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.

Over the last twenty years, Yorgos Lanthimos has cultivated an approach to filmmaking all his own. Like David Lynch, he has developed a singular, instantly identifiable style, which will, no doubt, one day be- if it is not already- referred to as Lanthimosian. Generally speaking, his films, though varied, usually explore power dynamics, featuring characters who speak in monotone, dialogue that is slightly unreal and darkly-comic narratives containing both bloodshed and nudity.

'Kinds of Kindness' bears all the hallmarks of his style. An anthology film- or triptych, as it is billed- its thematic content is open to numerous interpretations; the most obvious being control, as, in each of the three stories, it is examined in some form. In the first, a man tries to stand up to his domineering boss, with disastrous results. In the second, a policeman who is losing control of his life after the disappearance of his wife, finds things stranger upon her return. In the third and last, a woman working for a cult tries to find an individual who possesses a mysterious power.

With each tale, the case can be made that Lanthimos is examining a different aspect of control with regard to power dynamics and family structures. In the opening segment, Lanthimos explores the theme of subjugation and rebellion, highlighting the delicate balance between asserting oneself and the risks involved in challenging authority. Furthermore, the protagonist's journey can be seen as a poignant exploration of agency and longing.

In the second story the interconnecting notions of power, manipulation and the illusion of control are explored, as the policeman desperately tries to control and restructure a situation he does not recognise, nor has power over. The irrational demands he makes of his wife reveal the lengths one can go to maintain control and stability in the face of perceived chaos.

The third story raises questions about the limits of human agency, following a woman who has voluntarily given up control of her life to a cult. Like the first story, this can be seen as an exploration of subjugation and rebellion, or perhaps Lanthimos is examining fears associated with autonomy, of agency and desire.

However, while control appears thematically in each of the stories, there could be more at play. One could, perhaps, see the film as a religious allegory, with the three stories mirroring the ideas of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Lanthimos may be inviting viewers to explore fears associated with autonomy and desire through this lens.

On the other hand, considering the sacrifice of autonomy for comfort or survival becomes a recurring motif; might the film be primarily about just that: sacrifice? Or is it merely concerned with how manipulation, dominance and submission intersect? The film's digressive structure allows ideas such as these to unfold without arriving at tidy conclusions, leaving room for as many abstractions and interpretations as there are viewers.

Whatever the case, the stories are entertaining and darkly funny, full of the deliciously weird Lanthimosian dialogue many have come to love. However, as each are so engaging, it is a pity that they are not three individual, full-length films in their own right. Lanthimos and co-writer Efthimis Filippou could have expanded any of them into a stand-alone feature and, by doing so, heightened their power and impact considerably.

Despite this, 'Kinds of Kindness' remains engaging and thought-provoking, boasting assured, grounded visuals that heighten the narrative's strangeness. Lanthimos and director of photography Robbie Ryan film proceedings with realism in mind, avoiding flashy stylisations and unconventional camera angles. This juxtaposition between the natural cinematography and the inherent oddness of the narrative is both atmospheric and effective.

Furthermore, Jerskin Fendrix's score contributes greatly to the film's atmosphere. Full of sinister choral chants, like the singing of a group of mad monks, it adds an element of suspense and drama, complementing the visuals and the narrative. In addition, Anthony Gasparro's production design, as well as Amy Beth Silver's minimalistic set decoration and Jennifer Johnson's muted costume design, are immersive, drawing viewers further in to Lanthimos's odd world, emphasising the uncanny.

The film features some of Lanthimos's frequent collaborators, such as Emma Stone, Willem Dafoe, Yorgos Stefanakos and Margaret Qualley, alongside newcomers to his oeuvre, like Jesse Plemons and Hong Chau. All play multiple characters across the three stories- bar Stefanakos- and excel in each. Plemons showcases his versatility, bringing a decency and humanity to even the cruellest of men. Stone, meanwhile, proves yet again that she is a perfect fit for Lanthimos's material, inhabiting her disparate, bizarre roles with a remarkable ease and naturality.

In addition, Dafoe demonstrates once more why many consider him one of the finest actors working today, bringing authenticity to three markedly different personalities; from the good and the bad to the ugly. Furthermore, Qualley and Chau both bring life to smaller roles, showcasing their considerable abilities, while Stefanakos- totally mute- has a strong screen presence, making his enigmatic character all the more intriguing.

Darkly funny and overwhelmingly odd, 'Kinds of Kindness' is a typically Lanthimosian venture. Featuring three entertaining tales of madness, control and manipulation, it is utterly unique. Boasting striking cinematography, as well as a stirring, sinister score, one won't easily forget it. With strong performances from all in the cast- especially Emma Stone, Jesse Plemons and Willem Dafoe- and comically off-beat dialogue, it is all kinds of weird- and all kinds of wonderful.

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.

This feels like the summer movie for lanthimos' fans 😂

Good piece of art, not at the level of poor things IMHO, but still very interesting. Honestly I felt like with poor things some reviews were searching too much into a "positive ending" or a woman empowerment change... While poor things also had some very dark moments almost like a parody... Well, here we have the usual lanthimos... The one who tends to give us the worst of humanity 😂

I still need to reflect a bit, especially on the 2nd story, but yeah, definitely great dry humour movie. Oh and some scenes will make people talk ... :) This is a funny movie but it's also very harsh

Emma (or Emily 😄) and Jesse and Willem are brilliant as always.

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.