Sunday, November 11, 2018

The return of the Aurochs




“Beasts of the Southern Wild” is a curious film starring Dwight Henry and 9-year old Quvenzhané Wallis (the youngest person ever to be nominated for an Academy Award as best actress). The plot, while generally realist, perhaps even “kitchen sink realist”, also contains elements of fantasy. Perhaps it could be seen as a kind of folkish or quasi-folkish Americana? While it´s presumably set in the present day, it might as well symbolize a future United States around 2050 or 2100.

The main characters live in “the Bathtub”, a poor and isolated community off the coast of an anonymous US state (usually believed to be Louisiana since the film was made there). The community, which is multi-racial and slightly counter-cultural, clearly resents wider society, symbolized by a distant city with sky scrapers behind a huge protective wall. It´s not entirely clear whether the Bathtub people are forcibly segregated or have chosen to live isolated. Probably the latter, since they refuse to evacuate the area when ordered to do so by the “proper” authorities.

The seaside squatters have developed their very own mythology, which claims that an ancient breed of monstrous beings, the Aurochs, are set to return and wreak havoc on civilization once the Antarctic icecaps melt due to climate change. Indeed, the Aurochs (who look like huge boars rather than real aurochs) do return, but it´s not clear whether they are real, ghostly or simply a figment of the main character´s vivid imagination. The message of the film is “Green” and quasi-Buddhist, and Hushpuppy (the name of Wallis´ character) is frequently too philosophical for her young age.

Otherwise, the plot is actually quite uninteresting, focusing on Hushpuppy´s troubled relationship with her parents, an epileptic father and a mother who is a hooker, but the whole thing never becomes properly tragic. Indeed, “Beasts of the Southern Wild” is actually quite romantic. 20 years ago, I would probably have condemned a film like this as “reactionary” since it “romanticizes voluntary poverty”, stereotypes Blacks, or whatever. I suppose I´m more laidback these days. That being said, this isn´t my favorite flick, but I´m willing to give it the OK rating (three stars).

No comments:

Post a Comment