Annihilation

Damsels in distress slightly differently. Sophisticated chamber slow (you will feel it is twice as long; but it's not a complaint) second-rate movie, where, however, everyone behaves logically and appropriately in given situations and which takes the same from Strugacky as from Things and Arrival. But surprisingly little of VanderMeer's original. On the one hand, the scenes are both captivating and disturbing, atmosphere is dense. On the other hand, it is supposed to be a hardcore sci-fi movie that is rich in interpretation and that has dimension overlap. And I am not at all sure whether it is justified and or whether the movie is just pretending to be that way or if it is just banal. In any case, (not only) for these reasons, it will make you wonder about staff, that´s fur sure. The movie will not get out of your head as soon as you see closing credits. (12/03/2018)

I appreciate Garland for one thing: how he is able to seduce critics, through his bloated and, in this case, nonsensical B-movie, to write about sci-fi masterpieces. Which is the case of a film that looks quite bad on television and is vague everywhere where it should be concrete and concrete everywhere where it should be vague. Truly a daring film. (14/03/2018)

The less sense there is, the stronger the fate, or how not even a mutated extraterrestrial ecosystem isn’t enough for someone to act with some sense with their protozoan intelligence, isn’t it, Marceloo? But on the other hand, I wouldn’t take Annihilation as a deeply philosophical work, either – the fact that anyone can get frustrated because of that is funny. Portman and four more scientists, about whom a lot can be written (though certainly not that the director has made them likeable) go to investigate a Zone… and they find pretty much what the trailer promised, although there is less survival and mutated creatures than expected. Then it nicely goes to a highly atmospheric and wordless mind-fuck, but there’s nothing unpredictable about it, either. In a Nolan film, Nataly would have spoken a lot in the end and that would be it. I really enjoyed Annihilation, it’s visually excellent, the special effects are engaging and here and there it pushes the mind into a nicely dark direction. But I have a soft spot for sci-fi premises like this, in any media, and I’m really interested in the book version now. But I don’t think this film is that awesome, really; my expectations were perhaps a little higher. (12/03/2018)

Thanks God Garland didn’t make Arrival. Thanks to this, it did not lose its humanistic subtext and rational explanation, something that cannot be said about Annihilation. The surrealistic wandering through fantastic landscapes, decorated with brilliant set design and minimalistic music, is beautiful to watch and listen to, but the story is at times a survival, at times a parade of CGI monsters, and a nondescript finale. Sure, we don't always need a literal interpretation, but if it's WTF, it would kinda sting. Garland is a tinkerer of technology, a master of atmosphere and slow-burn stories about a few characters, but here he gets too wrapped up in the themes. There’re still a few brilliant directorial ideas, though. (14/05/2018)

Set in a green rainforest (and on a beach), Annihilation is a more intellectual version of The Thing. It has a rather mainstream theme with a slightly B-movie nature but interesting ideas, escalated into a hitherto unseen close encounter of the third kind, fascinating by its far-reaching imagination and a provocative need to find as many answers as possible in it. The final scene is a return to genre rules, but it turns out well. Garland is not a hitmaker, but rather a hard-core sci-fi filmmaker. While Arrival was about the relativity of the perception of time, Annihilation is about the relativity of biological lifeforms. Totally different, but in both cases brilliant, innovative sci-fi works, ambitious in their content. (24/12/2018)