I’m coming
to the party a little late on this one, so I’ll apologize up front.
I recently
caught Babadook on Netflix. I’d heard various people talking about it, good
things for the most part, so it made me wonder why it took so long to catch it.
But I was ultimately glad I did. However, for me at least, it came with a
catch: I had to watch it twice.
Unlike most
of the horror movies which came before it, this is not a point of view movie
(thank the Lord), and that alone makes it something of a rare treasure. While
the rest of the world still seem intent on making movies told through a
viewpoint, Jennifer Kent thankfully kept away from that particular overused
style even though it would have been all too easy to show this particular film
in that very way.
For the most
part it’s an uncomfortable film to watch. Essie Davis and Noah Wiseman give a
sterling performance. One also forgives the fact the film is sparsely populated,
and works all the better for it. In this particular case, Babadook doesn’t need
a cast of hundreds. It works perfectly as it is. Although by the end of the
film I was wondering who was going to pay for Noah Wiseman to go through
therapy. I felt sorry for the kid just as soon as I’d finished wanting to
smother him with a pillow. Because once the story gets going … well … that’s right
about the time you forgive the annoying character he was at the beginning, and start
concerning yourself more with how potentially traumatizing making the film
could have been for him.
I won’t
offer out any spoilers, but let me just go back to the beginning for a moment.
I watched
the film twice. I had to. I went into the film expecting something more than I
got by the end, and I couldn’t help feeling that I’d missed something along the
way. I wanted to know what the thing was lurking in the shadows. I wanted to
know what the book was all about. And I while I thought I’d figured it out by
the end, I still wasn’t sure. That being said, I wasn’t at all disappointed with
what I got.
IMDB has a
quote in the trivia section of the movie, which says:
Director Jennifer Kent was extremely sensitive about introducing the
themes of the film to child-actor Noah Wiseman. During the three weeks of
pre-production, she carefully gave him a child-friendly version of what the
story was about. Wiseman's mother was on set throughout filming, and Wiseman
himself was never actually present on set during scenes in which Essie Davis'
character abuses her son; Davis instead delivered the lines to an adult actor
who stood on his knees. Kent is quoted as saying "I didn't want to destroy
a childhood to make this film."
And do you
know what? I’m glad about that. The Babadook would have been an all too easy
film to make which had the potential to make a sizeable dent in Noah Wiseman’s
young life.
Even William
Friedkin (director of The Exorcist (1973)) said "I've never seen a more
terrifying film than 'The Babadook'". And I’m inclined to agree.
If you go
into Babadook expecting a monster movie, you might want to brace yourself for
the fact there isn’t one. Not really. And that, I think, is why I needed to
watch it a second time: because I was always waiting for the monster to arrive.
For me that’s the movies only failing. I was constantly expecting something I
never got.
The Babadook
is worth setting aside time to watch, as uncomfortable as it is, The only real flaw
I found was in lulling the viewer into believing there really was something waiting
for them in the dark.
Comments
Post a Comment