Review of The Lobster (2015) by Dave C — 23 Aug 2016

It turns out that a film that takes this much effort to make sense of is simply not very much fun. I am still not sure I really understand it, so I'll try my best to grapple with what I think it was trying to do. And I will go in to detail here, if only because I think spoilers would have helped me to have a better grasp of the story in the end (so spoiler alert):

As best I can tell the film is broken in to two parts. the first half explains the universe, setting up the rules of the game at hand, so to speak. The second half narrows in on how a individual navigates this world.

The essential idea is a universe where being single is apparently illegal. Having lost his wife, David (Colin Farrell) finds himself in a hotel (which is more of a prison) where he has 45 days to find another love. If he does he can leave. If he doesn't he gets turned in to an animal of his choice.

Outside of the hotel are those who have chosen to rebel against this forced system. The rebels are led by a Seydoux's character, who on the surface appears just as bound by rules as they are on the inside. In her circle they shouldn't dare try to fall in love.

There are a few things going on here that I believe are looking to say something about the pressures of societal expectations. First is the idea that everyone is narrowed to a label rather than a name, as this allows them to be recognized with greater ease. That one has a lisp, that one gets nosebleeds, and so on. The characters essentially get defined by their single most superficial trait, which in some strange way has a way of levelling the playing field.

The other dynamic of the film is the way it plays with the animal motif. The prison itself is encouraged to be seen as not dire but rather opportunistic. It is a place to have a new shot at love, but at the same time turning in to an animal represents a new shot at finding love as a different character. The important thing, as one character suggests, is to be prepared for failure and to choose their animal wisely, because not every animal plays well with others. Most choose the dog. Ferrell's character chooses the Lobster because of longevity and fertility. They say this is a smart choice.

Underneath all of this detail is an apparent desire to examine the absurdity of our societal pressures. These pressures can of course extend to all manners of life in which we don't measure up to expected norms, but it is specifically aware of the tension of being single. The premise itself remains intriguing and inventive, and certainly wholly original, but the problem I found was it just remains altogether dire and strange. I found myself looking for ways to allow the premise to resonate emotionally, but it remains a difficult task throughout both acts to find something in these characters to truly like. The more interesting section is the first where we are watching them put the details of the universe in to place. Unfortunately the second section where they set these pieces in play is the weaker of the two, which simply means that the universe in play doesn't manage to be much fun at all.

I know the critics loved this film and had nothing but great things to say. An initial glance shows that a fair portion of the audiences seemed to struggle with it. Sometimes being too inventive can work against you.