Kinds of Kindness

Giving this an 6/10 rating

Yorgos Lanthimos is one of those directors you are going to love or hate. 'Poor Things' was a really great film, earlier this year, garnered many awards, but this - 'Kinds of Kindness' is one that that I will not want to watch again, is just about good.

The film is split into three tales, all are good, well acted, good lines, it's all almost good, but for the actual characters them selfs, I just could not like any of them, these are people who I would not want to spend any time with at all, very unsettling humans, maybe that is the point? If so, it worked, but still, even with the real great laugh out loud moments, I still felt cold on this film.

It's not total crap, but in my mind, not Lanthimos' best. So 6/10 is the most I can give it, Could use trimming on time too.

We all know that Yorgos Lanthimos can make great movies, and he has proven this several times in the past. While his films are often uniquely creative and explore fascinating themes, they are also vastly different from the majority of other movies and therefore not for everyone. The best example might be Kinds of Kindness, which is so bizarre and radically different from most other films that it's almost unbearable.

There might be people who enjoy this type of movie, and I can certainly appreciate its unique perspective, which results in a one-of-a-kind piece with many intriguing elements. However, the overall experience was not entertaining for me at all. The production is undeniably stellar, featuring a stacked cast, all of whom deliver great performances.

The movie is structured as an anthology, split into three stories, with the main actors appearing in each story as different characters. While this approach has been done before, it remains a risky choice because it can easily confuse the audience or weaken the overall narrative. The themes explored are interesting and yet, paradoxically, not engaging at all. Each of the three unique, distinctive stories has an intriguing premise, but none of them truly deliver.

In the end, not one of the three stories was satisfying, and all concluded rather uneventfully. While there may be viewers who genuinely enjoy this movie, it is certainly not for everyone. If the first 30 minutes don't appeal to you, it's unlikely the rest will either. Additionally, there was no justification for this film to be stretched to almost three hours, as much of it could have been cut. Ultimately, the final result felt boring, pretentious, and frustrating. [5,1/10]

It was 3 hours of nonsense that could've been cut down into a Netflix short, although it was more watchable when it didn't take itself so seriously and had more humour like in the first segment. Emma Stone sank the whole thing in the final 2 hours.

The movie works when it's approaching the surrealism of a Buñuel film, e.g. Exterminating Angel, but then in the final couple segments it devolved into long scenes of Emma Stone randomly talking to people about dogs on an island, or trying to raise the dead, with stiff line delivery.

The director punctuates the boredom with random acts of violence, orgies, nudity, and animal abuse.

It was at the 2 hour mark where I wondered if this is really what the Hollywood elite does on their off-time, and they made a home movie about their debauchery as a tax write-off for Fox Searchlight. We did get to see a very nice yacht and some houses that probably belonged to one of the producers.

Weird, awkward, oldschool Lanthimos is back! His latest movies were extremely commercial, and now he's back to his roots with this low budget anthology of a movie. Three extremely crazy episodes that feel like Black Mirror episodes, "Kinds of Kindness" is a movie that explores human relationships with a significant other, with a boss and employer, different power dynamics of each relationship and the power that sex has in our lives and in the formation of our relationships. It's an absurd movie, very weird, and you vibe along with it realising that nothing is gonna ever make total sense and that's fine. I liked it a lot but it surely is not meant for a wide audience.

Yorgos Lanthimos returns with a vengeance, delivering a film that feels closer to his earlier cinematic endeavors. "Kinds of Kindness" is a challenging film in the sense that you have to experience it emotionally. Trying to intellectualize it will only lead to frustration. It's the kind of film that provides you with a very unique experience. When the credits roll and you leave the movie theater, you don't leave the film behind, you take it with you at home. It affects you, it lingers in your mind, and it makes you think about it all the time. That is, at least, the effect the film had on me.

Many things have been said about Lanthimos and his potential cinematic influences. From the cold, cynical minimalism of Michael Haneke, to Lars Von Trier's provocative, violent, and disturbing cinema, and finally, to Stanley Kubrick's ambitious, cinematically rich Odysseys. With this film in particular Lanthimos reaffirms what I always felt about him. There's a surreal, dream-like, psyche penetrating effect that he achieves with many of his films and "Kinds of Kindness" is definitely the most surreal, dream-like, and psyche penetrating cinematic experience that he has ever provided us with. I feel like he is much closer to David Lynch than most people think.

Watching "Poor Things" I felt like he was doing something like "The Elephant Man"-an adaptation of somebody else's work that people felt maintained his identity but was quite different and much more accessible compered to his earlier films-and now, "Kinds of Kindness" feels like he automatically jumped to making something along the lines of "Lost Highway" or "Inland Empire", an original film that is very experiential and hard to intellectualize, denying conventional interpretation and instead, aiming for the senses.

Three different stories, different characters played by the same actors, themes varying from power and control to love and death, "Kinds of Kindness" is certainly a unique kind of film that really grows on you the more you're thinking about it.

Lanthimos reunites with his fellow screenwriter and partner in crime, Efthimis Filippou and the result is exactly what I was expecting. I feel like this is a very personal film for both Lanthimos and Filippou with the second story in particular being a very devastating exploration of how we desperately want our significant other to be exactly the same way they were when we first met them. Or, at least, that's what I got from it, having watched the film once, so far. The final scene from the second story, strongly reminded me of the ending of Lynch's "Eraserhead" when Henry is finally reunited with the woman from the radiator after having exterminated the source of his problems aka his unwanted child.

The first story I felt was by far the most disturbing one, considering the state most people from younger generations find themselves into; sacrificing the prospects of leading a normal life and having a family, all for the sake of maintaining a prestigious job and achieving financial wealth, as they completely submit to those pursuits. This is something that is very evident in Greece and most countries of the Western world as well.

The third story is probably the most difficult to interpret, both in and of itself and in terms of how it creates the bigger picture that is this triptych of a movie.

From a technical standpoint, the film is meticulously crafted which is not particularly surprising considering that Lanthimos has proven time and time again that he is a remarkable filmmaker. The fact he is one of the last few remaining filmmakers who still shoot on film is very inspiring for younger, aspiring filmmakers who unfortunately grew up in an era in which cinema was transitioning from film to digital. The film looks gorgeous and the visual aesthetic of the celluloid elevates the film's atmosphere and otherworldliness.

After I watched the film, I was trying to understand whether Lanthimos and Filippou intended for us to see all these different characters played by the same actors as the same characters reincarnated in different lives-an interpretation that isn't exactly off the table, considering the film's surreal and occasionally supernatural logic-but eventually, I came down to the conclusion that they were trying to communicate something else.

We are all completely different in many respects, but in the end of the day, we are all struggling with the same things and we have very similar problems and existential anxieties which essentially make us all different versions of the same individual. It doesn't matter whether you're a slave of your boss, your husband, or your pastor. There's only one constant in life, and that's death.

We're all just trying to survive and find some kind of meaning. Some kind of kindness that might ease the pain of the inevitable ending that will come for as all.

-B. V.