Annihilation

I honestly got bored and started looking for the next film to watch before it had ended. I like Natalie Portman and she brings some weight to her role but this is largely a style over substance affair that takes little to no consideration for secondary characters or knitting together the plot holes. Shame as it could've been quite something.

After watching this film I read the reviews voted "most helpful," which all were long lists of plot holes and logical inconsistencies. They are absolutely right. I didn't think about it while watching the film, but when it's pointed out, yeah, nothing in this movie makes much sense.

But I still really liked it. It's creepy and atmospheric and more concerned with the psychology of people on a suicide mission than on the nuts and bolts of scientific investigation. It's often intense , usually beautiful, well acted, and had some really weird and mesmerizing moments.

I won't argue that you should forgive it for its plot holes, or that it has any deep meaning, or anything like that. In fact, it's probably easier to make a convincing argument against the movie than for it. I'm just saying, I really liked it.

ADDENDUM: I looked at the user reviews recently (2024) and the top reviews are no longer lists of plot holes. The people who enjoyed the movie, like me, have since my review pushed the naysayers down. Which I fully support.

Do you need all the answers and a nice tight ending? If so, don't watch. I say that not because I look down on anyone who needs that. Sometimes I need that. This is one of those more ethereal thinkers that some like and some don't though there is some pretty good action too. There are several scenes that honestly just scared the crap outta me. The acting is good. The effects are good. The premise is interesting. From the reviews, I was expecting much more glaring plot holes and fewer questions which were actually answered. I am trying to avoid spoilers so let me just say that I thought that while there were not a lot of concrete answers, we got some good theories proposed.

In slamming the movie, I saw one reviewer compare it to Sunshine, which he also hated. That review was what actually flipped the switch and got me to watch it, but I'd say that is a good test. If you don't like movies like Sunshine (also written by Alex Garland), you probably won't like this.

"Annihilation" begins with a captivating premise and a commendable lead cast, setting high expectations with its intriguing foundational idea. However, the film ultimately fails to deliver, hampered by a combination of lackluster supporting performances, tedious plot progression, and poorly executed dialogue.

The main cast, led with a certain gravitas, tries valiantly to bring depth to their roles, which are unfortunately penned with little sense and surrounded by weak character development. Their strong efforts starkly contrast with the uninspiring performances from the side cast, creating a jarring imbalance that disrupts the overall harmony of the film.

Dialogue throughout "Annihilation" feels forced and unnatural, often serving as clumsy exposition rather than meaningful character interaction. This issue is compounded by a soundtrack that, while fitting the film's theme, cannot compensate for the narrative deficiencies.

Perhaps the most glaring issue is the film's conclusion, which is riddled with logic flaws and does not make sense within the established context of the story. This not only leaves the viewer unsatisfied but also questions the coherence of the entire narrative.

In sum, "Annihilation" is a film that might attract viewers with its interesting premise and notable lead performances, but it quickly reveals itself as a frustrating experience, lacking in engaging storytelling and logical consistency. A classic case of a great idea that required much better execution to truly shine. This movie is only for die hard fans of paraterrestial films. Others better look into "Arrival".

While watching the movie, I was both engrossed by the events playing out onscreen while at the same time thinking "this could be done better". To me, the writing felt like it was done by a smart Middle-Schooler: smart enough to understand some science concepts and have a few interesting ideas, but too naive in the world to create realistic or logical human behavior.

There are just too many times that things occur that have no sense or logic. I'm not talking about the "alien" aspect, which is supposed to be somewhat mysterious and incomprehensible, but about the way that the humans in the story act or react to what's going on. The way that the government is handling the phenomenon seems strangely hands-off for what should be the most important event in the history of humanity, and the individuals involved make lots of odd decisions just to drive the story forward.

On top of that, there is a framing device where a survivor is being interrogated about the events of what is shown throughout the movie, and it not only doesn't provide any additional illumination to bother with the clunkiness, it tends to deflate a lot of the tension by giving away certain plot points before you see them on screen. The ending is more just vague for the sense of being mysterious rather than making you really ask questions afterward. I suspect that if you asked the Director how the ending related to the rest of the movie, he would't be able to give more of an answer than he wanted things to be left open-ended.

Finally, the characters are all fairly morose and sedated. There's a (weak) explanation in the movie for this, but the overall low energy makes you not care too much about any of the characters.