Reviewed by Colin Jacobson (December 10, 2024)
In all the annals of film history, I can’t think of any trailers that featured the name of the cinematographer as a potential selling point – until 2024’s Strange Darling. The thriller used the presence of actor Giovanni Ribisi behind the camera as a focal point of the ads.
Did this sell tickets? Probably not, but given the nature of this warped thriller, I guess the studio figured Ribisi offered a point of interest.
Two cars speed down the highway, with one clearly in pursuit of the other. After the first car crashes, this chase sends a woman (Willa Fitzgerald) into the forest on foot as a man (Kyle Gallner) runs after her.
Injured, the woman comes upon the isolated home of aging hippies Frederick (Ed Begley Jr.) and Genevieve (Barbara Hershey). As they attempt to help her, they also brace for the threat still posed by the man.
When I saw Darling theatrically, I went in virtually blind. Actually, I later realized I’d seen the trailer I mentioned earlier, but I didn’t recall this when I entered the multiplex.
As Darling launched, I feared I would find myself in for a long night due to the filmmakers’ apparent pretensions. Right off the bat, the credits declare “SHOT ENTIRELY ON 35MM FILM” and also soon tells us we will find “A THRILLER IN SIX CHAPTERS” that launches with Chapter 3.
Man, if those factors don’t point to a story high on its own full-of-itself supply, I don’t know what does. These elements prompted me to think I’d find an art-house serial killer tale that deviates from genre norms just to be different.
And to be 100 percent clear, Darling does skew what we expect from these kinds of films. However, it does so in a gleeful manner that subverts expectations and takes us on a wild ride.
As implied by the fact the film launches with Chapter 3, Darling comes with a decidedly non-linear narrative. It lurches ahead and backward with abandon.
Despite my fear that these cinematic choices would add up to little more than obnoxious affectations, director JT Mollner makes the leaps and bounds succeed. The film toys with conventions and finds fresh ways to alter the standard framework.
It become easy to see Mollner’s manipulations of the usual thriller as cheap windowdressing, but I think the choices go deeper than that. These decisions allow for a basic deconstruction of this sort of film and allow Darling to take us down unusual paths.
Indeed, the manner in which Darling teases and taunts the viewer simply wouldn’t work if told chronologically. While I think a version of the story depicted in a standard progression could do fine, it wouldn’t deliver the genre jolt that makes Darling so dynamic.
All of these unconventional choices make it hard to discuss Darling in detail, as the likelihood of spoilers rises high. Suffice it to say that after a cloying start, the film kicks into gear and becomes a clever and engaging tale.
And it holds up to additional viewings well. Given the ways Darling twists conventions, I feared it would lose punch without those surprises.
Instead, it remains tight and involving. Some excellent performances help keep it this way.
In particular, Fitzgerald owns the screen. Her unnamed character requires Fitzgerald to pull off massive personality and emotional shifts, all of which she does in a natural and convincing manner.
Darling still can seem more pretentious than I’d like. Nonetheless, it boasts so much inventiveness that I can forgive its occasional excesses.
Footnote: a minor – and not especially interesting – audio tag appears after the end credits conclude.