Résumés(1)

Un couple voit sa relation remise en question par l'arrivée d'invités imprévus, perturbant leur tranquillité. Amour, dévotion et sacrifice sont au cœur de ce vibrant et captivant thriller psychologique. (Paramount Pictures FR)

Vidéo (16)

Bande-annonce 1

Critiques (15)

claudel Boo !

Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

français J'étais très curieux de découvrir ce film d'horreur non conventionnel, un film précédé d'une réputation tout en contrastes et qui est à l'origine de la rupture entre le réalisateur et l'actrice principale. La première demi-heure, qui était caractérisée par une ambiance décente, m'a maintenu dans un suspense correct, alimenté par la promesse de quelque chose d'effrayant. Mais ensuite, l’intrigue s’embourbe royalement pour mener à une fin qui m’a véritablement révulsé. Et je pense que ce doit être le cas de chaque spectateur également, en particulier les jeunes parents. Je n’ai rien contre le recours aux procédés cinématographiques même s’ils sont choquants ou controversés, mais dans ce cas-ci, je vois mal comment justifier ça. ()

POMO 

Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

français Un projet créatif admirable exprimant une idée puissante, mis en œuvre de manière trop abstraite. Mais pourquoi pas ? La concentration sur les émotions du personnage principal dans la première moitié du film est si formellement précise et psychologiquement entraînante que peu de réalisateurs vivants peuvent y parvenir. Aronofsky le sait et c'est pourquoi il ose s'envoler à ce point dans la seconde moitié. Comme un peintre traçant spontanément d'un coup de pinceau et dont le son trait, au premier abord inquiétant, finit par devenir la valeur unique de l'œuvre dans son ensemble. J'accepte, je reconnais et l'impression finale du film m'enivre agréablement. ()

Annonces

J*A*S*M 

Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

anglais An excellently driven absurd thriller that works both as a portrait of an unhealthy relationship, as well as a parable of the relationship of humankind and the figure of the mother or Planet Earth. The second half, unfortunately, drowns into biblical allegories that are literally hair-pulling so even a moron would understand them, which radically affects the thought-provoking aspect. Yeah, God is a smug douchebag, the Scriptures are misinterpreted nonsense, poor life-giving Mother Earth, and humans are idiots… but what else? In the details and in the conclusion, that’s effective, but the impression of a smart film that has something to say vanishes. That said, the intention is commendable, sure. 7/10 ()

Matty 

Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

anglais Mother! is a very dark comedy of morals that degenerates into a surreal apocalyptic horror flick. First through hints and then increasingly explicitly, Aronofsky’s film makes it clear that we are not watching a realistic story. The idea that it will be a variation on Repulsion (1965) or Rosemary's Baby (1968), i.e. a domestic horror movie about a paranoid female protagonist, holds together for roughly the first hour. Then the film definitively abandons the moral, logical and any other norms that apply in our current world. The characters’ actions can no longer be explained based on any psychological parameter, there are no rationally legitimate relationships between events, and the laws of physics cease to apply. The subtext becomes the main text and it is impossible to come to an interpretation that is anything other than allegorical, unlike the above-mentioned Roman Polanski films, which until the end keep us in a state of uncertainty as to whether we are only watching the personified fragments of the protagonist’s disturbed mind. In attempting to come to a reading that is more grounded in reality, the film’s structure would collapse. However, Mother! does not base its narrative on uncertainty and unanswered questions. Nor does it try to encourage viewers to think about what has been left unsaid. As is his habit, Aronofsky instead shamelessly shoves his “big ideas” is our faces. Watching the film is an uncomfortable experience not because we would be groping for the message that it is conveying, but because we know (and see) more than we want. Sometimes it is necessary to attack all of the senses. Thanks to our physical attachment to the main character (the camera practically never wavers from her point of view), we sympathise with her, experience her physical suffering and understand both her growing frustration and her final act of defiance. In most of his films, Aronofsky works with a similarly aggressive visual style, for which he is often ranked among the biggest posers of contemporary American cinema, but for the first time in mother!, he clearly found appropriate material on which to use it. We can see the choice of the “story of all stories” as the basis for the narrative as a manifestation of a lack of judgment. However, we can also see it as a middle finger raised at critics who had previously blamed Aronofsky for the efforts of numerous midcult artists to address the problems of the entire universe with trite brevity. Mother! goes back to the beginning of life on Earth and, at the same time, ostentatiously flaunts its own banality. It doesn’t pretend to be high-brow art that we should long contemplate. A bit in the spirit of the “theatre of cruelty”, it is rather a naked attempt to draw attention, by any available means of expression, to the crisis in which humanity has found itself due to unjust social conditions and people’s selfishness, disinterest, hypocrisy, dismissiveness and complacency. It is a desperate and, in its ingenuousness, extraordinarily authentic cry, not a genial request. Perhaps you will find it offensive, or maybe you’ll laugh at it or it will make you sick, but it if doesn’t leave you indifferent, it has served its purpose. 90% () (moins) (plus)

Malarkey 

Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

anglais It was abstract as The Fountain but way more minimalistic. The music creates the tension which is rather distressing and disgusting. On the other hand, you will not understand a single character because of the film’s abstractness and eccentricity. All the actors did a great job but it doesn’t matter because you don’t understand the reason for their emotions. The first half has no logic and the second half is rather brutal. If you forget about the fact that Javier Bardem is actually the only living person in the film, it becomes great. But the director Darren Aronofsky didn’t make it easy for the viewers so you leave the cinema feeling it was one big madness with no logic, which will be confirmed by the final disgusting scenes which did nothing to me at all. ()

Photos (51)