web
counter
 

It's Not What You Think

By TK | Posted Under Film Reviews | Comments (68)



splice.jpg

Splice is not what you think it is. Let’s get that out of the way. It’s been marketed as a sort of cerebral horror film, and that’s not… quite right. It’s certainly a way to get people into the theaters, and the commercials, all full of swooping beasties and cries of fear and shock certainly play that up, but really, that’s the last 10 minutes or so. Instead, it’s a steady, slow-burning exploration of several themes — of science, genetics, gender roles, family dynamics, sexual dysfunction, and…

Let me back up. By now, it’s likely that everyone has seen the numerous trailers for Splice. Personally, I avoided watching any after the first one came up — once I know I’m going to review a film, I try to absorb as little information as possible. In its simplest sense, the trailers get the general concept right. Directed by Vincenzo Natali (Cube), and written by Natali, Antoinette Terry Bryant, and Doug Taylor, it is indeed a science-gone-wrong picture. Two lovers and scientists, Clive (Adrien Brody) and Elsa (Sarah Polley), are tinkering with DNA and genetic material in a quest to develop a new protein that will pave the way for huge medical advancements. In order to do so, they splice together different animal DNA to create a pair of amoebic, slug-like organisms — brand new organisms and a revolution in their own right. Hungry and ambitious as they are, they take things one step further, splicing in human DNA to create yet another organism. Against Clive’s better judgment, they allow the organism to be born and it rapidly and unexpectedly develops into a strange, humanoid creature that they name Dren (Delphine ChanĂ©ac).

Eventually, Dren grows beyond their capability to safely hide her in their lab, so they move her out to Elsa’s abandoned farm in the country. Up until this point, the film’s plot was relatively predictable, sort of a smarter, less idiotic, and less ‘splodey version of Species — or a less melodramatic Frankenstein of the modern era, if you prefer a more intellectual comparison. Dren can’t speak, instead only uttering weird chirps and trilling noises, and while Clive grows wary of her rapid development, Elsa’s maternal feelings for the creature begin to blur the lines between scientific impartiality and motherly protectiveness.

And then the film just goes right off the goddamn rails. The Frankenstein theme that was prevalent for the first hour of its production evolves, much like Dren herself, into a completely bizarre and twisted vision of the darker alleys of humanity. Like me, I’m guessing that most viewers were waiting for the film’s climax, when Dren would become the monster that was alluded to. And that does happen — horribly and nightmarishly so. But not before we are forced to examine the monstrous acts that people are capable of first. I refuse to spoil it, but suffice it to say that it travels some very unexpected terrain that will likely leave people pretty uncomfortable, yet wholly engrossed. Clive and Elsa evolve (or devolve, depending on your thinking) psychologically and emotionally, just as much as Dren does physically, and the results are grimly lurid and at times flat-out disturbing.

Splice is many things. It is not so much a scientific cautionary tale as it is an examination of humanity, ethics, and perversity. It’s a jarring turn that’s taken roughly 60 minutes into the film, and it’s bolstered by solid direction by Natali, and the strong performances of its leads. It’s no news flash that Polley and Brody are excellent actors, which was why it was sort of a surprise to see them cast in what appeared to be a run-of-the-mill science fiction tale. Now I know that there’s nothing mundane about it. In fact, the first two acts, which seemed to drag in part and are only salvaged by their nuanced performances and by the compelling curiosity regarding what will become of Dren, now seems more like an elaborate setup than anything else.

The problem is that that setup is at times clumsily rendered. Polley’s motivations in the film are subtly alluded to, and her development is finely rendered and sensible, even as it descends into madness. Brody’s Clive is far less so — little to no backstory is given to his character, which makes his radical change less understandable. Polley absolutely carries the film, and Brody’s work is admirable, if somewhat underwritten. The film’s two subplots — one regarding the pressure by their higher-ups on them to produce a viable, moneymaking scientific breakthrough, and another concerning Clive’s brother Gavin (Brandon McGibbon), are rather superfluous and distracting. McGibbon’s supposed to represent a voice of reason and conscience, but instead he’s simply a nagging bore. Meanwhile, the film wastes the remarkable performance of Simona Maicanescu as Joan, the company president.

That isn’t to say that Splice is a bad film. Despite its occasional missteps and failures, it succeeds in one way that 90% of modern films fail — it’s interesting as hell. It’s a twisted tale of love, betrayal, demons both figurative and literal, and scientific and ethical boundaries that are shattered irreversibly. It feels like one of those films that started with a couple of fascinating ideas, and a full-length film was cobbled together around them — with mixed results. Regardless, that doesn’t make its bizarre and squirm-inducing ending any less effective, and it’s at many times an intelligent, if unpleasant, experience. Whether or not that satisfies you will be entirely up to your particular proclivities.

TK writes about music and movies. He enjoys playing with dogs, raising the dead, and tacos. You can email him here.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



The More I See of Scott Pilgrim, the Less Interested I Become | An Edgar Wright Introduced Scott Pilgrim Clip | Pajiba Love 06/07/10









Comments

I was kind of turned off by some of the previews (they instilled a real "Why, Good Actors? WHY??" kneejerk reaction), then I had a friend tell me it was awesome... then I had a set of friends tell me that, while they wouldn't go into detail, I should know that I would probably have squicky nightmares for at least a month if I watched it. Then one of them offered to go see it with me if they could record my reactions on their camera phone.

I'm thinking I should probably give this one a pass.

Posted by: PaleoLithchick at June 7, 2010 12:11 PM

Only interested in Polley, now I know it's something I can make my friends watch in the hillside coffee plantation.

Posted by: arrrghzi at June 7, 2010 12:13 PM

Oh, excellent! I was afraid it would be another run of the mill, Sci-Fi horrory thing. I'm glad to know that there is more to it.

Posted by: admin at June 7, 2010 12:15 PM

I've been WAITING for this review to come up so I could shriek: "AAAAAAAAAAARGHHHHHH THIS WAS THE GROSSEST MOVIE I HAVE EVER SEEN! I WAS LITERALLY IN MY FRIEND'S LAP (not literally)"

Posted by: coveredinbees at June 7, 2010 12:17 PM

I'm an ardent supporter of anything Sci-fi, right down to the hideous SyFy original crapfests that have gotten me through many an afternoon hungover. To hear that this genre film is poignant, well-acted and has a special effects budget that probably blows Ice Spiders into the next glacial age? I am so down.

Posted by: Ulterior Motive Girl at June 7, 2010 12:32 PM

Is it as squicky as "The Fly" (Golblum version, of course) or "The Thing" (Kurt Russell version, even more obviously)? If so, I'm in.

Posted by: Slash at June 7, 2010 12:59 PM

WAAAAAAAAAY squickier than The Fly, which I saw when I was like, what, twelve, and didn't care. This freaked my grown-ass OUT.

Posted by: coveredinbees at June 7, 2010 1:03 PM

So, it's the structural opposite of May, then? This starts as a modern Frankenstein then switches to something different, while that starts as something completely different and ends as a modern Frankenstein. I still plan on seeing it. One day this week, I will wake up early enough to get myself together and see the matinee.

Posted by: Robert at June 7, 2010 1:13 PM

1) Great review. I am insanely curious about this now and will try and watch it as soon as possible.

2) A single example of an organism (i.e. 'Dren' in this movie) CAN'T EVOLVE. Give her a few generations of family, and maybe, but if it's just the one creature in this movie, pick a different fucking word.

Posted by: the_wakeful at June 7, 2010 1:18 PM

the_wakeful, she, well, rather does. Or perhaps mutate is the word we're looking for? But it's sci-fi, yeah, so I think we can't be too pedantic with real-world terms.

Posted by: coveredinbees at June 7, 2010 1:31 PM

After reading TK's review this morning, I raced out and caught the first showing I could find. Two hours of dumbstruck horror later, the look of shock may be permanently etched on my face. The "unpleasant" adjective is particularly apt. Damn.

Posted by: Dustin Rowles at June 7, 2010 1:32 PM

What I think is "Sarah Polley's cleavage." So it's not that? Damn.

Posted by: Todd at June 7, 2010 1:33 PM

iz thar netflixz in south east eyzya?

Anyway, the_wakeful, "develop" is such a pedestrian, undramatic, corporate word. ^_^ Words get co-opted and develop meanings that were not that of the original. "Evolve" has pretty much passed the tipping point or whatever in that process. Find another fight to champion, this one cannot be salvaged. Besides, the point of language and words is to convey meaning, when someone says "evolve", you understand what they are trying to say even if it's not the "strict meaning".

If we were in the academe then fire away, otherwise, learn to let it go.

Posted by: arrrghzi at June 7, 2010 1:36 PM

Oh good, I feel validated by Dustin's horror. I thought maybe I was being rather wussy. Also, when discussing this movie, my friend kept using the term MonsterDaughter, and it cracked me up.

Posted by: coveredinbees at June 7, 2010 1:36 PM

I'm intrigued, and would be very interested in reading a recap of the movie, especially since the combination of an easily squicked spouse and tiny tiny babies makes it impracticable for me to see it. Have you guys ever thought about doing movie recaps for those of us who want the cultural touchstones but rarely get to socialize with the over 2 set?

Posted by: SquishMama at June 7, 2010 1:40 PM

So for those of us who DO NOT like horror and not so much even the
Sci-Fi (yeah I was upset & spooked by Aliens. There I said it)... and sure
as hell not down with feeling "squickey" for any period of time ____
Where can I find the story spoilers to get the low down know what happens? I've done bumped around the Nets for a while now and have come up empty handed.

Posted by: Ms MoMo at June 7, 2010 1:46 PM

This movie is getting a lot more credit here than I think it deserves. The last 20 minutes or so of the movie are just a total disaster, nothing the characters do make any sense. The first hour is fairly thoughtful and builds suspense well, but it seemed to me that they didn't know what to do with it and the movie just kind of collapses under its own weight. The surprises at the end of the movie were anything but, you can see them a mile off in the distance and that means that once you get to about the 1:20 mark in the movie, you'll know how it's going to end.

It's fine for a second run or Netflix movie, but don't bother paying to see it in a first run theater.

Posted by: dizzle at June 7, 2010 1:48 PM

Just to gauge the awfulness, is it like Martyrs level or worse?

Posted by: arrrghzi at June 7, 2010 1:49 PM

arrrghzi, when I hear the word 'evolve' I think of Finch's developing differently shaped beaks over millions of years. Not exactly exciting horror movie fare, if you ask me. I haven't seen the movie yet, but I feel like 'mutate' is probably a better term, as coveredinbees mentioned. THAT has some terrifying connotations.

P.S. I like my women like I like my coffee: COVERED IN BEEEEEEES

Posted by: the_wakeful at June 7, 2010 1:50 PM

Wait, what? People are freaked out enough by this to merit a question in context of Martyrs, one of the most brutal horrors in recent memory? I'm...yeah. I still need to see it, but now I'm terrified. Do I go with my pre-horror latte to get the energy going or a soothing cup of herbal tea so I don't feel like my chest is going to explode? The last time I made that mistake, I was up all night thanks to The Strangers just screwing with my expectations again and again.

Posted by: Robert at June 7, 2010 1:55 PM

So if I hear you correctly, what yer sayin' is that you know Marmaduke, Marmaduke is a friend of yours, and Splice is no Marmaduke.

Posted by: A Bowl Of Stupid at June 7, 2010 1:55 PM

Whoa. I've had the misfortune of seeing Martyrs. Splice is messed up, but it ain't that messed up.

Posted by: TK at June 7, 2010 1:59 PM

Aw, the_wakeful.

Posted by: coveredinbees at June 7, 2010 2:02 PM

What could have made this film excellent would have been to drop Dren altogether and let the characters' complexities play out around Fred and Ginger and their ilk. A far subtler and more restrained approach to the products of their work and their personalities would have taken the goofy SyFy network feel out of the second half and elevated this to the 21st century Cronenberg homage it should have been.

Posted by: laredo at June 7, 2010 2:07 PM

Ms. Momo, the entire synopses is on Wikipedia. It's accurate; a friend of mine spoiled the film for me about a week ago and what's on the website is pretty much what he told me.

Yeah, I'm not seeing this.

Posted by: Brie at June 7, 2010 2:09 PM

Laredo, I completely disagree, it's the humanity in the Dren character that makes it all so complex and fascinating. Though Fred and Ginger did steal the show at one point and I may have laughed out loud.

Posted by: coveredinbees at June 7, 2010 2:10 PM

Really, this is all you need to know:
http://makesomelove.livejournal.com/227249.html

ALL THE SPOILERS. The review is entertaining as hell, despite being TL;DR and in all caps. I LOL'd so hard my dog thought I was crying.

Posted by: Darlene at June 7, 2010 2:11 PM

Fine, after reading the comments I'm definitely seeing this on the weekend. Che, grab a flight.

Posted by: admin at June 7, 2010 2:12 PM

@the_wakeful

But for the hoi poloi, like me, it is usually understood as "a transformation" when used in casual conversation. People can use and understand the word differently depending on context eg academia and non-academia.

At least in this usage, the basic concept of something changing is held. Compare that to the more annoying misuse of evolve or evolution as "going towards a perfect archetype".

Posted by: arrrghzi at June 7, 2010 2:13 PM

Dude, Darlene, that is the funniest thing I have read all day. And it is 100% accurate as well.

Posted by: coveredinbees at June 7, 2010 2:22 PM

I enjoyed it, extreme creepiness and all, although I did think the characters' motivations weren't really clear a lot of the time. I kept finding myself thinking, "Why the hell did you just do that?" But it was nice to see a mad scientist who's a chick for a change, and the lab/lab equipment/scientists felt real. It says something depressing about how science is portrayed in films that I get excited about the site of glass bottles with orange caps and those little plastic round thingies you use to float eppendorf tubes in water baths. Or maybe it just says something about what a nerd I am.

Posted by: dr. pisaster at June 7, 2010 2:40 PM

RE coveredinbees: "WAAAAAAAAAY squickier than The Fly, which I saw when I was like, what, twelve, and didn't care. This freaked my grown-ass OUT."

OK, duly noted. Thanks.

Yeah, the movies have always played fast and loose with the concept of hybrids and evolution and all that, knowing that most people are so ignorant of even basic science that they won't notice. Even being a non-scientist, I know that most of the shit in sci-fi movies couldn't really happen, but has to in the movie or there would be no movie. Or there would be a very boring movie: "Day 153: hybrid fetus still viable, growth unremarkable." Whereas in the movies, it would be: "Day 12: Holy shit, this thing grows fast! It's already got fully-formed eyes and the beginnings of what looks like tentacles... Uh-oh. I don't remember coding its genetic sequence for tentacle growth... "

Posted by: Slash at June 7, 2010 2:44 PM

Do caterpillars evolve into butterflies?

Posted by: Pat C at June 7, 2010 3:12 PM

I was going to post a link for spoilers but the livejournal one somehow makes this subject matter more palatable.

*possible spoilers but really just opinion*

This movie had the double whammy of scarring me twice. I first saw the trailer while pregnant, and it totally played into my fear of having a mutated flipper baby. Now that I have a 5 month old, I read these spoilers and it makes me aware of how it is my job to not fuck her up while raising her.

I will be skipping this.

Posted by: Theresa at June 7, 2010 3:25 PM

Pat C

No, they metamorphose.

Posted by: the_wakeful at June 7, 2010 3:26 PM

AUUUUUUGH! I don't know what to think. Whatever, I'm seein' it anyway. I am, exactly as Ulterior Motive Girl said, "an ardent supporter of anything Sci-fi, right down to the hideous SyFy original crapfests..."

The question is, will I be curled up in a fetal position under a blanket for a week, or will I be like, "Awse! When does this come out on DVD?" It could go either way.

So, are we pointing out the irony here that people imagine that The Human Centipede would send them into the squick stratosphere, whereas it (by all accounts) turned out to be as mundane as possible given the idea, whereas Splice looks like a real science-y sci-fi with some scary moments, when in fact it's so disturbing that it will leave any ordinary person rocking back and forth in the corner mumbling?

Posted by: MM at June 7, 2010 3:37 PM

HOLY FUCK! I just read the full synopsis for Martyrs, after reading some of the comments here. I'm usually all for the horror, gross or not, usually doesn't bother me. But, Jeezus Pete, what a fuckin' icky squicky gross-out disgusterating fuckstain that sounds like. YEEESHHH!!! I...think I'll miss it.

I'm glad to see the comparison of Splice to Species. That's exactly what mr. dammit and I thought watching the trailers....and I'm also glad to read it is NOT a re-hash of that. I, too, saw good actors in what appeared to be a cheezy sci-fi-horror mashup and wondered why. Now, my interest is piqued.

Posted by: dammitjanet at June 7, 2010 3:42 PM

Splice has proven that the art of the B movie has not gone away. I can't wait until this becomes a cult classic horror movie and I can laugh at the ridiculousness instead of being horrified.

Posted by: kelsy at June 7, 2010 4:17 PM

oh man, I saw this on Saturday with my husband. I am pregnant with twins, so yeah - parenting tips absorbed. For those of you who are planning to see it, try not to get any spoilers before you go, I have an idea it will be a LOT more fun (I like weird, gross, sick things) if you don't know what's coming (I accidentally got spoilers). My husband, god bless him, is unshockable, even without spoilers. I literally think there is nothing in this universe that could surprise him. :)

Posted by: southwer at June 7, 2010 4:18 PM

Ms MoMo: I use www.themoviespoiler.com every time. They have a splice recap here:

http://www.themoviespoiler.com/Spoilers/splice.html

Also I can't decide if I want to watch this or not, or if I should just read the spoilers and decide then. TORN.

Posted by: figgy at June 7, 2010 4:18 PM

Oh Holy God I started and then I couldn't stop and WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS MOVIE?!

Posted by: figgy at June 7, 2010 4:21 PM

Now that I have a 5 month old, I read these spoilers and it makes me aware of how it is my job to not fuck her up while raising her.

Good luck with that. No matter what, you're going to fuck up. Embrace it.

Posted by: admin at June 7, 2010 4:26 PM

Darlene I am traumatized for life because of this review, because I'm laughing so damn hard and just...oh holy godtopus. I say again: what the fuck is this movie??

Posted by: figgy at June 7, 2010 4:28 PM

This:

ADRIEN BRODY'S BROTHER IS ALSO A BIOCHEMIST AND HAS THE EXACT SAME HAIRCUT AS ADRIEN BRODY

and this:

"WHERE IS IT U GUYS ADRIEN BRODY'S HAIRCUT TOLD ME ALL ABOUT IT"

were definitely my favorite parts of that AMAZING LJ review because, no joke, I was like, "Why does that guy have the same flow-bee hipster hair that Adrien Brody has?" Then, CLUNNNNNK, in the dialogue, something like, "That's what being a scientist is about, little brother," or some such nonsense. And then I said, "Ohhhhhhhhhhhh."

p.s. I think reading that LJ review has affected my syntax.

Posted by: coveredinbees at June 7, 2010 4:36 PM

oh my god Darlene, bless you for posting that review. That was hilarious. :)

Posted by: southwer at June 7, 2010 4:39 PM

@admin... thanks. I do realize you are correct. The scariest part is I may never know what I did...

still skipping the movie.

Posted by: Theresa at June 7, 2010 4:48 PM

ugh... i saw this friday night and was thoroughly disgusted. and i completely disagree with those who say (see the rottentomatoes reviews) it was a simmering and nuanced film. there was no depth to the characters or story, no intelligent examination of themes, no likeable characters. it was completely predictable and its only purpose was to shock and appall.

and, sarah polley? i cannot figure out why people think she's a good actor. she's wooden in everything i've seen her in and this is no different. again, just "ugh."

Posted by: kuzum at June 7, 2010 5:19 PM

So how is Delphine Chaneac (Dren) in the movie? How is her performance? Because that woman is gorgeous.

http://imstars.aufeminin.com/stars/fan/delphine-chaneac/delphine-chaneac-20060522-132055.jpg

Posted by: DeistBrawler at June 7, 2010 7:56 PM

actually, delphine chaneac was the only interesting character for me. i thought she gave an excellent, entirely believable performance. and she is beautiful in the movie, gorgeous even in her freakish nightmare multi-species body.

Posted by: kuzum at June 7, 2010 8:21 PM

Delphine Chaneac is amazing. With no real dialogue she brings across a totally alien character with definite emotions and desires. I loved the movie, but I have a stomach of stainless steel...YMMV.

Posted by: Adam C at June 7, 2010 8:28 PM

@dammitjanet

I watched Martyrs on a laptop in the woods at night. Right after, I watched Visitor Q. Halfway through Visitor Q, I found myself rather watching Martyrs again, because Martyrs somehow disturbed me less.

Posted by: arrrghzi at June 7, 2010 8:37 PM

@arrrghzi

Curiosity about your comment just made me go look up Visitor Q on the IMDBees. OH MY HOLY CRAP. And people think Human Centipede is bad? No.Fucking.Way.

Posted by: MM at June 7, 2010 9:12 PM

@arrrghzi from what I just read, is one crapadocious fuckload of WTF?

Posted by: dammitjanet at June 7, 2010 9:41 PM

What do you mean Sarah Polley doesn't really seem to mesh with Sci-Fi? Her first big American movie was the remake of Dawn of the Dead, and before that, she was in a Canadian flick called Last Night about the last 6 hours on earth.

Of course, she was also in that movie where she had sex with Stephen Fry. . .

Posted by: Rowen at June 7, 2010 10:03 PM

@dammitjanet

I would have appreciated an "enter" or some sort of punctuation that implies discontinuation from my nick in that reply. ^_^

Posted by: arrrghzi at June 7, 2010 10:15 PM

@MM

The most breast milk I've ever seen in a movie. Also, consider the fact that there no babies in the film.

Posted by: arrrghzi at June 7, 2010 10:22 PM

Here's my thing:

SOMEDAY, male directors will stop writing and producing and directing stories whose soundtracks could basically be a beat poet whispering "RAPE-ITY RAPE RAPE RAPE-ITY RAPE RAPE." On that day, I will rejoice. This just in: raping all (or any) of the ladies in your story does not make you edgy, nor does it make that particular story particularly meaningful. So stop fucking doing it unless it's in the service of a better story.

Until then, get back, foul beast of a movie.

Posted by: Erin B. at June 7, 2010 11:45 PM

That LJ review might be the funniest thing I've read all day...

Even funnier - the comments at the bottom and how the author of the post is replying to every single one basically reiterating how traumatized s/he was by the movie and repeating the weirdest parts, and following it by "THE END!!!"

I think I might have to see this for myself. I'm a glutton for punishment.

Posted by: dene at June 8, 2010 2:09 AM

i do consider about these and when comes to my mind of seen this movie it was not all that science do matters to me it was only the most delicate story and kind of Navi attractions this creature does got, whether i don't know much about the science now do have some idea about DNA technology

source
http://blog.80millionmoviesfree.com/in-theaters/watch-splice-online

Posted by: sonajella at June 8, 2010 4:53 AM

So the brilliant scientists in this movie compound the first moronic thing they do by (amazingly) doing something even MORE moronic?

Posted by: , at June 8, 2010 10:57 AM

I'm truly sorry that some 15 year old who doesn't know how to turn off her caps lock has over-shadowed TK's great review. But damn, I keep re-reading it and it makes me laugh so hard.

"I WANTED TO RIP THE SCREEN OFF THE WALL AND GET IN A HOT AIR BALLOON TO DISTRIBUTE PAMPHLETS ABOUT HOW AWFUL THIS MOVIE WAS"

p.s. she doesn't turn off her caps lock but, for some reason, makes some interesting points about gender roles and disability metaphors. this LJ review is a beautiful mess of a contradiction.

Posted by: coveredinbees at June 8, 2010 2:08 PM

What in the holy hell was that last 20 minutes? Did someone splice in footage of another film starring Sarah Polley and Adrien Brody because the writers couldn't figure out how to end a good horror/sci-fi film in a halfway decent way?

Hate. Hate hate hate. Hate. Hate. Hate and anger. Mostly anger. This is Suspiria levels of failure to deliver what the film promises in the final scenes right here.

And it was so good until that one scene. So good. Like, I was already coming up with explanations for why it would make my Top 10 of 2010 list and probably be named my number 1 of the year. If nothing else, the self-destructive ending saved me from another year of unending "why did you like THAT?" questions online. So, thanks for destroying a beautiful, intelligent, well-acted, well-crafted film so no one could walk away calling it a favorite. Really. We all, strangely, appreciate it.

Posted by: Robert at June 8, 2010 2:37 PM

I fucking loved this movie, but there were two things I hated, which have already been covered by other commenters:

A single example of an organism (i.e. 'Dren' in this movie) CAN'T EVOLVE. Give her a few generations of family, and maybe, but if it's just the one creature in this movie, pick a different fucking word.

When the SCIENTISTS in this movie used this word to describe Dren's development, I died a little inside. Apparently the creationists have gotten to Hollywood. WHY AREN'T THERE ANY HALF-MONKEY, HALF-PEOPLE?!?!?

This just in: raping all (or any) of the ladies in your story does not make you edgy, nor does it make that particular story particularly meaningful. So stop fucking doing it unless it's in the service of a better story.

I guess we've already covered spoilers here but ***SPOILERS***

I didn't feel like Dren was a victim of Clive. I felt like Clive was a pretty shitty dude, but it's kind of how I feel when a professor has sex with a student (of legal age): the student may have consented, may have even initiated, but that doesn't make the professor any less of an asshole for not saying, "Hey, this is wrong."

But the rape of Elsa means that I will probably never watch this movie again, or at least stop it about the time they bury Dren. This shit is very, very triggering for me. In a story where it ACTUALLY MEANS SOMETHING (the only example I'm coming up with off the top of my head is the assault of Sheryl [?? it's been awhile since I saw it] in BSG season 1 or 2), I can deal. Rape is a real thing and I don't expect anyone to pretend it doesn't exist. But in Splice, or any other gazillions of movies where someone just gets randomly raped, it seems obvious that this is only happening because, culturally, we believe that this is what women deserve. It's no longer about "people are really fucked up and sometimes they are rapists" (and all the implications about power, etc, as in BSG), but "women are sluts and all deserve to get fucked, whether they want it or not." It's always obvious which side the writer/director/whoever is coming from, and it kills me every time. :-/

Posted by: jules at June 8, 2010 6:14 PM

This is the best Splice review I've read:

http://yuki-onna.livejournal.com/586183.html#cutid1

Posted by: Moobie at June 9, 2010 2:48 AM

SPOILERS

When Clive comes back to the apartment to confront Elsa after having sex with Dren, I turned to Mr. DaC and whispered, "The reason they're not talking is because the screenwriters looked at each other and went, 'Well, fuck. Where the HELL do we go from here?!'"

Also, I was very disturbed that biochemists are so tres chic. Awful plaid suit, I expected. Kid Robot and gigantic homage to anime above the bed? Yeahhhhh. All kinds of terrible. Some forums were trying to play it off as Elsa being infantalized, but I'm not buying it.

Thirdly, fuck this movie for showing the killing of a cat. :'(

/SPOILERS

Posted by: duckandcover at June 9, 2010 8:07 AM

SPOILERS

This movie hates women. Full stop. Also, I was sorta pissed at the heterosexism that says that any time a penis and a vagina get into close proximity (be they Fred and Ginger, Clive and Elsa, or Dren and one of her parents), they fuck. Anytime that a penis and a penis or a vagina and a vagina get into close proximity (Fred and Ginger, Elsa and girl Dren, Clive and boy Dren), they must be rivals. That shit is ridiculous. Also, I love how the only words that Dren speaks are disgusting rapey words. Thanks a lot, movie. Fuck you very much.

Posted by: madavis4 at June 16, 2010 2:21 PM

SPOILERS

Am I the only one that reads these reviews after a movie comes home? Interesting. The comments above were good to read after the fact. I thought it was a tremendously interesting movie, but flawed. The Clive/Dren sex scene I think was supposed to show first off how immasculated Clive was, and 2nd how completely off the reservation he and Elsa have gone as both scientists and morally responsible human beings. I don't think "inside you" was meant to be a sadistic one liner but Dren connecting with Elsa. I don't think he understood he was hurting her because hours before it had done the same with Clive. Or it did understand and this was revenge for cutting off it's stinger.

It was a fascinating movie, I liked it a lot. Tense but not scary, it was very much a hard sci-fi movie. It was smaller than I expected. I thought she would get loose at some point and wreak havoc. I had several questions when it was done but rather than plot holes I think I just need to pay closer attention on the next viewing. Especially Clive's strange comments to Elsa about her family history which we only got glimpses of.

Posted by: TylerDFC at October 25, 2010 1:43 PM

Finally watched this On Demand last night. I thought it was an excellent film, it made you uncomfortable and it made you think.

People seems to be really bothered by the rape scene at the end, especially when Dren utters his/her first words. I think that you REALLY need to pay attention to all the dialouge in the earlier parts of the film. Remember, Elsa had a conversation with Dren. She told her, "I am a part of you. I'm inside you". (they share DNA). Dren, having mutated into a male, repeats these words back to Elsa while mating with her. I don't think it was an act of revenge (even though Elsa was incredibly cruel to Dren). Once Dren had evolved in to a male, it's purpose was to spread it's seed and propagate the species.

Posted by: Norwego at November 14, 2010 10:18 AM