MovieChat Forums > Évolution (2016) Discussion > Beautifully filmed

Beautifully filmed

posted 8 years ago by Derek_MacPhail
10 replies | jump to latest

I'm looking for the positives. And one big positive of this film is that it is beautifully shot.

It definitely won't be for everyone - it certainly isn't for me - but if you want something more on the artsy side, this might fit the bill.

Frankly, it bored the life out of me. I don't mind slow moving, cerebral films, but they have to have a bit more to them that what was on offer here. A few people I spoke to after the movie also found it a bit too dull. In fact, during the movie, one person was heard snoring a few times (he woke up when a few people around him woke him up with their purposeful coughing).

[–] JacintoCupboard 8 years ago

On a certain level one might praise the cinematography, certainly one is obliged to take notice of the visuals because there isn't much else happening here.

But then again, the lingering on children's bodies is disconcerting, and not in a thought provoking or challenging way. It's all rather creepy, particularly when it is added to the sexualised underwater choreography with the female creatures.

I honestly don't know what was in the director's mind with all this, but there is some questionable material here that is hard to justify in the absence of some kind of clear narrative or message. What is left looks indulgent at best and exploitative at worst.

While I'm here, the 2001 homages in the soundtrack go beyond reference and into plagiarism. I wasn't impressed by the Ziggy Stardust/Man Who Fell To Earth makeup either.

To be cutting edge one needs to do way more than elude to other people's work and be obstinately impenetrable in what you bring to the table that is your own. Unintelligible only means 'too smart for you' for charlatans.

[–] jan-bollen 8 years ago

I actually liked it a lot, below you can find my review: https://bttcinema.com/2016/03/17/lucile-hadzihalilovics-evolution-mixing-bresson-with-argento/

[–] SteverB 7 years ago

Agree with every single point. 4/10 (only for the cinematography) at best.

__________________________________________
"In your opinion?"
"Um, yes your honor, in my opinion."

[–] Tchoutoye 8 years ago

Overall I found Évolution disappointing compared to Innocence, which I liked a lot.

For the first 20 minutes or so I was kinda captivated by the cinematography. But when the setting changed to the hospital the lighting just got darker and darker, to the point that I could hardly make out anything that was going on and I got rather bored, despite the viscerality of the operations, mutant procreation and whatever. This has to be one of the most underlit films of all time.

Plot, dialogue, lighting, score: everything was just too minimal, especially in combination with each other. The films suffers from minimalism in excess, as it were.
Maybe the film needed a more in-your-face soundtrack, that certainly did wonders for Under The Skin.

[–] lathe-of-heaven 7 years ago

I fully agree with you; especially your comment about EVERYTHING being just too damn minimal... 

I think you hit right on the weakness of this film. I also REALLY love vague, ambiguous films, like David Lynch's for example. LOVE them! However, as you brought out, I feel personally if they had just added a LITTLE more sound design, a TAD more punch to the interactions between characters (What the HELL is it anyway with the French where they seem to think that two characters staring COMPLETELY emotionlessly at each other saying NOTHING is somehow intriguing... uh, NO... )

In my lowly and wretched opinion, if the director had just maybe added a bit more of Lynch's 'Spirit' to the proceedings, in both more overt mood and sound design at least, THEN MAYBE this film would really have had more resonance with the audience.

For example, just MAYBE cut the long blank stares down to, oh, say 5 seconds instead of 20... And instead of just showing all that AWESOME, and (I felt) strikingly-lit imagery, such as in the hospital corridors or some of the creepy areas outside IN TOTAL SILENCE, they could have added some nice ambient, moody background sound like Lynch does, so that even the most mundane shots are given a MUCH more effective, ominous mood. The recent Horror film 'THE BLACKCOAT'S DAUGHTER' is an excellent example of that (some found the sound design a bit overbearing, but I frigg'n LOVED it!) Some of the shots were EXTREMELY simple, but adding the proper sound design made them quite powerful.

So, that to me was one of the bigger mistakes. Just all the bloody SILENCE during almost all the BEAUTIFUL, creepy looking scenes (with the exception of the ocean shots) and the protracted, bloody STARING, just kind of took whatever excellent potential there was right out of the film as far as I am concerned...

Just those 2 simple changes I feel would have gone a LONG way toward improving the audience's experience. It would have made those long, visually striking shots FAR more engaging and I think would have actually carried the film better.

I now have over 7000 films; many of them very rare and OOP. I LOVE to trade. PLEASE ASK! 

[–] buzios 8 years ago

I agree - beautifully filmed, visually faultless - but a film needs more than that - and ultimately I just found it dull.

[–] bigdaddyboxmeal 8 years ago

I have to agree to an extent. I did find it captivating, mainly for the photography and the fact that once every 20 minutes it hit you with a pretty visceral shot of some sort. Unfortunately they were never followed up.

I found myself searching for meaning in the film throughout and I found none. In fact, if anyone had some thoughts on what the film's overarching intent was I'd be interested.

At points I thought gender roles must play a part due to the cast being all adult female and underage male, but even though the roles were flipped somewhat I certainly don't think the director has done a particularly good job in vocalizing her intent through the movie.

A good watch due to its originality and look, but the lack of meat in there plot wise let it down.

[–] Errington_92 7 years ago

As others have stated, the use of cinematography and score make for an atmospheric piece. As for Évolution's plot, I can understand people's bemusement regarding its central theme. I feel this is partly due to its 79 minute length, making it difficult to formulate a cohesive narrative. Yet, you could also argue Évolution's mystic story obviously leads to ambiguity. Personally I felt Évolution represented the inhumanity of horrendous, self-serving goals. The women, who I collectively viewed as a cult (with emphasis on the nude, ritualistic beach scene) robbed the boys of their childhood. Instead of exploring their environments with wonder, they live in torment. Nicholas' fear of the island's landscape, such as the boys intimidating him with the dead fish, did well to emphasis the loss of purity within the boys.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not.

[–] bigdaddyboxmeal 7 years ago

That's an interesting interpretation. Elsewhere on the board others have put forward a theory that it's about gender roles and, specifically about feminism and how traditional gender roles don't promote equality for women. I can see that in part with the role reversals of men effectively being used as incubators, for want of a better word, but that's about as deep as it goes.

I have to say I enjoyed the film, but whatever agenda it had I think the short running time and ambiguous scenes kind of hindered that agenda rather than helped it.

[–] jehather 7 years ago

I was horrified watching it, and yes it's dull, beautifully shot, minimal dialogue. Overall it leans toward disappointment. Still, one of the more memorable movies I've seen in recent time.