Nocturnal Animals (2016)

A successful gallery owner receives a novel manuscript sent by her ex-husband. The further she reads into that story of a brutal incident, the more she realizes it is not a mere novel but a message aimed at her. Nocturnal Animals, the second directorial work by former fashion designer Tom Ford, weaves a psychological drama by precisely layering reality and fiction, past and present. This film, where every frame is stylishly refined, hides a chilling sentiment of revenge beneath that refinement.

What it’s about — A frame structure woven from three strands of time

Susan (Amy Adams) is a gallery owner living a glamorous but empty life. One day a novel manuscript written by her ex-husband Edward (Jake Gyllenhaal), from whom she parted twenty years ago, is delivered to her. The novel is a story of a man who suffers a horrific tragedy on a trip taken with his family and takes revenge for that loss. The film intercuts the present, in which Susan reads the manuscript; the fiction, in which the events of the novel unfold; and the past, in which the two were in love. As the three strands of time interlock, the weight of a choice Susan made long ago is gradually revealed.

Direction — The contrast of gray reality and rough Texas

The first thing that catches the eye in Tom Ford’s direction is the sharp contrast of two worlds. Susan’s reality is filled with cold grays and blacks, minimalist spaces. The Texas of the novel, by contrast, is drawn with desolate wilderness and harsh light, giving off a violent, raw sensation. As you’d expect from a former designer, his skill at controlling the texture and color of the frame is exceptional, and this visual contrast in turn supports the story’s meaning.

Ford cunningly overlaps the events of the novel and Susan’s memories. He designs it so the audience gradually catches on that what happens in the novel is a metaphor for the emotional violence Susan committed in the past. Thanks to this method of stacking meaning through a chain of images rather than explaining directly, the film grows clearer, if anything, after you’ve finished watching it.

Performance — Adams leaking her agitation through breath alone

Amy Adams expresses Susan’s interior through a performance that barely reveals expression. She grows steadily agitated as she reads the manuscript, but rather than letting that agitation explode, she lets it leak out only through her gaze and subtle breath. The regret and loneliness hidden behind a glamorous life seep out of that restrained performance. Jake Gyllenhaal carries a weight close to a dual role. Playing both the once-tender ex-husband of reality and the powerless father of the novel, he naturally connects the emotional link between the two figures.

Michael Shannon leaves a strong impression as the detective in the novel. He portrays the resignation and tenacity unique to a man facing death with a seeming indifference that runs deep, becoming the most memorable supporting figure in the film.

What the film says — A revenge repaid with a single novel

Nocturnal Animals says that revenge need not necessarily take the form of violence. Edward’s revenge is not a knife or a gun but a single novel. Through his writing he returns the wound Susan inflicted on him long ago, making her belatedly realize the value of what she discarded. The film depicts the process of a person once dismissed as weak proving his existence in the most powerful way. What the cost of carelessly discarding love is, that chilling conclusion lingers long.

Ratings and reception

By OMDb, the IMDb rating is 7.4 out of 10. The Rotten Tomatoes freshness is 74% and the Metacritic score is 67 out of 100. While many reviews highly praised the precise mise-en-scène and the actors’ performances, there were also criticisms that its cold, calculated mood obstructs emotional immersion. It won the Grand Jury Prize at the Venice Film Festival, earning recognition for its artistic merit.

Verdict

Nocturnal Animals may feel somewhat distant while you follow it with your head, but once you’ve fully grasped its structure, an emotion slowly rises. The question posed when the threefold story converges into one at the end is by no means light. This work, flawlessly completed visually as well, is a fine example of how style and theme can interlock. So, ★4.0.

Recommended for

• Those who like films you chew over for their frame structure and symbolism
• Those who enjoy restrained acting and precise mise-en-scène
• Those looking for a psychological drama with a long resonance over quick catharsis