Some varied thoughts (technically no spoilers, but I’d suggest not reading this if you are going to eventually watch it):
Let’s talk about the filmmaking craft first which on the whole is fantastic. This has some of the boldest editing of the last few years. Likewise Łukasz Żal‘s cinematography—half of the film nears absolute darkness, especially during the driving sequences, yet somehow maintains enough detail and tonal variation to not put you to sleep. And the snow! Y’all know how much I love precipitation in my movies.
Of course Kaufman is really the star of the show; most reviews so far talk about nothing except his writing. But surprisingly the script was not at the top of the list of things that struck me the most. Additional to what I’ve mentioned already, Jessie Buckley, Jesse Plemons (wow just noticed they have the same first name), Toni Collette, and David Thewlis turn in performances with an electricity that’s new to Kaufman’s films. Buckley and Plemons are endlessly watchable. I’m not sure Kaufman was necessarily going for entertainment, but he achieved it with these four actors nevertheless.
I’m Thinking of Ending Things did not confuse me. As with any great film (which I consider this to be for the most part), I don’t think I got everything the first time, but the mood came across—trapped in a car with someone you only vaguely like, endless conversations filled with futile academic musings, attempts to explain what you’re thinking but you’re just not quite intelligent enough to verbalize it, moments of genuine connection with another person soured by an implication you didn’t intend.
I think there might be some Persona/Mulholland Drive/Synecdoche, New Yorkdouble-personality stuff going on here with the janitor and Jake and with Buckley’s character, but I don’t think I really care? Seems like whatever is there in that regard is already well trodden by other movies, especially Kaufman’s own Synecdoche.
Now I have to talk about the Woman Under the Influence conversation. Her critique is completely baseless, but I think it serves to direct us toward her own insecurities with controlling her own life and the false safety/blissful fallacy of one’s own mind—I love this conversation, also because of the back and forth with Jake who obviously can’t properly express why he finds the film compelling (note: A Woman Under the Influence is one of my two or three favorite films, and I’ve also had it as the sole permanent favorite on my Letterboxd profile since the beginning of the year).
Of course I immediately reach for comforting Lynch comparisons after I watch just about anything now (I mean, elongated drives at night! Backwards sounds! Awkward domestic disputes that turn spooky when they go on for too long!), but right now I’m also thinking of the film as Kaufman’s Inherent Vice or Holy Motors: totally all over the place, nonsensical narrative, but they’ve got big chunks strewn throughout that captivate me entirely. A total 180 from Anomalisa which was relatively high concept and straightforward. As I’ve gotten older, I’ve started to lean toward this style more and more, especially since it lends itself better to further contemplation/re-watches. Less economical. Sprawling. More novelistic. Not to imply that I read. Keep your bloody books out of my movies!
Back to what this movie is “about” (ew, I cant believe I just used that word)—on top of what I’ve already mentioned, there’s very clearly something to do with misogyny or toxic masculinity that I’m not qualified to decode. And as was apparent with Kaufman’s last two directorial outings, he thinks a lot about dying. But, most importantly, I felt a deep connection with this film, a connection to a specific state of being I sometimes experience. (important note: I thankfully don’t suffer from clinical depression—I assume the following is generally a universal human experience):
Sometimes I’m eating a meal, perhaps with other people, and I take a bite of my food—let’s say it’s a chicken sandwich—so I take a bite of my chicken sandwich, and suddenly my brain kinda clicks over and I think, “Why am I eating this sandwich?” So I put the sandwich down. Is there something wrong with the sandwich? Not really. “Why am I spending time eating this sandwich? Why am I eating this sandwich?” The people I’m with say some pleasantries which enter the air and then dissipate. “Why am I eating this sandwich? What am I doing with these people?” There’s nothing wrong with these people. There’s nothing wrong with this sandwich. It’s just that my brain checked in with reality for a second and turned up empty-handed. I leave with the semi-eaten chicken sandwich in a to-go box; I think, I’ll probably enjoy this some other time. It sits in the fridge until I throw it away a week later. “What am I doing with these people? Why am I in the car with this guy I met six weeks ago at a bar during trivia night?” I’m thinking of ending things.
Note: I think I’ve only ever heard the word “ineffable” used three times in my life—once while watching this, and twice while watching and re-watching Cats.
Rating: 4/5
Edit:
I somehow didn’t mention that I’m not a fan of the last twenty minutes. Obviously can’t explain why exactly here, but I will say it loses focus. That’s a big reason for why it shoots a bit below some of Kaufman’s other work considering in many ways, especially technically, it’s his most impressive. You’ll need to ask me off of Letterboxd if you want specifics.
Edit 2:
I’ve been informed by a friend that Buckley’s character’s criticism of A Woman Under the Influence is based on Pauline Kael’s review of the film.