Mother! (2017)

[BetterButter]

Quote

A couple's relationship is tested when uninvited guests arrive at their home, disrupting their tranquil existence. From filmmaker Darren Aronofsky (Black Swan, Requiem for a Dream), mother! stars Jennifer Lawrence, Javier Bardem, Ed Harris and Michelle Pfeiffer in this riveting psychological thriller about love, devotion and sacrifice.

[Spartan Girl]

This looks so creepy.  Sure to be as much as a mind-fuck as Black Swan.

[RedheadZombie]

I have tried to be spoiled on this movie, because that's how I roll with horror films, but I cannot find even a hint of one.  I just read an article which shows comparison posters between mother! and Rosemary's Baby, and they're surprisingly similar.  The trailer does have that RB vibe, of Jennifer Lawrence becoming increasingly paranoid and hysterical, while everyone else remains calm, if a little sinister.  So my wild guess, based on nothing, is Michelle Pfeiffer needs a baby and Jennifer is chosen.  Maybe more and more people arrive to her house because they're anticipating the big event.  I don't remember if we ever see enough of JL in the trailer to reveal if she's pregnant.  My alternate guess is the movie poster shows JL laying down with an image of the house in her head, and everything she thinks happens is in her head.  But that seems too literal. 

ETA:  Just watched the trailer above, and the word "protozoa" is flashed on the screen.  WTF?  Is this going to involve an alien element?

Edited September 3, 2017 by RedheadZombie
Protozoa

[JBC344]

My initial guess is that Michelle Pfeiffer and Ed Harris are the parents of Jennifer Lawrence, who is suffering from a mental breakdown, her husband played by Javier brought her to the country to get well.  Michelle and Ed are playing the role as houseguests to be close to their daughter. The "craziness/horror" are Jennifer's mental delusions.  So Michelle would actually be the titled "Mother!"

Or

I also got the "Rosemary's Baby" vibe from it.  Not a remake but more along the lines of Javier is some cult leader, Michelle and Ed are followers with Jennifer as the unsuspecting wife. 

Protozoa is actually Darren's production company.

[RedheadZombie]

That makes sense about Protozoa.  I adore Ed Harris and It will be hard for me if he turns out to be a bag guy.  I've read speculation that Jennifer and Michelle play the same person, that sounds a bit silly.  It's coming out so soon, and will be the first horror film in a while I see without being spoiled first.  I often pull up Wikipedia and spoil myself while watching.

It seems like the film is exceptionally hard on Jennifer's character.  And I've read rumors that DA, known to treat female actors shabbily, was especially tough on Jennifer. 

[ClareWalks]

9 minutes ago, RedheadZombie said:

t seems like the film is exceptionally hard on Jennifer's character.  And I've read rumors that DA, known to treat female actors shabbily, was especially tough on Jennifer. 

I am curious about that, since Jennifer Lawrence and DA are now dating, according to Vogue Magazine (which I hate, but they have a big feature on J-Law this month).

[Dejana]

I haven't read them but there are spoilers about mother! floating around, and the reactions are hilarious. Apparently, this is not going to be general audience or Academy friendly.

[RedheadZombie]

4 hours ago, ClareWalks said:

I am curious about that, since Jennifer Lawrence and DA are now dating, according to Vogue Magazine (which I hate, but they have a big feature on J-Law this month).

There are relentless rumors that DA is the father of Natalie Portman's baby during the making of Black Swan, but I don't choose to believe that.  But there was talk of how he treated Jennifer during the filming of mother!, involving screaming at her, and doing endless and unnecessary retakes. I guess he believes in method acting where you have to literally feel the torment to act it.  I can't link efficiently on my phone, but the story was covered by Celebitchy, where the writers tend to be well researched and careful about their gossip.   If you want, you can go to their site and search by Jennifer Lawrence or DA's name. 

[JBC344]

8 hours ago, RedheadZombie said:

There are relentless rumors that DA is the father of Natalie Portman's baby during the making of Black Swan, but I don't choose to believe that.  But there was talk of how he treated Jennifer during the filming of mother!, involving screaming at her, and doing endless and unnecessary retakes. I guess he believes in method acting where you have to literally feel the torment to act it.  I can't link efficiently on my phone, but the story was covered by Celebitchy, where the writers tend to be well researched and careful about their gossip.   If you want, you can go to their site and search by Jennifer Lawrence or DA's name. 

Wow, I'm really surprised by that.  I love Darren Aranofsky and had no idea he was like that as a director.  I've never heard any of this information before.  If anything  during Black Swan I know it was Natalie's hardest role but not in any demeaning way.  I never heard one bad word said about him

Jennifer better watch it, she seems to get off by having these masochistic relationships with directors; David O Russell and now Aronofsky.  

[Dejana]

20 hours ago, RedheadZombie said:

There are relentless rumors that DA is the father of Natalie Portman's baby during the making of Black Swan, but I don't choose to believe that.  But there was talk of how he treated Jennifer during the filming of mother!, involving screaming at her, and doing endless and unnecessary retakes. I guess he believes in method acting where you have to literally feel the torment to act it.  I can't link efficiently on my phone, but the story was covered by Celebitchy, where the writers tend to be well researched and careful about their gossip.   If you want, you can go to their site and search by Jennifer Lawrence or DA's name. 

I never believed those rumors for a second but people who trade in gossip tend to gravitate to the more exciting option (famous director's affair with leading lady leads to breakup with Oscar winning actress!) rather than the duller/less celebrity-packed one (leading lady falls for male ballet dancer co-star you've probably never heard of).

 

I looked and the Celebitchy story is regurgitating an item from Star Magazine. Which is not to say tabloids are never right but they are known to embellish. But celebs have been willing to go on the record about his antics, so it wouldn't be shocking if the reality were worse. Here's an incident Jennifer mentioned to Vanity Fair:

Quote

One moment during filming got so intense, Lawrence says, that she hyperventilated and dislocated a rib. “I ended up getting on oxygen,” she says. “I have oxygen tubes in my nostrils, and Darren’s like, ‘It was out of focus; we’ve got to do it again.’ And I was just like, ‘Go fuck yourself.’ ”

 

Emma Watson shared a  similar story of Aronofsky wanting her to push through illness on the set of Noah:

Quote

"Because the film has a pro-environment message, Darren didn't want anyone drinking from plastic water bottles on set either. So that made things slightly harder.

"Everything we used had to be recycled or recyclable. Having no water bottles on set at five in the morning, when you're exhausted and delirious, wasn't ideal. I was so tired one morning I picked up a mug from my trailer and drank some stagnant water that had been there for the duration – so three months. I was so ill."

The actor was then shocked when the Black Swan film-maker told her to "use" her illness in a scene. "I came in the next day and was like: 'Darren, I don't think I can do this, I'm really sick,'" she said. "He was like: 'Use it for the scene.' And I turned round to the bus and was like: 'Is he joking? He is joking right?' and there was deadly silence."

Edited September 4, 2017 by Dejana

[BetterButter]

[snickers]

I don't know what to think.  Originally I wanted to see this, but now I'm not so sure.  JLaw said it is either a love it or hate it movie.  I liked Black Swan, despite it being weird as hell.  So far it is doing well on Rotten Tomatoes.  The more I hear about the plot though, the weirder it sounds.......

[Enero]

I keep seeing the previews for this and my first thought was JLaw is way too young for this role...again.  HB looks almost old enough to be her grandfather instead of her husband. 

I am curious to see Ed Harris and Michelle Pfiefer though, both of whom haven't been on the big screen in a while, at least as far as I know. Still I don't think they'll be enough to get me to see this. Maybe when it makes it to ON DEMAND I'll give it a shot. ?

[MarkHB]

The latest ads I've seen definitely give it a Rosemary's Baby vibe, and the stripped down cast list "Mother," "Him," etc. adds to that.

[Petunia13]

On 9/4/2017 at 2:44 PM, Dejana said:

I never believed those rumors for a second but people who trade in gossip tend to gravitate to the more exciting option (famous director's affair with leading lady leads to breakup with Oscar winning actress!) rather than the duller/less celebrity-packed one (leading lady falls for male ballet dancer co-star you've probably never heard of).

I consider Daniel Craig an upgrade. Go Rach! ??

[vavera4ka]

I saw it yesterday and I loved it. It's my fav movie of the year so far. I only disliked camera work - too in your (or rather JLaw's lol) face and shaky.

Jennifer Lawrece was genius in it. Forget everything she did before, she KILLED this role. There's better be at least a nomination for her out of this.

The movie is not horror. I repeat, it's NOT horror.

It's and allegory, a parable, a reflection on society and because of how terrifying society is the movie is terrifying at times. I felt assaulted during some scenes.

Idk if it's a spoiler, but I'd tag it anyway. On one hand Aronofsky, Lawrence and Bardem talk about it at every press event, but idk if you'd like to see if you can figure it out yourself or would rather know it. I noticed that upon exit out of the theater many people did not get it and thought the movie stupid. Later online I saw the same reaction, it went WAY over so many viewers' heads... I though it was rather obvious. I didn't know of it before the movie so I went and looked at how movie was promoted by the main people involved to see if I was supposed to get it or if I was supposed to go into the movie with this particular knowledge...

Spoiler

It's a biblical allegory. Bardem, the Poet is the Creator, Lawrence, his Muse is Nature, Mother Earth, whatever you'd like to call that image. Apply your knowledge of biblical stories to the movie and you will appreciate it on a whole new level.

Edited September 15, 2017 by vavera4ka

[GaT]

This movie sounds absolutely terrible to me. 

[Morrigan2575]

4 hours ago, vavera4ka said:

The movie is not horror. I repeat, it's NOT horror.

It's and allegory, a parable, a reflection on society and because of how terrifying society is the movie is terrifying at times. I felt assaulted during some scenes.

 

  Hide contents

It's a biblical allegory. Bardem, the Poet is the Creator, Lawrence, his Muse is Nature, Mother Earth, whatever you'd like to call that image. Apply your knowledge of biblical stories to the movie and you will appreciate it on a whole new level.

I had no desire to see the movie but, I had to know what it was all about. I came across this very spoilery (basically the entire plot of the movie explained in detail) review that describes exactly what you took away.

Mother! Explained (don't read if you don't want to be spoiled)

[GaT]

8 hours ago, Morrigan2575 said:

I had no desire to see the movie but, I had to know what it was all about. I came across this very spoilery (basically the entire plot of the movie explained in detail) review that describes exactly what you took away.

Mother! Explained (don't read if you don't want to be spoiled)

Thanks for that link. Now I know without any uncertainty, they don't make a big enough gun to force me to see this movie. 

Edited September 16, 2017 by GaT

[thuganomics85]

Well, critics might be divided/mixed, but we sure know how the majority of the audience goers felt: it got a rare F via CinemaScore.  Yikes!  But considering that some of the past "recipients" feature the likes of Solaris, Killing Them Softly, and Nicolas Cage's version of The Wicker Man ("Not the bees!"), there is a good chance that it will at least develop a cult following years from now.  Yay?

I still might see this since I love the cast and Aronofsky is rarely boring (Noah being an exception.)  But I guess it's good to know going in that might come out hating everything about it.  Good to know!

[AimingforYoko]

Usually, an 'F' Cinemascore means the audience did not get the movie they were expecting. Which means it was either marketed incorrectly, or was not possible to market correctly. 

[snickers]

I think one of the problems is they are marketing it as a horror movie when it's not, jlaw herself apparently said this (not being a horror movie). 

 

I had had to laugh, for a hot second it was certified fresh on RT-not anymore! I didn't know a movie could lose that status lmao 

[kiddo82]

I saw it last night with a friend of mine.  We both went in expecting a psychological thriller with a twist along the lines of Black Swan, the Sixth Sense, or even Shutter Island.  Between the two of us we both go the big messages but it wasn't until we googled it that 

Spoiler

the straight up allegory of the bible became apparent.  Yeah, Cain and Able and the flood we kinda pieced together but it was the little touchese we were missing like Ed Harris' wound where Adam's rib was taken and the diamond/crystal thing as the forbidden fruit in the garden of Eden.  Then the film progresses to more modern times and the symbolism is a little more obvious with the problems over overpopulation, all the inherent man made evils of society, not heeding mother nature's warnings, then finally mother having to end it all.

 

I didn't dislike it but it wasn't what I thought I was singing up for.  But I really don't know how you market this movie anyway.  And I didn't enjoy it as much as his other films.  Although, to be fair it's not really a film you enjoy even if you do know what you're getting into.  But I think my personal difference between this and say, Requiem for a Dream, is that Requiem is one of those movies that I'm glad I saw because it's so powerful but yet so disturbing that I never want to see it again.  Mother, on the other hand, is neither as powerful or disturbing, but I just have no desire to see it again.  (And for the record I couldn't wait to see Black Swan again.  And the Wrestler, while the most tonally different of all, is also one I appreciate multiple viewings of)

 

One thing I didn't read in my searches was 

Spoiler

The purpose of the blood stains reappearing on the floor.  I thought it was of particular interest because it was roughly the same size and shape of Nina's wound at the end of Black Swan and that (from what I've read) was supposed to symbolize her rebirth or progression to womanhood--however you want to take it--at the end of the film.  I wondered if in this film it was Aronofsky's way of foreshadowing the cyclical nature and supposed ongoing rebirth of creation.

Edited September 17, 2017 by kiddo82

[Corgi-ears]

I mean, good on Aronofsky for trying to popularize the Bible, it's such a little-known book.

[Mabinogia]

I had no real interest in seeing the movie because the trailer/commercials were so fucking pretentious, but I was curious what it was actually about, since the trailers/commercials don't tell you because if you know, they seem to think people either won't go see it, or the movie won't be as good? IDK why they chose to market it as something they don't want to actually tell you about but that kind of marketing always turns me off. 

Imagine my surprise when, upon reading the spoilers, the movie sounds even worse than I thought it would be! Hard pass here. I actually loved Black Swan, and I love Jen Lawrence, but nope. This just sounds....terrible.

[CofCinci]

I went to see this with my best friend. We looked at each other halfway through and signaled that we wanted to leave.  We left and snuck into Patti Cake$ for a second time. This film was tedious and pretentious. 

[MarkHB]

On 9/16/2017 at 8:44 PM, AimingforYoko said:

Usually, an 'F' Cinemascore means the audience did not get the movie they were expecting. Which means it was either marketed incorrectly, or was not possible to market correctly. 

I haven't seen it, but from the various descriptions, it's actually an art film about the missing/ignored element of the feminine divine in Judeo-Christian theology.  I'm not sure how one would market such a film, other than to Unitarian-Universalist seminaries and certain activist nuns.  :)

[johntfs]

I'm probably not going to see this movie, but I approve of it and I very much approve of Jennifer Lawrence's presence in it.  Let's face it, Lawrence could easily have built an entire multi-multi-millionaire career on Divergently Maze Running the Hunger Games as one of the X-Men: First Class Passengers.  Instead, along with pretty decent summer popcorn movies, she's willing to do stuff like Silver Linings Playbook, American Hustle, Serena, and, yes, this weird-ass thing. 

[GaT]

5 hours ago, MarkHB said:

it's actually an art film about the missing/ignored element of the feminine divine in Judeo-Christian theology.  

Wow, the more I hear about this film, the more I want to run away screaming from it LOL

[Macbeth]

On 9/16/2017 at 8:44 PM, AimingforYoko said:

Usually, an 'F' Cinemascore means the audience did not get the movie they were expecting. Which means it was either marketed incorrectly, or was not possible to market correctly. 

Yeah I read an article where the people really hated it.  And it was definitely not horror.  The best quotes were:

"This makes the Black Swan look like The Care Bears movie."

"When I die, I'll remember how much I fucking hated Mother."

Not good.  Not even enough fun to be celebrated as Camp.

I will watch it on demand - because I love Michelle Pfeiffer.  But wow.  I read another article where Michelle said that her character was described to her as a gargoyle.  She was insulted until she was told that she watches everything and doesn't miss a thing.  I think you should have gone with your first instinct Michelle and got out while you could.

Michelle if you want any hope of good parts - you have to do tv.  But I think tv is a little bit more of a commitment than she wants to give.

Edited September 19, 2017 by Macbeth

[raezen]

MichellePfeiffer is part way there, she just did The Wizard of Lies for HBO and she got an Emmy nomination. And honestly I'd much rather watch her in that then this film.

Edited September 19, 2017 by raezen

[Bruinsfan]

At least she probably got to hang out with some very talented actors between takes? It's got to be refreshing to talk to other people in the industry besides David E. Kelley.

[Macbeth]

16 hours ago, raezen said:

MichellePfeiffer is part way there, she just did The Wizard of Lies for HBO and she got an Emmy nomination. And honestly I'd much rather watch her in that then this film.

I saw that and loved it.  Michelle rocked in that movie.

[vavera4ka]

On ‎9‎/‎15‎/‎2017 at 1:21 PM, GaT said:

This movie sounds absolutely terrible to me. 

 

On ‎9‎/‎15‎/‎2017 at 2:53 PM, GaT said:

Thanks for that link. Now I know without any uncertainty, they don't make a big enough gun to force me to see this movie. 

 

On ‎9‎/‎18‎/‎2017 at 0:47 PM, GaT said:

Wow, the more I hear about this film, the more I want to run away screaming from it LOL

Tell me how you really feel lol

[Hybridcookie]

I watched it earlier, and didn't really like it, or get it (apart from some of the obvious symbolism), but weirdly, after reading up about it makes me like it a bit more; especially that Bustle article above.

I thought Jennifer Lawrence was great

[Robert Lynch]

The problem is that this movie was released prior to the movie It raking in the dough and killing any box office plans on the way.  That's what mainly happened. The movie had zero chance of performing well.

[raezen]

2 hours ago, Robert Lynch said:

The problem is that this movie was released prior to the movie It raking in the dough and killing any box office plans on the way.  That's what mainly happened. The movie had zero chance of performing well.

Marketing didn't help. So they open one week after thee record breaking horror film and they advertised it as a horror as well, which it isn't.  This could only bring on negative comparisons that shouldn't even exist IMO. I mean all you do by marketing to the same audience as It is bring in an audience that wishes they were seeing It.

[RedheadZombie]

I'm still interested in seeing this eventually, but I'm stuck on this spoiler:

Spoiler

Her baby being eaten.  Just how graphic is it?

[kiddo82]

On October 2, 2017 at 2:10 AM, RedheadZombie said:

I'm still interested in seeing this eventually, but I'm stuck on this spoiler:

  Reveal hidden contents

Her baby being eaten.  Just how graphic is it?

Not particularly.  But still disturbing.

[RedheadZombie]

8 minutes ago, kiddo82 said:

Not particularly.  But still disturbing.

Thank you.  I'm probably going to wait until it comes to the premium channels.  I don't think anyone I knew would appreciate the deeper meaning of the story, but I really enjoy the cast.  

[Duke2801]

Been dying to see this and finallly did. I refused to read any reviews beforehand because I didn't want to be spoiled. In hindsight I wish I had because I might have skipped it. 

I will say the first "act" - if you will -  is kind of interesting. It's tense and confusing. I guess I was expecting some kind of payoff or something for the confusion? But nope, we never really get any. 

The second part of the film is just chaotic and loud and I was ready for it to be over about 40 minutes before it actually was. 

[BetterButter]

[Spartan Girl]

So basically this movie is everyone going double fuckburger with cheese. Got it. Thanks, Honest Trailers, now I don't have to even watch it on TV.