|
 High-Rise is an adaptation of the J.G. Ballard novel of the same name. Directed by Ben Wheatley (Kill List, A Field in England) and starring Tom Hiddleston, Jeremy Irons, Sienna Miller, and Luke Evans, it traces the breakdown of civil society within a brutalist 1970s apartment building. The film operates as a feature length flashback, starting with the central character Dr. Robert Laing navigating the ruined apartment building in search of food. After flashing back to his move-in date three months earlier we get a tour of the metaphor that drives the plot of the film: the upper classes live on the high floors of the building, with the architect taking the top floor and roof for himself, and the lower classes live on the bottom floors. Its as straightforward and unsubtle as 2013's Snowpiercer, with the bottom floors suffering power outages while the upper class parties. Laing serves as a neutral ground, living in the middle of the apartment block and leading a middle class life as a physiology professor, pledging allegiance to neither side of the class conflict. High-Rise is a very dark comedy, one of the funniest films I have seen in theaters in a long time. It follows a unique pace, with frenetic editing obscuring the main action of the war between the upper and lower floors. Wheatley instead chooses to linger on the build-up and aftermath of each scene of conflict. This leaves plenty of time for the characters to demonstrate their regression to extreme caricatures of their respective classes as society breaks down. Luke Evans is especially notable as Richard Wilder, a small-time actor who goes from being an incorrigible lech to blood-smeared anarchist through the film's run time. Laing's psychoanalysis of Wilder is one of the comedic highlights of the film. With fantastic set design and an impeccable musical score there is basically nothing I didn't like about this movie. Go out and see it if you get the chance. 
|
#
?
May 19, 2016 06:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 03:03 |
|
|
Just got back from seeing this, and I absolutely love it. What a gorgeous movie. I do worry, with the comparisons to Snowpiercer, people won't get it. Basically, I'm picturing a lot of "but why don't they just leave?".
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2016 07:04
|
|
|
Loki_XLII posted:Just got back from seeing this, and I absolutely love it. What a gorgeous movie. I do worry, with the comparisons to Snowpiercer, people won't get it. I'm in a bit of a film nerd bubble but I haven't heard this criticism personally. Maybe part of it is living in a big city where people's attachment to their condos and that kind of lifestyle runs fairly deep. Unrelated:Both the book and the movie have what I think is the best opening line I've ever heard.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2016 14:55
|
|
|
Loki_XLII posted:Just got back from seeing this, and I absolutely love it. What a gorgeous movie. I do worry, with the comparisons to Snowpiercer, people won't get it. Its relatively subtle I guess, but its heavily implied that the world outside is no picnic. We only get quick glimpses of it, but I got the feeling that its like 90% parking lots. Its like Mad Max if instead of the wasteland there was an endless parking lot. There's effectively no law enforcement, and I'm not sure society is really functioning at all anymore. Dr. Liang goes to work but it barely seems necessary, he seems to be going through the motions. I watched this as a double feature with Brazil, but it would probably go really well with Playtime as well. Basebf555 fucked around with this message at 15:04 on May 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 19, 2016 14:59
|
|
|
If any1 can find that first orchestral cover of the ABBA song (not the portishead one) hmu!!
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
flashy_mcflash posted:I'm in a bit of a film nerd bubble but I haven't heard this criticism personally. Maybe part of it is living in a big city where people's attachment to their condos and that kind of lifestyle runs fairly deep. I get that and you get that, but I don't know. Maybe it's just me being paranoid. I actually love the decision to not focus on the world outside. Personally, I've seen close to this level of squalor myself, and that's one of the more terrifying parts of the movie for me. Forgive me for being dumb, but is the quote at the end about state and free capitalism from a real person?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2016 16:19
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Its relatively subtle I guess, but its heavily implied that the world outside is no picnic. Of course it's not, Margaret Thatcher is out there. This is also the answer to the poster above.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
Jenny Agutter posted:Of course it's not, Margaret Thatcher is out there. Cool cool cool. I thought that was probably the case but don't really know British politics or what voices sound like.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:If any1 can find that first orchestral cover of the ABBA song (not the portishead one) hmu!! I looked for this too, and the best I could find was https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Tknztyu9JI which isn't quite as good as the version in the film (mostly due to recording quality) but still, it hits the spot.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2016 21:52
|
|
|
I assume that no one leaves for the same reason that Laing doesn't: They can't help themselves. There's just *something* about life in the High Rise that keeps them there. I mean essentially the case is being made that you can't escape society, but there's also almost a supernatural draw that the place has, as you see when Laing strays outside and seems to be on the verge of a panic attack. There's also some wonderfully dry lines there.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 11:25
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:I assume that no one leaves for the same reason that Laing doesn't: They can't help themselves. There's just *something* about life in the High Rise that keeps them there. I really don't think there's anything outside that people would want to go out for. From what we're shown its all a big parking lot with a few buildings sprinkled in. And this huge parking lot sea is a battleground that doesn't appear to be safe at all.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 14:13
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:If any1 can find that first orchestral cover of the ABBA song (not the portishead one) hmu!! I saw in the credits Clint Mansell was credited with it, so that might help. DrVenkman posted:I mean essentially the case is being made that you can't escape society, but there's also almost a supernatural draw that the place has, as you see when Laing strays outside and seems to be on the verge of a panic attack. I don't even think it's an almost, in the final montage Laird refers to himself in the third person, and when asked who he's talking to, he replies with "the building." While the thematic messages are just as unsubtle, I don't think it's nearly as straightforward as Snowpiercer, which I don't mind at all. Between this, Kill List, and A Field In England, it's Wheatley and Jump's thing to use editing and scripting to obfuscate the narrative to create the atmosphere he wants, and to drive the thematic core of the film. It's confusing and difficult to wrap your head around, but I think it works in a Lynchian sort of way.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 15:08
|
|
|
Loki_XLII posted:Forgive me for being dumb, but is the quote at the end about state and free capitalism from a real person? As far as Maggie Thatcher can be considered a person, yes.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
coffeetable posted:I looked for this too, and the best I could find was Thank u for the hustle
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 01:33
|
|
|
I saw this today and thought that it was just not very good. It's a film that holds all its satire in its premise and, lacking any real intellectual depth, can't manage to do anything but restate that premise over and over again through its run time. The Snowpiercer comparison is instructive — as Snowpiercer goes, more and more is shown, the metaphor is expanded, and new points are made. We learn about the protein bars, we have the scene in the school room, we have the way the windows appear then disappear, and at the end we are twice forced to rethink everything that came before (with Namgoong and Wilford's monologues). In High-Rise, on the other hand, we are given right at the start that the building is stratified by level, and that society is a facade for a basic humanity that is easily remove ("the facemask slips off quite easily"). But that isn't developed. Wilder is an id-driven wild man and stays as such through the film. The top floors play aristocrat and indulge themselves beginning to end. The only jokes that land are delivered through dialogue — anything delivered visually (the camp out in the squash court, the loving, the chaos in the supermarket, the loving, the gym in disarray, the loving) falls flat. The film attempts to create mood, but that falls flat after the first time since it only hits one note again and again.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2016 04:56
|
|
|
That was very good and fun, especially because it was so blunt. The architect is called Royal and the stolen woman Helen. The wild guy is Wilder. Loved it.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2016 06:59
|
|
|
Loki_XLII posted:Just got back from seeing this, and I absolutely love it. What a gorgeous movie. I do worry, with the comparisons to Snowpiercer, people won't get it. Is the film actually anything like Snowpiercer because I thought Snowpiercer was fantastic
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2016 07:51
|
|
|
Lord Lambeth posted:Is the film actually anything like Snowpiercer because I thought Snowpiercer was fantastic I felt Snowpiercer got pretty weak at the end, and it sounds like for Hand Knit this movie didn't even start as strong. This film hasn't shown anywhere near me, so I can't comment on it.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2016 14:57
|
|
|
They're similar in the back-front/bottom-top stratification allegory, but that's it really. They're completely different in style and tone.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
Movie was gorgeous, wish I could have seen it in theaters. Glad it's on digital services at least. The whole building felt like an extended version of The Shining's Overlook Hotel by the end, loved the soundtrack, Hiddleston was great and more subdued than he's been lately. I actually thought it was quite funny too.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2016 15:51
|
|
|
Lord Lambeth posted:Is the film actually anything like Snowpiercer because I thought Snowpiercer was fantastic Would you like Snowpiercer if you knew from the start that Gilliam was right and Curtis's revolution was merely the result of an unrestrained/unrestrainable human id?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
Loved this movie, glad to see it get a thread. Absolutely bonkers in the best possible way, and had a lot in common with films such as The Wall, Land of the Blind, and Hunger Games.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2016 16:37
|
|
|
I was really excited for this because I love Wheatley's work, but it started to lose my interest about halfway through. I think it' a beautiful movie, the shots are fantastic, and I love all the quirky edits. It was a real pleasure to see. However, it was just so... unsubtle about everything. And I get that it's part of the aesthetic, especially being adapted from a book from the 70s, but I kind of felt like, by the 1 hour mark, I'd sort of heard everything the film was trying to say. Rich people on top, led by "Royal", poors on the bottom, led by "Wilder", choosing not to pick a side is picking a side, etc etc. I thought Snowpiercer did a better job of subtly implying that no matter who controls the train, it's still the same system of haves and have nots, still the same cycle of humanity. It was definitely a darkly funny film, dialogue-wise. I sputtered out a shocked laugh when one of the rich people was complaining about Wilder and said "He's even raping people he's not supposed to rape!" That's brutal. For all the disappointment I had with it, I found the film audacious in all the right ways, just no fucks given. It seems like a film that achieved a singular vision free from the usual film industry blandification process, so for that I think it's valuable. I'd rather see a daring film that misses the mark a little than another snoozer like X-Men Apocalypse. And, for what it's worth, I do keep THINKING about this movie and I enjoy reading about it, so perhaps it's more of a "long tail" success than an immediate one for me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 12:59
|
|
|
JG Ballard is extremely my poo poo, Ben Wheatley is extremely my poo poo, all the actors in this are great... gonna get high as a scraper and rent this tonight, thank God theaters are dying and streaming new movies is a thing because the nearest to me it's playing is LA and I'm not driving to LA for anything, much less a movie.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 18:37
|
|
|
Anal Surgery posted:However, it was just so... unsubtle about everything. And I get that it's part of the aesthetic, especially being adapted from a book from the 70s, but I kind of felt like, by the 1 hour mark, I'd sort of heard everything the film was trying to say. Rich people on top, led by "Royal", poors on the bottom, led by "Wilder", choosing not to pick a side is picking a side, etc etc. There's more to it than class struggle, though, or at least this was true of the original novel. It's not just about social stratification, though that is perhaps the bluntest and most upfront part of it. The lower orders in the high rise aren't poor by any stretch. Even the least privileged inhabitants are comfortably middle class. quote:I thought Snowpiercer did a better job of subtly implying that no matter who controls the train, it's still the same system of haves and have nots, still the same cycle of humanity. But the whole point of the high rise and how no-one leaves despite how bad it's getting and how everyone regresses to a sort of feral FYGM sensuous anarchy is that it's not the same. The social bonds are breaking, the customs and statuses that the inhabitants were previously familiar with are falling apart and they're changing, adapting to fit their new circumstances. Outside the tower Laing is a doctor, someone with status and purpose, whereas inside it he's a quiescent nonentity, someone entirely content to be left alone. He's happier being that, retreating into the primal hyperreality of the high rise, where there are no rules or expectations beyond brutal and darwinian survival. Nobody leaves because nobody wants to leave, even when they're being brutalised, battered, raped and otherwise abused. And perhaps that's a more urgent and fitting message than the age-old struggle between the haves and have-nots; that zombie capitalism shambles along anyway, because everybody likes being a part of its broken machinery. The system has warped them to to fit into the new space it has made for them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 00:31
|
|
|
Is the parking lot outside a black joke about nature? The jungle serves a similar image picture story word purpose, but this movie wouldn't have a jungle.
Arglebargle III fucked around with this message at 05:55 on Jun 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 05:50
|
|
|
If you haven't read the source material, or want to revisit it, Tom Hiddleston narrates the most recent audio-book version.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 06:18
|
|
|
It doesn't really matter what the world is outside. Like TomViolence says, they're caught in the web of society. None of them are proletarians. They're at the very least petits bourgouis. It's a world they know and it's a future they know.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 06:50
|
|
|
The architect purposely trapped the tenants by designing the complex as a grasping hand. In addition to the explicit exposition about this, there's that great Bay-esque rotating shot of Laing in the unfinished pond leading into the montage of his psychological breakdown. It seems like the architect maybe meant the complex to resemble the comforting hand of god, especially from his pure white workspace in the middle of a garden, but the brutalist style is better suited to oppressive assertion of power. Ultimately the residents are not being cared for by the building, but become completely dependent on it while being unable to function outside of it. Laing feels like a blood cell circulating through the building's veins.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 16:34
|
|
|
I got the sense watching the movie that a parking space was like a highly sought after resource, and figuring out where you parked your car and where to park it once you've returned home is a major issue. I imagined the world as 80% parking lot and 20% high rise buildings, with nothing from the natural world left to be seen anywhere. All that could be 100% wrong but I like that the movie gives you these little tidbits and lets you run with it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 16:38
|
|
|
I went to NYC to watch this in theaters, and afterwards witnessed an explosion in the street. I wrote about it here: https://letterboxd.com/monolith94/film/high-rise-2015/
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 16:49
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:There's more to it than class struggle, though, or at least this was true of the original novel. It's not just about social stratification, though that is perhaps the bluntest and most upfront part of it. The lower orders in the high rise aren't poor by any stretch. Even the least privileged inhabitants are comfortably middle class. This is a good post. Also, are you the ThomasViolence from twitter or is it just a moniker I don't know the reference to?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 00:11
|
|
|
Lil Mama Im Sorry posted:This is a good post. Nah, I'm a different guy. The handle's just a reference to the Sonic youth song of the same name. I'm glad my rambling post came across okay. Was drunk when I made it and I don't wield the language of critique too well when I'm blasted.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:Nah, I'm a different guy. The handle's just a reference to the Sonic youth song of the same name. I'm glad my rambling post came across okay. Was drunk when I made it and I don't wield the language of critique too well when I'm blasted. If that's how you critique drunk, you must be a demigod or something sober.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
Pretty garbage that it took Jo Cox's senseless death for this to see the light of day but here's the SOS cover in all its glory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVe-9VWIcCo
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:I got the sense watching the movie that a parking space was like a highly sought after resource, and figuring out where you parked your car and where to park it once you've returned home is a major issue. I imagined the world as 80% parking lot and 20% high rise buildings, with nothing from the natural world left to be seen anywhere. The thing is that parking lots cause desert conditions and exacerbate problems such as free-standing water that can't soak into the paved ground (flash floods anybody), and erosion of what's left of arable soil. With no green spaces to release oxygen and help pull carbon back out of the air, it creates its own actual wasteland over time. Even the damage caused by the construction process can take decades after being compressed by trucks and equipment to the point it can't absorb water.. The physics behind it is real, it's not just a fun Talking Heads song.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 22:14
|
|
|
Oh yeah also, the movie doesn't really make it clear in the beginning that Laing is actually getting ready to go off to work and give a lecture - while he's sitting around eating the Alsation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
Bumping thread to mention that its now on Netflix. As far as I can tell it was dropped on it kind of unceremoniously because I check what's scheduled to be released every month and it wasn't on there. In fact it wasn't even in the "New Release" or "Just Added" categories, instead I found it in Drama. While I enjoyed the movie as a whole I was kind of disappointed that it didn't directly keep the novel ending where Laing is on the balcony watching one of the other buildings and the power starts to go out over there. He kind of mentions it but it's not quite the same.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 04:04
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:Bumping thread to mention that its now on Netflix. As far as I can tell it was dropped on it kind of unceremoniously because I check what's scheduled to be released every month and it wasn't on there. In fact it wasn't even in the "New Release" or "Just Added" categories, instead I found it in Drama. Thanks for the heads-up. I've been wanting to see it for a while, and I'm surprised it's not showing up in one of the more popular and obvious categories on Netflix.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 03:03 |
|
|
TomViolence posted:There's more to it than class struggle, though, or at least this was true of the original novel. It's not just about social stratification, though that is perhaps the bluntest and most upfront part of it. The lower orders in the high rise aren't poor by any stretch. Even the least privileged inhabitants are comfortably middle class. Well no - you're probably describing aspects of the novel there. The film is about a single mom in the suburbs who gets married. And that's really it. Laing is presented as an incredibly boring dude who sustains himself with fantasies of transgressive violence when, in actuality, absolutely nothing unusual happens in the film. Wheatley puts no emphasis on the building causing people to go mad, because the building is not causing people to go mad in this version. He's instead adapted the book into a subpar American Beauty: a film about banal dysfunctional relationships. The randomly-appearing bags of garbage and whatever are externalizations of the characters' inner feelings. The characters don't call the police for the simple reason that nobody is actually endangered in any way. It's just a series of identical cocktail parties that gradually lose their luster. There's nothing realistic about the breakdown of this building - no verisimilitude in its malfunctions. High-Rise traffics in surrealism - mainly the surrealism of Georges Bataille. (References to "The 'Old Mole' And The Prefix Sur" abound: specifically in the Icarus wings mockingly applied to Laing.) The building represents a spiritual stratification, while the characters actually occupy a flat suburban expanse. That's to say that, at the end of the film, Laing is not 'talking to the building'. He's bemused by the idea of talking to the building, toying with the idea, because he's a pretentious ninny.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 08:55
|
|
