Saturday 24 January 2015

Under the Skin – Jonathan Glazer (2013)

 On the surface, the thin tissue-like narrative of Under the Skin depicts a straightforward story of an alien who becomes polluted by their exposure to humanity. So far, so Man Who Fell to Earth. However, if you penetrate beneath the purposively minimalist layer and examine the film’s form, the static compositions, the dispassionate approach, the unnerving score and the jarring juxtapositions of the fantastical and the mundane, a persistent question appears that asks, what is it that is really under the skin? Is it vulnerability or empathy? Is it desire or cruelty? Is it humanity, alienation or just a mess of meat?
  Under the Skin can get under your skin if you let it. It’s not a difficult or ridiculously abstract movie (as some have argued). Instead it’s an economical and precise film in a larger film culture of excess and negligence that seems to have diminished the ability to concentrate and be patient. The camera is often still, the takes are long and the activities are vague or distant but the camera’s point of view is often one of an alien watching patiently, silently and emotionally detached. For some Under the Skin is also a little too emotionally distant but the film also contains a hideously devastating depiction of a brutal tragedy, which is full of haunting pathos and piteous desperation. Little is how it appears on the surface, on purpose.
 This is a film about the trap of humanity. The trap of human appearances, human libidos and human bodies, which are exploited by the alien presence, but, which in turn exploit the very alien when those traps unleash the ingredients of human frailty, consideration, empathy and (finally) brutality. Driven by what is on the surface the humans and the alien are opened up to what is inside, both physically and emotionally, so that what is revealed under the skin is more than just how you look but how you act, in all its disquieting human complexity.