<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <title>House of Nettles: #lifeforce</title>
  <id>https://nex-3.com/tag/lifeforce/</id>
  <link href="https://nex-3.com/tag/lifeforce/feed.xml" rel="self"/>
  <link href="https://nex-3.com/tag/lifeforce/" />
  <updated>2024-10-18T10:20:37Z</updated>
    <entry>
      <title>Lifeforce (1985) - ★★★★</title>
      <link href="https://letterboxd.com/nex3/film/lifeforce/" rel="alternate"/>
      <id>https://letterboxd.com/nex3/film/lifeforce/</id>
      <published>2024-10-18T10:20:37Z</published>
      <updated>2024-10-18T10:20:37Z</updated>
      <author><name>Natalie Weizenbaum</name><uri>https://letterboxd.com/nex3/</uri></author><category term="nat reviews" label="nat reviews"/><category term="lifeforce" label="lifeforce"/><category term="letterboxd" label="letterboxd"/><content type="html">&lt;p&gt;
  This is a mystifyingly horny film. It&#39;s not mystifying &lt;i&gt;why&lt;/i&gt; it&#39;s
  horny—I&#39;m the world&#39;s biggest defender of the idea that vampires ought to be
  horny!—but in the way it goes about it. There is of course the almost
  softcore blatancy with which the camera constantly caresses Mathilda May&#39;s
  massive tits, but that really just serves to set the stage for the pervasive
  sexuality of the whole thing. The one-two punch of &#34;I can read her mind and
  she&#39;s a masochist&#34; / &#34;well I&#39;m a natural voyeur&#34;, in a scene notionally
  about tracking a monster that&#39;s actively killing people, stands out in my
  mind, as does the sweaty desperation of the prime minister. But really I
  think there&#39;s barely a moment here that&#39;s &lt;i&gt;not&lt;/i&gt; sexual in one way or
  another.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
  The film draws an immediate and firm connection between sex and the theft of
  lifeforce (General Ripper would be right at home). Even the first time we
  see it in a human-to-human context, the emaciated guard grasps at the air as
  though to initiate an embrace and the doctor who becomes his victim
  approaches out of tenderness. We can then read the fall of London as a sort
  of self-destructive orgy, a modern Sodom. Our two heroes are defined as
  heroic by their abstinence: Caine just likes to watch and so always has an
  objective position and knows what to do, and Carlsen has the astounding
  ability to choose not to have sex with a beautiful woman—or, at the movie&#39;s
  climax, to stop having sex just before it reaches the point of no return.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
  This is an approach to sex that sits at the particular crossroads between
  heteromasculinity and Christianity. It conceptualizes the ultimate horniness
  as an overpowering urge to overpower, and because overpowering others is
  wrong it conceptualizes everything about sexualith as immoral. But this
  totalizing view is in turn undermined by the film itself clearly existing to
  titillate the (presumedly heteromasculine—note that the only reference to
  queerness in the film is from the perspective of men wanting to watch
  lesbian sex) viewer. The film gives itself a gentle cloak of irony,
  playfully casting the viewer in the role of Caine the voyeur and the
  reframing the film&#39;s Christian bent as more of an erotic roleplay than a
  genuine expression of values.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
  It&#39;s a fascinating artifact, and one that—despite the intense
  heteromasculinity that no amount of irony can purge—I&#39;m inclined to
  appreciate. Because at the end of the day, I think vampire films should be
  about sex, and I&#39;ll be damned if this is not a vampire movie that is well
  and thoroughly &lt;i&gt;about sex&lt;/i&gt;.
&lt;/p&gt;

</content>
    </entry>
  
</feed>

