Why Tom Hiddleston’s ‘High-Rise’ Outshines the Original Novel!

by

Multiple times during his 50-year writing career, British author J.G. Ballard’s work seemed to predict the future. Whether it was the straightforward science fiction of his early ’60s pieces or the surreal and sometimes contentious satires of the ’70s, Ballard had a unique ability to transform humanity’s darkest traits into art. His works have been brought to life on screen by directors as diverse as David Cronenberg and Steven Spielberg, demonstrating the breadth of his talents. One of his most renowned works, the 1975 novel “High-Rise,” was adapted into a film in 2015 by the versatile director Ben Wheatley, who is known for critically acclaimed independent films like “Kill List,” “A Field in England,” and “Free Fire.

Exploring the inhabitants of a modern luxury high-rise apartment building as they descend into disorder when facilities fail, Ballard’s novel offers a chilling critique of how upper-class individuals consume each other when their perceived social structure disintegrates. Though Ballard’s work is effective, Wheatley’s adaptation might be even more unsettling, vividly depicting Ballard’s increasingly gruesome visuals in vibrant color. Despite receiving mixed reactions upon its release, High-Rise is a stunning portrayal of a dystopian nightmare. Now available on Netflix, interested viewers can witness its insanity firsthand.

‘High Rise’s Self-Contained World

Tom Hiddleston portrays Robert Laing, a medical professional who’s recently taken up residence in an unfinished luxury apartment complex that’s yet to be fully completed, with just one out of five towers ready for occupancy. This innovative living space boasts self-contained facilities such as a grocery store, spa, fitness center, and more, designed to cater to the residents’ every whim. Its elite inhabitants, which include actors, television presenters, lawyers, and various professionals, seem to thrive on their busy social lives, rarely venturing out for work being the only occasion that requires them to step outside.

Laing makes an effort to adapt himself to the social structure, forming friendships with certain residents and entering into a relationship with single mother Charlotte (Sienna Miller). He catches the eye of the building’s original architect and resident, Anthony Royal (Jeremy Irons), but it soon becomes evident that even a doctor is considered too common for the high-class inhabitants of the building. Shortly after his arrival, power outages begin in the lower levels, and what was once ordinary decadence escalates into full-blown class conflict. Wheatley skillfully portrays the decline of the building through a succession of striking visuals: decaying produce, rubbish accumulating in staircases, mysterious stains on walls.

In the narrative, the townsfolk progressively discard any compassion or sensitivity towards the escalating horrors they witness, eventually treating death as an ordinary occurrence. This desensitizing effect is also experienced by the viewer over time, but it appears that Wheatley intended this. The people lose their sense of community and humanity, driven instead by their most primitive instincts. Laing, the main character, transitions from observing the audience’s perspective to one who readily accepts the ensuing disorder.

Why the Film Might Surpass the Book

Ballard’s novel is quite unnerving when read, but it seems even more intense when adapted into a movie. In the book, Ballard employs a somewhat impersonal, detached writing style that subdues some of its potency. This might have been a deliberate move by him, serving to depict the residents’ growing unease in prose. However, the movie delivers an immediacy lacking in the novel. Essentially, it boils down to the unique qualities of each medium. A book lets readers imagine the horrors themselves, while a film brings them to life on screen.

Initially, “High-Rise” didn’t live up to expectations upon release, scoring only 60% on Rotten Tomatoes and falling short of recouping its production costs in cinemas. However, with time, what were once perceived as weaknesses – its cold atmosphere, unappealing qualities, and focus on stylistic superficiality – now seem like strengths when revisiting the film. Despite its graphic scenes of violence, these elements effectively portray the characters’ swift transition into tribalism and brutality.

The style is flawless, reminiscent of gleaming mirrors and sharp edges, giving off a ’70s retro-future vibe until it appears somewhat unsteady. This seems intentional, symbolizing the emptiness and superficiality hidden beneath the attractive facade. The structure takes on a character of its own, boasting an intimidating Brutalist design that seems precariously balanced, like a house of cards ready to collapse.

As I immersed myself in this cinematic experience, I found myself drawn to its unique blend of coldness and violence, which echoes the style of the legendary director Cronenberg. His 1996 adaptation of Ballard’s novel “Crash” was a storm in a teacup upon release, much like how this film stirred up quite a commotion. The inclusion of Jeremy Irons only served to underscore this, as his portrayal of twin gynecologists in “Dead Ringers” (1988) remains some of his finest work. This film’s self-contained housing block setting reminds me of Cronenberg’s early masterpiece “Shivers,” where a Canadian apartment building spirals into chaos and insanity, much like this film does.

Although watching High-Rise might not be a breeze, it generally fulfills its purpose in bringing Ballard’s book to life. Given that we are still navigating the aftermath of Covid-19 isolation, tribalism, and widening class distinctions, the story’s themes seem more relevant than ever before.

Read More

2025-03-11 05:02