If this review mirrored the structure of Strange Darling, this would be the third paragraph, and we’d already be deep into the meat with an obviously bloodthirsty maniac working hard to murder a woman by the side of the road. We’d then jump to the fifth paragraph—nearly the end—before skipping back to the beginning. Things would only start making sense retroactively. This is no way to write a movie review, but it’s a great way to experience JT Mollner’s twisty-turny kill fest Strange Darling, where well-worn tropes of the slasher film get stripped down and repurposed into a movie that feels like it’s wearing someone else’s skin as a disguise.
Separated into numbered chapters, Strange Darling‘s episodes are presented out of sequence to maximize the dramatic impact of choice bits of information. From the opening scene (Chapter 3), it seems pretty obvious that The Lady (Willa Fitzgerald) is the victim here, as evidenced by the fact that she’s screaming, covered in blood and running for her life from a dude (Kyle Gallner billed as The Demon) who keeps shooting at her with a hunting rifle. But of course, things are more complicated than that. Context is everything.
Working from his own script, Mollner doles out story beats with mischievous glee. The re-sequencing of the episodes keeps the viewer guessing but doesn’t drain the overall story of its power, which would be nail-biting even if presented in strict chronology. Before the Demon starts shooting at the Lady, she makes it clear, in a flirtatious conversation under the neon glow of a motel sign, that she’s into violent role play. The most salient feature of her message is that “no” always means “yes.” The Demon looks skeptical, maybe even scared, but the idea clearly appeals to him, as well. The attraction between the two is sweaty and animalistic, and the suspense humming beneath the surface is barbed with our fore-knowledge of all the blood, screaming and shooting we know is coming.
How things get to point B from point A is part of the appeal, but our curiosity also has to do with the spiky chemistry between the actors. Do these characters really want to harm each other, or is this just role play? If “no” always means “yes,” then can a safe word even apply? Giovanni Ribisi’s cinematography (yes, that Giovanni Ribisi) uses shallow depth of field and vibrant colors to center us within each character’s perspective and transmit their altered states of mind. An extended scene in a dingy motel room looks and feels like a sexy fever dream in an abattoir, while a later episode at a farmhouse recalls the claustrophobic paranoia of The Texas Chain Saw Massacre.
But Strange Darling is no simple slasher movie, even if there is a lot of slashing going on. The scrambled timeline toys with expectations and sets up an unpredictable third act where the monster, once slain, has a way of clawing its way back to life. Fitzgerald is riveting to watch in her transformation from naive seductress to frenzied but resourceful victim, and Gallner has his own tricks up his sleeve, hiding his intentions behind a poker face anchored by a mustache that’s practically its own character. Despite engaging performances from supporting actors Steven Michael Quezada, Ed Begley Jr. and Barbara Hershey, the tension goes a bit slack when the two principal characters are off-screen.
That’s the point at which the timeline settles into place, and the suspense boils down to wondering just how far this is all going to go. There are still surprises, but the secrets have been revealed and the loop has been closed. It might be time to think about rewatching the whole thing, with an eye to the clues you might have missed the first time through. The Lady’s attitude of no-means-yes can be instructive: whatever you thought was going on in Strange Darling, consider the opposite.
Photo courtesy of Magenta Light Studios
The post Strange Darling appeared first on Spectrum Culture.