Post by Dirty Epic on Apr 6, 2016 12:43:13 GMT
I saw High Rise with friends over the weekend.
{Spoiler Alert - Click Here To Reveal}
More or less as a film it’s okay but wasn’t blown away with it as I was the original novel. Perhaps the challenging nature of JG Ballard’s psychological fiction (atmosphere, mood and language) is the reason it’s taken nearly 40 years for it to be filmed and its no surprise very few of his works have made it on film or TV.
The film begins amidst chaos and squalid anarchy with the main protagonist Dr Robert Laing (Tom Hiddleston) feasting on barbequed dog in a high rise world feeling more like a post-apocalyptic world rather than the gleaming utopian future world it promised. This is seen in the flashback to Laing moving into the high rise three months earlier when it’s all new and gleaming and is everything it’s creator architect Anthony Royal (Jeremy Irons) had in mind. Royal lives in rooftop isolation with his wife Ann (Keeley Hawes) in a somewhat unreal utopian dream world. Royal sees the high rise like a ‘crucible for change’ and a ‘paradigm’ for the future. Social stratification see’s the wealthier residents on the top floors with reciprocal benefits and the ‘real people’ kept down below in the shadows – if you like an imaginary future-retro Upstairs Downstairs than science fiction. Laing begins to meet the residents both above and below him and starts to see that the normal world outside the high rise as isolated (perhaps slowly breaking down) and is creating a dangerous social situation where varying social groups are breaking up into opposing tribes. One of these is Richard Wilder (Luke Evans) a documentary film maker who lives on the lower floors. Wilder is uncouth and unconventional but forms a friendship with Laing and has decided to make a film exposing the social injustices within the building. Meanwhile the inevitable teething problems with the building begin to raise their head along with it’s social inequities. These come to a head when Wilder leads a rebellion at the swimming pool with a children’s party he organised gives him the perfect excuse to Gatecrash an exclusive event at pool for the upper floors only. Gradually more and more things in building begin to breaking down having a psychological effect on all residents of the building. A power cut finally breaks the camel’s back and this sets up a violent rebellion from the lower floors who led by Wilder. The residents loot the building’s supermarket and other facilities and turn violently against the wealthier residents on the upper floors. This eventually filters up to Royal in his ivory tower and his allies try and recruit Laing to crush the rebellion and more importantly deal with Wilder. Laing however doesn’t go with the wealthier residents and trawls an alliance with Wilder and those on the lower floors and ultimately finds himself amidst the chaos around him.
Taking my JG Ballard blinkers off and looking at it face value you can come away from seeing High Rise as a bit of a mess and yes there’s a reason why his works have been so hard to make into viable film and TV productions. However this is what I liked about High Rise and Ballard more generally makes you question things and your emotions and I do like his work for throwing up characters like these which aren’t necessarily likeable, unemotional, detached and in sterile bleak environments (like the high rise). I felt it captured the book perfectly and it’s sense of (what is going on?) absolute chaos. The film is however incredibly shot and very visceral. It’s weird and you do come out of the cinema dazed and confused. But isn’t this arguably what Ballard saw when writing High Rise and overall put’s you in a 1970’s vision of an expected future (now) we should have seen but didn’t quite work out like that – maybe the Thatcher era through this reality off course? The dystopia of High Rise and Ballard generally is very much with us now and if you walk around the London at the moment or even to a lesser extent say Manchester there’s glass and steel high rise all over and all around the world there are people very much like the characters here in High Rise.
In summary High Rise may not be everyone’s cup of tea on this forum and in some respects I can away from the film just as confused, shocked and cynical with the end result as I was blown away and excited with it. I’d rate it sat just short of 8/10 perhaps more focus, less of the luvvie set (i.e. Sienna Miller etc.), perhaps a little deviation from the novel and not copying things done before (i.e. Clockwork Orange) may have raised things for me. But I’m a fan of the novel and if you like easy going, feel good entertainment it’s not for you.
But for something which smacks what the ‘hell’ is this? it does everything it should! At least it’s not yet another British costume drama even if it has period cues in there… or are they the future? Even your Bol’s is in it Gene!
More or less as a film it’s okay but wasn’t blown away with it as I was the original novel. Perhaps the challenging nature of JG Ballard’s psychological fiction (atmosphere, mood and language) is the reason it’s taken nearly 40 years for it to be filmed and its no surprise very few of his works have made it on film or TV.
The film begins amidst chaos and squalid anarchy with the main protagonist Dr Robert Laing (Tom Hiddleston) feasting on barbequed dog in a high rise world feeling more like a post-apocalyptic world rather than the gleaming utopian future world it promised. This is seen in the flashback to Laing moving into the high rise three months earlier when it’s all new and gleaming and is everything it’s creator architect Anthony Royal (Jeremy Irons) had in mind. Royal lives in rooftop isolation with his wife Ann (Keeley Hawes) in a somewhat unreal utopian dream world. Royal sees the high rise like a ‘crucible for change’ and a ‘paradigm’ for the future. Social stratification see’s the wealthier residents on the top floors with reciprocal benefits and the ‘real people’ kept down below in the shadows – if you like an imaginary future-retro Upstairs Downstairs than science fiction. Laing begins to meet the residents both above and below him and starts to see that the normal world outside the high rise as isolated (perhaps slowly breaking down) and is creating a dangerous social situation where varying social groups are breaking up into opposing tribes. One of these is Richard Wilder (Luke Evans) a documentary film maker who lives on the lower floors. Wilder is uncouth and unconventional but forms a friendship with Laing and has decided to make a film exposing the social injustices within the building. Meanwhile the inevitable teething problems with the building begin to raise their head along with it’s social inequities. These come to a head when Wilder leads a rebellion at the swimming pool with a children’s party he organised gives him the perfect excuse to Gatecrash an exclusive event at pool for the upper floors only. Gradually more and more things in building begin to breaking down having a psychological effect on all residents of the building. A power cut finally breaks the camel’s back and this sets up a violent rebellion from the lower floors who led by Wilder. The residents loot the building’s supermarket and other facilities and turn violently against the wealthier residents on the upper floors. This eventually filters up to Royal in his ivory tower and his allies try and recruit Laing to crush the rebellion and more importantly deal with Wilder. Laing however doesn’t go with the wealthier residents and trawls an alliance with Wilder and those on the lower floors and ultimately finds himself amidst the chaos around him.
Taking my JG Ballard blinkers off and looking at it face value you can come away from seeing High Rise as a bit of a mess and yes there’s a reason why his works have been so hard to make into viable film and TV productions. However this is what I liked about High Rise and Ballard more generally makes you question things and your emotions and I do like his work for throwing up characters like these which aren’t necessarily likeable, unemotional, detached and in sterile bleak environments (like the high rise). I felt it captured the book perfectly and it’s sense of (what is going on?) absolute chaos. The film is however incredibly shot and very visceral. It’s weird and you do come out of the cinema dazed and confused. But isn’t this arguably what Ballard saw when writing High Rise and overall put’s you in a 1970’s vision of an expected future (now) we should have seen but didn’t quite work out like that – maybe the Thatcher era through this reality off course? The dystopia of High Rise and Ballard generally is very much with us now and if you walk around the London at the moment or even to a lesser extent say Manchester there’s glass and steel high rise all over and all around the world there are people very much like the characters here in High Rise.
In summary High Rise may not be everyone’s cup of tea on this forum and in some respects I can away from the film just as confused, shocked and cynical with the end result as I was blown away and excited with it. I’d rate it sat just short of 8/10 perhaps more focus, less of the luvvie set (i.e. Sienna Miller etc.), perhaps a little deviation from the novel and not copying things done before (i.e. Clockwork Orange) may have raised things for me. But I’m a fan of the novel and if you like easy going, feel good entertainment it’s not for you.
But for something which smacks what the ‘hell’ is this? it does everything it should! At least it’s not yet another British costume drama even if it has period cues in there… or are they the future? Even your Bol’s is in it Gene!