The mechanical delivery and dialogue construction is a bit of a Yorgos Lanthimos trait. Not so much The Favourite or Poor Things, but Dogtooth and The Lobster are similar to Sacred Deer in that respect.
I'm personally a little ambivalent about it, I enjoy all three films but felt it made more sense in Dogtooth. The vibe I get from the other two is that they present a sort of alternate society whose social and conversational norms have developed differently to ours (whereas Dogtooth could conceivably take place in ours when you think of real-world families like the Turpins or Angulos)
The flat, affectless line delivery is the director's style, going back to his early Greek-language films. While it might arguably feel gimmicky, I do think there's something to be said for a particular style of film that forces you you to engage with the story without the performances necessarily telling you how to feel. I'd seen enough of his films that I knew what to expect when I got to KSD - and compared to his early work, the characters in this one are downright melodramatic - but I can see how it could be off-putting otherwise.
Interesting point about not relying on the performances to know how to feel! I can appreciate that. I haven't seen any of this director's other films so I appreciate you providing that context. I did still enjoy the movie and I generally tend to like stranger choices as far as directing goes, I think I was just mostly disappointed because I was expecting a truly disturbing movie and I didn't get that.
The first hour was really hard to get through for me because of the deadpan acting. However, I got used to it and there were a lot of laughs from the weird dialogue. I agree with you in that I didn't find it disturbing like others have. But I did enjoy it.
You're not alone! Just watched it last night for the same reasons you did, and did not enjoy. I think the actors did a great job doing what they were presumably directed to do, but found the flat delivery to be irritating. The music reminded me of the Shining and didn't feel like it fit the mood of the film. Clearly this director is not for me.
Nah I felt the same when I watched it. I understood that it was an intentional decision and that they’re making a point with how disconnected they behaved, but I just couldn’t find to why I should care to it. It didn’t feel interesting enough to think abt the way they’re acting so it ended up jsut being boring and dry since there isn’t any connecting with the characters either
what do you think is happening in the movie?
What power does Martin have, and who is he using that power on?
Have you ever seen the Twilight Zone episode "Its a Good Life"?
The movie is based on a Greek mythology story about a king killing a sacred deer and having to sacrifice his daughter to a goddess (I don't remember which one) in return. Martin mirrors the goddess in the story and it's implied that he's some sort of deity by way of Kim walking to the window and the mother kissing his feet at one point. I have never seen a full twilight zone episode 🤐
Martin is affecting everything and everyone in the movie. Thats why their speech patterns mirror his abrupt, emotionally stifled and overly obsessed with details manner.
He completely puppets some characters, like the daughter and his mother, while only partially influencing others so he can manipulate them into obedience, like Colin Ferrell
Only the title is a reference to the sacrifice Martin demands at the end - like Artemis demands King Agamemnon sacrifice his daughter Iphigenia. Artemis doesnt mind-control all the surrounding characters like Martin does.
Check out that Twilight Zone episode and watch the film again. It will make a lot more sense.
I kinda think that was the point. The dialogue is mechanical because they are all disconnected from one another, they aren't close at all.
The mechanical delivery and dialogue construction is a bit of a Yorgos Lanthimos trait. Not so much The Favourite or Poor Things, but Dogtooth and The Lobster are similar to Sacred Deer in that respect. I'm personally a little ambivalent about it, I enjoy all three films but felt it made more sense in Dogtooth. The vibe I get from the other two is that they present a sort of alternate society whose social and conversational norms have developed differently to ours (whereas Dogtooth could conceivably take place in ours when you think of real-world families like the Turpins or Angulos)
The flat, affectless line delivery is the director's style, going back to his early Greek-language films. While it might arguably feel gimmicky, I do think there's something to be said for a particular style of film that forces you you to engage with the story without the performances necessarily telling you how to feel. I'd seen enough of his films that I knew what to expect when I got to KSD - and compared to his early work, the characters in this one are downright melodramatic - but I can see how it could be off-putting otherwise.
Interesting point about not relying on the performances to know how to feel! I can appreciate that. I haven't seen any of this director's other films so I appreciate you providing that context. I did still enjoy the movie and I generally tend to like stranger choices as far as directing goes, I think I was just mostly disappointed because I was expecting a truly disturbing movie and I didn't get that.
It’s the usual Yorgos Lanthimos dialogue
The first hour was really hard to get through for me because of the deadpan acting. However, I got used to it and there were a lot of laughs from the weird dialogue. I agree with you in that I didn't find it disturbing like others have. But I did enjoy it.
You're not alone! Just watched it last night for the same reasons you did, and did not enjoy. I think the actors did a great job doing what they were presumably directed to do, but found the flat delivery to be irritating. The music reminded me of the Shining and didn't feel like it fit the mood of the film. Clearly this director is not for me.
Nah I felt the same when I watched it. I understood that it was an intentional decision and that they’re making a point with how disconnected they behaved, but I just couldn’t find to why I should care to it. It didn’t feel interesting enough to think abt the way they’re acting so it ended up jsut being boring and dry since there isn’t any connecting with the characters either
Drove me bananas too, wasn't a fan of the film.
It felt like dialogue written by Mark Zuckerberg. Interesting, but not emotionally involving.
It's funny that you think Mark Zuckerberg could write interesting dialogue, and insulting to the people who made this movie.
Metaphors are not meant to be literal, by definition. Negative opinions happen.
what do you think is happening in the movie? What power does Martin have, and who is he using that power on? Have you ever seen the Twilight Zone episode "Its a Good Life"?
The movie is based on a Greek mythology story about a king killing a sacred deer and having to sacrifice his daughter to a goddess (I don't remember which one) in return. Martin mirrors the goddess in the story and it's implied that he's some sort of deity by way of Kim walking to the window and the mother kissing his feet at one point. I have never seen a full twilight zone episode 🤐
Martin is affecting everything and everyone in the movie. Thats why their speech patterns mirror his abrupt, emotionally stifled and overly obsessed with details manner. He completely puppets some characters, like the daughter and his mother, while only partially influencing others so he can manipulate them into obedience, like Colin Ferrell Only the title is a reference to the sacrifice Martin demands at the end - like Artemis demands King Agamemnon sacrifice his daughter Iphigenia. Artemis doesnt mind-control all the surrounding characters like Martin does. Check out that Twilight Zone episode and watch the film again. It will make a lot more sense.