Did I miss something?


It wanted to be a Wes Anderson film so bad. I could almost hear the director saying, "emotionally flat line delivery... Wes is going to love this!" But the truth is it wasn't very good. The writing was lazy and relied on voice over and clunky exposition. The stunted delivery and lacking emotional response added nothing to the movie(aside from "indie cred"). There's no investment in any of the characters. David didn't really have any motivation to get coupled off, he seemed like he would be just as happy to be a lobster. There was no resolution to any of the many subplots of the story. But worst of all the movie was trying to be deep but couldn't stay on message.
At first: People have to be in relationships or they're turned into animals (but we'll drop that entire concept half way through the film).
Then: single people live in the woods, but you're shunned if you start to couple off.
Next: take over the hotel to show the couples that their bonds aren't real, and that shared physical traits don't make you a good couple.
Finally: we should be together because we have a shared physical trait. But now you're blind so we can't be together, but we can be, but we can't be so I'll blind myself too.

Now for plot holes:
1) The donkey thing? Was the woman a jilted ex lover? Unless she left him and came back to murder him, shouldn't he be human and in love, and she be single and an animal? What was the point?

2) how do people get divorced if they have to be coupled? Is David's ex wife punished for clearing on and then leaving him?

3) what made the hotel have to stop having a 'bisexual' preference option? What happened that made them change that?

4) why do all the single people live right outside of the hotel? It's even said that the heartless woman has bagged over 100 of them. How many of them are out there? Why don't they go somewhere else?

5) where do the children come from? You cab just get one at the end of your couples retreat? What happens to the kid if the couple fails and gets turned into animals?

6) what happened to all the animals? Animals are endangered? But everyone keeps choosing to be dogs, "which is why the world is full of dogs."

7) why can a doctor make a woman blind, and turn people into animals, but they can't fix her eyesight? Like seriously, why?

8) What happens to anyone? The hotel keeps running, so did the couple that runs it work things out? Did the nose bleed girl and limp guy make it? What about lisp man? Did we actually get closer on anyone?

I'm sure I'm about to be told that I just didn't get it, so please, explain it. Why so many plot holes, why so many awful movie tropes? Is it possible that it's just not that good, but people want to like it so they can feel like they're better at watching movies?

reply

These aren't plot holes. These are just questions.

reply

Its good to ask questions. This movie does make you ask a lot of them. Maybe you watch movies to get answers - but sometimes it can be nice to see a film that asks questions instead. Its not that you dont get it - you are just trying a bit too hard TOO get it. Movies like this are the equivalent of something like a picaso painting. Thats not how a human should look! Why did he paint it that way? What is he seeing in the world that I'm not?

You noticed how the people in the movie were saying dofferent things. "You must be a couple, or you may as well be a dumb animal" or "if you flirt you should just lie in a grave". And even "in order to be a couple you must have a defining feature". The movie is showing different views on purpose, to illustrate something.

For me, I think it is that it is showing the dangers of using external society as a measure of how you are living. Couples shouldnt have to look or act a certain way to be a "valid" couple. He shouldnt blind himself to make them have a defining feature - they invented a language together for gosh sakes! But, being a part of that world, the two of them are unable to see their own love for the purity it already has.

Thats what I got out of it anyway. Plus a whole lot of laughs. And horrors lol. But I can see why some may find it very weird and hard to relate to.

reply

I think it's boring and dumb!!

reply

Yeah, so I don't know anything about your background but I got the movie like this:

In our world, nothing has to be the way it is. By creating an immersive alternate reality, as done by The Lobster, one has to remember, that lives aren't linear like movies. There are totally random things happening all the time, if you just see an excerpt of somebody's life

What you are trying to do, is applying our worlds logic to a movie, that is trying to give you a feeling, that things can go wrong, if everything is taken literally. And what you are doing, is taking the film literally. Making you not like the movie.

I'm not saying it's the best movie ever made. But it is a very daring, experimental, immersive experience I am looking forward to in films to come.

reply

You said this perfectly

reply