We Need to Talk About Kevin

We have to talk about Kevin is a movie by Lynne Ramsay who has shown that he knows cinema and knows the language of cinema. This film is an abstract film and a unique tragedy of a woman on the verge of collapse. An attractive collage of color, light, pop music, red motifs and abstract images well created by the director. Although the film is weak in characterization, especially for the character of the father, but thanks to the good direction, the film is strong and interesting.

Some friends say that the film asks the audience many questions and puts them in different situations, but it does not tell or give anything to the audience, and I reply that this is exactly pure cinema. The film raises important concepts that people should talk about, such as violence and its origin, unwanted pregnancy and its effects, inappropriate attachment patterns, the role of parents, the institution of the family and the role of society, attention, and more. The film also blends time well with its structural pattern and keeps the audience in time, present and past at the same time. At the end, the film raises this important question: How did kevin become a monster?

This movie jumps around in time. Eva Khatchadourian (Tilda Swinton) is a hard-partying drifter in her youth. In the present, she lives a lonely haunted life with a hostile town around her. In between, she marries the permissive Franklin (John C. Reilly) and has a suburban life with two kids. Her first child is the troubled Kevin (Ezra Miller, Jasper Newell). She's not a happy mother and they struggle to get along. Then a troubling incident sends Kevin to prison.

There is a lot of good acting in this. Tilda Swinton is good with her distancing. She shows that she's slightly troubled too. Ezra Miller is cold and scary. The movie doesn't go for the easy emotions. This is a haunted, cold and unsettling story. It's not a fun movie but it is a fascinating watch.

It could have been excellent, but to me it was just good enough. I feel let down by all the reviews saying how difficult to watch the movie is. I didn't find it difficult to watch. At all.

Because to me, the movie barely scratched the surface, it could have been much more than what it ended up being. Everything was hinted at but nothing was really said. I expected to see the stages of atrocities committed by Kevin, but it was just different scenes all making the same exact point, there was no gradual progression. Therefore, the 'biggest atrocity' that happens in the movie didn't feel believable or interesting to me, at all.

Eva was a greatly portrayed character, and I like the fact that they didn't just paint her as a bad mother but as one who's simply trying her best. She felt very real to me. But like for Kevin, I feel that her character only scratched the surface and that we could have been given more insights into her thoughts and feelings. Her husband (and father of Kevin), however, felt completely useless to me. We are given some insights into their marriage and relationship, but given the title of the movie I expected the father to take a greater place in the story.

While the idea behind "We Need to Talk About Kevin" is exceptional, I was put off by the direction of this film. While I know that a non-linear way of film making is popular these days, it's often overused--and here it is not used effectively. Too many times, the film jumps about in time and this took me out of the experience. This makes the film too unnecessarily confusing--so I am glad that I knew the plot so I could understand what was happening. Additionally, the film used a very deliberate artsy style--such as the overuse of the color red (the tomato fight, the stack of tomato soup cans, the paint)--resulting in sledgehammer symbolism. For me, the story was very strong on its own and didn't need all these tricks.

Tilda Swinton stars as a mother of a child who is seriously disturbed. However, her husband (John C. Reilly) is in complete denial and inexplicably the kid is never taken to see a therapist (or exorcist). As the film progresses, the child grows from an Oppositional-Defiant child to a cold and ruthless sociopath as a teen. You never ever hear about how he is perceived by teachers and neighbors--an odd omission. However, including the child killing animals, having one of the parents in complete denial, sexually offensive behavior and the hasty behavior towards his sister are all excellent touches--which I noticed since I used to work with folks like this (which would explained why I eventually gave up being a therapist and became a teacher). Unfortunately, as the film is out of sequence, you already know that sooner or later this will all lead to Kevin committing some atrocities.

Overall, this is a very compelling but frustrating film. I already talked about the film style which left me flat, but I also thought it very odd how the only one who seemed to notice anything unusual about Kevin was his mom. Even clever sociopaths are noticeable--perhaps not to everyone but to only be apparent to one person? Odd... The film is worth seeing but it just misses the mark for me--it could have been great.

The story of a mother, Eva (Tilda Swinton), attempting to raise her deeply disturbed child, Kevin (Ezra Miller), before he goes on to commit a horrific act at his local high school.

We see her before the act and after, as she attempts to pick up the pieces of her shattered existence.

The narrative jumps through the years multiple times, giving us glimpses of Kevin's twisted, hate-filled relationship with his overworked, underappreciated, emotionally distant mother, Eva.

Each little jab turns into a bigger act of hatred, of defiance. A comment morphs into a slap. A poopy diaper leads to a fight which results in a broken arm.

It's hard to know how to feel. The jumps through time are often confusing, making everything feel like one run-on scene stretched far too long. The timeline is meant to be blurred, as though the passage of time matters little here. Maybe that's the point.

The warning signs regarding Kevin are all there, but Eva can't - or won't, it could be argued - do anything about them. Her husband, Franklin (John C. Reilly), is content in his role as the more "likeable" parent to Kevin, and ultimately he's utterly useless. He doesn't listen to Eva when she says something is wrong. He thinks she's to blame for Kevin's darker moments, or he chooses not to see them at all.

The family's little girl, Kevin's younger sister Celia, gets hurt at home, and Eva *knows* in her bones that Kevin did it on purpose, but she can't call him out because Franklin doesn't support her. Worse, he thinks she's projecting her own traumas onto her son (which may be true to an extent).

The situation is horrifying because we, the audience, know where this is going, but we are powerless to either understand it or stop it.

Would things have been different if Eva had been more loving? I highly doubt it.

Would it have been different if she'd been more disciplinary and authoritative, and forced her hand? Probably not.

It's true that some people should never be parents. It's also true that some children are monsters. Others can be saved. But could Kevin?

Though it's easy to throw around blame *after* a horrific events occurs, the truth is that nobody knew for sure what Kevin had planned. Could they have stopped it if they did?

Ultimately, the film frustrates because there's no easy answer. No conclusion. Everyone is to blame. There is no triumph of right over wrong. Life simply proceeds.