‘Black Swan’: Wildly flapping
Darren Aronofsky is a filmmaker with the chops to be a great director and the impulse to be a sensationalistic one.
In many ways, his films are of a piece: stories about obsessions and mysteries – and obsessions with mysteries. From his debut “Pi” to his newest, “Black Swan” (which bears a surprising resemblance to that first film), with stops at “Requiem for a Dream” and “The Wrestler” (and even “The Fountain”), Aronofsky makes films that pull you in and, every once in a while, deliver a jolt just for the fun of it. It’s as though he’s testing the audience, saying, “Didn’t see that one coming, did you? Now – you still with me?”
So it is with “Black Swan,” an energetic and sometimes unnerving story of obsession and the pressure that goes with it. This tale of a ballerina, played by Natalie Portman, isn’t “The Turning Point” or “Mao’s Last Dancer” or any of those other nicey-artsy stories of the drive to achieve the pinnacle of one’s art.
Rather, “Black Swan” is like a horror-movie version of “The Red Shoes” – or perhaps it’s “The Red Shoes” meets “Saw” – in which the quest for perfection drives the dancer slowly mad.
Portman plays Nina, a member of the corps of what appears to be the New York City Ballet. She has greater ambition than that – and she’s pushed by her manipulative and domineering mother (Barbara Hershey), whose own career was curtailed when she became a parent.
Nina catches the eye of the artistic director, Thomas (Vincent Cassel, perfectly egocentric and imperious), who is looking to replace his old star (Winona Ryder) with a discovery. For his new production of “Swan Lake,” he wants to combine the Swan Queen and the Black Swan so they’re danced by the same ballerina, to make a statement about the duality of good and evil in the characters.
He believes Nina, with her obvious perfectionism, is right for the Swan Queen. She’s delicate and artful, conveying the longing and loss of the role. Though he believes she’s too controlled to play the Black Swan, he casts her anyway, then tries to browbeat her into becoming the dancer he envisions.
Her true goad is a new dancer, Lily (Mila Kunis), who has wings tattooed on her back and who has the devilish attitude that Thomas obviously is seeking for the Black Swan. Nina becomes obsessed with Lily, convinced that she is trying to undermine and supplant Nina in the role.
Aronofsky makes Nina a cringing, even simpering presence at first, seemingly scared of her own shadow. Indeed, that may be one of the film’s flaws: She’s so lost in her own head that it’s hard to imagine her summoning the strength and discipline to wow Thomas into giving her the role. But it’s not hard to envision her being overtaken by her imagination.
Once she has the role, she gains a little more poise. But that is subverted by her own dark fantasies of failure and loss, some about being displaced by Lily, some having to do with the sudden breakdown of her own body.
She cracks the toenail on her big toe doing pointe work (or does she?). When she digs at a hangnail, she pulls away a painful-looking strip of skin, like a zipper down the back of her finger (or does she?). She has rough, scratched patches on her shoulder blades (is she, in fact, growing wings?). She sees doppelgangers for herself on the subway. Her reflection in the mirror seems to have a life of its own.
All of this might be grist for a compelling psychological unraveling. And Aronfosky certainly injects these moments with exquisite tension and a certain gross-out panache.
Yet, at some point, his horror-movie shocks turn a little silly. It’s nice to see a filmmaker taking leaps and chances – but one also has to admit when those efforts inspire laughter instead of chills. Aronofsky grabs you by the lapels, thrills you with the tension he creates – but when it comes to the big reveals, you’re either giggling at what he shows you or already way ahead of him.
It’s not that there’s not craft here; there is. He’s a director with distinct gifts. But in this film, unlike in, say, “Requiem for a Dream,” where he did some of the same things, his choices don’t ramp up the stakes but, too often, undermine them.
It’s not Portman’s fault that the character seems like such a drip in the early going; it’s a testament to her craft that she can make us care about Nina in spite of that. Portman keeps you watching, even as Aronofsky defies you to take the ride seriously.
December 2nd, 2010 at 3:56 pm
You make it sound like it’s a new development to have the White Swan and the Black Swan danced by the same dancer, that is how it is usually done. There have been rare exceptions where two dancers have danced the roles but they are very few and far between.
December 4th, 2010 at 7:49 pm
Three gender critiques of this review:
1. The mother’s career isn’t “curtailed when she becomes a parent.” It is curtailed when she becomes a MOTHER. Men’s career are never derailed by their becoming parents. Never. Even single male parents almost always manage to find a woman – usually a grandmother – to do the heavy lifting of parenting when their careers are at stake. So let’s not use language that implies that the career disruption of parenting happens equally to both women AND men. It doesn’t.
2. The turning point is not a “nicey-artsy” film. That film is also about the brutal rivalries of the ballet world, the ruthless price of aging for women, and it features two great actresses. The reviewer only dismissively describes it as “nicey-artsy” because it’s perceived to be “a woman’s film.” It’s not nicey artsy at all. I wonder if the reviewer has even seen The Turning Point, as I have, or if he’s just relying on other sexist reviews of the film.
3. When male characters as artists have broken, delusional inner lives, we describe them as complex and fascinating tortured artists, never as”simpering” as the reviewer does here. In fact, we never use the word simpering to describe men even when they warrant it.
When I read a review in which a seemingly progressive male reviewer keeps stumbling over his own sexism, I’m not only annoyed, I also cannot trust the reviewer’s opinion of the film. THINK about the gender implications of what you write in the future. Disappointing.
December 6th, 2010 at 8:24 pm
@ DiMi
I think your gender-critique is somewhat unfair. 1. The mother’s career is curtailed by parent/motherhood not because of parental responsibilities but because of the physical nature of being a ballerina – a career known for it’s high incidence of eating disorders.
2. I never saw Turning Point, but what I think Fine means is that this is not the typical dance film where a dancer overcomes adversity to find their inner excellence by incorporating life lessons learned throughout the film.
3. Male artsy characters are described as simpering all the time. I just googled “simpering” and after a few dictionary definitions, the first hit was describing the frontman of Coldplay.
December 7th, 2010 at 5:55 am
LOVE WHAT YOU WROTE.
i found nothing sexist with what you said. in fact, the supposed misogyny of your review is nothing compared to the excessive misogyny of the film. Conniving vixen rival? check. Mommie dearest smother-mother? check. ‘innocent nymphet defiled by masculine man? How many more ‘evil-woman’ cliches can darren use? Didi is a loser. Mistaking sexism for critical resection.
And for the record, i am a progressive leftist WOMAN in nyc. didi, you are the one who is DISAPPOINTING. you make women look bad.
December 15th, 2010 at 9:46 pm
DiMi, you will find that if you observe the world through a red lens, everything you see will be a shade of red. Red is everywhere. Even the grass is red beneath that veneer of green that everyone else seems to appreciate. Soon, you come to believe that you are the only one who can see the inherent redness of the world and it angers you that others cannot see what is so obvious to you.
Beyond making you look silly, this myopia is a real tragedy. There’s a wonderful world of beautiful colors out there that you cannot enjoy or appreciate, because all you can see is red. I feel sorry for you and angry toward whichever denizens of the ivory towers of education so poisoned your perspective.
Let it go.
Not every disappointment in your life can be traced back to chauvinism. Not every circumstance in this world has its root in sexist repression. Be honest with yourself and try to see things as they really are. If it confirms your preconceived notions, it is probably wrong. If it makes you uncomfortable and challenges your most cherished conceits, it is probably right.
Yes, I am a man. And yes, I have children. And yes, they “derailed my career” because I chose to father them rather than simply to beget them. I have never looked back and don’t regret that decision one iota. I could have been much more “successful” if I had chosen differently, but no success in life could compensate me for what I and my children would have missed.
Have a better day. Your life is more beautiful and blessed than you guess.
December 20th, 2010 at 1:16 am
Good for you dad…it what DiMi said doesn’t describe you, then she wasn’t talking about you. But for far too many women and for far too few men, what she said is quite true.
January 9th, 2011 at 7:37 am
Portman’s performance is not worthy of praise. She spends the first 90% of the movie as if she took Joey from Friends soap opera acting advice i.e. “can you smell a fart?”. Then when she acts with confidence in the last ten minutes we are supposed to be impressed, ugh. Also she seems to be taking the “Jane Fonda/Halle Berry can’t act” road by orgasming on screen in the hopes of an Oscar. I liked the movie and Portman seems like a likable celeb but her acting here is not inspired.