I just finished watching 'Under the Skin' with Scarlett Johansson, wow.

[Raffi Ella]

I think it's a love it or hate it type movie, but I liked it a lot, it was pretty disturbing really and scary in a psychological way. It'll definitely be a cult classic since you know Scarlet gets naked in it, lol. But it's a really different role for her, she did an excellent job playing a cold blooded alien killer, very believable in my opinion. Except for her accent, she sucked at the faux British thing, haha. Still, she was good.

It's a gorgeous movie, filmed in Scotland. I loved that. I want to read the book now.


Anyone else see it? What did you think of it?

[Skittles]

1. I saw it - very creepy

I read that those encounters through the car window were reality bits, and the disfigured guy was real too

[Raffi Ella]

2. VERY.

I'm sitting here in the dark all creeped out after seeing it-


Oh yeah? I could barely understand anyone except for Scarlet.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

3. Had you read the book first? And, isn't the title = Under HER Skin ... ?

[Raffi Ella]

7. No, to both questions.

But, like most people that watched it, I had heard what it was about before going in. I was going to ask if you'd seen it and what you thought about it, but I see you already answered that down thread.

The story itself was interesting to me, Scarlet's acting immediately drew me in and the fact that it was shot in Scotland was also very compelling. The beauty of the film and the fact that I kept thinking about how she wouldn't have been able to do this had she not been a female, and that I kept thinking of my own femaleness and putting myself in her shoes was also part of it for me. It's about humanity itself, seeing a cold blooded absolute alien psychopath interacting with mankind in all their vulnerable and imperfect glory was astonishing to watch.

I don't want to give anything away for those who haven't seen it - suffice it to say that it's a love it or hate it kind of film. I get why some wouldn't like it but it was right up my alley.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

9. yes, Under The Skin. mea culpa. I didn't hate it but, I didn't love it, either.

However, I feel no need to read the book now that I get the premise of it all. And yes, her self discovery ,,, that part of the movie was interesting and intriguing. The First part of the movie drug for me. The pacing was too slow and redundant.

It was beautifully filmed.

The human element and her self discovery, since I did not know she was an alien. I took all those murders to be some kind of metaphorical allegory and that is why, ultimately, the movie failed for me. It does not stand alone, if you get what I mean.

It was an interesting film and I was intrigued throughout with what was going on ... so on that level it is a success.

[dr.strangelove]

4. I did not like it

I have become a big fan of Faber and all of his work except "The 199 Steps." I simply loved Under the Skin. It gave me chills reading it. I had high hopes for the film when I heard Glazer was adapting it and directing it. But I think it was a let down. I loved Sexy Beast and Birth, so I was hopeful he would be able to keep to the source and draw out the same feelings of "human farming" that the book had. I think the film missed this badly. On its own, it was beautifully shot and I think you are right, the full frontal nudity by a A-lister like "ScoJo" will cause the film to attain cult status, but I think the source material was fantastic and this adaptation lost so much of the message. Its a pretty film to watch and creepy enough to stand on its own in the horror/creepy genre, but I think people who read the book will dislike it.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

6. I had not read the book and I knew Nothing about the film going in. It had to Stand on It's own

for me and it did not do this. It dragged in places. Toward the end it got more interesting but, The Alien concept did not come across well for me. I thought it was trying to be a metaphor or allegory. I went to IMDB and once I read the synopsis I realized it was an Alien and based on a book and I got it. But, just to watch it with no before hand knowledge it misses the mark, I think. It was beautifully filmed and I can see it becoming a cult classic but, I feel no need to ever see it again myself.

Is this Faber the same guy that wrote The Crimson and The White ... ?

Michael Faber ...

[dr.strangelove]

10. Yes, GREAT BOOK!!!!

C&W is amazing.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

12. Yes, I thought so, too. Now, that has the makings for a Great Film, to me ...

I thought so since reading it. Would love to see C&W made into a movie.

Of course, might be a let down but, I must say he writes extremely interesting female characters.

[scarletlib]

25. BBC has done a mini series on this novel.

I though it was very good.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

27. Good to know, thanks. I will look for it.

scarletlib

[Raffi Ella]

8. Oh, wow. thanks for replying, the book sounds amazing.

I'm glad I didn't read it before seeing the movie since they're so different. Even though they are so different, and I loved the movie, I'm glad to hear the book is so good. I'm definitely going to read it.

I have a lot of thoughts about it all but I don't wanna say too much because I don't want to give anything away for those that haven't seen it and might want to. Suffice it to say that I really liked it. I'll probably like the book even better.

[dr.strangelove]

11. In the book she was farming humans

we were cattle or sheep (since its scottish) for her people. When the drifters came with her, she sent them to her world to be consumed. It was written so well, and scared the heck out of me while being deeper on some fun moral issues to think about. The movie to me was more of a creepy show and a beautiful naked woman.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

13. Definitely, the first half of the movie was this =

The movie to me was more of a creepy show and a beautiful naked woman.

Spent way too much time on that aspect, imo.

[Orrex]

21. Oh, come on.

The movie is 108 minutes. She was only naked for like 80 minutes. 90 minutes, tops.

Maybe 95.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

23. Did you see the mole on her ass, dude?

or was it a freckle?

Seriously, it could have been cut to about 96 minutes and been a tighter, better paced movie.

How many times must I watch a man drown in some kind of clear, jello like substance?

After the first couple of times that went past creepy and straight to (yawn) boring.

Now, Oldboy was kinda creepy but, then the plotline got predictable.

[Raffi Ella]

24. Yeah, it really is the least of the movie.

Her beauty wasn't the point of her being naked or maybe it was. In any case, it 's an amazing part of the story and amazing to see but not because it's a beautiful naked woman, not for me anyway. I mentioned it in the OP because even if people don't like it or don't get it, the movie will not be forgotten because she did in fact get naked.

But while she was striking to look at, her ordinariness was what was interesting to me and that she herself was so fascinated by her nakedness. Her femaleness and what it means to be female was what struck me, her actual naked body was secondary.

[Raffi Ella]

16. Yeah, Creep Show is right, It's nothing if not creepy. But it's beautiful too. And disturbing.

I just ordered the book.

[CBGLuthier]

5. I have it in my Netflix queue.

I am hoping it will be similar, visually at least, to Upstream Color, another love it or hate it film.

[Raffi Ella]

14. I just looked up that movie, omg.

I don't know if I could watch that, I may not be able to eat or sleep for days if I do. Is it graphic in how they do that to her? Or is it just a small part of the movie?

You'll have to post your reaction to Under the Skin after you see it. I was reading the reviews at IMDB this afternoon and it really is a love it or hate it kind of movie. People really loved it and think it's one of the greats or they really hated it and are angry about it, lol.

[CBGLuthier]

15. Upstream Color is not really graphic.

The part involving the woman being under control does not involve anything bad done to her other than theft and it is a small part of the movie.

It is the followup film from Shane Carruth who did Primer and it was worth the wait although it is a weird film.

[Raffi Ella]

17. Weird can be good.

I'll check it out, if it gets too graphic with the worms I'll just shut it down.

[antiquie]

18. Not too graphic, at all.

I just watched it.

[Raffi Ella]

29. it was a little graphic!

If that part where the worm is visible under her skin isn't graphic then I don't know what is! I almost shut it off but I just looked away until it was over. I'm glad it wasn't so graphic that I had to shut it off, it was great.

[antiquie]

30. Oh yeah.

Sorry about that.

[arcane1]

26. I LOVED Primer!!!!!!!! I probably need to check this one out too!

[Raffi Ella]

28. Weird was excellent.

That was intense, beautiful, powerful. I think anyone who has suffered will get it. I cried at the end when the pigs were racing free. Very powerful movie.

Under the Skin is grittier, darker, scary, but if you connected with Upstream Color I think you'll appreciate it. Both movies have an element of hope, one more blatantly than the other, but it's there.

[PasadenaTrudy]

19. Yes, I loved it! n/t

[MerryBlooms]

20. Is it disturbing in the, 'American Beauty', type of disturbing? I love that movie,

even though it's tough for me to watch.

[Raffi Ella]

22. It's not straight forward like American Beauty.

This is an art house movie, very avant-garde . There is very little dialogue and it's mostly left up to the viewer to interpret what they're seeing. I think it's fascinating. You may not.

It does speak of people, the human race and what we are capable of, who we are, what it means to be human. So in a way, yes, it's disturbing in sort of the same sense as American Beauty, but it's up to you whether or not you feel that way about, or have that reaction to, Under the Skin.