Read Mixed User Reviews for The Lobster

4

GiappomanAug 26, 2018

The idea per se is very intriguing. The realization, though, is quite poor, especially in the second half of the movie.

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

4

Benkoko11Feb 23, 2017

One of the strangest films of the year, perhaps of all time. The Lobster is a highly sylized sci-fi subversion of sexuality, relationships, and the concept of the nuclear family that is at its best when it weilds its bizarre surrealism andOne of the strangest films of the year, perhaps of all time. The Lobster is a highly sylized sci-fi subversion of sexuality, relationships, and the concept of the nuclear family that is at its best when it weilds its bizarre surrealism and absurdist humor but it loses steam in the second act.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

6

MovieRiffingAug 2, 2019

Yorgos Lanthimos' The Lobster opens spectacularly, inviting your imagination to explore the grand dystopian future it presents. It proceeds to dole out sharp commentary on society's pressure to find and maintain a relationship at any cost,Yorgos Lanthimos' The Lobster opens spectacularly, inviting your imagination to explore the grand dystopian future it presents. It proceeds to dole out sharp commentary on society's pressure to find and maintain a relationship at any cost, even by introducing a child to the dysfunction. However, all this goes to waste as The Lobster overstays its welcome. Without much more to say, the film drags along, promising a grand revelation in its finale. Alas, the final scene was telegraphed long ago to anyone paying attention, and lingers in the air like rotting shellfish.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

4

TVJerryJun 4, 2016

Colin Farrell gained 40 pounds to make him dowdy for his character, a single man checking into a special hotel. He has 45 days to find a new mate or he'll be turned into the animal of his choosing (guess what he chose?). Yes, this is anColin Farrell gained 40 pounds to make him dowdy for his character, a single man checking into a special hotel. He has 45 days to find a new mate or he'll be turned into the animal of his choosing (guess what he chose?). Yes, this is an alternate world (think Charlie Kaufman) with strict rules and weird procedures. The quiet wit and peculiar circumstances start with compelling imagination. By the 2nd hour, the narrative deteriorates into a slow-moving romance with more meanness and less humor. The actors speak with stilted stiffness and minimal emotion. While the absurdist setup is interesting and the payoff is equally weird, the film loses creative momentum. This must have been interesting for Farrell, but I hope he can lose that gut.… Expand

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

6

Said01Aug 10, 2016

I give it a six for originallity. It changes from the rest of the movies and the actors were very good. But the story was too weird for me it was even disturbing and towards the end I got a little bored.

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

4

GinaKMay 31, 2016

I read this was a very funny satire. It’s about as funny as the old 1984 film with John Hurt, except Hurt was not as lethargic as Colin Farrell’s David. Had anyone been laughing, I would have heard them. Not even a chuckle. But I am ratingI read this was a very funny satire. It’s about as funny as the old 1984 film with John Hurt, except Hurt was not as lethargic as Colin Farrell’s David. Had anyone been laughing, I would have heard them. Not even a chuckle. But I am rating this film low for one reason – it was much too long. Lanthimos is also not a very interesting director visually, which is probably why no one asks him to direct action films. Too many of the forest scenes, especially, were very “in your face,” although maybe it was so we could see the rabbits, who were all probably former humans, and which would then mean this was a joke about fecundity. Are you laughing? The performances were very good, and I guess we all got the point. After the screening, the theater invites you to leave a note about the film with a letter grade and a short comment. The funniest thing I saw all day was one of these notes, which read “Can’t wait for Lobster II.” Oh, God, no!… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

5

VonSeuxMay 27, 2016

"The lobster" is weird for the sake of being weird... not a movie I can easily recommend. Maybe would be better as a 40 minutes episode of Black Mirror.

1 of 9 users found this helpful18

All this user's reviews

6

SchroederRockJun 13, 2016

The Lobster is odd, a bit foreign and sometimes genius. The cast is delightful if a bit strange for the setting and the movie is definitely going to have a hard time appealing to modern comedy fans. Still, while I wasn't overly amused by theThe Lobster is odd, a bit foreign and sometimes genius. The cast is delightful if a bit strange for the setting and the movie is definitely going to have a hard time appealing to modern comedy fans. Still, while I wasn't overly amused by the movie's strange premise, it does invite some fun moments. I'm not really going to recommend this to anyone I know because I have a wider comedic taste than most of my friends and, if I didn't get a big kick out of it, their chances of getting anything is even less.… Expand

0 of 4 users found this helpful04

All this user's reviews

5

ClariseSamuelsOct 23, 2016

An attempt at a latter-day Theatre of the Absurd, this screenplay does not have the intellectual charm of a Samuel Beckett or Eugene Ionesco, or even for that matter, an Arthur Schnitzler. But with Colin Farrell, Rachel Weisz, Léa Seydoux,An attempt at a latter-day Theatre of the Absurd, this screenplay does not have the intellectual charm of a Samuel Beckett or Eugene Ionesco, or even for that matter, an Arthur Schnitzler. But with Colin Farrell, Rachel Weisz, Léa Seydoux, and Ben Whishaw on board, there is certainly no shortage of talent in this production. The basic premise is a dystopian state that does not allow people to be single. If you ever noted on a Saturday night that our society is a couples’ world, this film takes that observation over the top and into the realm of science fiction, where it may actually qualify for the mild horror genre.

At first the viewer will be intrigued by the drama of a basic dilemma—if you don’t find the perfect match at the hotel to which you are sent, then you will be transformed into the animal of your choice. The film’s protagonist David (Colin Farrell) says he wants to be a lobster if he doesn’t meet his match. A match entails finding someone with whom you share a salient characteristic such as nearsightedness, cold-heartedness, or even a medical condition such as constant nosebleeds. David fakes cold-heartedness to match up with someone he doesn’t care about and is found out. The punishment is severe, so he escapes this sick version of a honeymoon hotel and becomes a “loner,” part of a group of renegades who lives by their wits in the woods. Their leader (Léa Seydoux) is just as bizarre as the Fascist dictators she has rejected. Loners are prohibited from forming relationships with each other, and because they are constantly being hunted, they all have to dig their own grave so as not to inconvenience the others when they are killed.

For most of the film, there is a heavy emphasis on conversation rather than action. Because living in an emotionally suppressed society makes for insipid conversation, these people drone on relentlessly about uneventful trivia. The characters are robotic citizens who talk slowly, react slowly, and are too boring.

David finally finds some meaning in life when he falls in love with an equally nearsighted loner (Rachel Weisz). Thus, the second half of the film is about the dilemma of two loners illegally caught in a romance and the drastic measures to which they resort to escape their fate. The background music is a squeaky violin meant to underline the already unsubtle message of the film—romance has turned into something grim, tawdry, and unrecognizable in this fictional universe. Even true love, rare though it may be, in this context is merely another outlandish and depressing proposition. There is no redemption to be found here, no ray of hope, and the pervasive hopelessness unfortunately tries the viewer’s patience to its limits.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

jrodfilmsJun 4, 2016

the first half is better than the second. its good, but it could have been a lot better. still its worth checking out, i must admit the score can end up being annoying.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

4

tethysdustSep 27, 2016

The first part of the film was actually quite funny and satirizes attitudes about relationships in an absurd way. I think it would have worked much better for me as a short film. Once the first climax of the plot hit, the film lost myThe first part of the film was actually quite funny and satirizes attitudes about relationships in an absurd way. I think it would have worked much better for me as a short film. Once the first climax of the plot hit, the film lost my interest. I kept watching to the end, but it was just more boring and depressing story that wasn't really lightened anymore by the absurdity of the world.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

whatdafrakJun 2, 2016

This movie had me hooked from the beginning, but the tonal shifts and lack of empathy I had for the characters really put me off toward the end. A noble effort, and one day I may revisit and like it more, but not the homerun I was hoping forThis movie had me hooked from the beginning, but the tonal shifts and lack of empathy I had for the characters really put me off toward the end. A noble effort, and one day I may revisit and like it more, but not the homerun I was hoping for based on the trailer.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

5

lancekozJan 18, 2017

I rate it a five, there is about half a good movie in this. It has a funny opening premise, a gloomy satire of some unspoken aspects of society... but then runs out of imagination and humor. In the process, it becomes trivial. The oddlyI rate it a five, there is about half a good movie in this. It has a funny opening premise, a gloomy satire of some unspoken aspects of society... but then runs out of imagination and humor. In the process, it becomes trivial. The oddly robotic acting that most of the characters have becomes annoying after a bit, and everything wears out the original good impression. Could've been fun if much shorter.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

jgzegerMar 17, 2017

Although not without some entertainment value, strange is the operative word for this film, and you really have to be receptive to something very unusual in order to truly like it. As for me, it was a bit too odd for my liking.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

SojumDec 25, 2016

Wes Anderson on downers and about 30 minutes too long. So much effort into making the characters unemotional makes them unrelatable, leaving only moments and situations the only place for the viewer to connect. Even the awkward narrativeWes Anderson on downers and about 30 minutes too long. So much effort into making the characters unemotional makes them unrelatable, leaving only moments and situations the only place for the viewer to connect. Even the awkward narrative strains for unpleasantness. That makes for some wry, observations and humor but is dreadfully hard to endure for the length of the film.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

SnidelyWhiplashDec 17, 2016

People don't seem to understand that a movie being weird is not a reason to rate it badly. This film smartly presented its material in some ways, and in others was completely blunt and beat you over the head with its message. This was okay atPeople don't seem to understand that a movie being weird is not a reason to rate it badly. This film smartly presented its material in some ways, and in others was completely blunt and beat you over the head with its message. This was okay at first, but after a couple times it lost the effect. Which leads to the films main problem, it's to long and stretched to thin in the second half, which causes the film to become stale. Were this film to continue the main themes from the first half into the second it could proceed with a clearer and more entertaining narrative. But then tries to develop new ones half way through, which made the film drag on and end with an unfinished feeling. Were it not for the second half I would give this film an 8 or 9 but it fumbled greatly and left me with an impartial feeling. Give it a watch yourself, if you are not a film buff you probably wont like it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews