review by Evan
The Skin I Live In 2011
Watched Jul 03, 2012
Evan’s review:
I had high expectations and in a way they were met. In another way, that slowly became apparent as the movie progressed, they weren't.
The Skin I Live In is certainly an Almodovar film. It's a strange one but it certainly has his mark. I appreciated this. I also appreciated the acting. The performance by Antonio Banderas is just one of many truly outstanding performances in this film. Every single actor feels extremely real in their role. The cinematography is also memorable, as I expected it would be.
What I did not expect was how disturbing this film would be. I'll gladly watch the film again and see if the problem was me not the film, as I suspect most fans of the film will immediately assume. Still, I really do feel like, for me at least, the problem was the film. Admittedly this is one of the most disturbing movies I've ever seen. But it's not because of what happens as much as the way the film deals with it. In Blue Velvet, for example, there are a clearly characters that we're meant to connect too. Horrible things happen but there are also those trying to stop these things from happening. It's not morally black and white - Rear Window would be another good, if tamer, example - but I can still connect to the characters and I can still get a sense of what the film is trying to say.
I'm not exactly sure what this film was trying to say. Every character is a horrible person - or they're incidental. I say this not because I necessarily view people as plainly as good or bad but because the film doesn't offer much alternative. It shows the circumstances which lead people to do bad things - but it doesn't let me in enough to make me want to spend two hours with these people. I'm not saying the film is worse because of its disturbing content. But the fact that it shows such horrible things also doesn't immediately make the film worthwhile. It needs a reason no matter what. And I don't see a reason. Why did Almodovar feel this story had to be told? What was he trying to get across?
I can't help but feel that this is some kind of Mothers of America reaction to the film. I honestly have never responded to a movie quite this way before. I genuinely don't think that this is a moral judgement. This is not an evil film - not at all. I don't think the movie condones these actions. I just don't understand what purpose showing me all of this served. If I saw a purpose then I wouldn't mind. If that were the case, I'd praise it.
Don't think I hated the film though. There's much to like - the acting, the cinematography and some key scenes. Indeed, I was actually a fan of the movie at first. Slowly I started to grow less fond of it until one key revelation late in the film changed my outlook away from the positive toward the negative. Perhaps I just need to watch it again. And I would like too. I won't be forgetting this film anytime soon and that's certainly worth something. So we'll see. It's possible my current feeling - that the film has no substantial point to it - is correct. It's also possible it's wrong. Maybe on second viewing the value will appear to me. Evidently I missed it this first time around.
Although I liked the way you defended your opinion - I felt in the very same way when I saw Bertolucci's Luna -, I think The Skin I Live in has reasons to be awful. I think the movie is, simplifying things, a warning to the steps science is trying to do. Antonio Bandera's character is the metaphor for science craziness and egoism. That's the reason you probably don't feel connected with any characters, in my point of view, they aren't people, they are synecdoches for science, science's consciousness, population etc. The hypothetic message in the film is to simulate a break up in the limits of what is human, what is organic and what is synthetic, artificial, you know? At least that's the way I see it. What do you think? Does it seems fair?
Agree with Walter, both in his interpretation and in that I also like the way you explained your thoughts on the film =)
Thanks for the responses. I'm glad to hear that that's the interpretation you both came to because that's the one possible theme that I thought of while watching it. I was kind of hoping that that wasn't the theme though because if you're right I still don't like the film very much.
As a fan of scientific advancement I can't say I agree with the conclusions of the critique. Surely he can't be suggesting that we should forgo the wonderful medical advances that have been made recently in facial transplants. Horror and sci-fi films often play out fears of scientific advancement - and I love them. But they're usually more complex and relevant than this one. I would have probably preferred this as a full-out fun genre film. Even films like Brazil or Blade Runner find time for such things as hope and fun - even if they don't overwhelm the film.
It all comes down to the disconnect from the characters though. I think that that was a very poor decision. As a psycho-sexual drama it's not relatable and as a critique of modern scientific advancement I think it loses a lot of its validity. I don't believe that that would happen. If I'd cared for the characters and understood their situations then I probably could have believed what was happening. And that would have made all the difference, I think.
Another possibility: wouldn't it have been better to have a cop, or someone, and follow their story as they try to track down Banderas? They don't have to succeed but they would give the audience someone to root for and make the film feel a lot more realistic.
Anyway, I'll watch it again and see if, in that new light, it's any stronger. There is certainly a lot to like about it.
I understand your point. Surely do. In what concerns to me, even though I also like scientific development, I think this movie has a point. As I said, to say it is just a warning to science is simplifying things, Almodovar has always more psychological and the psychology here lies in the relationship of Antonio Banderas and the transsexual he created. Nor even himself can separate things anymore, he doesn't know what he is, what he likes, he is blind by his creation. The sex - which, in Almodovar's has always been so organic, so passionately filmed - had became pushed and artificial - "she" needs vaseline.
Unfortunately, I need to watch it again to reply all your points. If it is really necessary - you don't have to like it, hahah. But what I can say is that, even though science needs to keep advancing, I think art will always look for the "lost humanity is the mess of science", this is a perfect romantic theme for stories and that's what I understand by the very last scene with the mother and all.
"[...]Almodovar has always been more psychological[...]"*
Thanks. Agreed, agreed. I guess the problem is less that I didn't understand the movie was saying intellectually but just that I didn't feel it's message emotionally.
I, too, am a big proponent of scientific advancement. I felt that this film was a horror film, showing the extreme of scientific research applied originally for the right reasons, but ultimately twisted due to the lack of ethics in the application. Thinking back on it, I think the film was a bit muddled, almost like he was trying to get too much meaning packed into the film, and on top of the characters who are simultaneously horrible and sympathetic, that made it hard for me to connect to. But for a more realistic version of this tension between science and ethics, I thought that this was shown quite well in Rise of the Planet of the Apes - James Franco's character playing a little fast and loose with the scientific ethics because he's doing what he feels to be right.
Almodovar wrote quite a long in-depth piece for the press kit for this film, you might find it to be quite interesting.
Wow, Julie, thanks for that piece, I'll read it as soon as I finish the film I'm watching now. Didn't know he could give any explanations on his films, this might me interesting. :)
Fascinating stuff. Thanks a lot for the link. I'll check Rise of the Planet of the Apes soon too. I'm sure it'll be more conventional than The Skin I Like In but it'll probably also be more fun.
I have no idea if that is something that Almodovar normally does for all of his films, but I'm glad he did it for this one =)
hahaha, I'm looking back at this and thinking about how weird it seems that I would mention Rise of the Planet of the Apes in the same conversation as The Skin I Live In =) I still stand by my comment re: the scientific exploration aspect, it's just really funny to me now. I actually just bought Rise on Blu Ray, so we'll see how it holds up on a re-watch. The first time I thought it was a really smart, heartfelt, entertaining blockbuster, so hopefully that remains the same.
Rise of the Planet of the Apes isn't as rich and deep as The Skin I Live In since the scientific development isn't a subject to study. Instead, it is a reason to the events in the films. It's more Hollywood.
Yea, I wasn't really making the argument that it was as deep, I just thought it was a fun comparison. =)
I know. It worths a watch though. :)