DbcultAccessing Vault...
6.2/10
Senior Film Conservator
A definitive 6.2/10 rating for a film that redefined the boundaries of cult cinema. Sisters Under the Skin remains a cornerstone of transgressive art.
Look, if you have a thing for vintage melodrama where everyone talks like they’re reading a telegram, sure, give Sisters Under the Skin a spin. It’s for the folks who like watching people stare out of windows while thinking about their lost youth. If you need pacing, excitement, or characters who actually behave like humans, you’re probably going to hate it. It moves at the speed of a tired turtle.
The whole premise is just a classic 'rich guy feels sad' story. John Hunter Yates decides he’s done with the grind and wants a second go at being young and fancy in Europe. It’s the kind of decision that feels deeply detached from reality, which I guess is the point. But the movie doesn’t really dig into *why* he’s so miserable. He just is.
Most of this movie takes place in rooms that feel a little too quiet. When Elinor refuses to go along with his trip, you expect some fireworks. Instead, you get a lot of stiff dialogue and people adjusting their ties. It’s almost painfully polite for a movie about a marriage falling apart.
There’s a weird flatness to the emotional stakes. Yates is supposed to be this tortured soul, but he mostly just comes off as a guy who needs a hobby. I found myself looking at the background extras just to see if anyone was actually doing anything besides waiting for their cue. One guy in the corner holds a drink for what felt like an eternity. It became more interesting than the lead performance.
If you’re comparing this to something like Redemption, it’s missing that raw edge. It feels like a stage play that got lost on its way to the theater and ended up on film by accident. Sometimes, the camera just lingers on a face for way too long. You can practically hear the director thinking, 'Okay, now look sad,' and the actor nodding back, 'Got it, sad face engaged.'
I kept waiting for the 'sisters' part of the title to mean something explosive. It doesn’t, really. It’s all very subtle, which is a nice way of saying it’s a bit sleepy. It’s not a bad film, but it’s definitely one of those movies that vanishes from your memory the second the credits roll. 🕰️
It reminds me a bit of the stuff they try to do in The Poor Rich Cleaners, where they want you to care about the social standing of the characters, but the characters themselves are just too thin to hold the weight. It's a relic. A well-dressed, polite, and slightly boring relic.
IMDb 7.3
1933
Community
Log in to comment.
