![]() ![]() The third story is about twice as long and has multiple times the participants. As the night wears on, you worry mistakes will be made. Allison seems to enjoy being contrarian, admitting she was even lying about key points just to get or stifle a reaction from the others. We're put in Allison's position and different people might find fault with either husband or wife. The night starts out amenable but ratchets up the discomfort moment by moment, opening up the characters and their histories and looking for allies through a cross-section of confrontation. Blair also seeks solidarity from a fellow woman to call out Gabe's questionable viewpoints where he says life was simpler and perhaps better when gender norms were rigid. She wants to bring a dash of reality to Gabe's sense of self, which includes pushing him to adapt rather than holding onto a version of himself that no longer fits. He's feeling like he's compromised too much as an artist who still wants to be considered an artist, so he seeks a solidarity with their guest. Allison becomes the catalyst that pushes the husband and wife to open up their mounting disagreements and simmering conflicts with one another. The second story plays like an identifiable mumblecore indie and one of the most awkward dinners you'd never want to be part of. Part of the movie's fun becomes building the meaning and finding more hidden clues after you're done with it. Is the second story what really happened in real-life to Allison and then the third story is the film version of these events, with the roles swapped for greater personal anguish? Is the third segment what really happened in real life and, in her anguish, she has projected her hard feelings into her own movie version of her torment, achieving a delayed vengeance? Are both segments mere fictional accounts from Allison in the first segment struggling through serious writer's block? Dear reader, I cannot say because any of the interpretations I have cited, and many more, would be valid with enough careful corroborating evidence. From there, the movie invites you to build your own connections from its many surreal parallels that fold onto one another begging for discussion. There are really three primary stories here: 1) Allison sitting on the dock and then trying to write, 2) Allison coming into the realm of a dysfunctional married couple and adding extra jealousy and combustion, and 3) Allison is starring in an independent film that appears loosely connected to the second story, and this time she is being manipulated by her director/husband into thinking he is having an affair in order to add more realism to her screen performance. Gabe is now her director and her husband, and Blair is now the co-star that she suspects is having an affair, both with her real husband and the husband character in the movie they are making. Then the movie changes, and now Allison is an actress in a movie filming at the same cabin in the woods. There's a lot of tension between these two and perhaps some unwanted romantic advances toward Allison. She takes a retreat to a bed and breakfast out in the woods run by a husband and wife Gabe (Christopher Abbot) and Blair (Sarah Gadon). It all just made me realize even further how intriguing and rare a movie like Black Bear can be, an accessible puzzle that still works outside of the guise of sifting the pieces for larger meaning.Īllison (Aubrey Plaza) is a director who is looking to rebound her career. I spent time reading through different interpretations on Reddit about writer/director Lawrence Michael Levine's (Always Shine) surreal indie, each one providing new insights and connections. What an intriguing little movie Black Bear turns out to be that inspires so much interpretation and dissection. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |