The Lobster is a unique albeit slightly dull picture that leaves a lasting impression on its audience. Lanthimos has found a creative and accessible way to make social critique.

http://benoliver999.com/film/2016/01/14/thelobster/
Like  -  Dislike  -  90
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
ltcomdata
CONTAINS SPOILERS/10  8 years ago
It is difficult to categorize this movie. It is at once a surreal farce, a tragic dystopia, and a romantic tale. How good the movie depends on how one characterizes the movie.

As a farce, the movie criticizes the perceived pressure people feel from society in general to couple with each other. In the movie's dystopian future an uncoupled person must go to The Hotel in order to be paired off. If they are unable to do it, they are transformed into an animal of their choice and released into the forest, to hopefully find a mate as an animal, since they weren't able to do so as humans. Needless to say, there are couples (or members of coupes) who attempt to game the system and fake a romantic connection where there is none. Those who refuse to go along with the system are hunted down. All of which explains The Resistance: those who refuse to go along with the system, live in the forest, alone, and who, in rebellion to the system punish each other if they get into relationships with people among the group. Thus, as a farce, the movie also criticizes those unhappy people in society who deep down want a true and fulfilling relationship, but who have committed themselves to singleness because they resent society's perceived pressure to couple. Frankly, while the premise of the movie is intriguing, as a farce, the movie magnifies a minor annoyance out of proportion. If the movie is seen entirely as a farce, then the movie is easily dismissed once watched, because the problem that it points is relatively minor --- if existent at all.

And yet, the movie is not as easily dismissed. There is something deeper there than a laughable premise. Which means that the movie cannot be only a farce. Because the movie, in fact, talks about our need to couple. Ironic that. A movie which at first glance seems to make fun of coupling ends up treating our need to couple much too seriously to dismiss the issue. After all, there is a romantic tale here, even in the surreal context of a dystopian tragedy. For, while society forces people to couple, the main protagonists of the movie seek each other out to couple, even when society (a different one now) tries to keep them apart. And while the part of the movie which tries to force the male protagonist to couple is comedic farce, the part of the movie which shows him seeking his love is poignant, full of heart-warming and heart-breaking moments --- and thus affecting the viewer much more strongly.

I think the perspective of the female leader of The Resistance reveals the true nature of the movie. Her uncompromising stance against coupling --- and her insistence in leading a solitary, self-reliant life where you dig your own grave and your only hope is that your comrades will throw some dirt on it once you crawl to it to die --- leads her to blind the female protagonist. This same woman will occasionally visit The City for supplies and seems almost wistful of the life she has renounced, especially when visiting her parents, who are shown as relatively happy. It is almost as if her resolve to singleness stems more from a romantic disappointment that soured all relationships for her rather than from a philosophical belief. And therefore she endeavors to destroy all coupling --- excepting her parents' (perhaps because, like all children everywhere, she doesn't see their parents as romantic partners?). It is her jealousy that drives her to blind the main female protagonist --- so that she will no longer see the hand signs of love that she has developed with the male protagonist (because unnecessary talking is also forbidden, going against the singleness ethic). It is her jealousy that drives her to sabotage the relationships that form in The Hotel, by showing each person the deep flaws of their romantic partner: showing them that the love they profess for each other is inauthentic and easily destroyed.

The movie, as a farce, then has a great deal in common with the leader of The Rebellion. If it is a farce, then its goal is to sabotage couplings. But, like the leader of The Resistance, in the very act of sabotage it reveals the value that --- out of spite? --- wishes were not there. For the movie fails as a farce, showing us instead two people who are drawn towards each other romantically.

The end of the movie is a farcical question. Does he love her enough to share her darkness, as the circumstances of their surreal world seem to demand? The answer to that question is left up to each viewer. Is the male protagonist courageous enough, or will he continue to display the lack of virtue he has displayed throughout the film? Is the love that he feels for her real or not? After all, doesn't true love mean that no (morally licit) sacrifice is too small for the beloved?

I generally do not like surreal films. Despite this, I liked this movie.
Like  -  Dislike  -  40
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Reno
/10  6 years ago
> Another peculiar dystopian tale set in the future.

From the director of the Oscars nominated movie 'Dogtooth'. If you are familiar with his signature movie, you will find it so good. This is not the best movie I had seen that set in the future, but like any other it was another dystopian tale. A black comedy-romance with a decent storyline, performances and overall a nice entertainer.

The pace was very depressing, but I kept hooked to it for its frequent unpredictable scenes. The first act took place in a hotel which is the introduction to the odd world and the situation where the plot opens. When it moved to the 2nd half, especially after Rachel Weisz come into the frame, the entire scenario changed to atypical romance mode and kept that way till the last with a simple twist in the finale.

Colin Ferrell's character was something like the one from the movie 'Her'. But not the same movie, or the theme, except the combination of the genres. It was a good movie, I enjoyed it, but not as much as others say they did. IMPO, it is a one time watch movie for its peculiarness.

7/10
Like  -  Dislike  -  0
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
talisencrw
/10  6 years ago
This was an odd experience, as I just recently ended a self-imposed 12-year moratorium on relationships, due to a couple of bad ones I had within a short period of time in the early 2000's. It was very intriguing to see a type of dystopia exist in which 'singledom' was so vilified to the point of actually being against the law. I would never have previously thought that such a state of events was possible, but recent trends in 'political correctedness' on the one hand and both religious and political radicalism on the other means that, sadly, nothing is impossible anymore. I thought it was a remarkable idea for a film, and both the soundtrack and cinematography were outstanding. The bizarre script and bold direction brought forth some of the best acting I have yet seen from Colin Ferrell, Rachel Weisz and John C. Reilly, as well.

I'm definitely looking forward to seeing other films by this brazenly original writer/director. Long may his almost-Bunuelian take on things go forth.
Like  -  Dislike  -  0
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
mattwilde123
/10  6 years ago
This was Yorgos Lanthimos' English language debut. It was really funny. All of the actors had to perform their lines straight-faced and with no emotion which is very strange at first.

The screenplay and direction of the film was very intelligent and perfectly highlights the themes of the film. This film was very quirky and unique and so I really enjoyed it.

★★★★
Like  -  Dislike  -  0
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Back to Top