Kinds of Kindness (2024) User Reviews

It's a refreshing new chapter to Yorgos' filmography!

[NickKarabis · 8/10 · 31 May 2024]

"Kinds of Kindness" is Yorgos' latest cinematic achievement. A self aware, self conscious film that doesn't try to prove anything more than what is already well established. Yorgos is a freaking good filmmaker!

Traversing back to his early years in the industry, Lanthimos takes a gamble and gets a full house! Resembling more to his first movies, with "Kinds of Kindness" he embraces the directorial qualities that defined his work.

The idea to create an anthology movie was brilliant and effective. Three stories with a thinly visible thematic connection, offer an almost 3hr long journey through Lanthimos' wide and wild imagination.

The comic reliefs are quite present, cautiously placed throughout the stories. The humor is dry, raw, almost unintentional. It makes you laugh -sometimes a lot-, coming in a full contradiction to the cruelty and the strong element of macabre crowning the pleasing visuals.

The gore is generously poured all over the place, sometimes for serving a cause... or just for fun. The string that ties all three stories though, is the robust essence of decay that modern human relationships strongly consist of. The idea of manipulation, blind dedication, enslavement of someone's free will, greedy desires, hypocrisy and lack of empathy are so blatantly obvious, that it's really hard to not notice. It's this slowly rotting world that keeps these phenomenally separate stories together, and I'm here for it!

The first part, tells the story of an employee so ridiculously castrated by his hyper-manipulative boss, to the point where the lines between obedience and free will, seem to be devoured by a psychotic love triangle.

The second tells the tale of a police officer, who rejoins his wife, who almost lost her life in a tragic accident. She's welcomed home and everything seems to go back to normal, but something seems off...

And lastly, the third and final part of the anthology is about an absurd, muscle car driving, sex cult and their desire to find the "higher human" who can grant life through his touch.

All these short, sexually charged stories, beautifully shot and directed, offer a great time at the movies; an experience like no other.

P. S. Jesse Plemons is the absolute highlight of the movie! Hats off to this exceptional actor!

IT'S WORTH OF YOUR TIME!

Classic cynical lanthimos

[redaste97 · 8/10 · 6 June 2024]

This feels like the summer movie for lanthimos' fans 😂

Good piece of art, not at the level of poor things IMHO, but still very interesting. Honestly I felt like with poor things some reviews were searching too much into a "positive ending" or a woman empowerment change... While poor things also had some very dark moments almost like a parody... Well, here we have the usual lanthimos... The one who tends to give us the worst of humanity 😂

I still need to reflect a bit, especially on the 2nd story, but yeah, definitely great dry humour movie. Oh and some scenes will make people talk ... :) This is a funny movie but it's also very harsh

Emma (or Emily 😄) and Jesse and Willem are brilliant as always.

Lanthimos back to his roots

[grigoraaakis-889-295918 · 8/10 · 1 June 2024]

Weird, awkward, oldschool Lanthimos is back! His latest movies were extremely commercial, and now he's back to his roots with this low budget anthology of a movie. Three extremely crazy episodes that feel like Black Mirror episodes, "Kinds of Kindness" is a movie that explores human relationships with a significant other, with a boss and employer, different power dynamics of each relationship and the power that sex has in our lives and in the formation of our relationships. It's an absurd movie, very weird, and you vibe along with it realising that nothing is gonna ever make total sense and that's fine. I liked it a lot but it surely is not meant for a wide audience.

A Truly Surreal Experience

[ntinoskostas-30035 · 10/10 · 31 May 2024]

Lanthimos presents, through his unique perspective, (not only) three different kinds of kindness. Kindness as manipulation, control, inability to accept, obsession, submission, dependence, and greed. These are the only connecting threads between the three stories. These different kinds of kindness challenge, in every way-allegorically, surrealistically, and literally-the (problematic) structure of society. The constant extremities are all part of a sick human behavior, a sick social mentality. Once again, Lanthimos and Filippou do not provide a clear interpretation of what we see; everything has multiple interpretations, both hidden and apparent. Jesse Plemons emerges as the ideal protagonist, fitting seamlessly into the distinct directorial style meticulously crafted by Yorgos Lanthimos due to his exceptional performance(s).

Lanthimos & Filippou: A Unique Kind of Duo

[BVAMJX · 7 June 2024]

Yorgos Lanthimos returns with a vengeance, delivering a film that feels closer to his earlier cinematic endeavors. "Kinds of Kindness", is a challenging film in the sense that you have to experience it emotionally. Trying to intellectualize it, will only lead to frustration. It's the kind of film that provides you with a very unique experience. When the credits roll and you leave the movie theater, you don't leave the film behind, you take it with you at home. It affects you, it lingers in your mind and it makes you think about it all the time. That is, at least, the effect the film had on me.

Many things have been said about Lanthimos and his potential cinematic influences, from the cold, cynical minimalism of Michael Haneke, to Lars Von Trier's provocative, violent and disturbing cinema and finally, to Stanley Kubrick's ambitious, cinematically rich Odysseys. With this film in particular, Lanthimos reaffirms what I always felt about him. There's a surreal, dream-like, psyche penetrating effect that he achieves with many of his films and "Kinds of Kindness" is definitely the most surreal, dream-like and psyche penetrating cinematic experience that he has ever provided us with. I feel like he is much closer to David Lynch than most people think.

Watching "Poor Things", I felt like he was doing something like "The Elephant Man"-an adaptation of somebody else's work that people felt maintained his identity but was quite different and much more accessible compered to his earlier films-and now "Kinds of Kindness" feels like he automatically jumped to making something along the lines of "Lost Highway" or "Inland Empire"-an original film that is very experiential and hard to intellectualize, denying conventional interpretation and instead, aiming for the senses.

Three different stories, different characters played by the same actors, themes varying from power and control to love and death, "Kinds of Kindness" is certainly a unique kind of film that really grows on you the more you're thinking about it.

Lanthimos reunites with his fellow screenwriter and partner in crime, Efthimis Filippou and the result is exactly what I was expecting. I feel like this is a very personal film for both Lanthimos and Filippou, with the second story in particular being a very devastating exploration of how we desperately want our significant other to be exactly the same way they were when we first met them. Or, at least, that's what I got from it, having watched the film once, so far. The final scene from the second story, strongly reminded me of the ending of Lynch's Eraserhead, when Henry is finally reunited with the woman from the radiator, after having exterminated the source of his problems aka his unwanted child.

The first story, I felt was by far the most disturbing one, considering the state most people from younger generations find themselves into: sacrificing the prospects of leading a normal life and having a family, all for the sake of maintaining a prestigious job and achieving financial wealth, as they completely submit to those pursuits. This is something that is very evident in Greece and most countries of the Western world as well.

The third story, is probably the most difficult to interpret, both in and of itself and in terms of how it creates the bigger picture that is this triptych of a movie.

From a technical standpoint, the film is meticulously crafted which is not particularly surprising considering that Lanthimos has proven time and time again that he is a remarkable filmmaker. The fact he is one of the last few remaining filmmakers who still shoot on film, is very inspiring for younger, aspiring filmmakers who unfortunately grew up in an era in which cinema was transitioning from film to digital. The film looks gorgeous and the visual aesthetic of the celluloid elevates the film's atmosphere and otherworldliness.

After I watched the film, I was trying to understand whether Lanthimos and Filippou intended for us to see all these different characters played by the same actors, as the same characters reincarnated in different lives-an interpretation that isn't exactly off the table, considering the film's surreal and occasionally supernatural logic-but eventually, I came down to the conclusion that they were trying to communicate something else.

We are all completely different in many respects, but in the end of the day, we are all struggling with the same things and we have very similar problems and existential anxieties, which essentially make us all different versions of the same individual. It doesn't matter whether you're a slave of your boss, your husband or your pastor. There's only one constant in life, and that's death.

We're all just trying to survive and find some kind of meaning. Some kind of kindness that might ease the pain of the inevitable ending that will come for as all.

-BV.

Determination by others can be lethal

[hmmyalex · 7/10 · 4 June 2024]

This is a return to Lanthimos roots. The story is a punch in the stomach and the cinematography is interesting. There is the use of an echoing sound in most of scenes as if the sound is coming through a glass.

The movies follows three different stories with many things in common. The need to be accepted by others in a pathological manner. In the first this is the work environment where an employee wants to serve his boss at any costs, even killing a man. In the second story we see the need of a woman to prove her love to her husband. And in the third, the need of a woman to prove her cult the she belongs there.

In each story the circumstances escalade. In the first story our protagonist sacrifices his morals and wins his leader back. In the second story our protagonist sacrifices herself for the love of her husband and it is uncertain if she gets him back. And in the third our protagonist is being led to a terrible accident.

Each story is heavily invested in the power of sex in building the relationships and the loyalty.

Overall the movie talks about the consequences and the meaningless of following blindly any form of relationship. And the deep need for the human species to be accepted.

Review

[chrysap · 10/10 · 3 June 2024]

Concerning the first story, I think that it painted the picture of a scared man who did not trust himself, did not believe in his power and was therefore easily manipulated. This man was looking for a messiah, somebody who could tell him what to do, how to act and even what to eat and drink. The old guy is a narcissist who found an easy prey to manipulate. The narcissist ordered the young man toy kill R. M. F, because he wanted to ensure that he ( the young man ) would do anything he asked him to do. When the young man said no to killing R. M. F and decided to leave the narcissist, he found himself having trouble taking life in his own hands. He was isolated and completely alone, because that is exactly what a narcissist will do. Because the young man could not believe in his own power and felt so alone and isolated he decided to kill R. M. F. Killing R. M. F granted him a place back into the narcissist's abusive and controlling behavior.

R. M. F's death symbolizes the death of the free will of the young man who succumbed to the narcissist and therefore forever lost his own power.

The first story perfectly pictures what happens when we are looking for a messiah, an external force to save us. The only one who can save us is our self.

The second story, I believe, wanted to get across the same message. The young man was so dependent on his wife that he could not survive without her. While she was missing he was losing his mind. The problem was that he wanted her to be the exact same person she was when she met her. Even the slightest of change in her behavior made him lose his mind. On the other hand, the young woman was scared to leave her husband because he had been there for her in the past. So she stayed in this abusive relationship. The young man's demand towards his wife to give him her thumb and liver to eat for dinner symbolized the effort this young man was making to kill this version of his wife so he could get the previous version of his wife back.

The third story showed, in my opinion, how absurd it really is to be searching for a messiah.

This woman was looking for something so absurd and illogical that she abandoned her husband and her daughter. She took part in a cult which made her do illogical things and she did all of those things without thinking, without considering the absurdity of them all. Her husband tried trough a violent act to make her leave the cult. But even after being kicked out of the cult, the young woman continued searching for her messiah, only to find her and then lose her.

The last scene of the movie truly captures the message that the movie wants to get across.

There are no messiahs, no external forces that can save you. The only person that can save you is you and you need to believe in yourself enough to understand that you are your messiah.

Power, Control, Love, Blind faith.

[amplified_soul · 8/10 · 30 May 2024]

With these three absurd and grim stories, Lanthimos seems to be writing a love letter to Bunuel. Desperation, insanity, loneliness, cults, cannibalism, unquestionable faith and manipulation, are all there. I was sunk in, from the first close up of Plemons's mustached face, and Stone's celebratory dance in the parking lot 2 hours and 45 minutes later caught me by surprise, despite knowing it was coming. The cast really sinks into the robotic, yet powerful performances. Their delivery of the lines cautiously keeps you at bay, so that you can't really empathize with any of the characters, although you are desperately trying to. The dry humor pops up in unexpected moments and it almost feels unintentional.

The dominant emotion you feel during the movie is guilt, for having such a great time watching all this cruelty unfold on screen. The setting of a faceless, damp, summer New Orleans, binds perfectly with Robbie Ryan's beautiful cinematography. Extreme and long close ups, along with various wide lenses are back. Fendix's stoic score, which seems to consist mainly of piano and unsettling chanting, felt appropriate.

Is there any depth to all of this? Maybe not, but you have no other choice than to discuss about it with a friend, which is probably more than enough to make the director happy.

This macabre anthology film solidifies the fact, that no one makes movies like Lanthimos today. This isn't a movie for wider audiences, but his fans will definitely enjoy it, maybe a bit too much, like me.

"Kinds of Kindness": A Disjointed Descent into Absurdity

[nikolozchikovani · 2/10 · 24 May 2024]

"Kinds of Kindness" is an ambitious but ultimately disjointed film that attempts to capture the peculiar essence of a Yorgos Lanthimos-inspired world, populated by unempathetic characters whose bizarre actions lack any justification beyond directorial whim. The film oscillates between moments of potential intrigue and abrupt, unsettling turns that detract from any developing narrative.

One particularly jarring example is the segment "R. M. F. Is Flying." Here, we follow Daniel as he investigates the suspicious behavior of his newly rescued wife. Just when the story seems to gain momentum, it takes a grotesque turn: Daniel transforms into a psychopath, demanding that his wife feed him her thumb and liver, which she inexplicably complies with. This sudden descent into absurdity typifies the film's struggle to maintain coherent and compelling storytelling.

The characters in "Kinds of Kindness" fail to elicit any emotional investment. Unlike anti-heroes who, despite their flaws, possess qualities such as honor, courage, or a personal code that evoke empathy, the characters here are uniformly despicable without any redeeming traits. This lack of relatable or admirable qualities makes it difficult for the audience to connect with or care about their fates.

What is the message?

The messages that can be derived from this film are numerous, especially from the community that will inevitably enjoy this picture. One particularly troubling message emerges in a scene where Aka tells Emaly, who has been expelled from "the creepy orgy clan" after being raped by her husband, that "not everyone is suited for everything, some were made to lead a life with a husband and have children." This implies that traditional roles and desires are inferior to the clan's perverse lifestyle. Such a message is not only disturbing but also suggests a disdain for conventional values, which could be interpreted as the film's misguided attempt at provocation.

In conclusion, "Kinds of Kindness" is a nearly three-hour ordeal that fails to develop a coherent plot or deliver a meaningful message. Its characters are unappealing, the narrative is constantly derailed by gratuitous shock value, and any potential themes are lost in the chaos. The film might find an audience among those who appreciate avant-garde cinema that thrives on discomfort and confusion, but for most viewers, it will be a perplexing and unsatisfying experience.

What a disgrace of a movie

[justice-for-all · 2/10 · 2 June 2024]

Three hours of my life that seemed like torture.

Three completely absurd and grotesque stories with nothing that made sense. Classic Lanthimos, I cannot believe that scripts like that even make it to the Cannes Festival. Cant believe either how stars like Jesse Plemons and Emma Stone or Willem Dafoe agreed to play in this awful film. The latter two were a good duo in Poor Things, one of the few consistent films of Lanthimos.

If Lanthimos wants to make a statement in the film business he had better written more coherent stories to follow.

Or maybe something is going wrong in the film industry at large if it promotes such trash as art.

What a shame.