‘Pearl’ is gory fun. Mia Goth shines in ‘X’ prequel
Ti West is just showing off now. Earlier this year, the veteran horror director (“The Innkeepers,” “The House of the Devil”) came out with “X,” a gloriously deranged throwback to ’70s slasher films that was appropriately inappropriate and as smart about the genre as it was disturbing.
A few people gather in the guesthouse of a remote Texas farm in 1979 to shoot a porn film, having rented the place from the elderly couple who live on the farm. Things go awry, you might say. The most obvious antecedent is “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre,” if that gives you any idea of what’s going on.
It turns out that during quarantine in New Zealand while making that film, West shot a prequel in secret. “Pearl” tells the backstory of the title character, who we met in “X,” which
you don’t have to see first, but it wouldn’t hurt. (Besides, it’s really good.)
Mia Goth returns as a younger version of ‘Pearl’ from ‘X’
Pearl is once again played by Mia Goth, who co-wrote the script with West. In “X,” she played both the elderly
Pearl and the young Maxine, who ran away from her repressive home life to become a porn star.
Goth is excellent in “X” and even better in “Pearl.” She’s spent two consecutive movies playing two different (but linked) characters who go around shouting variations on, “I’m going to be a star!”
It’s time we listened.
“Pearl” is set in 1918. Another worldwide pandemic rages (what’s jarring about seeing characters in masks when they go to town is that it’s no longer jarring), and Pearl’s husband is in Europe, fighting in World War I. She misses him for obvious reasons, but also because of the promise he represents of getting off the farm, where she languishes.
Her cruel mother (Tandi Wright) discourages any sort of fun or happiness, lest the chores go undone. Some of those include caring for Pearl’s disabled father (Matthew Sutherland), who is unable to leave his wheelchair. Pearl must feed him and clean him.
But Pearl has plans. Big plans. And nothing is going to get in the way of them. When she’s dancing and singing for the farm animals and a duck interrupts, well, suffice it to say the alligator that lives in the pond (perhaps the same one from “X”) does not go hungry.
Pearl is not well.
The one bright spot in her life are her secret stops at the movie theater when she goes into town to fetch her father’s morphine (which she samples while watching films). She watches the chorus girls on screen and dreams of becoming one of them.
West uses filmmaking techniques from the early days of movies
One day, she meets the projectionist (David Corenswet). She shares her love of film and desire to be a star. He’s sympathetic, telling her that in Europe artists are truly free.
Then he shows her a stag film. And says he could imagine seeing her in one.
His speech extolling the virtues of early pornography and the importance of getting in on the ground floor of a new platform echoes the one the “executive producer” in “X” gives— one of several nods to the first film.
Pearl’s apple-pie sweet sister-in-law Misty (Emma Jenkins-Purro) arrives for a visit one day; she and her mom drop off a roast suckling pig, which Pearl’s mom refuses in a show of stubborn pride. And Misty lets Pearl in on a secret: A church is holding auditions for a Christmas dance show that will travel around the state. Increasingly disengaged from reality, Pearl pins her hopes on the audition.
Goth’s performance during the audition is a stunningly surrealist dance number that combines Pearl’s enthusiasm and desperation. Later, her lengthy monologue when she confides in someone about what’s really going on in her head is amazing, as she describes her obvious psychosis in a matter-of-fact manner, as if she were talking about the weather.
Goth owns the film.
Also: You probably don’t want to be on the other end of that conversation.
West went full grindhouse for the look of “X,” recreating the sleazy feel of the genre perfectly. Here he dips into early filmmaking, with the dissolves and scene wipes between scenes of the era (and hilariously incongruous given what’s on screen), as well as the oversaturated look of 1950s films, along with a jaunty score.
Things get gross and gory — it’s a Ti West film, after all — but more than anything else, West is having fun. Lurid fun, yes, but fun nonetheless. And if you’re a fan of horror and filmmaking, you will, too.