The beginning was nothing special and a bit too safe, but the film developed into something quite unabashed, innovative and adventurous! It is interesting to pay attention to gender parallels and role reversals (both obvious and subtle) between Clive, Elsa, their creations, and even Barlow and Chorot.
I have a lady friend who was deeply disturbed and offended by the "rape" aspect of this movie in its last act. She feels it was used as a prop merely for shock value. I'm wondering why it didn't bother me as much here as it did in films like IRREVERSIBLE and MONSTER. Maybe It's because I thought it was presented in far too an outrageous way to be truly transgressive? Any thoughts?
this is quite possibly the worst film of 2010. but it has a sole redeeming point from a sundance q&a: person: Why did you [Adrien Brody] agree to be in this? Brody: I wasn't really into the film until I got to the part where I [spoiler] in the barn. I was sold on the notion of that.
Johnny D, it is not a genre film. Why does it have to fit into one of those genre's? It's something different. This is a new type of horror / film (genre?). The horror isn't in the events necessarily but how truly believable they are. When Brody had "that moment" with Dren it felt right as it happened as much as we knew it was wrong. The horror was intellectual not physical.