Blog Archives

Affecting Only the Rich, or the World? : Possessor Analysis

2/22/2021

by Samantha Shuma

The future of technology is a daunting thing. What new gadget will bring the world to its knees? Its intellect becomes unmatched, or it can make people into something completely outside the scope of what humanity should be capable of. Possessor (Brandon Cronenberg, 2020) brings the unethical and drab side of what technological advancements could have in store for us. The main story focuses on taking one’s consciousness into the body of another for the sake of committing untraceable crimes. This affects high value targets, select individuals who have a role in wealthy society. However, the film’s world reveals another evil, one that affects a larger population. This accessible technology shapes the way civilians work and take the element of treating employees well out of the question for large corporations.

This analysis contains spoilers for Possessor, which covers a variety of horror and gore. Reader discretion is advised.

The film’s focus is Tas, a hired assassin for a secret organization. She does her killing not with her own hands, but with the hands of other people. As the title of the film implies, Tas ‘possesses’ a person close to the target, kills the target, then disconnects from the possessed by killing herself. This is done through a technological process, involving an implant being placed inside the host body and Tas is connected via a large headset. There, her consciousness fuses into the host and she has control over the host’s movement, and the original consciousness (belonging to the host’s body) is suppressed. The main hit of the film is against John Parse and Ava Parse, with the host being Ava’s boyfriend, Colin. John Parse is the owner of a data collecting company, his daughter being the next in line to own the company. Tas is put on the job because of Ava’s step brother, who hopes to take over the company once John and Ava are out of the picture. Problems arise during Tas’ hit when the connection between Colin and herself is not established properly. Colin’s consciousness takes control of himself while Tas is still inside him, making the completion of the hit spiral out of her control.

This whole process of possessing someone is not done through consent, but by kidnapping the host and forcibly placing the implant into their brain. By the time they wake up from surgery, consciousness transfer has already been completed. Seeing that Colin fights back against Tas, it can be safe to assume that the host is aware of what is happening but is unable to stop it. This process of possession goes beyond coercion and manipulation of brainwashing someone. It streamlines the process by having the consciousness of someone willing to commit murder inside of you, and once the process has begun it is impossible to disconnect without destroying your body. All that is left for the host’s consciousness to do is watch in despair as their body is destroyed by their own hand. It goes without saying that this whole experience is immoral, with the host living through horrible events that ultimately causes the death of innocent people (both the hosts and Tas’ targets). Hosts are unwillingly subjected to being possessed. One day, Colin is hanging out with Ava, getting ready for dinner. The next he is kidnapped, has a device implanted into his brain, and he wakes up with someone else at the wheel. Unable to move or speak of his own will, he is trapped, forced to witness his world fall come apart by his hand. The string of events Colin goes through ends in death, which was inescapable the moment Tas took over him. The film agrees with this sentiment, sharing its views through character reaction and character consequences. This mainly happens through Colin, who fights against Tas for the control of his body. Tas and Colin undergo immersive mental strain, concluding with Colin having his own murderous impulses and killing Tas’ family. Tas is left with nothing, Colin ultimately dies, no one wins. Even the company Tas works for loses as she fails to fulfill the hit on John Parse. The lesson 'villains never win’ is shown here, illustrating how using this technology does not yield good results.

Colin’s suffering is at the forefront of this film, as he’s the first host to fight back. The technology making this all possible is incredible, yielding the unethical possibilities of ‘possession.’ However, this is technology that isn’t widely accessible. While the implications are grim, it does not affect a large population. However, the film presents another kind of technology, one being used by the public. Colin works at John Parse’s company as a data collector. Watching an array of visual media, he must take notes on a particular visual in the image, such as the kind of curtains or color of furniture. He does not work in an office, rather a room that could be equated to a sardine can. Rows of people sit on benches in a dank, windowless room. Colin takes a small seat among them. They are packed together, all mumbling their observations. The feeling of claustrophobia demonstrates horrid working conditions. However, workers are complacent due to their means of working, a virtual reality headset. Once Colin puts on the headset, we see the trap these workers are placed in. While they are cramped together, the headsets show them in a wide space, simulating their own private offices, with an open window and modern decor, with the perspective of sitting at a desk, and a monitor displaying the media they must make notes on. There is a disconnect between what the eye sees and what is reality. Although this is only a small portion of the film, it demonstrates something that is more of a realistic horror. This kind of technology isn’t far from reach, VR headsets are something that is already available for public use. It is mostly used for playing games and for streaming content, but it could easily be implemented in a working environment. It is completely possible for workers to be placed in horrible working conditions of a sweatshop while wearing VR headsets that show them otherwise. In Russia, we already do this for cows, having them wear headsets to have them believe they are somewhere else for the sake of yielding better milk. It is not a stretch to see this being done for people for the sake of producing a larger quantity of completed work. We see that Colin doesn’t take this use of technology well, as he becomes sick and isn’t able to work. But he is the exception, as his co-workers seem content enough as they diligently collect data.

The present seems to be reaching ever closer to how we see the future of technology. We see VR reality in Possessor and realize it’s a future that isn’t that far away. It may have a price tag or be on store shelves, but it is something that people could develop and soon impact the world. What will be the advancement that tears us apart or leaves us in worse state than what we currently in? Will it allow us to do more than what should be possible? Sure, the ability to posses someone may seem far fetched, but the reality that nurtured this advancement is not. Incorporating VR headsets into the working environment can have damning implications, which Possessor introduces to us in just a portion of it’s runtime. The main story focuses on taking one’s consciousness into the body of another for the sake of committing untraceable crimes. This affects high value targets, select individuals who have a role in wealthy society. However, the film’s world reveals another evil, one that affects a larger population. This accessible technology shapes the way civilians work and take the element of treating employees well out of the question for large corporations.

Work Cited:
“Russian Cows Get VR Headsets 'to Reduce Anxiety'.” BBC News, BBC, 27 Nov. 2019, www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50571010.

0 Comments

Sound of Metal: A Review

2/12/2021

0 Comments

by Mason Leaver

Minor Spoilers for Sound of Metal

Part of the joy of watching films is the effect they can have on you long after you’ve left the theater or turned off the television. Sometimes this effect is just reflecting on how unbelievably good a scene was, or a performance, or the film as a whole. But I think many people would agree with my conviction that the best films are the ones we think about far down the road, the ones that leave us with something to wrestle with. Something to ponder. These films can often make us uncomfortable as we watch them in the theater, as we are coming to terms with the questions the film raises in real time. But after we walk out of the theater, we’re left to continue to ponder the questions the film raised. One great example of a film like this is Sound of Metal (Marder, 2020). Sound of Metal is a film that captures what I love about cinema- it is a technically polished film, with a solid plot and great performances, that leaves you thinking long after you’ve turned it off.
Sound of Metal focuses on Ruben, the drummer for a metal duet, alongside his girlfriend Lou, who plays guitar and does vocals. Ruben and Lou’s act is extremely underground- they’re living out of an RV, with no crew except the two of them, playing shows in tiny venues to small but devoted audiences. In other words, they’re barely scraping by, but they’re loving every moment of it. However, things start to go awry as Ruben begins to rapidly lose his sense of hearing, until he is totally deaf. Unable to play the drums, Ruben joins a deaf community for recovering addicts, where he will learn sign language and be supported by other people struggling to come to terms with their new condition. Over the course of the film, Ruben is repeatedly forced to reevaluate what is important to him, and he becomes a better person as a result.

Ruben learns sign language at the deaf community.

Riz Ahmed stars as Ruben, and he gives a deep, vulnerable and meaningful performance. Watching Ruben’s loss was heartbreaking, and watching as Ahmed depicted his transformation and growth was a delight. Riz Ahmed is an actor that I think is often underappreciated. He consistently gives very good performances- he shines in everything I’ve seen him in. For instance, his roles in Nightcrawler and The Sisters Brothers were both challenging, and he excelled in them. His performance in Sound of Metal is no different, and he ought to be recognized for it, hopefully with a Best Actor nomination at the Oscars this year.
Of course, a review of Sound of Metal wouldn’t be complete without mentioning the sound design. Obviously, it’s crucial that a film about losing one’s hearing reflects this trauma, and Sound of Metal does it wonderfully. On a technical level, the balance of the sound and the effects the sound design team used to create the sense of losing hearing works perfectly. And while the technical mastery is impressive, what makes it even more impressive is how director Darius Marder (who previously wrote 2012’s The Place Beyond the Pines) manages to use this sound design to communicate emotion and progress the story. The sound of the film often changes perspectives. At times we are able to hear all sound occurring in the scene (while Ruben is losing his hearing), but at other times we are not given any sound except for the most muffled noises, putting us into Ruben’s perspective. The party scene towards the end of the film is one of the best examples of this switching- we keep shifting from one perspective to another, showing how isolated Ruben feels. Sound of Metal will almost certainly be nominated for the Best Sound Editing Oscar, and I think it’s likely that it will win.

Riz Ahmed as Ruben

Sound of Metal is a film about disability, resilience through loss, addiction, relationships, religion, and more. Because it covers so many deep and complicated themes, it lends itself to being thought about long after the credits have rolled. And of course, the film’s premise forces you to ask the question- “What would I do if I lost my hearing?”. Sound of Metal forces us to confront these questions and to see just how difficult and traumatic that experience can be, but it also shows us the communities that are built up around these issues. The film also compels it’s audience to take an honest look at the ways in which society is not accessible to those with disabilities, and asks us how we could make the world better for everyone. It’s a film that rejects simplicity and demands thoughtful reflection. It’s worth a watch, and can be viewed on Amazon Prime.

0 Comments

Happy as Lazzaro: A Dystopian Parable

2/7/2021

0 Comments

By Ravi Ahuja

Note: This analysis contains spoilers

A family crowds around a room, celebrating the engagement of a young couple. There is barely anything to eat and even less to drink, but the room is still full of quiet contentment and a sense of community. Although the actual familial lines are fuzzy, there’s no doubt that this group is a family, pulled together by hard work and their collective experience. During the day they harvest tobacco, thresh wheat, take care of sheep, and do whatever else needs to be done in order to survive and make a profit. They have no one else to rely on. Despite their daily hard work, with women, children, and the elderly all doing what they can, they are visited the next day by a man who tallies up their harvest and their expenditures and sadly announces that their debt has only increased. The man, Nicola, is the partner and accountant of the Marquess who owns the land, an estate called Inviolata. The 50 or so people who live there are only sharecroppers scraping by off the portion of the harvest that is theirs. Among them is Lazzaro, a young man with no parents and a persistently happy disposition.

The family stands around a room with Lazzaro (Adriano Tardiolo) illuminated in the center

Despite the hard work, Lazzaro always does what is told of him with no complaint or hesitation, never even letting the smile slip from his face. Life is just as simple as it appears on the surface for Lazzaro. He desires nothing more than friendship, which Tancredi gives him. The rest of the workers abuse him, having him do any menial or undesirable tasks, not allowing him any break or small luxury. And yet, Lazzaro’s response is to seek more ways to help others, always volunteering his assistance to anyone who seems like they need it, even if they have hurt him or don’t deserve it. He is nothing less than a saint, albeit a simple-minded one.

Lazzaro and Tancredi (Luca Chikovani) playing with a slingshot

Happy as Lazzaro starts with a romantic depiction of rural life, where poverty is overshadowed by the simple pleasures of life in the countryside and having a close-knit community. The movie is shot on 16mm film and formatted with soft rounded edges to add to this warm nostalgic feeling, reminiscent of old polaroids and viewfinders. It doesn’t take long, however, for the audience to understand the reality of poverty. Life is not just simple and charming, but dangerous and hard. The family isn’t just missing some conveniences, they have little food or proper clothing or bedspace. With each passing scene, the illusion of an idealistic pastoral life is stripped further away. Their poverty is only exacerbated by the contrast between their lives and that of the Marquess when she comes to visit Inviolata along with her children.

The Marquess (Nicoletta Braschi) and Tancredi watching the workers

The Marquess’ house on the hill is filled with every luxury and convenience, with the laborers making and serving multiple course meals for her family of four. The beautiful furniture and drawers of silver cutlery seem almost offensive after watching the farmers unscrew lightbulbs to share between rooms. The Marquess smokes cigarettes while watching the farmers work, literally looking down on them from out her window. Her house looms in the background of several outdoor scenes, constantly acting as a reminder of her presence and position over the workers. In a conversation between the Marquess and her son Tancredi, it becomes clear that the farmers do not know that they are working in illegally bad conditions, but the Marquess makes it clear that she does not see what she is doing as wrong. She tells Tancredi, “Human beings are like animals. Set them free and they realize they are slaves locked in their own misery. Right now they suffer but they don’t know.” When Tancredi responds skeptically, she points out the window to Lazzaro toiling away, telling Tancredi “I exploit them, they exploit that poor man. It’s a chain reaction that can’t be stopped.” This view of exploitation as a natural and inevitable process and of human nature as indelibly cruel appears constant through the movie. The strong take advantage of the weak, and the weak survive by taking advantage of the weaker. There is no room to show compassion. The only exception to this rule is Lazzaro, who always does what is right no matter the personal cost.

The farmers threshing wheat while the Marquess and her daughter watch

When the police respond to a missing person call and arrive at Inviolata to discover the illegal sharecropping operation, there is at first a feeling of hope and relief. Finally, the poor farmers have been let out of their cycle of debt and hard work, and will be welcomed into a fairer, modern society. The harsh truth is that the farmers are even poorer and worse off living in the city than they were at Inviolata. Homeless, jobless, skill-less, they have no way of integrating into the modern world. The government is no help to them, proudly stating in a news article that the farmers have been placed in safer housing, while they squat in an abandoned lot. The surviving farmers are much more alone in the city, and have to resort to stealing and scamming rather than be able to work the land. Again, only Lazzaro remains immune to the corruption of the city.

The shift of setting to the city also makes clear the importance of nature, retrospectively making Inviolata seem charming and beautiful again even with the knowledge that their simple life was difficult. They were poor in the countryside yes, but they are poorer still in the city, and their extreme poverty is made even worse by their removal from nature and their community, the only things they’ve ever known. Lazzaro is strongly thematically connected with nature throughout the film, appearing more comfortable outdoors than under a roof. Even when rain comes, he seems content to stand outside while everyone else seeks refuge. Lazzaro can easily find fruit growing to feed Tancredi when he’s hungry, while Tancredi cannot. He is the one who identifies the vegetables growing as weeds in the city, allowing the farmers to regain some connection with the land. Despite the horrible poverty the farmers experienced at Inviolata, the movie does grant that a connection to the natural world is a gift.

Lazzaro cleaning trash from the abandoned lot the farmers live on

Happy as Lazzaro is not shy with its critique of capitalism, highlighting the constancy of its exploitative nature. Exploitation and ruthless human rights violations in the name of profits sometimes feels like something from a bygone era, when slaves worked plantations and children worked in factories. The world is surely much fairer today, where children go to school rather than work and everyone is ensured a minimum wage for working. The truth is that the Marquess is right, at least about the inevitability of exploitation within capitalism. It changes in execution and label, but the profit motive remains too important for exploitation to ever truly leave. Slaves became sharecroppers, factory workers became sweatshop workers, and capitalism keeps generating profit. Exploitation is not an evil exclusive to the rich either. When survival depends on profiting by any means, exploitation becomes the natural way of things. Concepts like justice and morality are valued less than money. The marquess is not the only villain in this story, just the richest one. Everyone is selfish and exploitative. The scene where Nicola, the accountant and partner of the Marquess is auctioning off labor contracts perfectly exemplifies the brutal spirit of selfishness that one must have to survive. Groups of immigrants take turns driving down the price of labor in order to secure money and work for themselves. And while it ends up hurting all of them to compete for labor, it is the only real option they have if they want to survive. The farmers too rely on exploitation, scamming the rare people who show them compassion and empathy. Not even the church is immune to this selfishness, refusing to allow the farmers to stay and listen to music for free because they are holding a “private function”. Only Lazzaro remains pure and honest.

Lazzaro walking through the tobacco field

          Lazzaro is the foil to this cynical view on human nature. The marquess insists that he too must participate in the cycle of exploitation, that he takes advantage of someone else, but he never does. He helps others purely out of the goodness of his heart, and harbors no resentment even to those who have betrayed him. Lazzaro is a clear messiah figure, showing the other characters and the audience the ideal human attitude and an alternative to the selfishness and greed around him. If everyone were a Lazzaro, exploitation would not have to be the inevitable nature of capitalism. But it is clear how hard such a world would be to reach. Lazzaro is more miraculous than real. Like Jesus, he is brought back to life; like Daniel in the lion’s den, Lazzaro is untouched by the wolves in the wilderness ; like David taking on Goliath, Lazzaro takes on the Bank armed with only a slingshot. And like the saints who died for their faith, Lazzaro too dies at the hands of a mob for doing what he believes to be right. Lazzaro doesn’t end up saving the world, his family or Tancredi. He ends up being exploited and killed. Doing the right thing doesn’t pay off in a society that incentivizes doing the wrong thing. Still, he does seem to inspire some change in the farmers who take him in in the city, showing them how to be at least a bit more selfless and compassionate. The farmer Lazzaro is closest to, Antonia, goes from not even buying a one euro beer for Lazzaro to being willing to spend 80 euros (all of their money) on pastries to thank Tancredi for inviting them to lunch. Even when they are refused at the door because Tancredi forgot about his invitation, Antonia is still willing to leave the pastries as a gift. A true act of Lazzaro.

          It seems that Happy as Lazzaro encourages a similar shift towards compassion and generosity. While there are times that survival does depend on making money at any cost, this is only ever true of the most exploited people in the movie. The Marquess does not need to exploit the farmers as she does in order to live. She exploits only because she has learned to value money above all else. Selfishness and immoral actions breed more of the same in one’s own life and in the lives of those around them. But Lazzaro proves that the same is true of selflessness. Goodness is just as contagious as evil. The problem is that selflessness is a revolutionary act in a society that preaches rugged individualism, and compassion is seen as a weakness to take advantage of. Despite the sad fate of Lazzaro and the other tragedies depicted throughout, Happy as Lazzaro shows many beautiful moments of intimacy and real human depth that can’t help but bring some hope that the world doesn’t have to be this way. The woman who stops and helps Antonia and buys her antique cigarette holder shows that Lazzaro isn’t the only one capable of being altruistic. Yes she gets taken advantage of, and anyone willing to show compassion must also accept that as a risk. But greed and exploitation is not a part of the human condition, despite what the Marquess says. Working against societal conditioning is hard, but the only way to ever make it less hard is to do it anyways and get society to begin to slowly change. Just begin asking yourself: what would Lazzaro do?

          Happy as Lazzaro is available for streaming now on Netflix (US).

0 Comments