![\"Lobster](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/81\/2016\/06\/Lobster-film.jpg\")
<\/a>\nThe Lobster is a movie that shows in high profile why I\u2019m hesitant to call what I do here from time to time commenting on movies that I\u2019ve seen as \u201creviews.\u201d There are areas in life about which I might legitimately be called an expert. Film is not one of these. I don\u2019t even have a history of seeing lots of them. I just like movies. About all I bring to the table is some sense of humanity and some basic literacy. <\/p>\n
That said over the past year my spouse Jan and I have started watching them in real live movie theaters on an increasingly regular basis. And while I blog mostly about religion I do cover other aspects of culture. So, commenting on movies seemed an appropriate addition. This said, because I do not have an educated eye, in addition to being hesitant to call these reflections \u201creviews,\u201d I\u2019ve also been hesitant to write of any of my negative experiences at the movies. So far I\u2019ve written a single more-negative-than-positive \u201creview.\u201d <\/p>\n
Well, here\u2019s my first negative.<\/p>\n
The professionals love the movie. For instance fully ninety percent of Rotten Tomatoes\u2019 one hundred, seventy-six reviewers liked it. And, not just the pros. At Rotten Tomatoes\u2019 seventy percent of the more than nineteen thousand viewer reviewers liked it. Rotten Tomatoes categorized it as \u201cdrama, science fiction & fantasy, comedy, cult movies.\u201d I guess the \u201ccult\u201d is anticipatory. It was written by Yorgos Lanthimos & Efthimis Filippou, and directed by Mr Lanthimos. The film features Colin Farrell as the only character I think has a name, \u201cDavid,\u201d Rachel Weisz plays the eventual object of his romantic hopes, and Lea Seydoux and Olivia Colman portrayed the principal antagonists. Many others rounded out a litany of surreal characters.<\/p>\n
Sheila O\u2019Malley, writing at the Robert Ebert site, tells us the Lobster, is \u201ca black-hearted flat-affect comedy from Greek director Yorgos Lanthimos, making his English-language debut, presents a dystopian world where being single is a criminal act.\u201d When for whatever reason someone finds themselves single she or he has forty-five days \u201cto find a new partner, and if the new partner does not materialize, the single person will be turned into an animal.\u201d Okay. I guess. it\u2019s a concept. <\/p>\n
Then Ms O\u2019Malley tells us \u201cThe message is clear\u2026\u201d Now, I have to admit it seemed pretty opaque to me. I mean I understood I was supposed to see something about authoritarianism. Here its about authoritarianism turned on human relationships. In one moment favoring couples. In another the single person. But, still authoritarianism crushing people. That I got. And, hardly news. I hoped there was something my untutored eye missed. Then Ms O\u2019Malley continued. \u201cCouples deserve official protection, and the privilege of being left alone by the unnamed State.\u201d That was it.<\/p>\n
She then tells us \u201cWhile extremely funny, it is a bitter and ruthless film.\u201d I got the bitter. I certainly got the ruthless. Lots of both. The funny, however, eluded me. My experience of the film was pretty much negative soup to nuts. It is lauded as \u201coriginal.\u201d Me, I found myself thinking of those parodies of advant-garde art, with people standing in the middle of a shallow lake while wearing a tuxedo, holding a plate with a pineapple on it, perhaps with a hatchet sticking out of the pineapple. Pretentious. Thinking it has something to say. <\/p>\n
Me, I found the film\u2019s message pretty thin soup.<\/p>\n
Bitter. Cruel. Soulless. Funny, I guess, if you like watching people being hurt.<\/p>\n
The Lobster runs two minutes shy of two hours. Seemed a lot longer to me.<\/p>\n