'Mother!' will shock, enthrall and infuriate

Many viewers will hate “mother!” the chamber thriller/psychological horror film from “Black Swan” director Darren Aronofsky. For more than half its length, “mother!” masks itself as a moody haunted house movie until things get insane in the final stretch.

Insane is too safe a word. Apocalyptic might be more applicable.

As an aggressive art house movie marketed as a mainstream thriller, surely the studio, Paramount, knew “mother!” would face backlash from audiences on its opening weekend (the film scored a rare “F” on Cinemascore crowd polling). Still, a limited theatrical release and traditional word-of-mouth campaign wouldn’t serve “mother!” any better. A movie this crazy deserves to be unleashed — you’re better off not knowing what you’re in for, even if you end up hating it.

The film’s unsettling first half centers on a nameless couple (Jennifer Lawrence and Javier Bardem) living in a secluded country home. Bardem plays an acclaimed poet struggling with writer’s block, and Lawrence is a dutiful and supportive wife — she’s restoring her husband’s childhood home in the hopes it will inspire him. Her character isn’t defined outside the marriage, and casting Lawrence in such a submissive role is particularly unnerving. The more her character tries to push back at her husband, the less control she holds over the plot.

Inspiration for the poet comes not from his wife but from two unexpected visitors — Ed Harris and Michelle Pfeiffer arrive on the doorstep and introduce immediate, if not totally intentional, chaos.

Oh, and the house creaks and moans as if alive (a literal beating heart pumps inside one wall). Then more houseguests arrive, and, well, there’s really no way to prepare for the assault Aronofsky unleashes.

Regardless of how one interprets the climax, the first two acts of “mother!” work exceedingly well as a psychological thriller and a study of how some relationships can be consumed and destroyed by the needs of a single, selfish partner (think of it as a demented spin on “The Giving Tree”).

Aronofsky also has more metaphorical themes in mind, which become explicit in the final act. Still, the early scenes in the movie are saturated with clues that more biblically minded audiences will catch onto before the climax.

As for the ending, I appreciate Aronofsky’s audacity, and like many of his prior movies (especially “Black Swan,” “The Fountain” and “Requiem for a Dream”), “mother!” goes for broke where most stories would hold back. In the case of “mother!,” the tonal shift comes on a bit too abruptly, especially given the slow-burn nature of what comes before. By the time Kristen Wiig arrives, “mother!” has essentially abandoned its grip on the real world. (Her big scene marked the moment several people left my screening of the film).

It won’t take much of an internet search to discover the film’s most infamous moment. There’s a sequence that is genuinely shocking and disgusting and reprehensible — yet it also seems inevitable and exactly the thing Aronofsky wants audiences to remember about his self-described biblical allegory. To me, it seemed like Aronofsky could have found a less literal way to reach his conclusion, as the visuals deliberately serve to alienate a large segment of the people who will see it.

Of course, the big question remains: Is “mother!” a good movie? Aronofsky certainly delivers a visceral experience, and even though he’s revealed his metaphoric intentions in recent interviews, the film allows for multiple audience interpretations. It probably benefits significantly from a second viewing, though sitting through it twice seems like a challenge most won’t want to face.

Plainly, I liked the movie, but you’ve been warned.

- • •

Tyler Wilson can be reached at twilson@cdapress.com