Since making this video I watched two other movie analysis videos-Chris Stuckman's and Lucas Blue, and it's interesting how their interpretations differs a bit from mine. Part of that is because I went into the movie with the book in my head, but I think based on your gender you may view the film's meaning differently. And I do think it is a movie that can have a lot of different interpretations, so I wouldn't say anyone's view of it is better than another's. What do you think?
Hearing the summary of the book I'm glad I only saw the movie without any book knowledge. The movie is much more interesting and mysterious in my opinion, not giving us any information about the aliens' home planet, society, class struggles and capitalist business ventures, and leaving it all to the imagination of the viewers. I think the movie was perfectly paced, but I'm not from the Tiktok generation and the pace of the book didn't influence my perception of the movie. All in all I don't think I will read the book as it sounds a bit like like 70s sci-fi schlock that naturally also lacks the incredible visual storytelling of the movie.
I never knew this was based off a book. I really liked the movie, the scenes where she picks up the guys, those are real people and they had hidden cameras, production would later ask them if it was okay to use in the film. Really enjoyed your analysis!
You did an excellent job recapping the book and the movie. I prefer the book and have read it so many times at this point. We have even visited Scotland where the novel takes place and stayed on "Ablach Farm" in Esswis' house (it is actually called Tarrel Farmhouse). We walked down to the shore of the Moray Firth where Isserley would spend time talking to the sheep and doing her exercises. We also visited many of the locations like some of the hitcher routes, where the assault happens, the jetty she drives to afterwards, and where she ultimately dies at the end. I am clearly obsessed! But it's such a great novel. I do like the movie as well, but it's just so different from the book. Thanks so much for posting this video, I really enjoyed it!
Thanks! Glad you liked my analysis 😁 And that's so cool! I was really glad the movie kept the setting in Scotland, despite their many other changes lol.
You have absolutely became my favorite UA-camr! I could listen to you talk all day. And you’re so pretty and kind! You also have beautiful teeth. 💗 I’m so glad you covered Under the Skin. It’s been my favorite book for years. It has so much to say. I love the movie, as well. But like you, I preferred the book.
Johnathan Glazer is so good, I wish he didn't take so long between films! Also the soundtrack to this (and Zone of Interest) by Mica Levi is amazing! Great video. :)
Regarding the baby on the beach scene in my mind it represents our own dismissive human relationship with sentient beings that we consider inferior and unworthy of our empathy. For instance in the livestock farming industry, where millions of male calves of dairy mother cows are slaughtered daily on a global scale because they hold no value for the dairy business, or billions of male chicks that are being shredded directly after hatching on egg farms for being useless for egg farmers, and consumers just don't care about them at all when we buy milk and eggs which perpetuates their suffering (unless you live vegan). The females are being exploited for their sexual biology and then slaughtered when depleted and the males are killed just for being useless. The same with human victims in war zones, hearing about yet another 500 Ukrainian and Palestinian children murdered eventually just doesn't move us to donate money anymore.
I never knew about the book, but the film was one of my favorites of that year. It’s devastating. It delves into the best and worst parts about humanity and what that means.
Really love the film. Knew it was an adaptation but have never read the book. So didn't know how different the film is. Not sure if you're aware of how Glazer filmed the scenes with Johansson's character interacting with the public. When she's walking around and with the van scenes, they were all shot using hidden cameras. So all of the people interacting with Johansson have no idea they are part of a movie. Love how Glazer turned the film into a social experiment that itself adds a layer to the film's meanings. Here's a link to an old interview with Glazer discussing one scene: ua-cam.com/video/S8MbvKqHWM0/v-deo.htmlsi=m9En-fsTJnc1ng3p It would be great if you did a comparison of Glazer's recent film Zone of Interest with the Martin Amis novel. Glazer's approach to making the film also adds a unique layer to the themes of the story.
Yeah so cool how they filmed it! I tried reading that one but I had such a hard time getting into the book and it felt like a chore to read so I didn't finish it. Love the movie though!
I just watched this movie today . Your video is a great overview about the story and your coverage of the book completely made me understand a movie I was lost after watching thank you very much and I subscribed looking forward to more of your reviews
I grew up in Scotland and just to say, hitchhiking was definitely still a reasonably common thing around 2013. However, it tended to be more backpackers exploring the highlands (my Dad used to love giving people a lift and we met interesting people from all over the world), and kids who grew rurally who missed the 1 or 2 buses that would pass each day (the latter I know from personal experience!). I also spent 12 years living in Glasgow from 2008 onwards and could count on one hand the amount times I ever saw someone trying to thumb a ride (and even then I would suspect they were probably young tourists). By 2020 it was a non-existent practice around the greater Glasgow area. Loved the review. Definitely going to revisit the film and hopefully get round to giving the book a try. BTW have you considered doing a review on Cloud Atlas? Just popped Michel Faber into the search to hear him speak and a talk between him and David Mitchell popped up. Amazing how the film really divided both the public and critics so would be cool to hear your thoughts. The book was nominated for some of the most prestigious awards here in the UK.
Oh interesting, thanks for sharing! And I read and watched Cloud Atlas a while back and loved both! I keep meaning to revisit them and make a video. I'll plan on doing that at some point this year!
I hitchhiked all over Scotland in the 90s. I wouldn’t do this in the US, but in Europe, at the time, it was super safe, even as a woman alone. I rode in the back of a lot of trucks! I knew friend who hitchhiked there though the 2010s, but in the Highlands and other less populated areas.
Hi, great video! I thought, having not read the book, that the skin was being harvested. 😅 Because, like you noticed too, the skin of the earlier victim was loosened before it was separated from the rest of the body. It was also left in perfect condition (no incisions or butchering). I assumed that because she didn’t need to eat or have any lower orifices (a lack of intestinal tract it kind of implied there too) , her body was powered in more advanced biochemical ways than humans. Lastly, when I saw that her skin came off / did not heal when torn and that she was a fully functioning organism without if, that made me finally think that her human skin was harvested from another human. I still think this may be happening in the movie version learning about the book from you. It seems the director was going a more for an art-house version of horror and tragedy vs sci-fi. Making it more about humans used for their skin and all of the metaphors that come with that idea leaves more room for a haunting minimalism. Staying with the bodyfarm concept would have required far more expositing, making it sci-fi vibes. Also, post “Soilent Green is people!” I think it was more elegant to make it vague and or not necessarily about human meat. But did I miss a shot in the movie that might show or imply that the humans were food? I assumed the bloody convertor belts were hauling the blood off as biowaste or had some other scientific purpose. 😅
This was such a great review! Thank you for talking about this book and film. I had no idea it was a book. I watched the film in theaters when it came out and I couldn't sleep that night. It really hit me. I was able to put together that Scarlett's character was capturing people to be eaten but it took me a few days after watching the film and reflecting on it that I was able to put some pieces together. I don't think it was made that clear in the film. (I also recently learned that Stranger Things took inspiration from this movie for their black pool scenes, which is very cool). Your summary of the book gave so much more context. Thank you for that, the book sounds really interesting. The book is too heavy for me to read at this point in my life, and I appreciate the fact that I can watch your review of it. P.S. your kitten is adorable. 🧡
I'm glad you liked my review! The book and movie are both disturbing but in different ways. And while I would read the book again, I think the movie might be a one time watch. And thanks! I didn't even know she made an appearance until I was editing lol.
I love your reviews. I have to laugh a bit at myself because I've seen many of these films, while not at all aware that they were first books. I did see this film. It left me troubled from the beginning to the end...troubled, angry, and sad. I thought everyone's performances were stellar (no pun intended). I don't see myself reading the book.
It is cheaper to eat as a vegetarian as opposed to a meat eater. That is why poorer families have “meatless Mondays” and the like. Especially now with groceries being a lot more expensive. I notice meat has probably gone up a 1/3 in price but veggies, nuts and legumes have gone up about a 1/10. So, really, poor people can take a stand for animal rights and climate change and also save money by making a meatless budget. I know, I have been poor. :)
Thank you for another great review! I really like this movie & have watched it four times, but I had no idea there was a book! I enjoyed the haunting scenes & themes. I will definitely be putting the novel on my "to read" list!
I saw the movie, and have not read the book yet. It was confusing - all of the backstory from the book you mention here was missing. So I was confused about why the men were brought into the black pool that melted their body, leaving the skin behind, beyond using the skin as part of the alien's disguises? I must have blinked or stepped out when the meat conveyor belt scene occurred - or maybe it was so shocking that my mind rejected it. Extreme weirdness and inhuman calculus was my impression. Her attempt to escape showed how she was changing, but in the end she was too alien to survive as a human: caught between two worlds. The movie was sad and depressing to me. I never knew the movie was based on a book, and it sounds like a more interesting story than the movie turned out to be.
Yeah very true about being caught between two worlds. Both are pretty depressing, but yeah I think the book is a bit more interesting in some ways. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the movie! Glazer leaves so much unexplained.
Amlis' character is just one big plot hole. The scene in the book where the vodsel writes mercy on the floor is another big plothole. Soon after that Amlis rides in Isserly's car. Who does he think built that car? Also, he says he never saw the ocean? How does one arrive in Scotland without ever seeing the ocean? It is an island... This whole idea of them not knowing vodsels have intelligent societies is so bogus. That really took me out of catharsis. I can suspend disbelief, but only to a point. Anyways. Thanks for the video! You are great.
@@WhytheBookWins I was sucked into it too! Such a trip! I was sucked to the point of scrutinizing every point it presented (which is never a good idea!). Lemme be honest, it was you who directed me to the book. I had seen the movie and after I was watching your videos I learned it was based on a book and then ran to read it. Thanks, yet again!
Thank you for this, I am a fan of the movie which I consider one of the best sci-fi ever done, changes notwithstanding (but then again, Tarkovsky changed Roadside Picnic into Stalker and his Solaris is not Lem's - then there is stuff like Annihilation which interestingly references both). You did a fantastic job with this one IMHO. I found your observation on the privileged status of the "good" alien very poignant, and it was also smart on the author's part to frame it. In the movie: I think the old model in the beginning is another actress. I do think that the movie girl is not even an alien biologically speaking, but a probe or bio-droid of some sort. Maybe that's another point of her "barbie doll anatomy" so to speak, on top of being a metaphor of her "alien-ess" and ultimate impossibility to connect. She spits out the cake, she cannot be human, which makes this story a sort of reverse blade runner and extremely tragic.
Oh wow I love your Blade Runner comparison! And yeah, I made some assumptions on her creation, but you are right that even amongst her own kind she may be some different kind of being rather than simply a normal alien in human skin. Funny you mention Annihilation, because that is a book vs movie video that will be coming out next month! Thanks for sharing your thoughts and I'm glad you liked the video ☺
Thanks for the review, I enjoyed the insight you had on the book and the movie. I watched the movie first and had so many questions that when the credits said it was based on the book, I had to read it! I think the movie was thought provoking on its own, but really enjoyed how more fleshed out the book was. One thing I did not like about the book (it's been a while since I read it, so my memory has faded) was the sexual assault on the main protagonist. And I don't know if I have a bias because the book was written by a man, about a woman (even an alien woman) but I thought it was too elaborate. I just remembered feeling disgusted and felt that there were details that were not necessary. Now I suppose some one could say that this was the author's intention and wanted to draw out that emotion from the readers, but as a woman reading about a fictional woman being assaulted by fictional man that was written by a man, I couldn't help but feel a little assaulted myself. I dont know if that's just me being a little too empathetic or, I dont know, dramatic? But I would love insight from others who had read the book, did anyone else have this viseral of a reaction or is it just me 😅? Like I mentioned, I know that could be the reaction or emotion the author intended 🤷♀️
It was definitely a difficult scene to read, but I don't think it effected me in quite the way your are describing. I see where you are coming from though because male authors writing about violence against women can feel more disgusting sometimes than if a woman writes it.
I thought the alien was a series of clones. I didn’t get the meat being sent back to the home planet part. I thought she was a vampire eating souls or something. Actually looking at the Wikipedia page, it says the director used the myth of the Baobhan sith as inspiration, so the vampire imagery makes sense, as does the blood. I thought the motorcycle guy was her servant. Like he was in charge of reincarnating her body if she was a vampire or spirit (fairy) of some kind. Oddly enough, the Baobhan sith is referenced as a influence on AHS: Delicate as well.
Hi guys, new sub.. Great analysis here. Personally I think Glazer is that rare thing, an experimental, some might say avant-garde film maker disguised as a mainstream multiplex-release director. I'd like to hear your thoughts on The Zone of Interest, the latest Glazer film based on the Martin Amis novel of the same name.
i haven't read the book but saw the movie!! i thought it was good! the filmmaking aspects are done really well even though i think i agree with your pacing issue! jonathan glazer though is always trying to do new techniques and unique ways to tell stories through the screen which is what i appreciate about the film and his style. do you recommend i check out the book if i have already seen the movie??
I saw the movie first. I think a lot of the comprehensibility of it for you is that you had the book to compare it to and to use as a resource. This is a prime example of adaptations that shouldn't even have the same name as their source material. They took the most basic high notes of the plot (there is a woman, she is an alien, and she is gathering men) and changed literally everything else. That's not an interpretation, that is a total lack of respect for the material and the lack of courage to put the scenes which they knew would be controversial onto the screen. Note it was the farming/harvesting of the men that was too offensive, not the sexual assault and then horrific murder of the woman. That tells you the filmmaker missed the entire point of the book. They leave out all of her backstory, her sacrifice, her ill treatment at the hands of both her own males and those on earth, her compassion, her pain, her despair, and finally her self destruction. They reduce her to a sexless, faceless, drone who is so unfeeling she would leave an infant to die alone... and then burn her alive. I highly suggest the book to anyone interested. The main character is so well written, you really feel for her and understand what she is doing and why. Everything has a reason, and it says a lot for class separation, and what makes people and society see other beings as inferior and therefore unimportant except as a resource. The aliens and their society are well developed and unique. As for interpretations of the film.. so often people go completely out of their way to come up with these elaborate hidden meanings.. the filmmakers must just sit and shake their heads at most of it. Sometimes black and white are just black and white.. it makes for great contrast.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! The book is definitely the better one in my opinion as well for many of the reasons you stated. Though I do think Glazer is a filmmaker who puts a lot of thought into every part of his films and so in this case, I think there is a lot that can be dissected and analyzed with the movie.
I think you may be reading too much into it. Like you I watched the movie first, no idea there was a book, read a review of it “same as the movie, just with a little more story on the aliens”. Kinda far from the truth, but. When they were making the movie the first draft was literally following the book, then they budgeted it... Out go the “human beings” out goes the farm, they literally threw 97% of the book away. But that’s okay, it’s an adaptation. I would love to see a remake, as a streaming season, with ALL the book stuff. Isserly is such a deep fascinating, contradictory character in the book, but the movie - less dimensional... Have you listened to the audio book? It’s incredible
@@geoffhoutman1557 I haven't listened to the audiobook but I will check it out. Currently listening to The Queens Gambit (the book the Netflix series is based on ) and it's great. That was an amazing adaptation as it's almost word for word from the book.
Since making this video I watched two other movie analysis videos-Chris Stuckman's and Lucas Blue, and it's interesting how their interpretations differs a bit from mine. Part of that is because I went into the movie with the book in my head, but I think based on your gender you may view the film's meaning differently. And I do think it is a movie that can have a lot of different interpretations, so I wouldn't say anyone's view of it is better than another's. What do you think?
Hearing the summary of the book I'm glad I only saw the movie without any book knowledge. The movie is much more interesting and mysterious in my opinion, not giving us any information about the aliens' home planet, society, class struggles and capitalist business ventures, and leaving it all to the imagination of the viewers.
I think the movie was perfectly paced, but I'm not from the Tiktok generation and the pace of the book didn't influence my perception of the movie.
All in all I don't think I will read the book as it sounds a bit like like 70s sci-fi schlock that naturally also lacks the incredible visual storytelling of the movie.
I never knew this was based off a book. I really liked the movie, the scenes where she picks up the guys, those are real people and they had hidden cameras, production would later ask them if it was okay to use in the film. Really enjoyed your analysis!
Yeah the way they filmed this with real people worked so well. The people who help her when she falls were also just random people in the street.
You did an excellent job recapping the book and the movie. I prefer the book and have read it so many times at this point. We have even visited Scotland where the novel takes place and stayed on "Ablach Farm" in Esswis' house (it is actually called Tarrel Farmhouse). We walked down to the shore of the Moray Firth where Isserley would spend time talking to the sheep and doing her exercises. We also visited many of the locations like some of the hitcher routes, where the assault happens, the jetty she drives to afterwards, and where she ultimately dies at the end. I am clearly obsessed! But it's such a great novel. I do like the movie as well, but it's just so different from the book. Thanks so much for posting this video, I really enjoyed it!
Thanks! Glad you liked my analysis 😁 And that's so cool! I was really glad the movie kept the setting in Scotland, despite their many other changes lol.
You have absolutely became my favorite UA-camr! I could listen to you talk all day. And you’re so pretty and kind! You also have beautiful teeth. 💗
I’m so glad you covered Under the Skin. It’s been my favorite book for years. It has so much to say. I love the movie, as well. But like you, I preferred the book.
Thank you so much!! This made my day 🤗
The scene with the baby is one of the most horrific scenes i have ever experienced
seriously 😣 so simple yet so effective
I have my own sub-genre for films called, "Would have made a great half-hour _Twilight Zone_ episode."
I put the film in that category.
Definitely!
Johnathan Glazer is so good, I wish he didn't take so long between films! Also the soundtrack to this (and Zone of Interest) by Mica Levi is amazing! Great video. :)
Regarding the baby on the beach scene in my mind it represents our own dismissive human relationship with sentient beings that we consider inferior and unworthy of our empathy. For instance in the livestock farming industry, where millions of male calves of dairy mother cows are slaughtered daily on a global scale because they hold no value for the dairy business, or billions of male chicks that are being shredded directly after hatching on egg farms for being useless for egg farmers, and consumers just don't care about them at all when we buy milk and eggs which perpetuates their suffering (unless you live vegan). The females are being exploited for their sexual biology and then slaughtered when depleted and the males are killed just for being useless.
The same with human victims in war zones, hearing about yet another 500 Ukrainian and Palestinian children murdered eventually just doesn't move us to donate money anymore.
So true unfortunately 😞 so many screwed up things happen but as a society we often just become desensitized to it.
I never knew about the book, but the film was one of my favorites of that year. It’s devastating. It delves into the best and worst parts about humanity and what that means.
The book is very different, but both delve into some similar themes.
Really love the film. Knew it was an adaptation but have never read the book. So didn't know how different the film is.
Not sure if you're aware of how Glazer filmed the scenes with Johansson's character interacting with the public. When she's walking around and with the van scenes, they were all shot using hidden cameras. So all of the people interacting with Johansson have no idea they are part of a movie. Love how Glazer turned the film into a social experiment that itself adds a layer to the film's meanings.
Here's a link to an old interview with Glazer discussing one scene: ua-cam.com/video/S8MbvKqHWM0/v-deo.htmlsi=m9En-fsTJnc1ng3p
It would be great if you did a comparison of Glazer's recent film Zone of Interest with the Martin Amis novel. Glazer's approach to making the film also adds a unique layer to the themes of the story.
Yeah so cool how they filmed it!
I tried reading that one but I had such a hard time getting into the book and it felt like a chore to read so I didn't finish it. Love the movie though!
I think he threw about half of Zone out in the adaptation, and 95+% of Under.
Sexy Beast still his best tho
I just watched this movie today . Your video is a great overview about the story and your coverage of the book completely made me understand a movie I was lost after watching thank you very much and I subscribed looking forward to more of your reviews
Thanks for subscribing! I'm glad you liked the video 😊
I grew up in Scotland and just to say, hitchhiking was definitely still a reasonably common thing around 2013. However, it tended to be more backpackers exploring the highlands (my Dad used to love giving people a lift and we met interesting people from all over the world), and kids who grew rurally who missed the 1 or 2 buses that would pass each day (the latter I know from personal experience!). I also spent 12 years living in Glasgow from 2008 onwards and could count on one hand the amount times I ever saw someone trying to thumb a ride (and even then I would suspect they were probably young tourists). By 2020 it was a non-existent practice around the greater Glasgow area.
Loved the review. Definitely going to revisit the film and hopefully get round to giving the book a try. BTW have you considered doing a review on Cloud Atlas? Just popped Michel Faber into the search to hear him speak and a talk between him and David Mitchell popped up. Amazing how the film really divided both the public and critics so would be cool to hear your thoughts. The book was nominated for some of the most prestigious awards here in the UK.
Oh interesting, thanks for sharing!
And I read and watched Cloud Atlas a while back and loved both! I keep meaning to revisit them and make a video. I'll plan on doing that at some point this year!
I hitchhiked all over Scotland in the 90s. I wouldn’t do this in the US, but in Europe, at the time, it was super safe, even as a woman alone. I rode in the back of a lot of trucks! I knew friend who hitchhiked there though the 2010s, but in the Highlands and other less populated areas.
Listen to the audiobook. It’s on UA-cam, about 9 and a bit hours long. Amazing narrator
Hi, great video! I thought, having not read the book, that the skin was being harvested. 😅 Because, like you noticed too, the skin of the earlier victim was loosened before it was separated from the rest of the body. It was also left in perfect condition (no incisions or butchering).
I assumed that because she didn’t need to eat or have any lower orifices (a lack of intestinal tract it kind of implied there too) , her body was powered in more advanced biochemical ways than humans.
Lastly, when I saw that her skin came off / did not heal when torn and that she was a fully functioning organism without if, that made me finally think that her human skin was harvested from another human.
I still think this may be happening in the movie version learning about the book from you. It seems the director was going a more for an art-house version of horror and tragedy vs sci-fi.
Making it more about humans used for their skin and all of the metaphors that come with that idea leaves more room for a haunting minimalism. Staying with the bodyfarm concept would have required far more expositing, making it sci-fi vibes. Also, post “Soilent Green is people!” I think it was more elegant to make it vague and or not necessarily about human meat.
But did I miss a shot in the movie that might show or imply that the humans were food? I assumed the bloody convertor belts were hauling the blood off as biowaste or had some other scientific purpose. 😅
You could be right! I was applying my knowledge of the book to the movie, but they could have been going for a different intent.
@@WhytheBookWins the book sounds like it would be an excellent streaming series.✨
This was such a great review! Thank you for talking about this book and film. I had no idea it was a book. I watched the film in theaters when it came out and I couldn't sleep that night. It really hit me. I was able to put together that Scarlett's character was capturing people to be eaten but it took me a few days after watching the film and reflecting on it that I was able to put some pieces together. I don't think it was made that clear in the film. (I also recently learned that Stranger Things took inspiration from this movie for their black pool scenes, which is very cool).
Your summary of the book gave so much more context. Thank you for that, the book sounds really interesting. The book is too heavy for me to read at this point in my life, and I appreciate the fact that I can watch your review of it. P.S. your kitten is adorable. 🧡
I'm glad you liked my review! The book and movie are both disturbing but in different ways. And while I would read the book again, I think the movie might be a one time watch.
And thanks! I didn't even know she made an appearance until I was editing lol.
I love your reviews. I have to laugh a bit at myself because I've seen many of these films, while not at all aware that they were first books. I did see this film. It left me troubled from the beginning to the end...troubled, angry, and sad. I thought everyone's performances were stellar (no pun intended). I don't see myself reading the book.
I'm glad I can surprise you! And yeah, both book and movie are very troubling.
It is cheaper to eat as a vegetarian as opposed to a meat eater. That is why poorer families have “meatless Mondays” and the like. Especially now with groceries being a lot more expensive. I notice meat has probably gone up a 1/3 in price but veggies, nuts and legumes have gone up about a 1/10. So, really, poor people can take a stand for animal rights and climate change and also save money by making a meatless budget. I know, I have been poor. :)
Thank you for another great review! I really like this movie & have watched it four times, but I had no idea there was a book! I enjoyed the haunting scenes & themes. I will definitely be putting the novel on my "to read" list!
Haunting is a great word to describe the movie 😳
I have seen the movie five times and I had no clue they were eating those people. I thought they were studying people like how people study bugs
That assumption makes sense! Had I not read the book, I wouldn't have thought they were eating the meat.
I saw the movie, and have not read the book yet. It was confusing - all of the backstory from the book you mention here was missing. So I was confused about why the men were brought into the black pool that melted their body, leaving the skin behind, beyond using the skin as part of the alien's disguises? I must have blinked or stepped out when the meat conveyor belt scene occurred - or maybe it was so shocking that my mind rejected it. Extreme weirdness and inhuman calculus was my impression. Her attempt to escape showed how she was changing, but in the end she was too alien to survive as a human: caught between two worlds. The movie was sad and depressing to me. I never knew the movie was based on a book, and it sounds like a more interesting story than the movie turned out to be.
Yeah very true about being caught between two worlds. Both are pretty depressing, but yeah I think the book is a bit more interesting in some ways. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the movie! Glazer leaves so much unexplained.
Amlis' character is just one big plot hole. The scene in the book where the vodsel writes mercy on the floor is another big plothole. Soon after that Amlis rides in Isserly's car. Who does he think built that car? Also, he says he never saw the ocean? How does one arrive in Scotland without ever seeing the ocean? It is an island... This whole idea of them not knowing vodsels have intelligent societies is so bogus. That really took me out of catharsis. I can suspend disbelief, but only to a point. Anyways. Thanks for the video! You are great.
That's such a great point! I think I was so sucked into the story I hadn't even thought about how it didn't make sense.
@@WhytheBookWins I was sucked into it too! Such a trip! I was sucked to the point of scrutinizing every point it presented (which is never a good idea!). Lemme be honest, it was you who directed me to the book. I had seen the movie and after I was watching your videos I learned it was based on a book and then ran to read it. Thanks, yet again!
Thank you for this, I am a fan of the movie which I consider one of the best sci-fi ever done, changes notwithstanding (but then again, Tarkovsky changed Roadside Picnic into Stalker and his Solaris is not Lem's - then there is stuff like Annihilation which interestingly references both). You did a fantastic job with this one IMHO.
I found your observation on the privileged status of the "good" alien very poignant, and it was also smart on the author's part to frame it.
In the movie:
I think the old model in the beginning is another actress.
I do think that the movie girl is not even an alien biologically speaking, but a probe or bio-droid of some sort. Maybe that's another point of her "barbie doll anatomy" so to speak, on top of being a metaphor of her "alien-ess" and ultimate impossibility to connect. She spits out the cake, she cannot be human, which makes this story a sort of reverse blade runner and extremely tragic.
Oh wow I love your Blade Runner comparison! And yeah, I made some assumptions on her creation, but you are right that even amongst her own kind she may be some different kind of being rather than simply a normal alien in human skin.
Funny you mention Annihilation, because that is a book vs movie video that will be coming out next month!
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and I'm glad you liked the video ☺
@@WhytheBookWins Really looking forward Annihilation! Cheers!
Thanks for the review, I enjoyed the insight you had on the book and the movie.
I watched the movie first and had so many questions that when the credits said it was based on the book, I had to read it!
I think the movie was thought provoking on its own, but really enjoyed how more fleshed out the book was.
One thing I did not like about the book (it's been a while since I read it, so my memory has faded) was the sexual assault on the main protagonist. And I don't know if I have a bias because the book was written by a man, about a woman (even an alien woman) but I thought it was too elaborate. I just remembered feeling disgusted and felt that there were details that were not necessary. Now I suppose some one could say that this was the author's intention and wanted to draw out that emotion from the readers, but as a woman reading about a fictional woman being assaulted by fictional man that was written by a man, I couldn't help but feel a little assaulted myself. I dont know if that's just me being a little too empathetic or, I dont know, dramatic?
But I would love insight from others who had read the book, did anyone else have this viseral of a reaction or is it just me 😅?
Like I mentioned, I know that could be the reaction or emotion the author intended 🤷♀️
It was definitely a difficult scene to read, but I don't think it effected me in quite the way your are describing. I see where you are coming from though because male authors writing about violence against women can feel more disgusting sometimes than if a woman writes it.
I thought the alien was a series of clones. I didn’t get the meat being sent back to the home planet part. I thought she was a vampire eating souls or something. Actually looking at the Wikipedia page, it says the director used the myth of the Baobhan sith as inspiration, so the vampire imagery makes sense, as does the blood. I thought the motorcycle guy was her servant. Like he was in charge of reincarnating her body if she was a vampire or spirit (fairy) of some kind. Oddly enough, the Baobhan sith is referenced as a influence on AHS: Delicate as well.
Oh interesting, I hadn't heard of that so thanks for sharing!
Adam Pearson is a pretty amazing actor.
This film is arthouse gold. But I can imagine the director saying, “She wears a human suit so her alien nature is UNDER THE SKIN!”
Hi guys, new sub.. Great analysis here. Personally I think Glazer is that rare thing, an experimental, some might say avant-garde film maker disguised as a mainstream multiplex-release director. I'd like to hear your thoughts on The Zone of Interest, the latest Glazer film based on the Martin Amis novel of the same name.
Yeah I want to go back and watch his older movies! And I will anxiously await what he does next.
i haven't read the book but saw the movie!! i thought it was good! the filmmaking aspects are done really well even though i think i agree with your pacing issue! jonathan glazer though is always trying to do new techniques and unique ways to tell stories through the screen which is what i appreciate about the film and his style. do you recommend i check out the book if i have already seen the movie??
also great work as always!
Yeah I would definitely recommend the book!
I have only seen this and The Zone of Interest by Glazer but I definitely want to watch more from him!
I saw the movie first. I think a lot of the comprehensibility of it for you is that you had the book to compare it to and to use as a resource. This is a prime example of adaptations that shouldn't even have the same name as their source material. They took the most basic high notes of the plot (there is a woman, she is an alien, and she is gathering men) and changed literally everything else. That's not an interpretation, that is a total lack of respect for the material and the lack of courage to put the scenes which they knew would be controversial onto the screen. Note it was the farming/harvesting of the men that was too offensive, not the sexual assault and then horrific murder of the woman. That tells you the filmmaker missed the entire point of the book. They leave out all of her backstory, her sacrifice, her ill treatment at the hands of both her own males and those on earth, her compassion, her pain, her despair, and finally her self destruction. They reduce her to a sexless, faceless, drone who is so unfeeling she would leave an infant to die alone... and then burn her alive. I highly suggest the book to anyone interested. The main character is so well written, you really feel for her and understand what she is doing and why. Everything has a reason, and it says a lot for class separation, and what makes people and society see other beings as inferior and therefore unimportant except as a resource. The aliens and their society are well developed and unique. As for interpretations of the film.. so often people go completely out of their way to come up with these elaborate hidden meanings.. the filmmakers must just sit and shake their heads at most of it. Sometimes black and white are just black and white.. it makes for great contrast.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! The book is definitely the better one in my opinion as well for many of the reasons you stated. Though I do think Glazer is a filmmaker who puts a lot of thought into every part of his films and so in this case, I think there is a lot that can be dissected and analyzed with the movie.
I think you may be reading too much into it. Like you I watched the movie first, no idea there was a book, read a review of it “same as the movie, just with a little more story on the aliens”. Kinda far from the truth, but.
When they were making the movie the first draft was literally following the book, then they budgeted it... Out go the “human beings” out goes the farm, they literally threw 97% of the book away. But that’s okay, it’s an adaptation.
I would love to see a remake, as a streaming season, with ALL the book stuff. Isserly is such a deep fascinating, contradictory character in the book, but the movie - less dimensional...
Have you listened to the audio book? It’s incredible
@@geoffhoutman1557 I haven't listened to the audiobook but I will check it out. Currently listening to The Queens Gambit (the book the Netflix series is based on ) and it's great. That was an amazing adaptation as it's almost word for word from the book.
She is a serial killer
Yeah but there is much more to it than that. And she isn't the one who actually kills them in the book.