CIFF 2005 REVIEW: ANIMAL

Unlike Dr. Jekyl and Mr Hyde which deftly explored the futility of reducing man's moral nature to his body chemistry Animal suggests our need to be aggressive isn't really any different than our desire to be evil and that we'd better learn to take the "good" with the "bad." Of course even as we all debate the question of origins, and biologic future whoever loses the debate is assuming they won't be eaten by the winner. Animal leaves me feeling as if I've been asked how many molecular biologists can dance on the head of pin by someone who's more interested in why they are the way they are rather than how they should be.

ANIMAL

This stylish even lavishly mounted sci-fi thriller is reminiscent of other better films but will still provoke a solid conversation about the nature of human aggression and evil. Its biggest problem is that it confuses the two. Molecular biologist Thomas Nielsen is conducting research into the root of human aggression. While conducting interviews with a notorious sociopathic killer he secretly convinces the man to try a serum designed to neutralize his homicidal tendencies. Wanting quicker results Nielsen then tries the formula on himself only to realize too late that it’s real effect is the reversing of the subject's nature. Someone less aggressive taking the drug becomes more aggressive and someone more aggressive less so. As the sociopath escapes from prison and begins the process of learning empathy the shy Nielsen becomes a Neanderthalish brute and the two men become locked in a struggle to the death.

What director Roselyne Bosch means as a cautionary tale devolves the moment it raises the spectre of evolution. Scenes of an increasingly feral Nielsen harassing then brutally seducing his lover by a campfire to the howling of wolves inspired more giggles than rumination about man's possibly bestial origins. There are psychological, philosophical, and religious implications aplenty in the dialogue but they are all jumbled together as if they are interchangeable. Viewers who, like myself, are ready to acknowledge the fuzziness of such boundaries will nonetheless balk at the idea that there are no boundaries at all. Performances are generally solid and as stated production values are high but this is a film that ventures into territory in need of more insight.

The character of the suddenly enlightened sociopath is powerfully brought to life but one has to ask if we are mere biology then why shouldn't the strongest survive? Who cares about the race? This is in no way off the subject of my review. The film's entire emotional resonance is purposefully (yet I believe falsely) connected to the idea that the one state is more desirable than the other. My question is why? Why should I behave differently than an animal?