Fear Itself: THE BEAST

Bertrand Bonello’s The Beast is a nesting doll narrative full of resonances fit for an age of anxiety. He’s done this playfully serious structuring around free-floating modern fears before. His Nocturama is a tensely shaggy hangout with a group of disaffected young bombers hiding out in an abandoned mall after a violent protest—captured by capitalism even in rebellion. His Zombi Child is a boarding school drama wrapped around voodoo flashbacks that tie together into a double-knotted story of immigration and isolation—twice over lost to oneself even as one is drawn even deeper into oneself. The Beast is hooked into a modern sense of foreboding and unease manifesting as eerie stasis and passivity that makes dangers, real or imagined, no less possible. It’s wrapped in a bevy of sci-fi conceits. It’s 2044. Some undefined apocalypse has left the streets of Paris largely abandoned, with stray animals wandering about, and passerby wearing clear air-filtering masks. Léa Seydoux stars as a woman who submits a request for promotion to her Artificial Intelligence overlord (Xavier Dolan’s voice) and is told she must undergo an emotional purging. Hooked up to a pseudo-spiritual machine—a vat of goo and wires that’s one part Minority Report and one part Cronenberg—that’ll prompt her to relive past lives and purge her centuries acquiring human softness.

As it begins, the movie quickly settles into a romantic tragedy straight out of Henry James. It’s a flooded Paris of 1910 where a the owner of a doll factory sneaks up to the edge of an affair with a dashing stranger (George MacKay) she meets at an art show. From the near-future interludes to the birth of Modernism—she sees avant garde paintings and is overseeing her product’s transition from porcelain to plastic—she’s stuck in a period of technological and emotional transition. (It also cues ideas about the creation of art as reflection and population of interior spaces, matched in time with an embodied A.I. “doll” played with impressive impassivity by Saint Omer's Guslagie Malanda.) Seydoux navigates serenely yet quiveringly across times with a slippery double role, playing the subterranean romantic yearnings and curiosities as her stuffed-shirt husband drifts away in favor of a pretty and serious flirt. The movie kicks into even higher tension in its second half as the double role adds a third. Now we’re in 2014 Los Angeles where the period piece stylings are rawer within our modern memory. This section deals with the burbling impending violence of MacKay as a vlogging incel stalker (a sadly familiar type) while Seydoux is now an aspiring actress disaffectedly ensorcelled in the labyrinthine gig economy of bad commercials and empty housesitting, only freed from routine by lonely websites, lonelier pills, and somehow loneliest crowded nightclubs. If the Jamesian story is about the pain of denial and the dangerous sparks of new possible connection, the Hollywood one is about the creeping dangers of the lack of connection.

In each time period, Seydoux and MacKay are on a collision course, sometimes romantic, but always fraught with contemporaneous fears and foibles. What form does society give to its unanswerable conflicts, its grinding prejudices and self-fulfilling prophecies? What, after all, is the beast? (A key line has to be an advertising director on a green screen set asking his actress: “Can you be scared of something that isn’t there?”) Here are two parallel plots that play out back to back, with the futurist frame dance between. Their implications and tensions and uncertainties circle, echo, and collapse. Bonello plays each genre almost entirely straight, but their juxtapositions accumulate and resonate. At times fleeting glitches filter in, lingering oddness even before Josée Deshaies’ cool digital frames might suddenly be pixellating, or skipping, or repeating, but just rarely enough to surprise each time. (Pity anyone seeing it streaming instead of theatrically or on a disc for the doubt they’ll have about whether these intentional choices are wi-fi troubles.) Here, in triplicate, is a woman and a man on a doomed loop of trauma reincarnated. Here, human fears feed human foibles and the inevitable dooms of our own, or others’, making. All one can do is scream as old anxieties are reborn anew and expressed afresh—familiar faces in new forms, every beginning fraught with the knowledge that this, too, shall end.

Point and Shoot: CIVIL WAR

A tense provocation, writer-director Alex Garland’s Civil War has sequences of frightening violence wherein the logic of action movies is turned inside out to make us root for the shooting to stop. Our lead characters are photojournalists courageously and recklessly charging after the action. The bullets fly and we flinch with them as the action charges ahead. We see bloodshed as intimate, personal—bodies hanging in an abandoned car wash, piled in mass graves behind farm houses, pulled apart by machine guns. The movie imagines a near-future America devolved into sectarian warfare, rebel troops amassing outside Washington to take on a fascistic president who has, in his third term, disbanded the FBI and shoots protestors. This isn’t the queasy-making romance of a lost cause, or a wishful thinking, that’s been burbling up with Civil War nostalgia for 150 years. If the United States were actually to fall into an all-out second Civil War it would look like this—balkanized, radicalized, individuated, dangerous and unpredictable. It’d be three backwoods guys with AR-15s guarding their local gas station. It’d be a random militia holed up trying to overpower and execute soldiers. It’d be insurgents storming the capitol.

Garland doesn’t worry overmuch about how we get there. The movie starts years into the conflict as we get the sense the war is drawing close to a climactic point of desperation. Dialogue has some free-floating allusions to past massacres, controversies, and realignments. We get the gist. The screenplay never announces the policy positions of its combatants, although a reasonably intelligent viewer could pin down the overarching particulars of the state of play. Instead, it stirs up its political intensity with immediacy of intent. It communicates clearly and directly, and with great force, ideas about the hell war puts all people through, and of the complicated natures of the specific people who make their mission the witnessing of it. This is a bleak vision of how some people are just waiting for an excuse to revel in chaos, and the movie plays it off with a throughly muddled sense of rooting interests. Of course we want our main characters to survive; that’s movie logic. But by stripping out actual specific policy or parties, we see only the tension between chaos and order. Stopping for speeches or debates that lay out the stakes might serve to soften the walloping dread and loud gunfire of sectarian violence and its rippling collateral damage. It’s a portrait of society in free fall, a little nervous about how plausible it could be.

Garland has often been a filmmaker interested in the fragility of the human body. Look at the time-warping drugs of Dredd or zombified rage that can infect from merely a drop in 28 Days Later. Or see the blurry lines between man and nature in the haunting alien landscapes of Annihilation and between man and machine in Ex Machina. With Civil War, Garland takes that investment in how fragile people are and pushes further into how that fragility is inextricable form the systems and institutions we build. It finds that larger perspective in sticking small and personal amidst the national ramifications. It’s confined to a picture of photographers dutifully witnessing while getting a charge out of following along—and it makes them vulnerable, too. Some (Kirsten Dunst) are disillusioned about the value of their job; her slow bleeding-out of conviction is a marvelously controlled and subtle performance. Others (Wagner Moura) gets a sick thrill out of the danger. Still others (Stephen McKinley Henderson) are tired veterans of the business, while a young newbie (Cailee Spaeny) gets a shock to her system as she enters the fray. All of them are shaken and stretched, with their fragility drawn out to the movie’s sick, cold conclusion that’s as inevitable as its central dialectic: guns and cameras are both point and shoot. The power of a still image is juxtaposed with the moving image—weaponizing a grainy freeze frame silence in the flow of clinical digital filmmaking to feel the etching of history and the foreshortening of context in each stuck frame—as it creates a tension between its creation and the chaos that breeds it. We’re left with the empty pit-of-the-stomach worry, and the wonder at what’s more powerful than fragile people rushing into history with a gun and a camera shooting in tandem—revolution written with or driven by a photo op.

Master of Nun: IMMACULATE and THE FIRST OMEN

Immaculate is all about Sydney Sweeney. This Euphoria and White Lotus highlight has taken a whirlwind tour of genres on her way to movie-stardom in the last couple years, starring in the compelling true-crime transcript-play Reality, the amiably junky B-level superhero flop Madame Web, the charming sleeper-hit rom-com Anyone But You. She’s turning into something of a reliable leading lady. Now here she’s a novice nun from Detroit assigned to small-town Italy. And then she turns up pregnant—an immaculate conception whispered about in hushed tones. If you guess there’s some kind of gnarly Catholic conspiracy underway, with she the unwilling victim, you’d be right on the mark. This puts the entire film’s stress on her increasingly frightened face, framed in tight habits and tighter close-ups as she escalates a freak-out. It’s a neat little horror package that manipulates its religious iconography with sick twists and subtle jabs until it all spills out in quick splatters and some nasty, if conspicuously out-of-frame, implications. Sweeney holds the screen in every scene, stretching her big eyes and quivering lips, teasing out a fine compliment of hushed confusion, squeamish doubt, and burgeoning realizations. One believes she’s slowly awakening to the depths of danger in which she finds herself. Director Michael Mohan proves a steady genre hand on the reins, finding the slippery sinister angles, burbling choral echoes, and artful arrangements of blood and violence to keep the convent creepy. His previously collaboration with Sweeney was a similarly small-scale horror effort The Voyeurs, which similarly resuscitated an older mode—in that case the sexy thriller—with some red-blooded earnestness. It’s fun to see Mohan and Sweeney really going for it with some nunsploitation, and, though it misses opportunities to make the other characters pop more memorably or really ramp up the sleaze, they once again turn up some modestly enjoyable echoes of old thrills.

Even better is The First Omen. This is a strong work of horror iconography attuned to genuinely gripping and upsetting consequences. It takes the expected trajectory of a franchise play and uses its familiar trappings to actually dig down deep into the creepiest and most unsettling corners of its premise. It also might be one of the most Christian movies in recent memory, especially if you count how many times it made a squeamish audience member in my screening murmur, “Oh, Jesus.” This much-belated prequel to 1976’s blockbuster creepy-kid, childhood-of-an-antichrist horror picture takes its ideas as seriously as its genre, and therefore earns every shivery image. (Once you see from where a ghostly hand emerges, you won’t soon forget it.) Its images aren’t just free-floating fear, but add up to a movie awash in the implications of a young woman losing control over her mind and body, with many hands wanting to interfere in her reproductive potential for devilish purposes. 

Director Arkasha Stevenson’s feature debut creates a palpably paranoid setting, the austere Gothic architecture and winding cobblestone streets of Old World seriousness jangling with a period-appropriate flurry of student protestors and conspiratorial heretics and Catholic whistleblowers and nervy novitiates and troubled teens and cute Italian paramours and prickly priests. She pushes the camera into blocking and art direction posed with a casual sense of shivering suspense, the characters seemingly drawn inexorably into the terrible fates that await them. There’s a wooziness to the film, a nightmarish quality that sleepwalks into darkness from its extreme slow-motion opening violence to its eruptive finale. Between is pure, stylish unease. And that’s a hazy contrast infecting an otherwise precise eye for the procedures and rituals of the time and place—and then the fiery and bloody effluvia that spouts off in the most unsettling moments. It has a handsome, filmic look that makes the shadows stormy with danger, and the close-ups freckled with slow-dawning emotional confusions. The innocent nun at the center is Nell Tiger Free, whose severe stare betrays brewing doubts even as she draws closer to what she thinks is a kind of spiritual salvation, all-too-slowly aware of the hellish designs these evil clergy have in store. Though our knowledge of the franchise might keep us ahead of her, Free’s steady embodiment of her character’s emotional and spiritual state is so compelling, and the ensemble of expert character actors around her (Sonia Braga, Ralph Ineson, Bill Nighy) so commanding, that the inevitable somehow feels surprising anyway. If only all prequels played so vivid and pointed and involving.