MovieChat Forums > The Lobster (2015) Discussion > My main problem with this movie is its p...

My main problem with this movie is its premise

posted 7 years ago by nickisillia
6 replies | jump to latest

Usually, dystopian or allegorical stories - even if they are meant to be satirical or humorous, like this one - are dealing with a certain condition that is real and, therefore, we can relate to. I'm not saying that there is only one way to interpret a movie, but this movie is making so much effort to be perceived as a allegory that it eventually succeeds. And it certainly seems to be an allegory of a very specific notion: the social stigma towards single people. Only that this notion is not a real problem, it is a fabricated problem, because there isn't really any collective social stigma towards single people.

I would understand if the movie was trying to deal with the way a specific social group is intolerant towards single people, but this movie implies that the whole society is intolerant towards single people, as if it is a universal problem. All successful stories about dystopian societies deal with more fundamental, universal themes (Blade Runner: "love is what makes us human" / 1984: "the dangers of totalitarianism"). And there are also other kinds of stories that satirize a very specific social group, like the films of Luis Buñuel who very evidently satirize the bourgeoisie.

But Lanthimos trying to impose the "intolerance towards single people" as a universal problem is just being didactic. I think he even realized this himself and halfway trough the movie he introduced a new theme: "society does not allow people to be together unless they have common interests". Which doesn't make any sense at all.

[–] Giraffe_Monster 7 years ago

And it certainly seems to be an allegory of a very specific notion: the social stigma towards single people. Only that this notion is not a real problem, it is a fabricated problem, because there isn't really any collective social stigma towards single people.

While I will agree that this notion isn't as "universal" as the other ones that you brought up, it's still something very common nowadays. You might not experience it everywhere you go, but pretty much everyone has to deal with those issues at some point in their life, on a more personal/direct level.

For example, today there is still a huge stigma towards women who say they want to focus on their careers and/or who don't want any children, and a lot of people are quick to dismiss them and judge them as "cold" or "emotionless", stuck with the belief that women are only there to have babies and stay at home.

Yes, this "stigma" might not be as widespread as something racist like "I hate black people", but there's no denying that family/friends always tend to ask stuff like "when will you settle down", "when will you find someone", etc. etc., as if it was mandatory/necessary for someone to actually be in a relationship to be happy and fulfilled, when that has never been the case: single people can be happy, too. I guess that wrong notion that you need to be in a relationship/married is heavily brought upon people mainly because of religion (maybe), but yeah.

That's just one of many angles though, but nowadays due to how (easily) vulnerable everyone is thanks to the internet/social media, and how much of their lives are shown to the outside world (private or not), people are judged ever more quickly/mercilessly based on what they look like, what their current life/job/marital situation is, etc. There's no denying that once you put yourself "out there" - even if it's just through comments like this one - people will judge you and call you out.

What this movie does - in my opinion - isn't that different from what we already do to eachother on a regular, daily basis, with the exception that in The Lobster's world things were taken a step further and this whole judging/rating of people has now become the "law", and wherever you go you must adhere to a certain universal "expectaction" that isn't that different from what we find in our real world, I believe.

Just my opinion :)

Fine, fine, I'll leave! But first I'm going to bother these peanuts! Hmm? Yes? Hmm? HMM?

[–] thulk01 7 years ago

I think your analysis is spot on. For example if you're over a certain age and haven't had a boyfriend or girlfriend or you haven't kissed someone or had sex, etc, then the majority of people will see it as "weird."

Another example is if you were to say that you're just not interested in dating/relationships/sex, it would be seen as "weird."

People who enjoy spending time alone are seen as "weird."

I have also heard that there are some people who believe all asexual people are just faking it. They don't understand that anyone could be different from themselves, so they feel threatened by it and shun it.

I don't know if stigma is the right word for it but there is definitely something there and this movie seemed to be criticizing it.

[–] betsywetsy 7 years ago

I think that's probably not what it's about. It might not even be about anything, just an interesting thought experiment. This isn't a sane man vs an evil state, it's an insane world with everybody buying into the insanity. The common interests thing in particular is deeply internalized, to the extent that Rachel Weisz "can't do that anymore" with Colin Farrell once she's blinded.

[–] novany 7 years ago

I respectfully disagree with your argument. I don't think the movie is intended to champion or delve into being a single person. It does however takes stabs at the rules associated with couple-dome. For instance, the absurd notion that if you are in a relationship, you shouldn't or don't need to masturbate. Or worse, that one would accept the cruelty of his/her partner for the sake of staying with that cruel partner (david & cruel woman), because he/she can't "survive" without the partner (dentist & hotel manager) -- no matter how cruel.

There is poignancy in david & short-sighted woman's plight. They are figuring out how to forge a genuine relationship, but seem to be strangled by the rules of couple-dome forced upon them. For instance, why would david think it necessary to not only contemplate blinding himself but to actually do so?

Ouch!

[–] timax_911 7 years ago

It's my first time seeing it but i don't think the dystopian idea is how they perceive and isolate single person.

The rule of this dystopian is to solely match each human by category.
People describe themselve with personnal interests and those interests are the only criteria of a relationship. So they make love a banality.

If you match, in return you live in the city with this fake love will eventually end at the same place it have began. If you can't match, they let you live as an animal. Human's love isn't the same as what animal can feel. It is bestiallity, so a metaphorical way to describe how they perceive love.

So love is a banality in this distopian world. Love have no felling and everything is animalistic.

[–] infinity8 7 years ago

In general, dystopias are meant to exaggerate tendencies that already exist in society for purposes of satire. In 1984, for example, the government lies about pretty much everything. Even the worst fascist government doesn't manage to control its propaganda that well, but many fascist societies do attempt control through pro-government propaganda, and this tendency even exists--albeit to a lesser degree--in fairly democratic nations.

Modern society may not have quite the animus toward single people as the society in The Lobster does, but there is still a notion that everyone should find a mate and that there's something wrong with you if you don't, particularly by a certain age.

The lobster also satirizes the idea that two people are perfect for each other just because they have X in common. David is so convinced that he and his match have to be alike that he considers (and possibly goes through with) blinding himself. The singles leader blinds David's love interest in the belief that taking away one commonality will be enough to keep the couple apart.

I haven't heard of anyone in real life considering blinding himself to have a chance with a particular person, but we tend to assume that people who have something in common are "meant to be." For example, if you like tennis, your friends might try to set you up with someone who plays tennis. In a romantic comedy, two characters with a shared trait--clumsiness, for instance--would be seen as a match. Social scientists talk about "assortative mating," which refers to the tendency of people to couple up with people of their social class, education level, etc. And if you date someone too far outside of your categories, your friends and family may think that person isn't good enough for you (or their friends and family will think you're not good enough for them). Of course, in spite of these tendencies, there's nothing to say that that two people without obvious commonalities can't fall in love.