There is indeed an intoxication and a seduction at the heart of Emerald Fennell’s Saltburn, that one has to admit is disarming. It’s so disarming in-fact that even on a second watch now, this 2hr 11min grand erotic thriller (that isn’t actually that thrilling) remains terribly entertaining for me. Fennell was up against rock bottom expectations I have to admit, as time passes more and more I actually dislike Promising Young Woman despite its handful of great elements. So the divisiveness surrounding her second feature led me to feel that I would probably side with the negative detractors of the film. But despite its many flaws, I just can’t lie to myself and not admit that I really do like Saltburn, even loving many of its aspects. But a second watch really did solidify for me that this is a terribly entertaining film, but not an especially great one when held to scrutiny. Or for that matter just looked at at a glance.
To be honest I feel the best aspect of this film’s roll out is the lack of attempting from the creative team to make this film actually about something more than it actually is. For the most part Fennell is discussing the film with the same attitude that I feel it should be accepted with; an entertaining farce. There are elements of class and there are elements of other such topics that are at best under-explored and one could even make the argument are even touching being problematic. But is Saltburn attempting any great discussion within its actual text? Well, you could make the argument that yes it is attempting and failing. To be frank I don’t know why I am defending it as much as I am? I really can’t remember in recent memory where a film has come out that was seemingly a prestige feature where I ended up with the final argument of “have some fun guys”. I mean I am writing what should be an educated review of this film and in the end my personal argument is that I don’t actually think this is a great movie, at times I actually don’t think this film is good at all, but the overwhelming aesthetic, vibe and audacity of it is very much entertaining to me and in a sense admirable. Now, I have had the experience already of someone messaging me saying “wow, that was f*cked up” whilst I was literally in the middle of watching Under the Skin, so I do get the sense of the tweet that has circulated that ‘Saltburn is weird for people who haven’t seen any weird films’. Although I may be personally desensitised, there was something about being in a cinema and having a few walkouts during scenes of great shock, even though personally I have seen things far worse on screen, there was still a thrilling modern shock and awe quality to this film and chiefly a horniness that I do think we have squirmed away from in recent years. I think much of the greatness of the film in its overall aura lies with the work of cinematographer Linus Sandgren whose work here is genuinely some of the most sublime and sumptuous work of the year, used in so many effective ways that one really is put under the spell of what is being presented. I too think Fennell’s directorial work is leaps and bounds above Young Woman, here there is flare with effect rather than glossy and without foundation, here there are multiple scenes that I genuinely was taken aback by how well they were directed – again, is this largely down to the fact that they were up against rock bottom expectations? Quite possibly. But despite the fact that I prefer this script leaps and bounds above her prior, the same issues arise – shock without substance, immense impracticality narrative wise and a surprising similarity when it comes to its reveals and twists in the sense that they make very little sense or are entirely predictable and in the ultimate conclusion of the film presented like a twist when to be honest I thought we knew that that’s what was happening the whole time?
But the
qualities of strength go beyond Fennel and Sandgren, Anthony Willis’s score for
instance is similarly sumptuous and overall the whole films use of music is
specific and note perfect – I don’t need to tell you at this stage that the
film’s final track is one of my favourites and it’s a pleasure to have it be
reclaimed and celebrated as it rightly should be, even if with lament it’s no
longer mine. A bird flying away. But
the real stars are indeed the stars themselves. The film really does utilise
the acting prowess and star power of its cast to incredible excess and immense
delight. Although time and time again particularly in the case of our lead
Barry Keoghan they are hamstringed by the ever shifting and at times
nonsensical character motivations that are lumped upon them, each member of the
cast revels in the dryness and the chaos of what they are given and each really
do rise to the seductive quality of what is being asked of them. Keoghan is
stellar as is Jacob Elordi as his ultimate obsession. Keoghan like I said is
given a script that I’m sure was very hard to parse when it came to motivations
and the like but does a great job at offering us the depiction of manipulation
scorned by obsession that the character needs, with a fearlessness and dedication
to the films many shocking moments. Elordi is charismatic with an ease that we
already knew, but actually manages to imbue a real pathos and humanity to his
character, even if again he is thwarted by a script that shifts on a dime with
little justification what and how his Felix character does or feels at any
given moment. The entire ensemble are stellar in fact, with Archie Madekwe
being another dry and cutting figure in the roster and Richard E. Grant going
both the most jubilant and most ferocious. However for me the films two
standouts lie with the two supporting women of the film with Alison Oliver and
Rosamund Pike, and of course poor, poor Pamela played by a near film stealing
Carey Mulligan. Both Pike and Oliver have their fair share of hilarious moments
(especially Pike), but time and time again they have an incredible subtlety and
profound sadness (especially Oliver) that makes the film land in those rare
moments that it feels wholly of a piece without issue.
A 7/10 that I cannot deny for me personally has incredibly entertaining elements that could have taken it higher, despite a script that as devilishly witty and funny as it is, hides its plethora of nonsense behind great vibes and a randiness that I have fallen for twice now. The acting is all genuinely excellent and the cinematography of Sandrgen is some of the most astounding of the year without hyperbole. Fennell too has gone from making a film I in many ways saw the promise in (sorry) but felt greatly outnumbered by the wave of adulation, to making a film that I this time can’t fully get in on either bandwagon. I don’t think this is abysmal trash, but I certainly don’t think it's some great masterpiece. As cringey as it may sound for an alleged critic to pen as his conclusion; Saltburn is a piece of incredible vibe and aesthetic with a freakiness that I relished, but has very little substance. But does a film this entertaining have to actually have any? Probably, but this is very entertaining without it all the same.
P.S. Above all else one cannot remove the blatancy of the Ripley of it all and for me personally saying out loud in interviews that you were inspired or are homaging doesn’t actually allow one to just rip off. Almost every plot beat mirrors and the character of Farleigh as a stand in for Freddy, never mind Felix for Dickie is painfully obvious. But whereas the character of Ripley is one of the great characters of all time and Highsmith’s ultimate creation, with layers and layers of believable and sensical pathos and tragic decision making and intelligence – Oliver is just a hodgepodge of different things that falls apart the second you start to actually think about it.
- Thomas Carruthers
0 Comments