Kinds of Kindness (2024) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
176 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
Essentially Lanthimosian
Over the last twenty years, Yorgos Lanthimos has cultivated an approach to filmmaking all his own. Like David Lynch, he has developed a singular, instantly identifiable style, which will, no doubt, one day be- if it is not already- referred to as Lanthimosian. Generally speaking, his films, though varied, usually explore power dynamics, featuring characters who speak in monotone, dialogue that is slightly unreal and darkly-comic narratives containing both bloodshed and nudity.

'Kinds of Kindness' bears all the hallmarks of his style. An anthology film- or triptych, as it is billed- its thematic content is open to numerous interpretations; the most obvious being control, as, in each of the three stories, it is examined in some form. In the first, a man tries to stand up to his domineering boss, with disastrous results. In the second, a policeman who is losing control of his life after the disappearance of his wife, finds things stranger upon her return. In the third and last, a woman working for a cult tries to find an individual who possesses a mysterious power.

With each tale, the case can be made that Lanthimos is examining a different aspect of control with regard to power dynamics and family structures. In the opening segment, Lanthimos explores the theme of subjugation and rebellion, highlighting the delicate balance between asserting oneself and the risks involved in challenging authority. Furthermore, once free of the controlling structure he had grown subconsciously comfortable in, the protagonist seeks to regain his subjugated position- a poignant exploration of agency and longing.

In the second story the interconnecting notions of power, manipulation and the illusion of control are explored, as the policeman desperately tries to control and restructure a situation he does not recognise, nor has power over. The irrational demands he makes of his wife in order for her to demonstrate her love to him reveal the lengths one can go to maintain control and stability in the face of perceived chaos.

The third story raises questions about the limits of human agency, following a woman who has voluntarily given up control of her life to a cult and, like the protagonist in the first story, tries to regain her subjugated position, once free. Perhaps Lanthimos is examining fears associated with autonomy, of agency and desire.

However, while control appears thematically in each of the stories, there could be more at play. One could, perhaps, see the film as a religious allegory, with the three stories mirroring the ideas of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Lanthimos may be inviting viewers to explore fears associated with autonomy and desire through this lens.

On the other hand, considering the sacrifice of autonomy for comfort or survival becomes a recurring motif; might the film be primarily about just that: sacrifice? Or is it merely concerned with how manipulation, dominance and submission intersect? The film's digressive structure allows ideas such as these to unfold without arriving at tidy conclusions, leaving room for as many abstractions and interpretations as there are viewers.

Whatever the case, the stories are entertaining and darkly funny, full of the deliciously weird Lanthimosian dialogue many have come to love. However, as each are so engaging, it is a pity that they are not three individual, full-length films in their own right. Lanthimos and co-writer Efthimis Filippou could have expanded any of them into a stand-alone feature and, by doing so, heightened their power and impact considerably.

Despite this, 'Kinds of Kindness' remains engaging and thought-provoking, boasting assured, grounded visuals that heighten the narrative's strangeness. Lanthimos and director of photography Robbie Ryan film proceedings with realism in mind, avoiding flashy stylisations and unconventional camera angles. This juxtaposition between the natural cinematography and the inherent oddness of the narrative is both atmospheric and effective.

Furthermore, Jerskin Fendrix's score contributes greatly to the film's atmosphere. Full of sinister choral chants, like the singing of a group of mad monks, it adds an element of suspense and drama, complementing the visuals and the narrative. In addition, Anthony Gasparro's production design, as well as Amy Beth Silver's minimalistic set decoration and Jennifer Johnson's muted costume design, are immersive, drawing viewers further in to Lanthimos's odd world, emphasising the uncanny.

The film features some of Lanthimos's frequent collaborators, such as Emma Stone, Willem Dafoe, Yorgos Stefanakos and Margaret Qualley, alongside newcomers to his oeuvre, like Jesse Plemons and Hong Chau. All play multiple characters across the three stories- bar Stefanakos- and excel in each. Plemons showcases his versatility, bringing a decency and humanity to even the cruellest of men. Stone, meanwhile, proves yet again that she is a perfect fit for Lanthimos's material, inhabiting her disparate, bizarre roles with a remarkable ease and naturality.

In addition, Dafoe demonstrates once more why many consider him one of the finest actors working today, bringing authenticity to three markedly different personalities; from the good and the bad to the ugly. Furthermore, Qualley and Chau both bring life to smaller roles, showcasing their considerable abilities, while Stefanakos- totally mute- has a strong screen presence, making his enigmatic character all the more intriguing.

Darkly funny and overwhelmingly odd, 'Kinds of Kindness' is a typically Lanthimosian venture. Featuring three entertaining tales of madness, control and manipulation, it is utterly unique. Boasting striking cinematography, as well as a stirring, sinister score, one won't easily forget it. With strong performances from all in the cast- especially Emma Stone, Jesse Plemons and Willem Dafoe- and comically off-beat dialogue, it is all kinds of weird- and all kinds of wonderful.
124 out of 158 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Drawn out, cold characters, not Lanthimos best film
donmurray295 July 2024
Giving this an 6/10 rating

Yorgos Lanthimos is one of those directors you are going to love or hate. 'Poor Things' was a really great film, earlier this year, garnered many awards, but this - 'Kinds of Kindness' is one that that I will not want to watch again, is just about good.

The film is split into three tales, all are good, well acted, good lines, it's all almost good, but for the actual characters them selfs, I just could not like any of them, these are people who I would not want to spend any time with at all, very unsettling humans, maybe that is the point? If so, it worked, but still, even with the real great laugh out loud moments, I still felt cold on this film.

It's not total crap, but in my mind, not Lanthimos' best. So 6/10 is the most I can give it, Could use trimming on time too.
36 out of 51 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Works because of Jesse Plemons, until it overindulges into nonsense
joris_w21 August 2024
Kinds of Kindness is divided into three stories with the same cast. A high level of absurdity and unpredictability mixed with some mystery make for a funny quirky thriller at first. Jesse Plemons excels at making this quirkiness work to the benefit of the movie.

Then the first chapter ends and turns into the second, shuffling things around, which already begins to demand some tolerance and patience from the viewer. Random things are inserted for shock value that amuse at first but then become to seem pretentious.

By the third chapter, the movie has overindulged in random ideas that are appear intended to impress without clear direction. At this point it's just absurdity for the sake of absurdity, which comes across as an underestimation of the critical viewer.

All in all, I enjoyed the first part, and think Plemons did great, but ultimately believe we could've picked a better movie, and intend to stay away from films by this particular director in the future.
26 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
I fell asleep
AntoineMatuttis8 July 2024
I fell asleep watching this film which is extremely rare for me. I was so glad once it was over and the credits rolled.

I am a fan of weird films and I loved "Poor Things", "The Lobster" and other movies Lanthimos has made. This one however was completely random and terribly boring - no consistent storyline, just random scenes playing on screen.

The first third of the movie was the strongest part but even this section of the movie was slow and even though I liked the message it wasn't as thought provoking as it could have been. The script was simply lacking.

Don't watch it in a cinema - watch it at home as second screen content while you do something more interesting.
68 out of 95 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Determination by others can be lethal
hmmyalex4 June 2024
Warning: Spoilers
This is a return to Lanthimos roots. The story is a punch in the stomach and the cinematography is interesting. There is the use of an echoing sound in most of scenes as if the sound is coming through a glass.

The movies follows three different stories with many things in common. The need to be accepted by others in a pathological manner. In the first this is the work environment where an employee wants to serve his boss at any costs, even killing a man. In the second story we see the need of a woman to prove her love to her husband. And in the third, the need of a woman to prove her cult the she belongs there.

In each story the circumstances escalade. In the first story our protagonist sacrifices his morals and wins his leader back. In the second story our protagonist sacrifices herself for the love of her husband and it is uncertain if she gets him back. And in the third our protagonist is being led to a terrible accident.

Each story is heavily invested in the power of sex in building the relationships and the loyalty.

Overall the movie talks about the consequences and the meaningless of following blindly any form of relationship. And the deep need for the human species to be accepted.
26 out of 44 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A director that felt eager to explore what he knows
Camerenth28 June 2024
Lanthimos has almost rubber banded back to his usual films from his Oscar winning film. A cynical look at various interpersonal relationships between, Boss and worker, Husband and Wife, and Cult leader and its members.

Being essentially an anthology film while having such strong connective tissues for each story. As such for a story like this, each story will be compared to the other and not all deliver the themes of the movie with such precision. Two of the stories provide strong mystery on top of a serious analysis of control and sexuality amongst the various character dynamics.

It's a mixed bag but something that feels strong in its direction but don't provide consistency in that direction.
19 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Review
chrysap3 June 2024
Warning: Spoilers
Concerning the first story, I think that it painted the picture of a scared man who did not trust himself, did not believe in his power and was therefore easily manipulated. This man was looking for a messiah, somebody who could tell him what to do, how to act and even what to eat and drink. The old guy is a narcissist who found an easy prey to manipulate. The narcissist ordered the young man toy kill R. M. F, because he wanted to ensure that he ( the young man ) would do anything he asked him to do. When the young man said no to killing R. M. F and decided to leave the narcissist, he found himself having trouble taking life in his own hands. He was isolated and completely alone, because that is exactly what a narcissist will do. Because the young man could not believe in his own power and felt so alone and isolated he decided to kill R. M. F. Killing R. M. F granted him a place back into the narcissist's abusive and controlling behavior.

R. M. F's death symbolizes the death of the free will of the young man who succumbed to the narcissist and therefore forever lost his own power.

The first story perfectly pictures what happens when we are looking for a messiah, an external force to save us. The only one who can save us is our self.

The second story, I believe, wanted to get across the same message. The young man was so dependent on his wife that he could not survive without her. While she was missing he was losing his mind. The problem was that he wanted her to be the exact same person she was when she met her. Even the slightest of change in her behavior made him lose his mind. On the other hand, the young woman was scared to leave her husband because he had been there for her in the past. So she stayed in this abusive relationship. The young man's demand towards his wife to give him her thumb and liver to eat for dinner symbolized the effort this young man was making to kill this version of his wife so he could get the previous version of his wife back.

The third story showed, in my opinion, how absurd it really is to be searching for a messiah.

This woman was looking for something so absurd and illogical that she abandoned her husband and her daughter. She took part in a cult which made her do illogical things and she did all of those things without thinking, without considering the absurdity of them all. Her husband tried trough a violent act to make her leave the cult. But even after being kicked out of the cult, the young woman continued searching for her messiah, only to find her and then lose her.

The last scene of the movie truly captures the message that the movie wants to get across.

There are no messiahs, no external forces that can save you. The only person that can save you is you and you need to believe in yourself enough to understand that you are your messiah.
105 out of 163 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
It's just weird, but it'll stay with me
DanLawson1461 July 2024
POSITIVES:

1) The cast are all great screen presences whom it's impossible to take your eyes off, and it's quite impressive how well the leads are all able to inhabit three different characters in the space of one film 2) The technical aspects of the film are all just as great as you'd expect from a Lanthimos film. The direction, cinematography, costume design, production design etc are all superb 3) I think the score deserves a special mention. It's incredibly melodramatic but in a great and memorable way 4) For a film that's just under three hours long, I was never bored or feeling like the time was passing slowly. The film feels a lot shorter than it actually is, which is definitely a good thing

NEGATIVES:

1) I always have and always will have a fundamental problem with anthology films like this. The fact that the film is made up of three separate stories, each of which are just under an hour long, means that it's impossible to ever actually latch on to or care about one specific story or character. None of the individual stories or individual characters are given enough time to breathe or be properly fleshed out, meaning everything feels rushed and not impactful. Each of the three stories could easily have been their own feature length film and that would've been more enjoyable I think 2) I found the film to be very cold and emotionless. All Lanthimos films come with odd line delivery at times, but in films like The Favourite or Poor Things you can still connect emotionally with the characters. Here, on the other hand, everyone seems to deliver their lines in a completely emotionless and staccato way, making the film feel quite robotic and without any depth 3) By the end of the film, I had grown incredibly frustrated at the fact that none of the three stories we've just sat through come with any kind of resolution or payoff. I'm not one of those people that needs everything laid out plainly and clearly to be able to understand it, but I also don't think it's fair to ask an audience to sit through almost three hours with you and then not really give them any answers about what they've just seen. Each one of the three stories just left me with more questions than answers and this grew irritating by the end of the film. Don't set up all these interesting characters and mysteries and then give us literally no answers or payoff about what has been happening or why it's been happening!
13 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Classic cynical lanthimos
redaste976 June 2024
This feels like the summer movie for lanthimos' fans 😂

Good piece of art, not at the level of poor things IMHO, but still very interesting. Honestly I felt like with poor things some reviews were searching too much into a "positive ending" or a woman empowerment change... While poor things also had some very dark moments almost like a parody... Well, here we have the usual lanthimos... The one who tends to give us the worst of humanity 😂

I still need to reflect a bit, especially on the 2nd story, but yeah, definitely great dry humour movie. Oh and some scenes will make people talk ... :) This is a funny movie but it's also very harsh

Emma (or Emily 😄) and Jesse and Willem are brilliant as always.
77 out of 124 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Intriguing if Inconsistent Anthology on the Dangers of Control
elicopperman1 July 2024
As of this summer season, a brand new film from Yorgos Lanthimos has been released called Kinds of Kindness. Following its premiere at the 77th Cannes Film Festival, in which lead actor Jesse Plemons won the award for Best Actor, the film got released in late June across America and has garnered fairly positive reviews. It's honestly shocking how quickly it came out after Lanthimos' last feature Poor Things, which not only came out to the states a mere six months ago, but also had Emma Stone as the primary lead. Regardless of any coincidences, it's best to see how this ambitious black comedy anthology has turned out for the whole world to see.

Executed as a triptych feature film, Kinds of Kindness details three distinct yet loosely connected storylines with mostly the same cast of Emma Stone, Jesse Plemons, Willem Dafoe, Margaret Qualley, Hong Chau, Joe Alwyn and Mamoudou Athie. Each storyline follows the multifaceted theme of control and how human beings cannot fight against it enough before returning to it and resulting in a lack of satisfaction in their lives. While each segment tells a completely different narrative, they are all connected with the anonymous person known as R. M. F. And thus are only connected within the essential absurdities going on throughout the overall feature. Due to the film's structure, it may be hard for most people to tie down what the film is saying as a whole, but the filmmakers and cast manage to keep the blending of deadpan humor and absurdist tragedy concise enough tonewise within each segment that it could at least leave you talking more and more in the end. Although this film relies largely on its ensemble cast to carry Lanthimos and co-writer Efthimis Filippou's complicated screenplay, the intricate cinematography, stream of consciousness-like editing and haunting score are just as welcoming for viewers.

Now as for the segments themselves, the first one entitled "The Death of R. M. F." details corporate lackey Robert Fletcher who follows every order from his boss Raymond, only for his life to fall apart when he refuses to do one that is life threatening. Every conceivable aspect of Robert's own life is executed like a tragic moral of not biting the hand that feeds, complete with the man's complicated morals on murder, his marriage failing rapidly and how his own position could be broken at a whim. In addition to Jesse Plemons nailing Robert's desperate emotional state, this segment may be the most grounded in the whole feature due to its relatable premise and concise theme on how losing control can fundamentally break a person. The second segment, "R. M. F. Is Flying", details a police officer named Daniel whose wife Liz returns home after being lost at sea. Because Daniel doesn't believe his wife is who he knows her as, he ends up pushing Liz to prove her loyalty to him which results in truly horrific outcomes. Although Plemons and Emma Stone are giving this segment their all, this segment may be the weakest in the film due to its confusing moral ambiguity. It does at least offer so much needed surreal comedy, which was definitely lacking in the first segment.

Finally, the third segment entitled "R. M. F. Eats a Sandwich" details two cult members Emily (Stone) and Andrew (Plemons) trying to find an unknown woman who can bring the dead back to life. On top of this segment being the longest in the entire feature, there's arguably a lot more going on in this one storywise, complete with Emily obsessing over a woman she saw in her dreams who she believes is the "one" to getting drawn back to her estranged daughter and abusive husband. The cult itself is focused on reversing death and thus this segment possibly ties the film together through its absurd deconstructive look at the danger of seeking autonomy. Because cults themselves are usually made to control others for their odd concepts and morals, a lot of interpretation within this segment's storyline could be the disturbing nature of whether to be a part of something seemingly special or going against it. It's arguably weirder than the first two segments and nowhere near as brutally relatable or questionably humorous as either of them, but the characters themselves are endlessly fascinating based on how their own roles either make or break others around them. It's possible that at least one of them will leave you wondering what is up with their whole lives.

So while Kinds of Kindness may be a bit too absurd and surreal for its own conceptual intrigue, the cast and intricate filmmaking qualities do tie it together well enough as an admirably ambitious anthology worth checking out at least once. Compared to Lanthimos' more narratively concise films like The Favourite and the aforementioned Poor Things, this one might leave as many people scratching their heads in bewilderment as it will leave others contemplating the thematic qualities surrounding it. Regardless of where you stand on this film, it is admirable to see an absurdist filmmaker like Lanthimos unleash his vision internationally with fewer restrictions.
12 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Confused mess
bobtastic_arnold30 June 2024
Warning: Spoilers
First of its not A film, it's 3 short films. The plots have some themes that cross over and it's the same actors in each of the films but there playing different characters. The main trailer being shown for the film only really covers the 3rd of the shorts so it's not a real representation of what your going to see. To be fair I don't think there is a trailer you could make for the films that would give a fair showing of what to expect. Of the 3 stories I preffered the 3rd one.

The acting is pretty good but in the directors usual off centre style, thats something some people like, plenty wont.

The look of the films is interesting but thats about it really.

Its an in coherent mess of thought put onto the screen.

If you watched the last few films the director made this isnt it, this is more like his original work Dogtooth and it's way out there.
59 out of 68 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Lanthimos back to his roots
Weird, awkward, oldschool Lanthimos is back! His latest movies were extremely commercial, and now he's back to his roots with this low budget anthology of a movie. Three extremely crazy episodes that feel like Black Mirror episodes, "Kinds of Kindness" is a movie that explores human relationships with a significant other, with a boss and employer, different power dynamics of each relationship and the power that sex has in our lives and in the formation of our relationships. It's an absurd movie, very weird, and you vibe along with it realising that nothing is gonna ever make total sense and that's fine. I liked it a lot but it surely is not meant for a wide audience.
55 out of 93 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
looking for the easy connection
SnoopyStyle29 August 2024
The team of Yorgos Lanthimos and Efthimis Filippou brings three stories of surreal darkness and people behaving poorly. Margaret Qualley, Jesse Plemons, Hong Chau, Willem Dafoe, and Mamoudou Athie play different characters in each of the three stories.

Coming into this, I didn't know that this is an anthology movie. The first story is interesting as I tried to figure out the premise. And then it ended. That surprised me. The second story has an intriguing changeling mystery. I just wish that they resolve that part of the story better. The last story is the least compelling. It's a cult. It's already weird. Being weird adds nothing. It does have one surprise that interested me, but the last story is mostly blah.

Most of my brain power ended up looking for a connection between all three stories. There are definite similarities, but there is no easy defining theme. Sure, there is the surrealism, the darkness, and the ugly human behavior. In a sense, that is getting in the way of enjoying this movie. My main conclusion is to split this up into three movies and I don't necessarily need the last one to be made. Each one is about half of a movie. I can see the first two stories getting expanded into full movies. The third one could be a movie, but it needs something more interesting.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
No depth, no point, nonsensical waste of time.
bowandarrow-169735 July 2024
I've never been saddened by good actors participating in a piece of work, until I watch this thing. Not creative, not intuitive, no intuition, absolutely no depth, no point, complete nonsense. If there was a silver lining on the nonsense, I would mention that. However, there is not. To say that we left unsatisfied, would be an understatement. If one would like to waste a few hours of their life, then watch this film. Honestly, other than the cast of actors, there is not a single good aspect of this movie. This is not art, because there is nothing creative or artistic about nonsense, with no story, no scheme, plot. Chaotic nothingness. That's it..
74 out of 90 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
I think the director was high on his own farts
Degree71 July 2024
It was 3 hours of nonsense that could've been cut down into a Netflix short, although it was more watchable when it didn't take itself so seriously and had more humour like in the first segment. Emma Stone sank the whole thing in the final 2 hours.

The movie works when it's approaching the surrealism of a Buñuel film, e.g. Exterminating Angel, but then in the final couple segments it devolved into long scenes of Emma Stone randomly talking to people about dogs on an island, or trying to raise the dead, with stiff line delivery.

The director punctuates the boredom with random acts of violence, orgies, nudity, and animal abuse.

It was at the 2 hour mark where I wondered if this is really what the Hollywood elite does on their off-time, and they made a home movie about their debauchery as a tax write-off for Fox Searchlight. We did get to see a very nice yacht and some houses that probably belonged to one of the producers.
82 out of 130 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Brutal Triptych
cutie712 July 2024
Weird, but make it Yorgos weird 😂 As someone who adores everything he makes, I loved "Kinds of Kindness" as well. The film is a brutal triptych fable, intertwining three distinct (yet interconnected) stories: a man without choice striving to take control of his life, a policeman grappling with the eerie return of his wife who was missing at sea, and a determined woman searching for a person with a unique gift destined to become a spiritual leader. The excellent performances by the cast bring each bizarre scenario to life, making the surreal narrative feel both real and deeply emotional.

Full disclosure: "Kinds of Kindness" is not a movie for everyone, and I didn't love it as much as I loved "Poor Things." However, the film's ability to stay with you long after it's over is undeniable. The unsettling yet captivating plot forces you to ponder the complexities of choice, identity, and destiny. While it may not be universally appealing, for those who appreciate Yorgos Lanthimos's unique storytelling style, this film is a compelling addition to his body of work.
6 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Kinds of Kindness
jboothmillard6 July 2024
Warning: Spoilers
This film was already in the can and had success at the Cannes Film Festival, it had its official theatrical release a few months after the acclaim received for Poor Things, I was looking forward to more weirdness on screen from writer/director Yorgos Lanthimos (Dogtooth, The Lobster, The Favourite). Basically, the film consists of three distinct but loosely connected stories (all the characters dream, that's the only connection I could see). "The Death of R. M. F" - Robert Fletcher (Jesse Plemons), follows every order that is given to him by his controlling boss and lover, Raymond (Willem Dafoe). Raymond controls every aspect of Robert's life, including his relationship with his wife Sarah, their sex life, and their chances to have children. Raymond does not want Sarah to conceive a child; Robert is forced to give her birth control drugs, dismissing her failures as miscarriages. One day, Raymond orders Robert to kill a man known only by his initials, R. M. F. (Yorgos Stefanakos), crashing his car at a particular intersection and the man has willingly agreed to be killed. Robert fails on his first attempt and later confesses his strong unwillingness to do it, but Raymond sternly insists it must be done. After his refusal, Robert's life falls apart and Sarah goes missing. Robert has a dream about approaching Raymond to beg him for another chance. Robert is desperate and repentant to Raymond, begging for another chance, only to be rebuffed. Wanting to gain Raymond's respect again, Robert meets Rita (Emma Stone), but he finds out her life is also being controlled by Raymond. Rita was also tasked with crashing into and killing R. M. F. Later, Rita goes to hospital in critical condition. In a last effort to gain Raymond's respect, Robert steals a nurse's clothes and kidnaps R. M. F., who is in the same hospital. He dumps his unconscious body in a parking lot and repeatedly runs him over with a car, eventually killing him. Robert goes to Raymond's mansion, and he, Raymond, and Raymond's live-in lover Vivian (Margaret Qualley) embrace on the couch. "R. M. F. Is Flying" - Police officer Daniel (Jesse Plemons) is mourning the disappearance of his wife Liz (Emma Stone), a marine biologist who went missing at sea. One night, having dinner with his partner and his friend Neil (Mamoudou Athie) and Neil's wife Martha (Margaret Qualley), Daniel requests to watch a video Liz is in. Daniel gets emotional and they agree to put the video on, which turns out to be a sex tape. It is a wife-swapping orgy of the four of them together, and they do not seem uncomfortable while watching it. During the evening, Daniel is shocked when he receives news that Liz has been found and rescued in a helicopter piloted by R. M. F. Liz miraculously returns to Daniel but he finds many things about her are strange and unlike how she was before. Liz's behaviour is odd, she has new interests, and she cannot fit into her shoes. Daniel becomes suspicious that she is not his real wife. His growing obsession and paranoia cause him to exhibit erratic behaviour. During a traffic stop, he shoots a passenger (Joe Alwyn) in the hand and then drinks his blood, leading to him being suspended from the police. Liz recounts to her father George (Willem Dafoe) a dream she had while lost at sea, where dogs were the dominant species and kept humans like Liz as pets. Trapped at home with Liz and still unconvinced she is his real wife Daniel begins starving himself. For some time, Daniel had been receiving strange phone calls from an unknown caller, in which they remained silent, and he questions if it is the real Liz. One night, Daniel orders his wife to harm herself, telling her he wants to eat her finger. Following his orders, Liz severs her finger and serves it to Daniel; he does not actually eat it, feeding it to the cat. After ordering her to do so, she ultimately cuts out her own liver, intending to cook and serve it, but she dies from heavy blood loss. Immediately afterwards, another Liz shows up at Daniel's door, and they happily embrace. During the credits of this story, footage of dogs living like humans is shown. "R. M. F. Eats a Sandwich" - Emily (Emma Stone) and Andrew (Jesse Plemons) are two cult members who are looking for a woman with the ability to reanimate the dead. They bring a candidate named Anna (Hunter Schafer) to the morgue, but she is unsuccessful in her test. Emily regularly visits her estranged husband, Joseph (Joe Alwyn), and their daughter (Merah Benoit) in secret. Later at headquarters, cult leader Omi (Willem Dafoe) gives Emily and Andrew information on another possible candidate, but the woman is already dead. Emily believes that she dreamed about the woman they are looking for. While Emily and Andrew are eating at a restaurant, a woman named Rebecca (Margaret Qualley), who resembles the woman Emily dreamed about, approaches them. Knowing who they are, she suggests that her twin sister, Ruth (Margaret Qualley), could be the perfect candidate. Andrew brushes this off, saying that a candidate's twin must be dead, to meet the requirements. While visiting her old home, Emily runs into Joseph and their daughter as she is leaving, and Joseph invites Emily to return sometime. She does, only for Joseph to drug her drinks and rape her while she is unconscious. Emily is examined by cult member Aka (The Whale's Hong Chau), who licks her body, and she is found to be "contaminated". After being kicked out of the cult, she plans to return and meet with Ruth who called earlier to say she can meet the requirements. Rebecca kills herself by diving into an empty swimming pool during Emily's visit. After visiting Ruth's veterinarian practice and seeing her healing of a dog, Emily knocks her out and brings her to the morgue. When Ruth wakes, Emily orders her to bring R. M. F.'s corpse back to life. Miraculously, Ruth succeeds in reanimating his body, and Emily celebrates, dancing energetically to "Brand New B****" by Cobrah outside her car. Later, Emily crashes her car on the way to the cult's headquarters, killing Ruth. In a mid-credits scene, the revived R. M. F. Eats a sandwich and spills ketchup on his shirt. Also starring Margaret Qualley as Vivian, Hong Chau as Sarah / Sharon, Joe Alwyn as Collectibles Appraiser Mamoudou Athie as Will / Morgue Nurse, and Krystal Alayne Chambers as Susan. Stone, Plemons, Dafoe, Qualley, Chau, Alwyn and Athie in multiple roles all do a great job being eccentric, and Lanthimos does bring his unique unusual style which is good. The first story with a man and his predetermined life is alright, the second story of the dead wife returning is the most interesting, and the third with a cult and bodies raised from the dead is the least effective but not bad. There are shocking and funny moments of sex and violence that get your attention, and it is visually splendid but it's not quite as clever or memorable as I was hoping, but it's a worthwhile enough absurdist black comedy. Good!
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
It's a refreshing new chapter to Yorgos' filmography!
NickKarabis31 May 2024
"Kinds of Kindness" is Yorgos' latest cinematic achievement. A self aware, self conscious film that doesn't try to prove anything more than what is already well established. Yorgos is a freaking good filmmaker!

Traversing back to his early years in the industry, Lanthimos takes a gamble and gets a full house! Resembling more to his first movies, with "Kinds of Kindness" he embraces the directorial qualities that defined his work.

The idea to create an anthology movie was brilliant and effective. Three stories with a thinly visible thematic connection, offer an almost 3hr long journey through Lanthimos' wide and wild imagination.

The comic reliefs are quite present, cautiously placed throughout the stories. The humor is dry, raw, almost unintentional. It makes you laugh -sometimes a lot-, coming in a full contradiction to the cruelty and the strong element of macabre crowning the pleasing visuals.

The gore is generously poured all over the place, sometimes for serving a cause... or just for fun. The string that ties all three stories though, is the robust essence of decay that modern human relationships strongly consist of. The idea of manipulation, blind dedication, enslavement of someone's free will, greedy desires, hypocrisy and lack of empathy are so blatantly obvious, that it's really hard to not notice. It's this slowly rotting world that keeps these phenomenally separate stories together, and I'm here for it!

The first part, tells the story of an employee so ridiculously castrated by his hyper-manipulative boss, to the point where the lines between obedience and free will, seem to be devoured by a psychotic love triangle.

The second tells the tale of a police officer, who rejoins his wife, who almost lost her life in a tragic accident. She's welcomed home and everything seems to go back to normal, but something seems off...

And lastly, the third and final part of the anthology is about an absurd, muscle car driving, sex cult and their desire to find the "higher human" who can grant life through his touch.

All these short, sexually charged stories, beautifully shot and directed, offer a great time at the movies; an experience like no other.

P. S. Jesse Plemons is the absolute highlight of the movie! Hats off to this exceptional actor!

IT'S WORTH OF YOUR TIME!
75 out of 133 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
I'm Never Sure Of What's Going On, But Dang!
boblipton30 June 2024
Warning: Spoilers
Yorgos Lanthimos has cowritten and directed a trilogy of bizarre stories with a repertory cast. In the first, Jesse Plemons does everything that Willem Dafoe asks so pleasantly of him, no matter how important or trivial. However, he refuses to ram his car into a particular vehicle; he can't bring himself to commit murder. As a result, he is thrust from Dafoe's presence. In the second story, marine biologist Emma Stone has been missing at sea for some time. When she finally returns, husband Jesse Plemons thinks it's actual someone else. In the third story, Plemons and Miss Stone are members of a cult run by Willem Dafoe, They are looking for a woman who matches some very specific characteristics.

There are roles in all three stories for these players, as well as Margaret Qualley and Hong Chau. All three are filled with unpleasant details, delving into the sort of dreamscape that Lanthimos offered audiences in POOR THINGS. Once again, he takes his time in telling his tale, viewing his weird details as neither remarkable nor unremarkable; that's what gives that movie and this their chimerical qualities. You may or may not like them. You may or may not understand what symbolism he is using. For my part, I couldn't find anything coherent. Still, it's a compelling collection of tales, whatever may be going on.
5 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A modern day grimoire of oddities
cybydzb27 June 2024
I loved it. You truly didn't know what was gonna happen next. A refreshing way to tell a story, it's the most awkward and intense anthology of stories. Like if Grimm horror was written by an autistic maniac (I'm saying that as a compliment). The way the dialogue is so awkward and formal yet makes perfect sense in each universe.

I'm very glad I barely watched any trailers going in because the only one or two I saw made no sense and now I look back in. They actually made perfect sense. It's three stories told by the same cast that have no connection to each other.

Extremely well done and like always Yorgos keeps you perplexed.
31 out of 53 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
The most Yorgos
masonsaul4 July 2024
Kinds of Kindness is off putting by design. A film about the twisted lengths people go to for the ones they love that practises what it preaches by being a nearly 3 hour anthology film that tests if you can truly love Yorgos at his most everything. The first 2 stories are really strong and the third nearly destroys all the good will they've built up, so it averages out at really good overall.

The cast includes first time and frequent collaborators who are all able to be the right kind of peculiar here, regardless of previous experience. Jesse Plemons is the best by far. He's already a natural at being incredibly awkward and unsettling so his collaboration with Yorgos is a match made in heaven. It's no coincidence that the weakest story of the three also happens to be the one he's in the least.

Yorgos Lanthimos directs with self indulgence. He's still gifted at getting fearless performances from his cast and continues to make films that are unapologetically uniquely him. This film is a statement confirming that despite his critical and commercial success reaching new heights with Poor Things, the old Yorgos who loves to show humanity at its most peculiar and least humane isn't going anywhere.

Robbie Ryan's cinematography turns the everyday locations into gorgeous backdrops that begin to feel as strange as everything else with a saturation that's uncharacteristically vivid. Jerskin Fendrix's score is initially hard to listen to but quickly finds its place as it twangs its way through all three stories with the same level of off kilter tragedy.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Pretentious Twaddle
gsdpjmcdgw2 July 2024
I sat through about 90% of this film until I realised that what I was feeling wasn't intellectually challenged, what I was feeling was that this film is a load of pretentious, self indulgent, twaddle.

The cast is reasonably stellar - Dafoe, Stone, Plemons. It's in three parts - which I assume are meant to have some sort of thematic thread running through them - but other than sheer awfulness, that theme was beyond me. Insofar as script and acting went - well both of those happened and I'm sure a lot of effort went in to them, but why anybody funded this, other than on the back of the "success " of Poor Things is beyond me - maybe it looked good as an idea on paper.

I do like to be challenged and, sometimes made to feel uncomfortable when I go to see a film, and the three vignettes that make up this film are certainly challenging. However, even stand alone, they are really hard work - they each shock and have reasonably original stories, but good grief, talk about a film maker self stimulating through their own art - this one really takes the biscuit for that practice.

I am sure that some will feel that this is a masterpiece, but, as you may have worked out, I'm not one of them.
129 out of 162 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Power, Control, Love, Blind faith.
amplified_soul30 May 2024
Warning: Spoilers
With these three absurd and grim stories, Lanthimos seems to be writing a love letter to Bunuel. Desperation, insanity, loneliness, cults, cannibalism, unquestionable faith and manipulation, are all there. I was sunk in, from the first close up of Plemons's mustached face, and Stone's celebratory dance in the parking lot 2 hours and 45 minutes later caught me by surprise, despite knowing it was coming. The cast really sinks into the robotic, yet powerful performances. Their delivery of the lines cautiously keeps you at bay, so that you can't really empathize with any of the characters, although you are desperately trying to. The dry humor pops up in unexpected moments and it almost feels unintentional.

The dominant emotion you feel during the movie is guilt, for having such a great time watching all this cruelty unfold on screen. The setting of a faceless, damp, summer New Orleans, binds perfectly with Robbie Ryan's beautiful cinematography. Extreme and long close ups, along with various wide lenses are back. Fendix's stoic score, which seems to consist mainly of piano and unsettling chanting, felt appropriate.

Is there any depth to all of this? Maybe not, but you have no other choice than to discuss about it with a friend, which is probably more than enough to make the director happy.

This macabre anthology film solidifies the fact, that no one makes movies like Lanthimos today. This isn't a movie for wider audiences, but his fans will definitely enjoy it, maybe a bit too much, like me.
33 out of 60 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
You make your own call, to me it's doing crazy, extreme, wild things for happiness.
blanbrn5 July 2024
If your like me and watch plenty of movies and are a film buff then you know that the movies directed by Yorgos Lanthimos are complex, strange, and different, a little confusing as you the viewer have to search for the meaning and form your own take. This latest work "Kinds of Kindness" is much the same yet the acting and on screen chemistry is in all pro and all star form. You get a pleasure seeing the wonderful Emma Stone and the supporting performances from Willem Dafoe, Jesse Plemons, and Margaret Qualley make the film a joy. Set and told like a book with different stories and chapters, you see it a man Robert(Plemons) who just can't escape his normal life as he's controlled by Raymond(Dafoe). Then the other stories go on with a mixture of accidents, blood, and a missing person still thru it all love is felt with sex and raw passion. Really this is film is a metaphor as to what people will do and how far they will go to please and be kind to others and find happiness. Overall probably not the greatest film ever made yet still for it's subplots, and different stories and wild out crazy things it does entertain any film watcher.
4 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
three stars for the lead players none for the movie
jmccrmck-651721 July 2024
1) after seeing the trailers for this movie and having seen 'Poor Things' I was really looking forward to seeing this movie ; the trailer and the movie have nothing in common.

2) my partner and I walked out after the second portion of the film and if you see it I think you will know why.

3) as others have noted here and the way my partner put it,' it just didn't gel for me' 4) the theater was absolutely full and we could not sit together and when the movie became pointlessly gratuitous I went to her seat so she could leave if she wanted to. It is a disjointed meanandering screen play in which I failed see any coherent narrative. There were delusions in 'Birdman' and they carried the story along , in this move there is no story to carry . Profoundly disappointed and nothing about this movie is profound.
75 out of 93 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed