Under the Skin DVD Blurb by Shale May 16, 2015 Disclaimer: I may be quirky in my assessment of movies and even use an axiom, "I enjoy bad movies" when professional critics uniformly pan a movie that I found enjoyable. I guess the flip side of that would be "I do not enjoy good movies," because occasionally I cannot stand a movie that the professional critics rave about. This is why I use the term 'blurb' instead of review - I am not a professional movie critic, just a guy who loves to be entertained by cinema. While in the video section of Target this week I saw this DVD with a prominent pic on the cover of Scarlett Johansson. I noticed that the movie was released in 2014 and couldn't understand why I never even heard of it, much less not have seen a movie with Johansson (even old grampas get crushes on cute girls). Turns out it was a limited release and also opened on April 4, 2014 the same weekend of Captain America: The Winter Soldier, which I did see and which also had Johansson in it. (Oops, Just noticed Italian Poster. Oh well, it looks like the DVD cover) So, for $10, the price of a matinee movie I got the DVD, anticipating a nice sci-fi movie with Johansson playing an alien in a hot human body seducing men for her alien intent. Put in the video and for the next hour and forty-eight minutes was bored, somewhat confused and quite disappointed. Within the first quarter-hour I discovered this was a sci-fi art film. You can tell by artsy camera angles, long sequences of no action, just staring while inane everyday activity of surrounding ppl takes place. Oh, and dark overcast, rainy settings, like this one filmed in Scotland. This film is rated R because of some discreet love scenes, an attempted rape and full frontal, tho dimly lit male nudity and a nice dimly lit scene of Johansson nude. Can't put the nude pix here, enjoy the lingerie. After my disappointment and putting the DVD in my bag going to the thrift store since I don't intend to ever watch it again, I went online just out of curiosity to see what the real critics thot of it. The aggregate reviews on Rotten Tomatoes gave it an 85% Fresh. WHAT!!?? Did they watch the same movie I had? The Critics Consensus: Its message may prove elusive for some, but with absorbing imagery and a mesmerizing performance from Scarlett Johansson, Under the Skin is a haunting viewing experience. The audience (of which I usually side) gave it a 54%, which still seemed high, so admittedly, it must be me out of step with the world. (Don't worry, I'm used to that). According to Wikipedia, this movie got even more rave reviews at the art movie circuit and was named one of the best films of 2014 by many critics. Here, read for yourself: "Xan Brooks of The Guardian gave Under the Skin five out of five and called it 'far and away the best picture' in the Venice Film Festival. Peter Bradshaw, also of The Guardian, said it was 'visually stunning and deeply disturbing,' and gave the film five out of five stars, as did Andrew Lowry of Total Film, Dave Calhoun of Time Out and Kate Muir of The Times. Robbie Collin of The Daily Telegraph also gave it five stars, and wrote: 'if my legs hadn't been so wobbly and my mouth so dry, I would have climbed up on my seat and cheered.' Matt Zoller Seitz gave the film four out of four stars, describing it as 'hideously beautiful. Its life force is overwhelming.' Richard Roeper gave the film an A+ and four out of four stars, stating: 'This is what we talk about when we talk about film as art.' Christy Lemire gave it four out of four stars, calling it an 'undeniably haunting, singular experience' and one of the best films of 2014. Jon Espino of the Young Folks gave it nine out of ten stars and called it 'easily one of the most visually haunting films of 2014." WTF!? How can I be so obtuse not to see what these ppl saw in this movie? Oh well, pearls before swine I suppose. Gonna go watch Lucy again (liked by 60% of critics) to cleanse my palate of this movie and enjoy Scarlett Johansson.
