This film is listed as a thriller/mystery and the plot summary suggests that it will be a great slice of sci-fi ideasmanship with a big Hollywood name in the lead. Regardless of whether the film is any good or not, it is pretty important that you ditch expectations at the door, because this is not so much a thriller as it is a character piece that uses this device to explore its central character(s). You need to know this because ultimately the film is very slow, really doesn't give you anything in the way of easy answers and will require you to think back over the film once you do reach the ending. So while it is generally good to come to a film without knowing much about it, it is best here to go in without bringing your own assumptions.
The plot sees a history professor living out a life that he appears to find dull. He gives the same lectures and he has similar sex with his girlfriend – all of which seems to be in contrast to the opening scene where we see him at some very seedy sex club. One night he is watching a movie on the suggestion of a colleague and he sees what appears to be himself in a tiny supporting role. Turning to the internet he finds that the struggling actor in question is indeed a perfect match for him, and he sets out to meet him – something that both men quickly realize is a mistake.
This plot unfolds in a way that is patient and atmospheric; the soundtrack broods across the entire piece, everything is dimly lit apart from a few scenes and generally there is a feeling of things not being right. This is added to by the presence of large spiders in a couple of scenes – in particular a giant one that treads across the entire city. As a presence the film is engaging in its mystery but while it entices you to work out what is happening, it is better to be thinking about what it all means, since this is a film or allegory more than action. Viewing it as such and a lot of it makes sense – not all of it – but most of it. There are clear themes of infidelity, of moral weakness, of temptation and within all of these the spiders and the doppelgangers all fit in a way that will make sense if you take the time after to think back over it – but not if you are too busy being annoyed at the end for not being the tidy thriller conclusion you expected. Once you do think back through it, I would say that it is perhaps not as smart or as subtle as it would like to think itself, but it does still work thanks to some good ideas in fragmenting the flow of time through the narrative (but mostly keeping this to itself) and also making it pretty clear that it is not a straight piece as the one-line pitch would suggest).
I should be honest and say that I didn't know anything about the film when I watched it and I did get caught up in the mystery looking for the film to hand me everything; however I did also buy into the brooding atmosphere so it was clear that there was more meaning than solutions to be drawn here. Villeneuve is clearly one who likes the darker side of things; having seen Prisoners and the short film Next Floor from him recently I think that much is clear. Here he makes the most of that and is helped by the soundtrack and cinematography. Gyllenhaal understands the film well and his performance(s) is well targeted to be ignorant but yet also informed as to how he lays out the path; it is a subdued performance(s) but one he does well. Outside of him there is really just a supporting cast but Laurent and Gadon both do their parts well. Rossellini's character doesn't really work (being a bit too obvious in what she delivers) and I also didn't care too much for her casting since she seems like Lynchian shorthand that wasn't needed by that point.
Enemy is a strange film but it is a mostly engaging one. It is dark and brooding in its presentation and while the mystery is more about meaning than explaining events, it compels on both levels. It is not as smart as it would like to think though and I can understand a level of frustration with it, but to me it was a film I enjoyed while watching and appreciated thinking back over it.
The plot sees a history professor living out a life that he appears to find dull. He gives the same lectures and he has similar sex with his girlfriend – all of which seems to be in contrast to the opening scene where we see him at some very seedy sex club. One night he is watching a movie on the suggestion of a colleague and he sees what appears to be himself in a tiny supporting role. Turning to the internet he finds that the struggling actor in question is indeed a perfect match for him, and he sets out to meet him – something that both men quickly realize is a mistake.
This plot unfolds in a way that is patient and atmospheric; the soundtrack broods across the entire piece, everything is dimly lit apart from a few scenes and generally there is a feeling of things not being right. This is added to by the presence of large spiders in a couple of scenes – in particular a giant one that treads across the entire city. As a presence the film is engaging in its mystery but while it entices you to work out what is happening, it is better to be thinking about what it all means, since this is a film or allegory more than action. Viewing it as such and a lot of it makes sense – not all of it – but most of it. There are clear themes of infidelity, of moral weakness, of temptation and within all of these the spiders and the doppelgangers all fit in a way that will make sense if you take the time after to think back over it – but not if you are too busy being annoyed at the end for not being the tidy thriller conclusion you expected. Once you do think back through it, I would say that it is perhaps not as smart or as subtle as it would like to think itself, but it does still work thanks to some good ideas in fragmenting the flow of time through the narrative (but mostly keeping this to itself) and also making it pretty clear that it is not a straight piece as the one-line pitch would suggest).
I should be honest and say that I didn't know anything about the film when I watched it and I did get caught up in the mystery looking for the film to hand me everything; however I did also buy into the brooding atmosphere so it was clear that there was more meaning than solutions to be drawn here. Villeneuve is clearly one who likes the darker side of things; having seen Prisoners and the short film Next Floor from him recently I think that much is clear. Here he makes the most of that and is helped by the soundtrack and cinematography. Gyllenhaal understands the film well and his performance(s) is well targeted to be ignorant but yet also informed as to how he lays out the path; it is a subdued performance(s) but one he does well. Outside of him there is really just a supporting cast but Laurent and Gadon both do their parts well. Rossellini's character doesn't really work (being a bit too obvious in what she delivers) and I also didn't care too much for her casting since she seems like Lynchian shorthand that wasn't needed by that point.
Enemy is a strange film but it is a mostly engaging one. It is dark and brooding in its presentation and while the mystery is more about meaning than explaining events, it compels on both levels. It is not as smart as it would like to think though and I can understand a level of frustration with it, but to me it was a film I enjoyed while watching and appreciated thinking back over it.