Weird monsters and monstrous media: The adaptation of Annihilation | Intellect Skip to content
1981
Making Monsters
  • ISSN: 1753-6421
  • E-ISSN: 1753-643X

Abstract

This article scrutinizes Jeff VanderMeer’s novel (2015) and its cinematic adaptation directed by Alex Garland (2018) with the aim of investigating the tensions between the weird and visualization. It argues that it is in the monstrous, weird function of the medium in that the weird persists. By engaging with Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari’s concept of becoming, I argue that the computer-generated imagery of the film invites us to think of digital images themselves as monstrous – an articulation of the molecular, cellular, trans-species exchanges and mutations of the film, which sustains a movement towards becoming-imperceptible while becoming-visible. I argue that by releasing the monstrous, weird-making and world-making qualities of the literary and cinematic medium, the two works open us up to flowing articulations of the world that are not centred around the human but directed towards an appreciation of our existence in an incommensurable, incomprehensible, but nonetheless real and material, more-than-human embeddedness.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/jafp_00091_1
2023-07-10
2024-02-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alaimo, S.. ( 2010), Bodily Natures: Science, Environment, and the Material Self, Indianapolis, IN:: Indiana University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Ayers, D.. ( 2015;), ‘ Chimeras and hybrids: The digital swarms of the posthuman image. ’, in M. Hauskeller,, T. D. Philbeck, and C. D. Carbonell. (eds), The Palgrave Handbook of Posthumanism in Film and Television, Basingstoke:: Palgrave Macmillan;, pp. 99108.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Beaulieu, A.. ( 2011;), ‘ The status of animality in Deleuze’s thought. ’, Journal for Critical Animal Studies, 9:1&2, pp. 6988.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Beyer, J.,, Trannum, H. C.,, Bakke, T.,, Hodson, P. V., and Collier, T. K.. ( 2016;), ‘ Environmental effects of the deepwater horizon oil spill: A review. ’, Marine Pollution Bulletin, 110:1, pp. 2851.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Braidotti, R.. ( 2013), The Posthuman, Newark, NJ:: Polity Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Brown, W.. ( 2012;), ‘ Monstrous cinema. ’, New Review of Film and Television Studies, 10:4, pp. 40924.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Carroll, S.. ( 2016;), ‘ The terror and the terroir: The ecological uncanny in new weird exploration narratives. ’, Paradoxa, 28:1, pp. 6789.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Christiansen, S. L.. ( 2021), The New Cinematic Weird: Atmospheres and Worldings, Lanham, MD:: Lexington Books;.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. D’Andrea, M. A., and Reddy, G. K.. ( 2013;), ‘ Health consequences among subjects involved in Gulf Oil spill clean-up activities. ’, American Journal of Medicine, 126:11, pp. 96674.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Deleuze, G.. ( [1986] 2013), Cinema I: The Movement-Image, London:: Bloomsbury Academic;.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Deleuze, G., and Guattari, F.. ( [1988] 2013), A Thousand Plateaus, London:: Bloomsbury;.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Denson, S.. ( 2020), Discorrelated Images, Durham, NC:: Duke University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Derrida, J.. ( 1990;), ‘ Some statements and truisms about neologisms, newisms, postisms, parasitisms, and other small seismisms. ’, in D. Carroll. (ed.), The States of ‘Theory’: History, Art, and Critical Discourse, New York:: Columbia University Press;, pp. 6394.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Derrida, J.. ( 1995), Points …: Interviews, 1974–1994 / Jacques Derrida; edited by Elisabeth Weber; translated by Peggy Kamuf & Others, Stanford, CA:: Stanford University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Fisher, M.. ( 2016), The Weird and the Eerie, London:: Repeater Books;.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Friedman, T.L.. ( 2010;), ‘ Global weirding is here. ’, New York Times, 17 February, https://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/17/opinion/17friedman.html Accessed 7 April 2022.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Haraway, D.. ( 1992;), ‘ The promises of monsters: A regenerative politics for inappropriate/d others. ’, in J. Walmark. (ed.), Cybersexualities, Edinburgh:: Edinburgh University Press;, pp. 31466.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Hauser, B. R.. ( 2018;), ‘ Weird cinema and the aesthetics of dread. ’, in S. Moreland. (ed.), New Directions in Supernatural Horror Literature, Cham:: Palgrave Macmillan;, pp. 23552.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Hellstrand, I.,, Henriksen, L., and Koistinen, A.-K.. ( 2018;), ‘ Promises, monsters and methodologies: The erthics, politics and poetics of the monstrous. ’, Somatechnics, 8:2, pp. 14362.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Kara, S.. ( 2014;), ‘ Beasts of the digital wild: Primordigital cinema and the question of origins. ’, Sequence One, 1:4, pp. 18.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Kara, S.. ( 2016;), ‘ Anthropocenema: Cinema in the age of mass extinctions. ’, in S. Denson, and J. Leyda. (eds), Post-Cinema: Theorizing 21st-Century Film, Falmer:: REFRAME Books;, pp. 75084.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Lovecraft, H. P.. ( [1927] 2020;), ‘ Supernatural horror in literature. ’, in H. P. Lovecraft. (ed.), Lovecraft’s Guide to Writing: A Collection of Essays, Bristol:: Read Books;, https://www.perlego.com/book/1484485/lovecrafts-guide-to-writing-pdf. Accessed 1 February 2022.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Luckhurst, R.. ( 2015;), ‘ American weird. ’, in E. C. Link, and G. Canavan. (eds), The Cambridge Companion to American Science Fiction, New York:: Cambridge University Press;, pp. 194205.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. MacCormack, P.. ( 2010;), ‘ Lovecraft through Deleuzio-Guattarian gates. ’, Postmodern Culture, 20:2, https://doi.org/10.1353/pmc.2010.0008.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Martin-Jones, D.. ( 2016;), ‘ Trolls, tigers and transmodern ecological encounters: Enrique Dussel and a cine-ethics for the Anthropocene. ’, Film-Philosophy, 20:1, pp. 63103.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Moreland, S.. ( 2018;), ‘ The birth of cosmic horror from the s(ub)lime of Lucretius. ’, in S. Moreland. (ed.), New Directions in Supernatural Horror Literature: The Critical Influence of H. P. Lovecraft, Cham:: Springer;, pp. 1342.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Morton, T.. ( 2013), Hyperobjects: Philosophy and Ecology after the End of the World, Minneapolis, MN:: University of Minnesota Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Neilson, T.. ( 2020;), ‘ Annihilation (2018): Animating the (non)human of the Anthropocene, fantasy/animation. ’, Fantasy Animation , 26 November, https://www.fantasy-animation.org/current-posts/2019/11/26/annihilation-animating-the-nonhuman-of-the-anthropocene. Accessed 29 November 2022.
  29. Neimanis, A.. ( 2017), Bodies of Water: Posthuman Feminist Phenomenology, London:: Bloomsbury;.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Nirta, C., and Pavoni, A.. ( 2021;), ‘ Introduction. ’, in C. Nirta, and A. Pavoni. (eds), Monstrous Ontologies: Politics Ethics Materiality, Wilmington, DE:: Vernon Press;, pp. xvxxxiv.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Noys, B., and Murphy, T. S.. ( 2016;), ‘ Introduction: Old and new weird. ’, Genre, 49:2, pp. 11734.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Powell, A.. ( 2015;), ‘ Growing your own: Monsters from the lab and molecular ethics in posthumanist film. ’, in M. Hauskeller,, T. D. Philbeck, and C. D. Carbonell. (eds), The Palgrave Handbook of Posthumanism in Film and Television, Basingstoke:: Palgrave Macmillan;, pp. 7787.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Prince, S.. ( 1996;), ‘ True lies: Perceptual realism, digital images, and film theory. ’, Film Quarterly, 49:3, pp. 2737.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Rai, A. S.. ( 2013;), ‘ Ontology and monstrosity. ’, in M. Levina, and D. T. Buy. (eds), Monster Culture in the 21st Century: A Reader, London:: Bloomsbury Academic;, pp. 1521.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Rodowick, D. N.. ( 2007), The Virtual Life of Film, Cambridge, MA:: Harvard University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Ruddick, S. M.. ( 2017;), ‘ Rethinking the subject, reimagining worlds. ’, Dialogues in Human Geography, 7:2, pp. 11939.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Shildrick, M.. ( 2002), Embodying the Monster: Encounters with the Vulnerable Self, London:: Sage Publications;.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Shildrick, M.. ( 2018;), ‘ Visual rhetorics and the seductions of the monstrous: Some precautionary observations. ’, Somatechnics, 8:2, pp. 16377.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Stark, H.. ( 2017;), ‘ Deleuze, subjectivity and nonhuman becomings in the Anthropocene. ’, Dialogues in Human Geography, 7:2, pp. 15155.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF) ( 2018;), ‘ Annihilation’s mind-bending adaptation. ’, YouTube , 22 February, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJTwYo1llxA&t=39s. Accessed 10 April 2022.
  41. Turnbull, J.. ( 2021;), ‘ Weird. ’, Environmental Humanities, 13:1, pp. 27580.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Ulstein, G.. ( 2017;), ‘ Brave new weird: Anthropocene monsters in Jeff VanderMeer’s The Southern Reach. ’, Concentric-Literary and Cultural Studies, 43:1, pp. 7196.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. VanderMeer, A., and VanderMeer, J.. ( 2008), The New Weird, San Francisco, CA:: Tachyon Publications;.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. VanderMeer, J.. ( 2015a), Annihilation, London:: Fourth Estate;.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. VanderMeer, J.. ( 2015b;), ‘ From annihilation to acceptance: A writer’s surreal journey. ’, The Atlantic, 28 January, https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2015/01/from-annihilation-to-acceptance-a-writers-surreal-journey/384884. Accessed 7 April 2022.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Giuliani, Alice. ( 2023;), ‘ Weird monsters and monstrous media: The adaptation of Annihilation. ’, Journal of Adaptation in Film & Performance, Special Issue: ‘Making Monsters’, 16:1&2, pp. 10114, https://doi.org/10.1386/jafp_00091_1
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1386/jafp_00091_1
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error