Annihilation

Mr E

Alex Garland's new movie, based on Jeff VanderMeer's novel of the same name.

No idea what the hell is happening in the trailer, but it looks atmospheric and moody.

IMDB wrote:

A biologist signs up for a dangerous, secret expedition where the laws of nature don't apply.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufaDurSCKOk

pixelburp

Having read the book, the trailer certainly suggests they have successfully captured the heavy sense of foreboding & dread of Area X, not to mention the body horror.

Slydice

That was tense! I'm sold!

Looper007

Ex Machina was one of the real gems of the last few years and Alex Garland has been involved with some of my favourite films over the years. Trailer looks tense. Natalie Portman is very hit and miss actresses for me, Oscar Issac is in there and you have a pretty strong female cast. If it's as great as Ex Machina then we are in for something awesome.

kasm

Was surprised they're making this- not exactly an easy sell to casual moviegoers if it's faithful to the book, as pixelburp mentioned the foreboding & dread seems to have been captured pretty well.

Sad Professor

Garland says it's a somewhat loose adaptation of the book.

https://io9.gizmodo.com/how-ex-machinas-director-wants-to-film-vandermeers-craz-1717774472

Pero_Bueno

Looks really good ! Looking forward to it.

Pity Natalie Portman is in it - she is distracting.

Slydice

She looks solid in the trailer.

.ak

Natalie Portman has aged! Think she looks serious in this. Wouldn't be a fan of hers usually but she looks great in this, touch of Black Swan going on there.

Disposable1

Pero_Bueno wrote: »

Looks really good ! Looking forward to it.

Pity Natalie Portman is in it - she is distracting.

You reminded me of this

Can't wait for this film

pixelburp

In a further sign of the way film distribution is going, apparently outside of US, Canada & China, Annihilation will be going straight to Netflix 'internationally' & 17 days after theatrical release:

http://deadline.com/2017/12/annihilation-netflix-deal-alex-garland-natalie-portman-1202218649/

Disappointing; assuming the final product was any good this could have been a good one to have seen on the big-screen.

Slydice

ah but maybe it's just an american news site talking about american cinemas.

here it's also listed as out in Cinema in a bunch of other countries on 23 February:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2798920/releaseinfo?ref_=tt_dt_dt

Listed for Ireland on 23 February here:
https://scannain.com/upcoming-irish-cinema-release-dates/3/

Grace has been talking about the newer faster-to-streaming thing on the horizon for about 2 years now. On one or both of her channels:
https://www.youtube.com/user/BeyondTheTrailer/videos
or
https://www.youtube.com/user/BTTMovieMath/videos

Something about .. making money.. or reducing piracy.. or early release at a high price for families who don't want the hassle/cost involved in bringing and minding large families to a cinema. Something in that direction. Might have been competition between studios either.

Agent Coulson

Or it’s just sh1t and the produces felt they would get a better deal off Netflix and putting it out on a worldwide cinema release.


Same thing happened with The Circle earlier this year and it was sh1t.

Pero_Bueno

I hope its not ****, the books are excellent

ixoy

If it's like the book though, it'd have a bit of an art house vibe to it. It's possible Garland stuck to the mood and they realised it'd be hard to market so gave it to Netflix for a lump sum instead.

Hande hoche!

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Or it’s just sh1t and the produces felt they would get a better deal off Netflix and putting it out on a worldwide cinema release.


Same thing happened with The Circle earlier this year and it was sh1t.

Yeah that would be my read on the situation, it's a reflection of the product rather than the direction of the film industry. Will give it a watch all the same.

pixelburp

I think you can speculate in either direction, and Netflix's strategy of acquiring films left right and centre has lead to a wild see-saw of quality - but then no more than any normal studio to be fair. The Circle was a bit of an abomination, and its failure in the US box office just underlined that fact & kinda made Netflix look like fools, but by and large I've found their 'own' movies to be of a reasonable standard. Features like 'Okja; have been the standout for me, while others like 'What Happened to Monday', while far from perfect showed a wilder, creative streak standards studios clearly lack (I haven't seen it, but I believe Mudbound has also been doing well for them).

On the face of it, Annihilation has a writer / director who has already garnered a lot of praise for his previous work; a star with a decent CV, if not a powerhouse at the box-office; and a widely acclaimed, if tough read of a novel as source material - one that (having read it) honestly wouldn't be that hard to adapt if you had someone who knew what they're doing. If anything, a faithful adaptation might lead to a frustrating movie more than an ostensibly bad one, as the novel is a very ambiguous, speculative read.

This isn't me wanting Annihilation to the amazing at all costs mind you, but I could well believe Netflix sensing another sleeper, indie hit on a par with Garland's Ex Machina and trying to overtake the praise.

ixoy

ixoy wrote: »

If it's like the book though, it'd have a bit of an art house vibe to it. It's possible Garland stuck to the mood and they realised it'd be hard to market so gave it to Netflix for a lump sum instead.

Apparently, I'm right! From The Hollywood Reporter:

The movie, which wrapped shooting July 2016, had a poor test screening this summer that sources say was the root of the conflict. After the screening, Ellison became concerned that the movie was “too intellectual” and “too complicated” and wanted changes made to make it appeal to a wider audience. They included making Portman’s character more sympathetic as well as tweaking the ending.

Rudin, who executive produced Machina, sided with Garland, defending the movie and refused to take notes. Rudin was able to hold his line, according to a source, because he has final cut.

Now of course it could be crap too, but I really did think it would be a difficult movie to sell if it stuck to the books.

Keplar240B

What is area X ? aliens?

pixelburp

ixoy wrote: »

Apparently, I'm right! From The Hollywood Reporter:


Now of course it could be crap too, but I really did think it would be a difficult movie to sell if it stuck to the books.

Yeah the book really is a strange ambiguous beast for definite, itself kinda art house literature. A true adaptation is always going to yield an equally strange, dreamlike and intangible film and could well believe that test audiences didn't respond to that. Hopefully it augers well with the final product.

ixoy

pixelburp wrote: »

Yeah the book really is a strange ambiguous beast for definite, itself kinda art house literature. A true adaptation is always going to yield an equally strange, dreamlike and intangible film and could well believe that test audiences didn't respond to that. Hopefully it augers well with the final product.

The book nailed the idea of a creeping sense of dread. It'll require a tight reign to keep that without going OTT or using cheap tactics. Some of the other elements.. well I'll be interested to see how they tackle it. I've a bit of faith in Garland.
I do wonder if they'll mix in elements from the whole trilogy into this.

kasm

Did the studio making this read the book? Looks like the feedback of 'too intellectual ' and 'too complicated' should attract the fans of the book anyway.

The studio has basically said make it dumber and less complex for joe and joesphine public so we can make our money back. As long as its not rubbish it will end up with a cult following probably.

Mr E

Full trailer out today... looks amazing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89OP78l9oF0

RocketRaccoon

Mr E wrote: »

Full trailer out today... looks amazing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89OP78l9oF0

I've never even heard of the book but that looks enjoyable, definitely one to watch for me.

Slydice

Not sure what people would find difficult to understand. Feels like they explain what's going on pretty well right there.

Mr E

The teaser from September was a bit confusing, but the main trailer was very clear.

Slydice

Only now do I see it's Alex Garland, the same screenwriter as not just Ex Machina but also: 28 Days Later, Sunshine, 28 Weeks Later, Never Let Me Go, Dredd, Big Game
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Garland#Filmography

Haven't seen Never Let Me Go or Big Game but they would be somewhere on my to-watch list

pixelburp

I suppose it was always likely a subsequent trailer might lean more into a more plot-focused direction; I preferred the first promo TBH, if only because it matched the oppressive ambiguity of the book.

Also, for those that read the book:

am I imagining things or are there more on the expedition in the trailer than there were in the book? I count 5 in the video, whereas IIRC only 4 went into Area X in the book. I guess that's a deliberate creative decision: an added redshirt perhaps, or someone more significant?

Hector Savage

I have read the books and loved them, but this trailer looks really ****ty ... just a big monster jump scare fest ..

unplayable

im a huge fan of ex machina and most of garlands previous work and was very excited for this..but i have to agree the trailer is AWFUL..teaser was much better and im sorry i watched the trailer. hopes for this are not high..

Hector Savage

unplayable wrote: »

im a huge fan of ex machina and most of garlands previous work and was very excited for this..but i have to agree the trailer is AWFUL..teaser was much better and im sorry i watched the trailer. hopes for this are not high..

Agree.
Teaser looked really mysterious seemed to carry the mood of the books, but this trailer was pants - but then again, it could be just a bad trailer, I still have some hope for the movie.

Mr E

No theatrical release in Ireland. Straight to Netflix on March 12th.

http://entertainment.ie/cinema/news/Annihilation-will-not-be-released-in-cinemas-in-Ireland/401062.htm

hatrickpatrick

Mr E wrote: »

No theatrical release in Ireland. Straight to Netflix on March 12th.

http://entertainment.ie/cinema/news/Annihilation-will-not-be-released-in-cinemas-in-Ireland/401062.htm

Is there any chance with this that a cinema like the lighthouse or IFI might still do special screenings, or would they not be allowed to do that?

Sad Professor

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Is there any chance with this that a cinema like the lighthouse or IFI might still do special screenings, or would they not be allowed to do that?

I don't think they would want to show it. Exhibitors have been fairly united in telling Netflix where to go with their simultaneous releases.

JP Liz V1

Mr E wrote: »

No theatrical release in Ireland. Straight to Netflix on March 12th.

http://entertainment.ie/cinema/news/Annihilation-will-not-be-released-in-cinemas-in-Ireland/401062.htm

I thought it might be one for Dublin Film Festival

peteeeed

the early reviews are pretty good

https://twitter.com/ZSharf/status/961434792725286917

buried

Excellent. Garland is the Man

Vinculus

+28 Days Later :-)
I'm really looking forward to seeing this.

Hector Savage

buried wrote: »

Excellent. Garland is the Man

So you have seen it ?

buried

Hector Savage wrote: »

So you have seen it ?

Excellent NEWS Hec. Excellent News. Garland is the man

Vinculus

"The full details of the soundtrack album for Alex Garland’s sci-fi thriller Annihilation have been revealed. The album features the film’s original music composed by Ben Salisbury & Geoff Barrow (Free Fire) who previously scored the director’s 2015 feature Ex Machina."

peteeeed

UK trailer

poster

peteeeed

guardian review

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/feb/22/annihilation-review-natalie-portman-thriller-leaves-a-haunting-impression

http://www.metacritic.com/movie/annihilation?ref=hp

CatFromHue

I have to say I really love listening to Alex Garland talk about making films.

He can be very insightful, thoughtful, and fed up in the same sentence.

s7ryf3925pivug

This is being released on netflix at midnight.

ArthurG

Doesn't appear to be up there yet......

Mr E

It is for me.

johnny_ultimate

This can't help but exist in the shadow of Stalker. Garland is obviously no Tarkovsky, and the self-invited comparison to the master isn't entirely flattering. But despite that, Annihilation manages to emerge as a pretty interesting work that has plenty to offer.

It's a confident work visually, making it more of a shame that Netflix were cruel enough to deny it a big screen release. The idea of refraction is the central visual feature of the film (along with the colourful flora and

sometimes fauna

of the Shimmer) and it's realised well - not just in the Shimmer, but foreshadowed early by many shots through water, transparent curtains or other obstacles. That also echoes the emotional haze many of the characters - of which there are actually very few - are going through. The landscape is a curious, hypnotic thing here - a sort of hyper-reality that's undermined by characters' (who are determinedly dour to a fault) propensity to explain what's going on - a touch more mystery wouldn't have gone astray, even if some of the explanations have poetic consequences (

one character giving in to her inner flower

). Also: lens flair with purpose!

Where it most obviously departs from Tarkovsky is in its genre leanings - this is sedate by Hollywood standards, but still a relatively straightforward adventure / slasher flick for much of its running time. It's tedious at times in that respect, while surprisingly effective at others (one creature has a creepy gimmick that works very well indeed even if the accompanying CG doesn't hold up 100%, especially in small screen HD). Its character motivations -

all dealing with some form of familiar grief or trauma

- don't break new ground nor are they particularly deeply explored, but they do the job. The climax is clearly a high-point here -

a sort of extra-terrestrial incarnation of the landscape we've just spent an hour in, where the exposition stops and the filmmaking - sound, visual effects, character arcs and even environment - start working in cogent harmony. It doesn't quite follow through with it's underwhelmingly ambiguous ending, but hey ho

.

It's a strange mix overall: it doesn't all work by any stretch, but enough does to more than carry the film. It actively asks us to compare it to one of the greatest sci-fi films ever made - one of the greatest films full-stop - and naturally doesn't come remotely close to it. But it's still reasonably successful on its own terms, and definitely several cuts above most mainstream sci-fi.

Just to repeat though: give us our goddamn cinema releases Netflix

Slydice

Gave it a watch and thought it was good.

Yep, probably missed some cool visuals on the big screen. Definitely squinted to try and see some things better.

s7ryf3925pivug

Slydice wrote: »

Gave it a watch and thought it was good.

Yep, probably missed some cool visuals on the big screen. Definitely squinted to try and see some things better.

Looks great on a big hdr tv. Better than my local cinemas maybe and without randomers

KilOit

Merrick Icy Timber wrote: »

Looks great on a big hdr tv. Better than my local cinemas maybe and without randomers

One of the few HDR Netflix films, looked great on 4k tv