STRANGE DARLING. A Cult Classic or Just the Best Film of the Year? [REVIEW]

I once heard an anecdote from the life of Alfred Hitchcock, in which the master of suspense, struck by the thought that he had come up with a brilliant idea for a film in his sleep, jumped out of bed in the middle of the night. Half-awake, he quickly scribbled down his dazzling idea on a piece of paper. When he woke up in the morning and remembered the whole nocturnal event, he ran to the desk where the paper lay. Full of hope, he looked at it, only to see what was probably the most overused movie plot of all time: “Boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl back…” This anecdote not only proves that film ideas don’t simply emerge in the heads of writers in a dreamlike state, but it also tells us that clichés exist so we can break free from them. “Strange Darling” doesn’t just avoid clichés—it completely breaks free from them!

When it comes to films that defy narrative conventions, it’s often best to know nothing about them before watching. However, the thankless task of the reviewer is to lift the veil of mystery just a bit, to reveal a glimpse of the story’s disruptive nature, to spark a desire without revealing too much and spoiling the intrigue. With “Strange Darling”, this is even harder because J.T. Mollner decided on a nonlinear narrative. The film is divided into six episodes plus an epilogue, and the fun begins roughly in the middle. It’s a tricky situation. Perhaps the best approach is to borrow from Hitchcock’s anecdote and say that “Strange Darling” is a story about how a boy meets a girl, the boy loses the girl, and the boy gets her back again—just not in that order. And really, why is it always the boy who meets, loses, and gets the girl back in these stories? And what does “losing and getting back” even mean? Confused? Good!

I haven’t mentioned yet that “Strange Darling” is a thriller. Yes, but don’t worry, that’s not a spoiler. We learn this right at the start of the film from Jason Patric, who, in a low voice with a sexy, subtle rasp, reads out text scrolling across the screen—similar to the beginning of “The Texas Chain Saw Massacre” (1974). However, “Strange Darling” is not a riff on the wild adventures of Leatherface. Or maybe it is? I’m not sure anymore. What I do know is that it’s a punk-spirited, wild, electric thriller with a grindhouse vibe, the kind of film Quentin Tarantino might have made—if he didn’t have a tendency to flood his characters’ mouths with words. In Mollner’s film, instead of words, blood splashes from the characters’ lips—they taste its metallic flavor after cutting their lip, cracking a tooth, or biting off a piece of someone’s body. Despite all its love for ultra-violence, which would make Alex DeLarge proud, “Strange Darling” is also, in its deranged way, incredibly sensual. In fact, in the context of male-female erotic relationships, Mollner’s film has a lot of interesting and significant things to say—possibly key to the movie’s ultimate meaning. All this is illustrated with an excellent soundtrack, punctuated by a fantastic cover of Nazareth’s “Love Hurts” performed by Z Berg, which sets the rhythm for “Strange Darling”.

Besides a really successful soundtrack, the viewer’s ears will also surely notice the use of loud, distorted sound effects, which perfectly complement the visual depravity and further intensify the tension that remains high throughout “Strange Darling”—just like the film’s pace, which never drops. Unlike the male lead’s member, which fails to rise after taking too much ketamine. Speaking of the film’s characters, it’s impossible not to praise the performances of Gallner and especially Fitzgerald, who deliver a compelling blend of erotic-romantic tension and blood-soaked, boundary-pushing cat-and-mouse games.

Great script, successful direction, intense pacing, stunning acting, and good music aren’t the only strengths of “Strange Darling”. These elements wouldn’t deliver such spectacular thrills without the style that shines through in the cinematography by a man previously known for his work in front of the camera. Giovanni Ribisi, yes, him, brings a gritty tension to Mollner’s film through the use of analog 35mm film, adding more grain, more dirt, and more tension. Oh yes! Modern audiences can handle anything! They can handle the saturated colors: of panties, wigs, blood, neon lights, as well as the monochromatic beginning and end—all in the same movie! If you’re going to have fun, go all out!

Some snarky readers of this review might sum up my assessment of Mollner’s film with a quote from a song by the Polish band Pudelsi: “Gienio’s drawing, there’s nothing missing,” and they might have a point. However, after watching “Strange Darling”, they’d realize that while it’s filled to the brim with flashy ideas and tricks, it’s also a thoughtful work from start to finish. It has a lot to say about male-female relationships, about women’s perspectives on relationships or fleeting encounters, and about their needs. And despite all this, it’s a completely unique film, which not only makes it one of the best movies of the year but maybe even a future cult classic.