NETFLIX REVIEW: Annihilation – future cult classic or subpar sci-fi?

A meteorite streaks past the camera. It carries an alien mineral, and it ain’t Vibranium. It smashes into a lighthouse; the invasion of planet Earth has begun.

Ground zero is covered by an iridescent dome called the Shimmer, which looks like a soap bubble, or a gigantic blister. Those who enter don’t return. It’s top secret, but the phenomenon is expanding, threatening to swallow up whole cities and states…

Annihilation started life as the first volume in Jeff VanderMeer’s Southern Reach book trilogy, where a nameless four-woman crew venture into the mysterious Area X. One, a perpetual student and passionate observer of tide pools known only as “the biologist”, served as narrator.

In Alex ‘Ex Machina’ Garland’s adaptation, the biologist – now named Lena – is played by a characteristically poised Natalie Portman as an ex-military John Hopkins professor. Flashbacks reveal her cheating on her angelic-looking soldier husband Kane (Oscar Isaac) with Daniel (Interstellar’s David Gyasi).

We see Lena Portmansplaining cellular senescence – AKA aging – to Kane, playfully arguing whether God makes mistakes. As they discuss the odd silence around Kane’s deployment, he tenderly says they’ll be under the same stars, but Lena mocks the idea of pining for her husband. He goes MIA, before mysteriously returning, clinging to life.

annihilation swimming pool

F*%! you, humanity! There’s something about the fruiting corpse in the swimming pool that feels like it sprung from the imagination of a serial killer on NBC’s late, lamented Hannibal.

After discovering Oscar Isaac escaped the Shimmer, a guilt-wracked Lena leaves him on a ventilator to join Dr Ventress (Jennifer Jason Leigh) for the next mission. The rest of their team are all damaged goods: Tessa Thompson is self-harming physicist Josie, Gina Rodriguez is addict Anya, Tuva Novotny’s geologist Cass is a grieving mother.

Josie theorizes that the Shimmer is a prism that refracts everything, including DNA. Time is distorted, while living things are reshuffled so that flowers twist into human shapes, deer have twig antlers, alligators grow shark teeth. Cass dies in the jaws of a mutant bear who later bellows with its victim’s voice.

Faced with the grotesque fate of being broken down into this new ecosystem, an already cancer-stricken Ventress rages that it feels like dementia. Josie refuses to let terror be her surviving fragment. She walks peacefully into the flower mannequin forest, buds sprouting from her self-harm scars.

Is Annihilation, therefore, about how we choose to accept the inevitable? While some thought it was about cancer, or interpreted the Shimmer as a manifestation of Lena’s guilt (to others it was about depression, or Pokémon), Garland himself said he was going for something on a theme of self destructiveness.

OK, but this stupid thing invaded us. Although Lena believes the organism doesn’t ‘want’ anything, it’s hard not to take it personally; there’s something about the fruiting corpse in the swimming pool, or the artfully arranged skeletons, that feel like they sprung from the imagination of a serial killer on NBC’s late, lamented Hannibal.

Following the trend for fans to virtue signal when sub-par movies debut on streaming platforms, there was outcry when international rights went to Netflix. Yet US theatre-goers only graded it a C CinemaScore. Fans try to ‘unpack’ the movie, lauding the way it ‘doesn’t give us all the answers’, rather than admit it loses its way as it nears the epicentre.

7 thoughts on “NETFLIX REVIEW: Annihilation – future cult classic or subpar sci-fi?

  1. Pingback: PAGE to SCREEN Book Haul: OPHELIA, ANNIHILATION, OASIS, THE LOST WIFE | Slow to the Party

  2. Pingback: 7 Hair-Raising Books & Movies for ‘Halloween’ | Slow to the Party

  3. Pingback: BOOK REVIEWS: Annihilation & The Book of Strange New Things.. | Slow to the Party

  4. booksofb

    I read all 3 books I’m this series and then saw the movie – found the movie to be pretty disappointing. I thought the movie just abandoned so much of what made the books intriguing. As I reviewed the books, I kept coming back to the same concern – how will they ever get this onto the screen? I’d suggest that they never should have tried. Cheers, Brian

    Reply
    1. Lindsay Acland Post author

      Thanks for saying this! I didn’t think it was very good at all, especially the ending. I’ve seen a lot of bloggers think it was a masterpiece, apparently. Its only very loosely based on the first book. I don’t know why they bothered.

      Reply
      1. booksofb

        Thank you and my pleasure. I reviewed both the books and the movies and I was pretty honest about how I felt. Thanks for following and I’m looking forward to reading more of your posts. Cheers, Brian

        Reply
  5. Pingback: Annihilation – future cult classic or subpar sci-fi? — Lindsay Acland | Fantasy Gift Sources: Book Reviews, Article Resources, News

Leave a Reply to booksofb Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.