Évolution

This movie is the equivalent of watching a famous painter perform his craft; you stand there, amazed at the beauty being demonstrated, and then when it's all over, you wonder, "What did he just paint?". I am all for films that make you think and create an ambiguous air in both storytelling and message, but this film is beyond absurd. The premise, the events that transpire throughout the movie, the lack of rhyme or reason as to why the events are taking place in the first place, etc. It was like a puzzle with not only missing pieces, but with each piece a part of a different puzzle. It's beautiful shot with some amazing cinematography, so be prepared to be amazed at some of the vistas shown throughout the film. But the movie just does not make any sense, and the ending does not clarify anything, nor does it bring it all together. Had it clarified some of the events, it actually would have been a great art film. As it stands, it's quite possibly the most nonsensical movie I have ever seen. I would not recommend watching it.

After watching the film I read some interviews with the writer/director Lucile Hadžihalilović and she mentioned how it had taken her a long time to get funding for this film. Never have I been less surprised. Not creepy enough to be a full blown horror film and too creepy to just be a pure art film.

The film is about a young pre-pubescent boy named Nicolas who lives on a remote island with his mother, several other women and other young boys around his age. He is told he is sickly by his mother and urged to eat a really wicked looking blue creation for his "health" and eventually has to go to a hospital where he is repeatedly operated on.

I won't spoil the movie, but Hadžihalilović isn't one for jump scares and Nicolas's illness and the reason for his hospital visits are made clear very early on. It all unfolds in a creepy atmospheric way so that the audience is aware of the bad things that are going on before Nicolas is, though he too learns the secret behind his illness soon enough.

The movie is very beautifully filmed with lots of stunning shots of the water and the seaside. However one thing I take issue with is how dark some of the shots were. Maybe it was the fault of the distributor for not cleaning up the shots but there are some nightime scenes where instead of being frightened I was merely confused because the screen looked pitch black.

Nevertheless the movie is very easy to follow on and the ultimate story and horror is pretty simple.

I'm not a horror fan so this was not really a movie for me, but for art fans who are looking for a slow scare, this might be for you.

A little like an abstract painting that refuses to represent recognizable subject matter in favor of expressing a "mood." Contrary to what others here have said, there *is* a story-line. The problem is that the underlying narrative structure is too basic to support so many elaborate, mystifying trappings.

It helps to know that the director based the movie on the experience she had when she was 10 and went to a hospital to get her appendix taken out. So given the main character's nightmarish attempt to figure out what's happening to him, we're basically seeing an elaborate series of puzzling visual metaphors for the director's disorienting personal experience as a child in hospital.

This movie isn't hiding anything or failing to be coherent. It just wants to be a darkly evocative visual collage instead of a straight-up narrative. Accordingly, it's rewardingly rich visually, but it's like a poem that sounds great but doesn't involve you in anything really important. All of the many unanswered questions it raises make it hard to let the visuals just wash over you.

In other words, behind all the evocative, disturbing imagery (again "unsettling" is the best word) it's *just* a retelling of a personal experience; there isn't a deeper message than "fear of the unknown." For me that wasn't enough.

The mood is conveyed. The story is told. It's just not terribly profound.

It's tough to call this a horror movie, because some will expect something completely different. It's more of a mystery thriller with horror touches. If you though Under the Skin is horror, with Scarlett Johansson and liked that movie too, you probably will like this one also (because of a similar vibe, not because of themes that are colliding, but it may touch the same nerve as well).

While it's slow burning and cooking, that fact may annoy and disappoint people. But if you stick with it, the movie will reward you. It's a strange story and movies that have the heart to go different directions should be rewarded. Or at least enjoyed for what they are. Hopefully something you can dig while watching

Nicolas lives in an isolated and decrepit French coastal town. The only inhabitants are boys and older women. The food is about as palatable as a botulism sandwich and all the boys have to take 'medicine' as they are all sick.

Then one day Nicolas goes swimming and discovers the body of a dead boy. He then starts to question what is going on and sets out to discover the truth.

Now this is a short film lasting only 79 minutes and the dialogue is sparse, however all the screen time is put to excellent use. The SFX are all top notch and the boys are superb in what are very physical roles. It is a slow burn but that is offset by a very stylised and stylish picture palette that uses vivid colours to great effect and the cinematography and framing of the shots gives it an art-house feel that just oozes quality. It is not a film to 'enjoy' as the subject matter is so dark but it is one you can admire – hence my rating.