Friday, December 13, 2024

Speak No Evil: Remake Vs. Original

Speak No Evil

The Speak No Evil remake forges its own path.

Listen at the podcast providers of your choice.


There was a running joke this year in the online movie world. That they were really looking forward to the English language remake of Speak No Evil to come out...so they could stop seeing f***ing previews for it. This went double for film geeks who had already seen the original Danish film that was released in 2022 and weren't exactly itching for another 100 plus minute punishing watch of a social taboos be broken, myself included. Which is why the good reviews from critics and solid audience responses surprised me. Did they really do anything that different? Turns out...yeah, yeah they did.

The Setup

The movie follows the Daltons, an American family residing in England that befriend an unconventional family (Paddy, Ciara, and their mute son Ant) on holiday in Italy. Some time later, the Daltons get an invite from said couple to spend some time at their farmhouse in Devon. An invitation that the Daltons quickly regret taking as Paddy and Ciara continue to push their personal limits...

Speak No Evil is a great example of how to remake a foreign movie. A lot of Americanized or English language remakes of foreign films suffer from one of two problems. The first is missing the point of the original film. They have a name and a plot, but not a clear idea about what makes the original film so compelling. These often come with changed endings to match American sensibilities (see the remake of The Vanishing).

The second is recreating the film almost beat for beat, which usually indicates an unconfident filmmaker that also doesn't understand nuances of the film that might be specific to the culture it was created in. For instance, if The Magnificent Seven was about samurai, you'd probably wonder...why they didn't adapt it to something more American. Hence cowboy gunslingers vs. samurai.

Speak No Evil threads the needle by using what works and adding its own spin.

What Still Works: The Discomfort

The 2022 Danish film is about the limits and problems with social niceties. From the second our main couple meets this other couple, they're drawn in because they seem fun-loving and exciting, but there's also an air of danger and discomfort about them.

Once they arrive at this family's little farmhouse, that discomfort goes into the stratosphere as our villainous couple push our protagonists buttons and by the time they really want to push back, it's too late.

Of note, is that the father in this situation figures out what's going on, but refuses to warn his family out of a sense of decorum and potentially cowardice.

The 2024 version keeps the discomfort with some variations. We see some rough handling of the Paddy Ciara's son Ant, Paddy challenges our wife/mother Louise's vegetarianism both with an offering of meat and in conversation, and in general Paddy and Ciara are overly familiar and aggressive with their new "friends."

Which leads into the two main changes that shift what the movie is about and make it work as well as it does.

New Element #1: Toxic Masculinity

If you've seen interviews with James McAvoy about this movie, you're probably aware that he based his performance in this movie on manosphere influencer and alleged sex criminal Andrew Tate. And that's not an accident. Because outside of breaking societal taboos, Paddy is also the epitome of toxic masculinity.

Something that stands out about how Paddy acts and talks is that he's always looking to dominate or guide the conversation onto what he wants. No matter what's happening, Paddy wants to be in control and seems to get off on confronting Louise, which he always plays off as "honesty" or a joke.

This especially stands out in comparison to our nice husband Ben. Ben is not perfect. He is mostly a passive man who isn't upfront about his own feelings, even to his wife, and the distance he's put between himself and his family was a trigger for martial strife that he and Louise are trying and failing to work through.

It means there's an appeal to Paddy who looks and acts strong (the swimming scene puts an emphasis on McAvoy's body). I also think the movie does an excellent job of selling Paddy and Ciara's lifestyle with giant shots of the landscape and brighter/warmer lighting that feels homey vs the original's desaturated look.

But, in my favorite little nuance, when it comes time to confront Paddy or "be a man" Ben is the one who does things like make sacrifices for his family or do what's morally upstanding in ways Paddy can't/won't. Regardless of whether or not he's as physically imposing or as tough as the other men around him.

New Element #2: Agency for the Rest of the Family

Another reason I like this version, and genuinely may prefer it, is because a number of the other characters, including Paddy and Ciara's put-upon son Ant, Louise and her and Ben's daughter Anges all get more agency in this story.

In the original film these characters are present, but more used to reflect everything that's going wrong, and to emphasize how/why ignoring all of the red flags is a bad idea. 

In this version they all have agency and character arcs including Agnes' crippling anxiety that forces the family back, Ant's constant pushes to reveal what's really going on, and Louise actually acting much more like the traditional patriarch, especially when the finale kicks up.

I really like this because it's not only more emotionally satisfying, but also provides a refutation of Paddy's beliefs.

So now we're gonna talk the ending which may make or break the movie for some people. So I'll say that this movie gets a 7/10 from me. Now the spoilery stuff!

Giant Spoiler Warning

The Endings: Side by Side

The original movie unravels what's going on and provides its finale through a single lens. The husband Bjørn. He discovers that his hosts have been killing couples and taking in children for some time while doing some snooping, before discovering the couple's "son" dead in the pool. But he does not warn his family.

Which he clearly should have because as he's trying to rush his family off the property, their car breaks down, and when he returns, Patrick (our villain is in the car with his family). When asked why he's doing this, Patrick says, very pointedly at Bjørn, "because you let us." Because that's exactly what happened. He refused to push back or let his family know the danger and they end up dead for their trouble, literally being stoned to death.

His refusal to admit anything was wrong or embrace conflict got all of them killed and let serial killers go free.

Now let's talk about the remake's ending.

The first major change is that Ant, the couple's stolen son, spends the majority of the movie trying to reveal what's going on. He shows marks on his body, a truly horrifying image that reveals that he's been subject to different kinds of physical abuse and tries to warn Agnes over and over again, before finally concocting a time and place to show Agnes what's really going on. Not only are these scenes really smart, since the camera and script show Ant distracting Paddy so he can get Agnes away from the group without suspicion, but also means that Agnes can go tell her mom which means the whole family finds out at the same time...and now they have to find a way to leave and get Ant and run.

This is also where Louise gets to demonstrate her mettle by calming her daughter who is a hair's breath from a breakdown and guide Ben from mental breakdown towards strength. "Your family needs you" she tells him and Ben, to his credit steps up.

So now we've got a new cat and mouse game as the whole family has to pretend everything is fine as they try to leave with each move being countered by Paddy's passive-aggressiveness before he finally puts Ant in harm's way and the family is captured.

Thanks to some quick thinking and reacting from the whole family, they violently break free and begin a cat and mouse game that gets Ciara and their accomplice killed (note that Louise saves Ben from being stabbed to death in this case). 

And now we're going to hit maybe my favorite sequence of the movie.

Our family has a dilemma. They need to get to a car, but the car is about two stories down with a ladder on the ground. So Ben, shimmys down the to the gutter and lets go, clearly breaking a bone in the process, but he's able to right himself and get the ladder on the roof and let his family down. I love this because it allows Ben to be courageous for his family without giving into the animalistic "alpha" nonsense Paddy exudes.

But as they're looking for the car Paddy emerges with Agnes in tow. Ben and Louise drop their weapons to placate Paddy which thankfully gets him monologuing just long enough for Agnes to stab Paddy with a drug she snatched up in the earlier melee. The whole family unit worked together to take this guy down in a way his family never could.

Ben moves to shoot and kill Paddy, but Louise tells him it's over.

Unfortunately, it's not over for Ant. Clearly broken by what he's witnessed and been through, Ant gets on top of Paddy, who taunts him with his parental slogan "that's my boy" before Ant bashes him to death with a rock and begins silently crying in the car as the family leaves.

So why do I like this so much?

Because it refutes everything about Paddy's worldview. A woman led her family to defy him, the husband he believed was weak demonstrated a courage Paddy seems incapable of (he sent Ciara up to the same roof), and the anxious girl he was going to "make his own" stuck him with his own drug before his "son" killed him for being an abusive asshole. Paddy has been undone by his own hubris. It's a great change to the ending that both gives the movie new/different scenes and also reinforces its own themes about masculinity and family.

No comments:

Post a Comment