@@calgon1890 a) the word is 'biased' b) as Kermode has said many times before, there is no such thing as an objective view of cinema. Everybody takes baggage to a film; critics just have more baggage than most
@@doswillrule I fully agree with this and I also think Mark is one of the best out there. In general I find his "baggage" to be a huge plus. My OP simply was begging to be written - that's all ;-)
I whole heartedly disagree with most of what you said but it was entertaining to watch and I love hearing differing opinions. It's a polarizing movie. Definitely not for everyone.
The original Suspiria and this new reimagining of it are 2 completely different experiences all together. Yes, they have the same basic premise and characters but Guadagnino wasn't trying to 'remake" Dario Argento's Suspiria. To everyone saying the comparisons are justified and expected would you make the same comparisons between John Carpenter's The Thing and the original that was released in the 1950's? Or would you view them as 2 different movies with similar story lines? Both versions of Suspiria are great in my opinion and both should be viewed with a different approach.
It's worth noting that JC's The Thing was a literary adaption of the short story "Who Goes There?" by John Campbell upon which the Howard Hawks original was based. The changes Carpenter made at least had some provenance outside of the Hawk's film. J.C.'s The Thing worked for me because Carpenter was being true to the common source material of a non-cinematic work more than the original. Having said that, there are a few remakes I genuinely like, which were remakes of the original films and not re-adaptions of the source material, such as Herzog's Nosferatu (which was a straight up remake of the silent film) and The Sorcerer (a remake of the French film Wages of Fear). Like those two, Kauffman's remake of Invasion of the Body Snatchers (which I also liked) only had the original as a reference. I haven't seen Suspiria 2018 yet so I can't judge it, though I have to say I tend to be highly skeptical of remakes in general
Mr. Kermode, you’re one of my favorite critics, but I’m gonna have to disagree with you, strongly. I found the new Suspiria to be just as mesmerizing and horrifying as the original, even if those films are totally different from each other. There is so much to digest after seeing it for the first time in theaters. Tilda Swinton, Dakota Johnson and Mia Goth gave strong acting performances, allowing us to connect with their characters. Music and choreography were almost dream-like in a sense that you feel like you were entering into a strange nightmare. And how about the cinematography? Even if the film did lack vibrant colors, the way everything was shot was nothing short of striking. This may come off as an unpopular opinion, but Suspiria is Luca Guadagnino’s masterpiece along with Call Me By Your Name, and definitely the greatest and most beautiful horror film I’ve seen this year. My favorite of 2018!
it is BETTER... the new one is better... i hate remakes and i only vaguely remember the original (i guess it didn't make much impact on me), but this movie is FAR SUPERIOR to the original.... i don't think there is any question... not that i didn't have a few issues with it myself, but the overall movie i found to far exceed my expectations
This version is great film and stands on its own. It doesn't try to be like Argento one. This film feels like the cult film Possession (1981) with its cold uncomfortable look. Thom Yorke score is fantastic.
I saw Possession just before watching the new Suspiria, and I have to agree. There’s the Cold War theme, Berlin setting, and color palette and also the dreariness and themes of division. Possession felt like it was directed by an interpretive dance choreographer, because everyone emoted and moved in such exaggerated gestures. The original Suspiria and this reimagining are set in dance academies, but only one is _about_ dance.
I completely disagree. I am a megafan of the original and giallo but this new version was thrilling and enigmatic for me to watch. The casting of the witches was brilliant and Tilda and surprisingly Dakota and Mia too. I loved the score so much I listen to it on repeat every day. It was too long but I felt it was more like a Kieslowski film than an Argento with the mood and tone which I infinitely prefer.
Yeah, it was a very different beast to the original. I enjoyed both for different reasons. I did think the new film could have lost about 40 minutes; a lot of the contextual stuff (Bader Meinhof etc) was needless fluff and I kept expecting it to have more impact on the plot, and it didn't at all. But the casting was great, the horror setpieces were really unusual and well executed (lol).
Mark is too concerned with the original. These two movies have as much in common as Tarantino's Inglorious Basterds and the original one. Only the title. Mark as a respected veteran film critic should know better than to watch the new one through the lens of the old one. They are two separate works.
"loses that sense of electricity, loses that sense of cinematic thrill" - wtf is Mark talking about. This is one of the most cinematic films of the year. Every element of the film making process is weaved together in a beautifully loving way that builds to an intensely stomach churning finale that has you gasping for air. Guadagnino wanted to recreate how he felt seeing the original. In terms of cinema being able to make you feel things, to create a full bodied experience that requires a post screening lie down, this is a masterpiece. The original, though i hasten to compare them, is overrated and shallow. But that comparison is redundant when both movies are completely different beasts. Suspiria 2018 was a joy to watch, one of my favourites of the year. This cannot be said enough, Luca Guadagnino's ability to cathartically take you on a journey is pure artistry, the man is a cinematic master.
Reecey L Sounds like you could be LG's No.1 fan, but I'm glad you enjoyed it more than I did. I agree with regard to needing a lie down, but I would have welcomed this during the film!
So what this review is telling me is that Kermode understands a lot about Argento's "Suspiria" (although I wouldn't even consider it horror at all, rather being a brilliant kind of lush, psychedelic, campish, and surreal splatter slapstick, as all of Argento is), and nothing about the new "Suspiria" at all. He's basically comparing apples and oranges, because you just can't compare the old and the new "Suspiria", since they're not even the same genre or have just remotely the same themes, purpose, or sensibilities. Both are perfectly fine works on their own and don't even *NEED* to be compared to the other because how independent and achieved both versions are in their own respective ways which are entirely different from each other. But to get down to what new "Suspiria" is really about (and which completely went over Kermode's head), it's a melancholical tale about various forms of German guilt and denial, both Nazism, post-war denial of Nazism's atrocities, and 70s Left-wing terrorism. I've only seen it once (but I think I will again once it's on Prime or on free TV), but I think it also portrays East-German socialism and the West-German government's reaction to 70s Left-wing terrorism as another forms of German guilt. And somehow, the evil magic of the dance school is and always has been involved with all those forms of German guilt and denial. When the school's reign of terror is ended, it's by means of obliteration and forgiving by blissfull forgetting, just as the old professor's guilt-ridden memory is obliterated by means of a stroke, basically as a way of "coming to terms" with the past. I didn't stay in the theater to see Bannion appear after the credits, but I've read she's thereby making the viewer forget about the film (and probably German guilt thereby) just as she'd made the old professor forget about his own sins. I don't mind that it's an American girl coming over to save Europe in new "Suspiria" as some people do. I'd feel more uneasy about "forgetting" about German guilt, because I think it's critical we remember it, and "forgetting" about it often goes hand-in-hand with the sort of German denial new "Suspiria" also seems to denounce. But the film is very well made as a melancholic piece of art and how it tells this message of forgiving by forgetting and how its makers obviously think that forgetting and denial can be two different things. And again, comparing old and new "Suspiria" is like comparing apples and oranges, two highly achieved films of entirely different genres, themes, purpose, and sensibilities.
Seeing the original in cinemas on a huge screen was likely my greatest cinema experiences, even better than Space Odyssey or Fury Road. Everyone was quiet when needed and laughed when it was too much. And that soundtrack, just wow.
@@randomguy6679 Uhhhhh, Volk is the only piece that repeats multiple times, and that’s because it’s a diegetic piece that the dancers are actually dancing to. The title track has one repeat and aside from that there are no other repeating tracks. Wanna watch the film again?
With all the horror movies filled with nothing but cheap jump scare these days, this was a breath of fresh air for me. People these days don't know ( or care ) how to watch movies and only look for instant gratifications. Jump scare is good but it's only a device and you really shouldn't depend on it. Real scary films come from great storytelling. Watching LG's Suspiria was an experience. There were some scenes that I felt chills run down on my spine. Not because of certain images but the implications of them. Also, this is simply a different interpretation of the same material. If source material is good, many directors would be tempted to make their own versions of it. The Thing was remade 3 times. Invasion of the body snatchers was remade 4 times.
This film and the original (which I love) is like Bad Leutenant and Herzog's version. Two completely different takes with only a few similar slements, and shouldn't really be compared all too much. But yeah, "the pure cinematic joy" or the original is quite something.
The original is better measured by its influence, than by it’s own merit. It’s one of my favourite films but not because it’s a masterpiece of storytelling.
The original is better. If the remake was never made, the original would still be remembered. Now let's say the remake was the original Suspiria and the Argento one was never made, the remake one would have been forgotten in three months and given B- or C+ at best. The only people would remember is that Olga scene.
I don't understand why critics are not LOVING this movie. I mean, just read the comments below: the public is ADORING Luca Guadagnino's Suspiria!!! Is there some sort of conspiracy against Luca Guadagnino? Did he annoyed someone after Call Me By Your Name? I don't understand.
The worst mistake anyone can make when reviewing this movie is compare it to the original. Why would any director want to create a remake that just mimics "what was good about" the original? What would be the point? Isn't that what the original is there for?
It's a remake. You're asking it to be compared to it. If you don't improve on it or differentiate on it to quite a degree it just doesn't need to exist. Even if it isn't a remake films don't exist in a vacuum.
Didn’t see the original film so can’t fully relate to Mark’s views, but totally disagreed with his opinion. Though the film definitely made it’s themes clear, it didn’t do it in a way that weighed the film down. The film did lay out what it was about but I was okay with that because it gave the story a unique perspective. It was less of a “solve the mystery” story and more of an “upset the already upset balance”
@@tombojumbo Okay, relax. I just made my case clear. You can disagree with me but don't be condescending. As for what you two said, no it's not pointless (despite me and Mark sharing two different perspectives I can still compare and contrast my opinion with his) and I felt that it was unique because the film's story did not shroud itself in mystery and instead allowed you to focus on the characterisation and themes. I'll admit that a standard mystery would have been a bit more compelling but I didn't think that there were no surprises or room for interpretations. (Spoilers) You say that the story layed itself out but what about the reveal that Susie was Mother Suspirioum? That was not made clear at all during the film.
Could not disagree more. Suspiria 2018 is probably the best movie of 2018. It's a perfect remake because it deviates from the original, not rehashed the same themes.
There's a whole scene of exposition dump by Udo Kier in the original. I thoroughly disagree with him about the length and depth of the film. I think it's brilliant
I feel like this movie and Argento's original are very much different beasts; it's two very talented filmmakers approaching the same basic story with their own styles, interpretations and perspectives. Every negative or mixed review I've seen of this film draws comparisons to Argento's original. If you go into this thinking of Argento, and looking for comparisons, then I don't think you'll enjoy this as much as if you enter with a clear mind. For my money, it was a cracking film.
The comparison is understandable it is a remake. There's no need to remake it as Suspiria is not exactly on the normie radar and if it's such a different film then just call it something else and it would be better received because it doesn't have the baggage of the classic original.
I love Mark, but this particular review is way too long, sounds self important and concentrates mainly on a different movie. It genuinely sounds like he's reviewing his own review.
I don’t mind when the film gets supertextual. I can’t even explain why but it just works. Maybe it’s meant to be frustrating but I don’t find it pretentious
The first genre tag on TH-cam is fantasy and I think that feels right, it’s full of lore and exploration of the world while also delivering a captivating story, i love it.
Mark completely missed the point; as he occasionally and unexpectedly does sometimes. The two films work on their own terms. Yorks soundtrack is stunning.
"An operatic Aztec sensibility" - sweet Jesus :) Love Kermode but unless he was being ironic with such a pompous, over-stuffed review I fear this rant jumped several sharks.
I think that the historical contest is a hint for the watcher, to understand that even if the movie seems to be about ballet dancers and some kind of social climbing, it is actually very political and the themes are of historical importance in their own context.
I disagree with most of what’s been said. Guadagnino‘s Suspiria has an element of ease and relief that is very pleasing, especially towards and during the climax of the film
I love Mark but he can get things so wrong. The recent Suspiria was one of the best horror films to come out in a decade. No need to compare it to the original at all. This film takes the idea of the Witch very seriously and forces the audience to as well.
Guadagnino's film is an elegy on the impressionistic themes of the original film meant to serve as both an allegory for the time when the original film was made and a meditation on how today's society of anger is falling prey to the mistakes of the past, just as the coven and its academy do in the film. To quote one of my great intellectual heroes Ursula K. le Guin "Anger continued on past its usefulness becomes unjust, then dangerous. Nursed for its own sake, valued as an end in itself, it loses its goal. It fuels not positive activism but regression, obsession, vengeance, self-righteousness. Corrosive, it feeds off itself, destroying its host in the process. The racism, misogyny, and counter-rationality of the reactionary right in American politics for the last several years is a frightening exhibition of the destructive force of anger deliberately nourished by hate, encouraged to rule thought, invited to control behavior. I hope our republic survives this orgy of self-indulgent rage." But deeper than that, Guadagnino's film touches on the inevitable failure of sexuality, and how the most inbred desire of all living things to transcend the entropic arrow of the universe through the rigours of propagation leads to the collapse of the intellect and emotions through obsession and anger. If Kermode is so picky about adaptations replicating the original, then I'm surprised that he did not criticize Alex Garland's 'Annihilation' (which is a very well-made film) from disappointingly only adapting two scenes from near the beginning of the film from the source material, devising a wholly different plot, and neglecting the themes of humanity's relationship to the natural world and the criticism of anthropocentrism that were central to VanderMeer's novel and are poorly represented in film compared to other media such as literature and television. All this leads to two comments: this is proof of the underrepresentation of true intellectualism in film criticism and begs the question of whether Mark Kermode does any reading.
A funny one to measure. I found it bloated, self important and pretentious to watch, however the performance's were quite good and I found myself analysing it long after I'd left the cinema. Worth a watch, just don't expect the intensity delivered by that first trailer...
Not sure it is fair to be comparing, Guadagnino has been very clear to say this is a cover version with his spin rather than a remake. I saw it as film of cinematic indulgence which clearly made no attempt to win over anyone on the fence. The people making made what they wanted to see and made a lot of it. I loved it, and honestly partially because I could tell many would hate it and that it was clear the people making it didn't care. It's backed heavily by MUBI which should be a huge indicator to anyone aware of them where the priorities lie.
Whether it's a remake or a "cover version", it's going to be compared to the original. If he didn't want it to be compared to Argento's film, then he should have made his own original movie.
@@DorianCairne, no. Directors should be free to retell stories they love in their own styles and have it judged on it's own merit and not on its ability to mimic something they never intended to mimic.
@@jakeinator21 Story? Suspiria has an extremely thin plot. It's a film defined by its visuals. If this guy wanted to make a similar film with his own unique flair, he could easily have made another movie about witches and simply said it was INSPIRED by Suspiria, without riding the fame of the movie's title. I mean, do you think the only way to make a movie about vampires is by remaking Nosferatu?
So your justification for judging "remakes" based off comparison to the original is that they could have made a different movie? I don't follow your logic. Why should a filmmaker paying homage to a film they love by recreating it with their own style have their film judged based on comparison to the original and not its own merit? Why do they not deserve to have their film examined for what it is and not what it wasn't? Do you apply the same logic to music? Do you judge Johnny Cash's version of Hurt as bad simply because it was acoustic/western style and not industrial/alternative rock like the original? It just seems to me that you are either partial to the original film or simply didn't like the new one, and are making generalized statements about how something should be received as some weird form of gatekeeping.
@@jakeinator21 Funny you should mention musical covers - everyone's having a go at Kermode for comparing this film to the original, but I dare you to find me a single review of a song cover that doesn't bring up the original. And yes, that is absolutely my "justification". I'll just ask this directly: if Guadagnino wanted to make his own movie that would be based solely off its own merits, then why did he opt for a remake of a classic instead of his own original movie? Other than the obvious fact that the familiar name would draw attention to it, I mean.
If you are a fan of the original version of Suspiria as Mark is then I don't see the problem with him explaining why he didn't enjoy the remake through the lens of what made the original special. II don't know how that can be avoided if you are a film critic. I laughed about Argento 'flirting with the ridiculous' and the 'What!?' moments in some of his films. Makes me want to relive all the joyous 'What!?' moments in Phenomena all over again.
Sounds like the director made an essay on the original Suspiria rather than remaking it, which sounds fantastic to me. Suspiria didn't need to be remade, but I love the idea of it being enlarged upon. Looking forward to this !
@8:20 I disagree, what was fresh about the setting of this film was providing an environment where the actors' decisions can make sense. This is something we have to suspend our reasoning for most films to make their plot work, but providing a heavy handed background, under which the characters can come to the conclusion they do helps a lot to get immersed in the experience and the vision of all the creators. That said, the humour and some CGI near the end didn't work for me, but the rest of the film and especially its setting of choice to retell a simple story was fascinating.
I'm a huge Argento fan (until the 90s at least) but I've never been a huge fan of Suspiria, certainly not in the evangelical way it seems to be revered. I much prefer Deep Red, Tenebrae and even Inferno, which I think does a much better job of doing all the things Suspiria gets high praise for. That said I was utterly baffled at the prospect of it being remade, but the more I hear about it the more I want to see it. I'm not at all surprised that MK didn't like it and I think the review reveals his reasons why as well, but it's clear the director is trying to do something very different which surely is the main objective of a remake. It's not like Suspiria has a brilliant story that needs to be retold, the challenge is to take the bare bones plot and infuse it with a different mood which it sounds like it does. To criticize it for not being Argento is just odd. But I do think 2 1/2 hours does sound a bit daunting.
I've seen it twice, and on second viewing I came away totally convinced it's a movie in its own right. It is what Suspiria should be in 2018, and I can't fault it for that. It focuses more on the horror of the reality of the original movie's setting, and the depth of the constant struggle of chaotic forces in our lives that often seems almost supernatural. For that it's a little clever. I can, however, fault it for distracting me with Tilda Swinton as an old man. If you can look past the prosthetics and the horrible voice work of her in that role, see it again without the anticipation and expectation of watching the original.
disagree completely.... i despise remakes, as a philosophy .... and this one actually won over my prejudice... it is absolutely not too long... it is the right length for the mood it presents and what it tries to accomplish.... the old man make up was a big turn off for me, but the story being stretched to 2.5 hours was a non issue because i was enjoying the movie
Unpopular opinion here but Argento's Suspiria is seriously overrated, sensation and visual splashiness for its own sake. A big pretty package that's empty inside. Guadagnino's remake may be pretentious and self-important but he put more thought and context into each scene than Argento did in his whole movie. And the idea that Argento's film is 'pure" cinema is undercut by that completely ridiculous scene with the "psychiatrist" (and what kind of psychiatric professional buys into the idea of the OC-CULT?). It's one scene that betrays Argento's narrative weakness; no amount of window dressing could make up for what was a really empty and vacuous film.
I couldn't get involved with either version on first attempt (made it to about the fifteen minute mark with both), despite being a huge and eclectic horror fan. Now that I've finally experienced these two different versions of a similar story, I'm glad that I did. Between the two of them is a fantastic film, although both lack qualities when scrutinised individually. If the acting from the 2018 version, along with its dance performances, were present in the 1977 film, it'd have been flawless. The Dario Argento version is, to my mind, far superior. It's more focused, less on-the-nose, far creepier, has the more palpable atmosphere, and, despite Thom Yorke's best efforts, the better soundtrack. I appreciated the choreography of the Guadagnino version, the feminism and overt sexuality, and the last 10 or so minutes, but in the end the film was far too bloated with irrelevant information about the time-period (as Mark bemoans), and on occasion skirted awfully close to the ridiculous (the takeover in the basement). Incidentally, the 1977 film was an undiscovered classic for me all these years! And the soundtrack! In Fabric, also reviewed by Mark, has a similar creepiness (and soundtrack) to it, if you're looking for something else...
I prefer the 2018 version myself. I watched the original Suspiria for the first time on 4k on the big screen around the time the remake was about to come out. I dig the soundtrack and set design and cinematography but everything this was blah. I really wanted to like In Fabric. I loved the trailer but found the stories in the anthology to be half baked.
@@AdrianMendoza23 I've grown to appreciate the 2018 version on repeat viewings, too. In Fabric is a weird one, for sure, and you need to in the mood for its dream-like state. I think the musical scene involving the mannequin is creepy and mesmerising in equal measure.
The original Suspiria is pure sensory overload for your reptilian brain, and the remake unsettles you through your conscious brain, becoming more unsettling and interesting the more you think about it. The remake has the advantage of being able to play with your expectations, but they're both masterpieces.
If I had to pick between the two, I'd have to go with the remake. The reason I'm with it is because at least this version actually gets to the point with the witches and actually invested me on what was going to happen at the end. The original has the problem (retrospectively) of keeping the witches a mystery which some will find slow and boring considering it's been done to death in horror. When I watched the original I knew that the teachers were killing the students all because of an episode of Billy & Mandy in which Billy joins a ballet school where the head mistress is a witch who harvests souls. It shows how ingrained this trope is in horror films that it comes off as dated at this point because we know what's going to happen. Overall I thought the remake was fine. The acting was pretty good (especially from Swinton), the dance choreography is well done, the editing and cinematography succeeded in homaging 70's film making techniques. It has problems though like the RAF/Nazi backdrop (which I feel is shoehorned into the story), the film could have been cut in a few spots making the run time more shorter (2hrs at most) and the radiohead soundtrack really doesn't do much for me. Both films have their strengths and weaknesses but overall the remake is just a better story.
I usually agree with everything you say, but this was a film based mainly on the originals lives of the people extended, the story is basically the same, it just depicts a more in depth realisation and connection to the characters
The constant imagery of the wall reminded me of Possession. I really enjoyed this take on Suspiria but the climax was robbed by Thom Yorke's vocals :/ really took the wind out of it for me
What does a Mark Kermode review mean? It means that past a certain age you are not allowed to wear leather jackets; that any variant in the spelling of a person's name is risible; that creative persons should not be TOO creative - they should accept clear genres - unless their 'major work' is in the past, & it has become accepted as a standard. No pretensions allowed, in fact, unless it is wearing a certain kind of retro suit with a certain retro haircut. Everything is graded by his reasonable, blokish normalcy.
As an American, I've always preferred Spanish and French horror - they're just much more visceral about their horror (WITH the intellect as well) REC and REC 2 are my all time fav horror flicks and Martyrs really messed me up. With that said, I was never a big fan of Italian horror - always stayed away from Fulci flicks and I was never a big Argento fan. But this new Suspiria film was incredible, I was blown away by it and it wa much better than the original. It may even take the spot as my all my time fav horror flick.
Aah now ... this is interesting! I remember very little about the original but, I was only 16 & something deep in my memory tells me it was pretty good. Also, you mentioned Martys, which worked for me (haven't seen REC I dont't think). As a result of this review AND what you said, I'm in two minds about whether to watch it or not. It''s just popped up on my Amazon Prime so, if it's free I guess I can't complain.
@@user-kt6fp8me6h Thank you for the tip. Pretty sure I've not seen them. I'll hunt them down. I'm the same age as Kermode & grew up with (and loving) the same horrors as him - Hammer movies on TV aged 11yrs etc. It's awfully frustrating, trying to find good stuff, when you've exhausted every flick on Netflix, Amaxon Prime & Sky cinema, lol (and, like you I'm sure, I've sat thru' some really dire dross to find good ones).
I think all of Mark's points about the "story" and "tone" are valid....................but how many other horror movies have someone getting tied into a literal knot through magical ballet powers? I mean, come on Mark.
Argento's (and Daria Nicolodi's, it's fair to say) Suspiria had some flaws, but it worked. From the very beginning til the end it was a journey in one direction, without single needles scene. New version is blend of dull drama and poor horror. Going in lots of directions and at the end gets nowhere. Disappointment.
I'm a huge fan of the original and was super excited when i heard there was a remake, but seriously! Highly disappointed. The remake lacked the essence of what made the original so good and as the reviewer mentioned the original had immaculate style and attention to detail, the over saturated lighting and the chilling sound track. I felt so underwhelmed while watching this which just ended in frustration. If your going to attempt to remake one of the most iconic cult horror films its got to be good, this doesn't even come close to that. Which makes me sad, Tilda you were wasted in this movie :(
I'm looking forward to this one actually. I haven't got the best relationship with the original as it was one of those "scariest movie ever" that let me down on first viewing. Great to look at, but I think Argento did better later on with Phenomena and Opera.
I found Inferno a bit frustrating to be honest, but it's been a while. Maybe it's time for a rewatch... Thanks. During my arcade days KoF96 was the only game I never saw anyone beat. Goenitz got in the way all the time!
Well made 'interpretation' but personally too long winded, serious and oppressive in its aim to not copy the originals flamboyant colorful style. love many story concepts and performances in this version but I dont think Dakota had the gravity for certain later scenes and there's some big gaps in the narrative to back up the ending (which i still loved in many ways). The old guy's arc is almost unnecessary, he could have been almost completely removed and it wouldn't have damaged the movie for me. Marks nailed this review. There's half a great horror movie in here and ANOTHER poignant post war drama stuffed in. Dance scenes were ace though, the music and visuals combining beautifully in these moments.
I was quite enjoying it until the climax. I felt it totally derailed. The entire audience completely snapped out of the film and started snickering and talking. You have a good movie with a bad ending, but then you have a good movie with a bad ending that ruins the experience before it
Mr Kermode, are you aware of a streaming service called Shudder? I believe you might like it. Also, I agree with some of your points about this remake. I found some of it unnecessary and I suppose a little pretentious. But I still really enjoyed it, not sure I love it like the original.
Great review. I think the new version suffers from all the issues Mark brings up. Perhaps if the current version had not had the benefit of some stylistic ties to the original, it might have suffered even more. Mark's right to bring up the Argento masterpiece.
even as a big argento fan I don't rate suspiria that much compared to most of his other 70s/80s work... deep red and tenebrae are far better imo (and I hope those don't get remade!)
@HEY 4Q2 yeah don't think I've ever made it all the way thru Inferno... and only watched Phenomena twice. I did however kind of think Sleepless from 2000 recaptured a bit of his classic style. also The Card Player is so bad its good! :)
@HEY 4Q2 yeah I mean he could've stopped making films at Tenebrae (my personal fav) and I think his reputation / influence today would be about the same tbh
@HEY 4Q2 strange isn't it. I think Fulci and Lenzi are 2 other italian directors who seemed to randomly go from good to bad throughout their careers. (New York Ripper being my favourite Fulci flick, followed by Lizard In A Woman's Skin - 10 years seperating those 2 films!)
Great review as always from Mark, but it really sounds like the original hurts Mark's perspective on this film, and I think if he was some how able to just shake off the comparisons to the original, he may take it for what it is, which is an entirely different story. The way Guadagnino explained it beautifully is: Reflecting the story of Susie and the witches through the division and anger in Berlin at the time. So while Mark criticizes it for being a shorter movie, within a longer movie, weighed down by the political atmosphere at the time, I would argue that the stuff that Mark thinks ways down the film, IS the story this time. The film is really about 1977 Berlin, told through the perspective of Susie and the witches at the dance academy. I loved it, and I hope Mark reevaluates it again with a different perspective.
I agree. It was long, tiresome and full of superfluous sequences. Tilda Swinton as the old fella was very distracting and unnecessary. It's never good when an hour before the film finishes one wonders "when will this pain end".
There's a 2 minute review in there being weighed down by these additional 9 minutes of talking about how the movie is nothing like the original..
exactly what i was thinking
Lmao! I couldn't agree more! He is being bias because he "loves" the original. People who are bias needs to stop acting like they are critics.
@@calgon1890 disagree. His passion for certain movies is what I love about him, especially when it comes to Blade Runner
@@calgon1890 a) the word is 'biased'
b) as Kermode has said many times before, there is no such thing as an objective view of cinema. Everybody takes baggage to a film; critics just have more baggage than most
@@doswillrule I fully agree with this and I also think Mark is one of the best out there. In general I find his "baggage" to be a huge plus. My OP simply was begging to be written - that's all ;-)
I whole heartedly disagree with most of what you said but it was entertaining to watch and I love hearing differing opinions. It's a polarizing movie. Definitely not for everyone.
The original Suspiria and this new reimagining of it are 2 completely different experiences all together. Yes, they have the same basic premise and characters but Guadagnino wasn't trying to 'remake" Dario Argento's Suspiria. To everyone saying the comparisons are justified and expected would you make the same comparisons between John Carpenter's The Thing and the original that was released in the 1950's? Or would you view them as 2 different movies with similar story lines? Both versions of Suspiria are great in my opinion and both should be viewed with a different approach.
It's worth noting that JC's The Thing was a literary adaption of the short story "Who Goes There?" by John Campbell upon which the Howard Hawks original was based. The changes Carpenter made at least had some provenance outside of the Hawk's film. J.C.'s The Thing worked for me because Carpenter was being true to the common source material of a non-cinematic work more than the original. Having said that, there are a few remakes I genuinely like, which were remakes of the original films and not re-adaptions of the source material, such as Herzog's Nosferatu (which was a straight up remake of the silent film) and The Sorcerer (a remake of the French film Wages of Fear). Like those two, Kauffman's remake of Invasion of the Body Snatchers (which I also liked) only had the original as a reference. I haven't seen Suspiria 2018 yet so I can't judge it, though I have to say I tend to be highly skeptical of remakes in general
Unlike The Thing Suspiria isn't a novel.
Mr. Kermode, you’re one of my favorite critics, but I’m gonna have to disagree with you, strongly. I found the new Suspiria to be just as mesmerizing and horrifying as the original, even if those films are totally different from each other. There is so much to digest after seeing it for the first time in theaters. Tilda Swinton, Dakota Johnson and Mia Goth gave strong acting performances, allowing us to connect with their characters. Music and choreography were almost dream-like in a sense that you feel like you were entering into a strange nightmare. And how about the cinematography? Even if the film did lack vibrant colors, the way everything was shot was nothing short of striking. This may come off as an unpopular opinion, but Suspiria is Luca Guadagnino’s masterpiece along with Call Me By Your Name, and definitely the greatest and most beautiful horror film I’ve seen this year. My favorite of 2018!
it is BETTER... the new one is better... i hate remakes and i only vaguely remember the original (i guess it didn't make much impact on me), but this movie is FAR SUPERIOR to the original.... i don't think there is any question... not that i didn't have a few issues with it myself, but the overall movie i found to far exceed my expectations
This is a review of Argento’s film and not this new version 😂
If you wanna make a horror film kermode likes. just stay away from anything that makes him slightly nostalgic.
Don't remake films, ever
He loves movies that reference earlier horror movies. The problem here is that the new movie is called 'Suspiria'.
This version is great film and stands on its own. It doesn't try to be like Argento one. This film feels like the cult film Possession (1981) with its cold uncomfortable look. Thom Yorke score is fantastic.
I saw Possession just before watching the new Suspiria, and I have to agree. There’s the Cold War theme, Berlin setting, and color palette and also the dreariness and themes of division.
Possession felt like it was directed by an interpretive dance choreographer, because everyone emoted and moved in such exaggerated gestures. The original Suspiria and this reimagining are set in dance academies, but only one is _about_ dance.
I completely disagree. I am a megafan of the original and giallo but this new version was thrilling and enigmatic for me to watch. The casting of the witches was brilliant and Tilda and surprisingly Dakota and Mia too. I loved the score so much I listen to it on repeat every day. It was too long but I felt it was more like a Kieslowski film than an Argento with the mood and tone which I infinitely prefer.
Yeah, it was a very different beast to the original. I enjoyed both for different reasons. I did think the new film could have lost about 40 minutes; a lot of the contextual stuff (Bader Meinhof etc) was needless fluff and I kept expecting it to have more impact on the plot, and it didn't at all. But the casting was great, the horror setpieces were really unusual and well executed (lol).
I LOVE the original and really liked the 2018 version. I'll definitely purchase when released on blu ray.
I see no Kieslowski on this one. Its more like a Lovecraftian Bob Fosse film.
Yes both of these films are artistic masterpieces. I'm a huge fan of Argento and giallo as well. Suspiria 2018 is a brilliant and visionary.
Mark is too concerned with the original. These two movies have as much in common as Tarantino's Inglorious Basterds and the original one. Only the title. Mark as a respected veteran film critic should know better than to watch the new one through the lens of the old one. They are two separate works.
remake apologist
Title,same. Setting,dance academy. Occult/horror genre. Hmmmmm yes,two different movies.
Comparisons were inevitable.
If a film is a remake, it's going to be compared to the original. If filmmakers don't want that to happen, they should make the film a remake.
*should not make the film a remake, sorry.
"loses that sense of electricity, loses that sense of cinematic thrill" - wtf is Mark talking about. This is one of the most cinematic films of the year. Every element of the film making process is weaved together in a beautifully loving way that builds to an intensely stomach churning finale that has you gasping for air. Guadagnino wanted to recreate how he felt seeing the original. In terms of cinema being able to make you feel things, to create a full bodied experience that requires a post screening lie down, this is a masterpiece. The original, though i hasten to compare them, is overrated and shallow. But that comparison is redundant when both movies are completely different beasts. Suspiria 2018 was a joy to watch, one of my favourites of the year. This cannot be said enough, Luca Guadagnino's ability to cathartically take you on a journey is pure artistry, the man is a cinematic master.
You have awful taste
Reecey L Sounds like you could be LG's No.1 fan, but I'm glad you enjoyed it more than I did. I agree with regard to needing a lie down, but I would have welcomed this during the film!
It's really interesting how wildly different opinions are about this film from reviewers that i respect.
So what this review is telling me is that Kermode understands a lot about Argento's "Suspiria" (although I wouldn't even consider it horror at all, rather being a brilliant kind of lush, psychedelic, campish, and surreal splatter slapstick, as all of Argento is), and nothing about the new "Suspiria" at all. He's basically comparing apples and oranges, because you just can't compare the old and the new "Suspiria", since they're not even the same genre or have just remotely the same themes, purpose, or sensibilities. Both are perfectly fine works on their own and don't even *NEED* to be compared to the other because how independent and achieved both versions are in their own respective ways which are entirely different from each other.
But to get down to what new "Suspiria" is really about (and which completely went over Kermode's head), it's a melancholical tale about various forms of German guilt and denial, both Nazism, post-war denial of Nazism's atrocities, and 70s Left-wing terrorism. I've only seen it once (but I think I will again once it's on Prime or on free TV), but I think it also portrays East-German socialism and the West-German government's reaction to 70s Left-wing terrorism as another forms of German guilt.
And somehow, the evil magic of the dance school is and always has been involved with all those forms of German guilt and denial. When the school's reign of terror is ended, it's by means of obliteration and forgiving by blissfull forgetting, just as the old professor's guilt-ridden memory is obliterated by means of a stroke, basically as a way of "coming to terms" with the past. I didn't stay in the theater to see Bannion appear after the credits, but I've read she's thereby making the viewer forget about the film (and probably German guilt thereby) just as she'd made the old professor forget about his own sins.
I don't mind that it's an American girl coming over to save Europe in new "Suspiria" as some people do. I'd feel more uneasy about "forgetting" about German guilt, because I think it's critical we remember it, and "forgetting" about it often goes hand-in-hand with the sort of German denial new "Suspiria" also seems to denounce. But the film is very well made as a melancholic piece of art and how it tells this message of forgiving by forgetting and how its makers obviously think that forgetting and denial can be two different things. And again, comparing old and new "Suspiria" is like comparing apples and oranges, two highly achieved films of entirely different genres, themes, purpose, and sensibilities.
Strangely, I also think it's a reaction to man-hating 3rd-vvave feminism.
Seeing the original in cinemas on a huge screen was likely my greatest cinema experiences, even better than Space Odyssey or Fury Road. Everyone was quiet when needed and laughed when it was too much. And that soundtrack, just wow.
Yes that great soundtrack with three songs that play over and over and over again and get very annoying very fast
@@randomguy6679 Uhhhhh, Volk is the only piece that repeats multiple times, and that’s because it’s a diegetic piece that the dancers are actually dancing to. The title track has one repeat and aside from that there are no other repeating tracks. Wanna watch the film again?
Saw it tonight.counted 9 people walk out ! Not a film for everyone but i thought it was stunning.
With all the horror movies filled with nothing but cheap jump scare these days, this was a breath of fresh air for me. People these days don't know ( or care ) how to watch movies and only look for instant gratifications. Jump scare is good but it's only a device and you really shouldn't depend on it. Real scary films come from great storytelling. Watching LG's Suspiria was an experience. There were some scenes that I felt chills run down on my spine. Not because of certain images but the implications of them. Also, this is simply a different interpretation of the same material. If source material is good, many directors would be tempted to make their own versions of it. The Thing was remade 3 times. Invasion of the body snatchers was remade 4 times.
This film and the original (which I love) is like Bad Leutenant and Herzog's version. Two completely different takes with only a few similar slements, and shouldn't really be compared all too much. But yeah, "the pure cinematic joy" or the original is quite something.
The original is better measured by its influence, than by it’s own merit. It’s one of my favourite films but not because it’s a masterpiece of storytelling.
Agreed - it's a beautiful, illogical cinematic nightmare.
The original is better. If the remake was never made, the original would still be remembered. Now let's say the remake was the original Suspiria and the Argento one was never made, the remake one would have been forgotten in three months and given B- or C+ at best. The only people would remember is that Olga scene.
I'm late to the party. This film is delightful.
I don’t know if “delightful” is the right word
I don't understand why critics are not LOVING this movie. I mean, just read the comments below: the public is ADORING Luca Guadagnino's Suspiria!!! Is there some sort of conspiracy against Luca Guadagnino? Did he annoyed someone after Call Me By Your Name? I don't understand.
The worst mistake anyone can make when reviewing this movie is compare it to the original. Why would any director want to create a remake that just mimics "what was good about" the original? What would be the point? Isn't that what the original is there for?
Then what's the point of making a remake at all?
Then why remake it? If you're idea is so radically different make a new property.
It's a remake.
You're asking it to be compared to it. If you don't improve on it or differentiate on it to quite a degree it just doesn't need to exist.
Even if it isn't a remake films don't exist in a vacuum.
PauLtus B Y’all missed the point. It ain’t a remake folks!
+NoFluff British Beer reviews
Then why call it Suspiria?
Then why have similarly named characters?
Didn’t see the original film so can’t fully relate to Mark’s views, but totally disagreed with his opinion. Though the film definitely made it’s themes clear, it didn’t do it in a way that weighed the film down. The film did lay out what it was about but I was okay with that because it gave the story a unique perspective. It was less of a “solve the mystery” story and more of an “upset the already upset balance”
@@tombojumbo Okay, relax. I just made my case clear. You can disagree with me but don't be condescending. As for what you two said, no it's not pointless (despite me and Mark sharing two different perspectives I can still compare and contrast my opinion with his) and I felt that it was unique because the film's story did not shroud itself in mystery and instead allowed you to focus on the characterisation and themes. I'll admit that a standard mystery would have been a bit more compelling but I didn't think that there were no surprises or room for interpretations.
(Spoilers)
You say that the story layed itself out but what about the reveal that Susie was Mother Suspirioum? That was not made clear at all during the film.
Could not disagree more. Suspiria 2018 is probably the best movie of 2018. It's a perfect remake because it deviates from the original, not rehashed the same themes.
There's a whole scene of exposition dump by Udo Kier in the original. I thoroughly disagree with him about the length and depth of the film. I think it's brilliant
did anyone know that the old doctor, was played by tilda swinton as well? that blew me away lol
Mother Markos as well apparently
I feel like this movie and Argento's original are very much different beasts; it's two very talented filmmakers approaching the same basic story with their own styles, interpretations and perspectives. Every negative or mixed review I've seen of this film draws comparisons to Argento's original. If you go into this thinking of Argento, and looking for comparisons, then I don't think you'll enjoy this as much as if you enter with a clear mind. For my money, it was a cracking film.
sam m8 it is a complete experience rather than the stylistic notions of the original. I much preferred it too, especially the twist!!
The comparison is understandable it is a remake. There's no need to remake it as Suspiria is not exactly on the normie radar and if it's such a different film then just call it something else and it would be better received because it doesn't have the baggage of the classic original.
I love Mark, but this particular review is way too long, sounds self important and concentrates mainly on a different movie. It genuinely sounds like he's reviewing his own review.
When you say "different movie", you do mean "movie that this film is directly based on and was inevitably going to be compared to", right?
I don’t mind when the film gets supertextual. I can’t even explain why but it just works. Maybe it’s meant to be frustrating but I don’t find it pretentious
The first genre tag on TH-cam is fantasy and I think that feels right, it’s full of lore and exploration of the world while also delivering a captivating story, i love it.
Mark completely missed the point; as he occasionally and unexpectedly does sometimes.
The two films work on their own terms.
Yorks soundtrack is stunning.
"An operatic Aztec sensibility" - sweet Jesus :) Love Kermode but unless he was being ironic with such a pompous, over-stuffed review I fear this rant jumped several sharks.
I think that the historical contest is a hint for the watcher, to understand that even if the movie seems to be about ballet dancers and some kind of social climbing, it is actually very political and the themes are of historical importance in their own context.
I disagree with most of what’s been said. Guadagnino‘s Suspiria has an element of ease and relief that is very pleasing, especially towards and during the climax of the film
I love Mark but he can get things so wrong. The recent Suspiria was one of the best horror films to come out in a decade. No need to compare it to the original at all. This film takes the idea of the Witch very seriously and forces the audience to as well.
Interesting Its a review of the new version of Suspiria but almost all of the discussion keeps referring to the original Argento version.
Guadagnino's film is an elegy on the impressionistic themes of the original film meant to serve as both an allegory for the time when the original film was made and a meditation on how today's society of anger is falling prey to the mistakes of the past, just as the coven and its academy do in the film. To quote one of my great intellectual heroes Ursula K. le Guin "Anger continued on past its usefulness becomes unjust, then dangerous. Nursed for its own sake, valued as an end in itself, it loses its goal. It fuels not positive activism but regression, obsession, vengeance, self-righteousness. Corrosive, it feeds off itself, destroying its host in the process. The racism, misogyny, and counter-rationality of the reactionary right in American politics for the last several years is a frightening exhibition of the destructive force of anger deliberately nourished by hate, encouraged to rule thought, invited to control behavior. I hope our republic survives this orgy of self-indulgent rage." But deeper than that, Guadagnino's film touches on the inevitable failure of sexuality, and how the most inbred desire of all living things to transcend the entropic arrow of the universe through the rigours of propagation leads to the collapse of the intellect and emotions through obsession and anger. If Kermode is so picky about adaptations replicating the original, then I'm surprised that he did not criticize Alex Garland's 'Annihilation' (which is a very well-made film) from disappointingly only adapting two scenes from near the beginning of the film from the source material, devising a wholly different plot, and neglecting the themes of humanity's relationship to the natural world and the criticism of anthropocentrism that were central to VanderMeer's novel and are poorly represented in film compared to other media such as literature and television. All this leads to two comments: this is proof of the underrepresentation of true intellectualism in film criticism and begs the question of whether Mark Kermode does any reading.
A funny one to measure. I found it bloated, self important and pretentious to watch, however the performance's were quite good and I found myself analysing it long after I'd left the cinema. Worth a watch, just don't expect the intensity delivered by that first trailer...
So what did you think of the new one?
Not sure it is fair to be comparing, Guadagnino has been very clear to say this is a cover version with his spin rather than a remake. I saw it as film of cinematic indulgence which clearly made no attempt to win over anyone on the fence. The people making made what they wanted to see and made a lot of it. I loved it, and honestly partially because I could tell many would hate it and that it was clear the people making it didn't care. It's backed heavily by MUBI which should be a huge indicator to anyone aware of them where the priorities lie.
Whether it's a remake or a "cover version", it's going to be compared to the original. If he didn't want it to be compared to Argento's film, then he should have made his own original movie.
@@DorianCairne, no. Directors should be free to retell stories they love in their own styles and have it judged on it's own merit and not on its ability to mimic something they never intended to mimic.
@@jakeinator21 Story? Suspiria has an extremely thin plot. It's a film defined by its visuals. If this guy wanted to make a similar film with his own unique flair, he could easily have made another movie about witches and simply said it was INSPIRED by Suspiria, without riding the fame of the movie's title. I mean, do you think the only way to make a movie about vampires is by remaking Nosferatu?
So your justification for judging "remakes" based off comparison to the original is that they could have made a different movie? I don't follow your logic. Why should a filmmaker paying homage to a film they love by recreating it with their own style have their film judged based on comparison to the original and not its own merit? Why do they not deserve to have their film examined for what it is and not what it wasn't? Do you apply the same logic to music? Do you judge Johnny Cash's version of Hurt as bad simply because it was acoustic/western style and not industrial/alternative rock like the original?
It just seems to me that you are either partial to the original film or simply didn't like the new one, and are making generalized statements about how something should be received as some weird form of gatekeeping.
@@jakeinator21 Funny you should mention musical covers - everyone's having a go at Kermode for comparing this film to the original, but I dare you to find me a single review of a song cover that doesn't bring up the original.
And yes, that is absolutely my "justification". I'll just ask this directly: if Guadagnino wanted to make his own movie that would be based solely off its own merits, then why did he opt for a remake of a classic instead of his own original movie? Other than the obvious fact that the familiar name would draw attention to it, I mean.
If you are a fan of the original version of Suspiria as Mark is then I don't see the problem with him explaining why he didn't enjoy the remake through the lens of what made the original special. II don't know how that can be avoided if you are a film critic.
I laughed about Argento 'flirting with the ridiculous' and the 'What!?' moments in some of his films. Makes me want to relive all the joyous 'What!?' moments in Phenomena all over again.
Also the 'higher and higher' clip cast my mind back to my favourite scene from Argento's 'Sleepless', also involving a ballerina wearing Pointe shoes.
It's funny, I agree with a lot of what Mark said, but even with everything he said, I still do prefer the modern Suspiria. why is that, I wonder.
Sounds like the director made an essay on the original Suspiria rather than remaking it, which sounds fantastic to me. Suspiria didn't need to be remade, but I love the idea of it being enlarged upon. Looking forward to this !
The original Suspiria was visually stunning but very silly.
That was the point! 🤦♀️
@8:20 I disagree, what was fresh about the setting of this film was providing an environment where the actors' decisions can make sense. This is something we have to suspend our reasoning for most films to make their plot work, but providing a heavy handed background, under which the characters can come to the conclusion they do helps a lot to get immersed in the experience and the vision of all the creators. That said, the humour and some CGI near the end didn't work for me, but the rest of the film and especially its setting of choice to retell a simple story was fascinating.
I love a film with an Aztec sensibility
So did you like it or not Mark?
I already know that Thom Yorke has killed it with this soundtrack, and his first time composing for a movie as well! We don’t deserve him.
I'm a huge Argento fan (until the 90s at least) but I've never been a huge fan of Suspiria, certainly not in the evangelical way it seems to be revered. I much prefer Deep Red, Tenebrae and even Inferno, which I think does a much better job of doing all the things Suspiria gets high praise for. That said I was utterly baffled at the prospect of it being remade, but the more I hear about it the more I want to see it. I'm not at all surprised that MK didn't like it and I think the review reveals his reasons why as well, but it's clear the director is trying to do something very different which surely is the main objective of a remake. It's not like Suspiria has a brilliant story that needs to be retold, the challenge is to take the bare bones plot and infuse it with a different mood which it sounds like it does. To criticize it for not being Argento is just odd. But I do think 2 1/2 hours does sound a bit daunting.
yeah I love argento's 70s/80s output but I'd put deep red and tenebrae way above suspiria.
@@CS-mo7xp i agree 100% also good is "bird with the crystal plummage"
I love the original & the new version as well 10 out of 10...
I've seen it twice, and on second viewing I came away totally convinced it's a movie in its own right. It is what Suspiria should be in 2018, and I can't fault it for that. It focuses more on the horror of the reality of the original movie's setting, and the depth of the constant struggle of chaotic forces in our lives that often seems almost supernatural. For that it's a little clever.
I can, however, fault it for distracting me with Tilda Swinton as an old man. If you can look past the prosthetics and the horrible voice work of her in that role, see it again without the anticipation and expectation of watching the original.
i'm 8 minutes in and don't know what he thinks about the film!
He hates it.
welcome to kermoees vague reviews
disagree completely.... i despise remakes, as a philosophy .... and this one actually won over my prejudice... it is absolutely not too long... it is the right length for the mood it presents and what it tries to accomplish.... the old man make up was a big turn off for me, but the story being stretched to 2.5 hours was a non issue because i was enjoying the movie
5 Star review from Robbie Collin... can we have another Kermode V Collin debate please?
Did the original suspria have a subliminal cuts. I swore I thought I seen one of scary eyes.
I wish he would talk more about the subject matter than the style and his love for Argento.
So...how was the film? I can't listen to him go on about the other film.
Unpopular opinion here but Argento's Suspiria is seriously overrated, sensation and visual splashiness for its own sake. A big pretty package that's empty inside. Guadagnino's remake may be pretentious and self-important but he put more thought and context into each scene than Argento did in his whole movie. And the idea that Argento's film is 'pure" cinema is undercut by that completely ridiculous scene with the "psychiatrist" (and what kind of psychiatric professional buys into the idea of the OC-CULT?). It's one scene that betrays Argento's narrative weakness; no amount of window dressing could make up for what was a really empty and vacuous film.
I couldn't get involved with either version on first attempt (made it to about the fifteen minute mark with both), despite being a huge and eclectic horror fan.
Now that I've finally experienced these two different versions of a similar story, I'm glad that I did. Between the two of them is a fantastic film, although both lack qualities when scrutinised individually.
If the acting from the 2018 version, along with its dance performances, were present in the 1977 film, it'd have been flawless. The Dario Argento version is, to my mind, far superior. It's more focused, less on-the-nose, far creepier, has the more palpable atmosphere, and, despite Thom Yorke's best efforts, the better soundtrack.
I appreciated the choreography of the Guadagnino version, the feminism and overt sexuality, and the last 10 or so minutes, but in the end the film was far too bloated with irrelevant information about the time-period (as Mark bemoans), and on occasion skirted awfully close to the ridiculous (the takeover in the basement).
Incidentally, the 1977 film was an undiscovered classic for me all these years! And the soundtrack!
In Fabric, also reviewed by Mark, has a similar creepiness (and soundtrack) to it, if you're looking for something else...
I prefer the 2018 version myself. I watched the original Suspiria for the first time on 4k on the big screen around the time the remake was about to come out. I dig the soundtrack and set design and cinematography but everything this was blah. I really wanted to like In Fabric. I loved the trailer but found the stories in the anthology to be half baked.
@@AdrianMendoza23 I've grown to appreciate the 2018 version on repeat viewings, too.
In Fabric is a weird one, for sure, and you need to in the mood for its dream-like state.
I think the musical scene involving the mannequin is creepy and mesmerising in equal measure.
This is the first mixed review I've heard on TH-cam for this film so I'm still seeing it
This isn’t so much about the new film as it’s a review of the old one! I hope you enjoy it, I found it exquisite
@@castoputa i agree this aint barely a review of a film
@@luna6093-d6c So it's worth the little over an hour trip to see it
Mega MovieZ In my opinion, it's not worth spending 5 hours of your life going to see this film, but those defending it here would clearly disagree.
The original Suspiria is pure sensory overload for your reptilian brain, and the remake unsettles you through your conscious brain, becoming more unsettling and interesting the more you think about it. The remake has the advantage of being able to play with your expectations, but they're both masterpieces.
If I had to pick between the two, I'd have to go with the remake. The reason I'm with it is because at least this version actually gets to the point with the witches and actually invested me on what was going to happen at the end. The original has the problem (retrospectively) of keeping the witches a mystery which some will find slow and boring considering it's been done to death in horror.
When I watched the original I knew that the teachers were killing the students all because of an episode of Billy & Mandy in which Billy joins a ballet school where the head mistress is a witch who harvests souls. It shows how ingrained this trope is in horror films that it comes off as dated at this point because we know what's going to happen.
Overall I thought the remake was fine. The acting was pretty good (especially from Swinton), the dance choreography is well done, the editing and cinematography succeeded in homaging 70's film making techniques. It has problems though like the RAF/Nazi backdrop (which I feel is shoehorned into the story), the film could have been cut in a few spots making the run time more shorter (2hrs at most) and the radiohead soundtrack really doesn't do much for me.
Both films have their strengths and weaknesses but overall the remake is just a better story.
What is up with the suit case?
Check out " Suspiria - The Fake Blood Soundtrack Version" on here. A "re-imagined" soundtrack over the full original movie. Headphones advised.
I usually agree with everything you say, but this was a film based mainly on the originals lives of the people extended, the story is basically the same, it just depicts a more in depth realisation and connection to the characters
The constant imagery of the wall reminded me of Possession. I really enjoyed this take on Suspiria but the climax was robbed by Thom Yorke's vocals :/ really took the wind out of it for me
You're so right. Possession is most definitely a major influence on Suspiria 2018.
What does a Mark Kermode review mean? It means that past a certain age you are not allowed to wear leather jackets; that any variant in the spelling of a person's name is risible; that creative persons should not be TOO creative - they should accept clear genres - unless their 'major work' is in the past, & it has become accepted as a standard. No pretensions allowed, in fact, unless it is wearing a certain kind of retro suit with a certain retro haircut. Everything is graded by his reasonable, blokish normalcy.
So why are you here then?
The film - obviously.
In the Goblin original score, they actually chant the word "Witch" all the way through the main theme music.
As an American, I've always preferred Spanish and French horror - they're just much more visceral about their horror (WITH the intellect as well) REC and REC 2 are my all time fav horror flicks and Martyrs really messed me up. With that said, I was never a big fan of Italian horror - always stayed away from Fulci flicks and I was never a big Argento fan. But this new Suspiria film was incredible, I was blown away by it and it wa much better than the original. It may even take the spot as my all my time fav horror flick.
Aah now ... this is interesting! I remember very little about the original but, I was only 16 & something deep in my memory tells me it was pretty good. Also, you mentioned Martys, which worked for me (haven't seen REC I dont't think).
As a result of this review AND what you said, I'm in two minds about whether to watch it or not. It''s just popped up on my Amazon Prime so, if it's free I guess I can't complain.
@@razzle1964 REC and REC 2 should not be missed, both excellent horror films.
@@user-kt6fp8me6h Thank you for the tip. Pretty sure I've not seen them. I'll hunt them down.
I'm the same age as Kermode & grew up with (and loving) the same horrors as him - Hammer movies on TV aged 11yrs etc. It's awfully frustrating, trying to find good stuff, when you've exhausted every flick on Netflix, Amaxon Prime & Sky cinema, lol (and, like you I'm sure, I've sat thru' some really dire dross to find good ones).
I enjoyed it. I can't stop thinking about it. Stop telling me how I feel. Thank you.
I think all of Mark's points about the "story" and "tone" are valid....................but how many other horror movies have someone getting tied into a literal knot through magical ballet powers? I mean, come on Mark.
Argento's (and Daria Nicolodi's, it's fair to say) Suspiria had some flaws, but it worked. From the very beginning til the end it was a journey in one direction, without single needles scene.
New version is blend of dull drama and poor horror. Going in lots of directions and at the end gets nowhere. Disappointment.
I'm a huge fan of the original and was super excited when i heard there was a remake, but seriously! Highly disappointed. The remake lacked the essence of what made the original so good and as the reviewer mentioned the original had immaculate style and attention to detail, the over saturated lighting and the chilling sound track. I felt so underwhelmed while watching this which just ended in frustration. If your going to attempt to remake one of the most iconic cult horror films its got to be good, this doesn't even come close to that. Which makes me sad, Tilda you were wasted in this movie :(
I'm looking forward to this one actually.
I haven't got the best relationship with the original as it was one of those "scariest movie ever" that let me down on first viewing. Great to look at, but I think Argento did better later on with Phenomena and Opera.
I found Inferno a bit frustrating to be honest, but it's been a while. Maybe it's time for a rewatch...
Thanks. During my arcade days KoF96 was the only game I never saw anyone beat. Goenitz got in the way all the time!
ok but what is an "Aztec" feel?
Well made 'interpretation' but personally too long winded, serious and oppressive in its aim to not copy the originals flamboyant colorful style. love many story concepts and performances in this version but I dont think Dakota had the gravity for certain later scenes and there's some big gaps in the narrative to back up the ending (which i still loved in many ways). The old guy's arc is almost unnecessary, he could have been almost completely removed and it wouldn't have damaged the movie for me. Marks nailed this review. There's half a great horror movie in here and ANOTHER poignant post war drama stuffed in. Dance scenes were ace though, the music and visuals combining beautifully in these moments.
This is how I feel about cape fear
Completely agree with Mark, and I’m not even that big of a fan of the original Suspiria.
Hell will freeze over, pigs will fly... when Mark reviews a film and doesn't make one reference to The Exorcist.
Pretty much the best remake, ever. It's awesome.
Tilda Swinton is playing the Ancient One from Dr. strange again.
He prefers the original. Then blah blah blah ........
Suspiria 2018: music by thawm York
Suspiria 1977: music by the goblins
I was quite enjoying it until the climax. I felt it totally derailed. The entire audience completely snapped out of the film and started snickering and talking. You have a good movie with a bad ending, but then you have a good movie with a bad ending that ruins the experience before it
.. The ending was the best part !!
agree
Mr Kermode, are you aware of a streaming service called Shudder? I believe you might like it. Also, I agree with some of your points about this remake. I found some of it unnecessary and I suppose a little pretentious. But I still really enjoyed it, not sure I love it like the original.
Please do "The House That Jack Built"
Great review. I think the new version suffers from all the issues Mark brings up. Perhaps if the current version had not had the benefit of some stylistic ties to the original, it might have suffered even more. Mark's right to bring up the Argento masterpiece.
Mark is clearly too attached to the original.
even as a big argento fan I don't rate suspiria that much compared to most of his other 70s/80s work... deep red and tenebrae are far better imo (and I hope those don't get remade!)
@HEY 4Q2 yeah don't think I've ever made it all the way thru Inferno... and only watched Phenomena twice. I did however kind of think Sleepless from 2000 recaptured a bit of his classic style.
also The Card Player is so bad its good! :)
@HEY 4Q2 yeah I mean he could've stopped making films at Tenebrae (my personal fav) and I think his reputation / influence today would be about the same tbh
@HEY 4Q2 strange isn't it. I think Fulci and Lenzi are 2 other italian directors who seemed to randomly go from good to bad throughout their careers. (New York Ripper being my favourite Fulci flick, followed by Lizard In A Woman's Skin - 10 years seperating those 2 films!)
7:37 He said "Skimp"!! : )
unpopular opinion i liked it more then the 1977 suspiria
Thom York's name is pronounced "Tom York"
WHAT SONG IN THE CLIP FROM THE MOVIE???
Just check out the soundtrack of the film.
Which Richard Stanley film is teh 'Mode referring to? Hardware?
Ok, I can see it.
Sorry for being an ignoramus, but can anyone tell me what he's referring to in The Argento?
Great review as always from Mark, but it really sounds like the original hurts Mark's perspective on this film, and I think if he was some how able to just shake off the comparisons to the original, he may take it for what it is, which is an entirely different story. The way Guadagnino explained it beautifully is: Reflecting the story of Susie and the witches through the division and anger in Berlin at the time. So while Mark criticizes it for being a shorter movie, within a longer movie, weighed down by the political atmosphere at the time, I would argue that the stuff that Mark thinks ways down the film, IS the story this time. The film is really about 1977 Berlin, told through the perspective of Susie and the witches at the dance academy. I loved it, and I hope Mark reevaluates it again with a different perspective.
Thom Yorke
And one of the great smoking movies, which I always champion, in part given the time and place.
wow i think this is kermode's most accurate review
I agree. It was long, tiresome and full of superfluous sequences. Tilda Swinton as the old fella was very distracting and unnecessary. It's never good when an hour before the film finishes one wonders "when will this pain end".
Ian Vaughan Jones I walked out. Seemed never ending
Finally saw this film... and I'm utterly astounded... why is Mayo such an absolute prat and a philistine?