Review of Hold the Dark (2018) by Loic-Madec — 23 Mar 2019

Given the precision with which Saulnier directed Hold the Dark, I don't think his film is subject to multiple interpretations - at least not with regard to the main theme - or that it is necessary to use the book to get an explanation; Hold the Dark offers enough elements to decrypt it.

KEY CHARACTER: VERNON SLONE All the action in Iraq makes it possible to lay the foundations for receiving Saulnier's message. Vernon kills men he is paid to kill; without joy, unlike the stupid comrade who makes a selfie in front of corpses and who just before says, delighted: "You're a f****** meat-eater, Slone." First judgment. First mistake. Vernon Slone is not the compulsive killer he seems to be. His air is doubtful; he takes no pleasure in his task. He simply has a duty to perform. He joined the Army. He acts responsibly, as part of his commitment. In the city, his instinct led him to discover a comrade raping an Iraqi woman. The spectator first thinks that Vernon Slone is a voyeur, that he enjoys the "show". No. He stabs his American colleague. He then hands the knife to the woman, so that she can finish him off. Logically (and this will gradually become more prominent), Slone has eliminated a weak link in the group: an individual who, through his irresponsibility, damages the image of the group and potentially puts it at risk. Slone, in all conscience, for the interest of this group, was forced to intervene in order to rid it of an altered element: the rotten apple will not affect the other fruits in the basket. There was no barbarity in Slone's act. We must escape the temptation to disavow him, to blame his savage intervention, to propose an alternative (arrest the rapist, have him court-martialed). Hold the Dark being an allegory, is visible only in the rough contours of an elaborate discourse.

READING GRID This angle of the analysis of the film and this acceptance of the functioning of the mechanics that animates Vernon Slone, allow us to solve the puzzle proposed by Saulnier. *Why the masks?* When you see the scene of cannibalism among wolves, you don't judge them. You know that this can be so. You accept. Medora and Vernon wear a wolf mask when they do what they have to do, away from our judgments. The mask serves them to hide from our sententious gaze: we who are not free from defects, we who are not transparent to ourselves, we who, by our failings and our near-sightedness, put others and the group(s) in danger... when they, on the contrary, do what is in conformity with their commitments towards those with whom they are connected; they take, for example, at the end, the coffin of their child, because their involvement is total, even with the dead. *Policemen* They symbolize the failure of socialization and the disorder generated by the social bond, especially when important links in the chain are damaged. Donald Marium, the chief of police, is naturally sympathetic to us - his Indian wife and the fatherhood to come humanize him -, when he is in reality, despite his duties, a stranger to the altruism that should animate him. Indeed, when Cheeon's child was abducted, Donald Marium and his men only intervened the next day and did nothing thereafter. The child's body was never found: a tragedy in the Indian community of Keelut. However, the police don't care. The distance is not only physical (an hour's drive), it is also mental - because it is cultural: socialization stumbles on the identity reflex. This detachment maintains a persistent hatred between the police and the Indians.

*What happened with Medora?* The viewer has difficulty conceiving that it matters little enough to know why Medora killed her son. Whether Bailey is a child born (or not) of an incestuous relationship is of little interest. It is the consequences of Bailey's death (the serial murders: on a chain) that count. This concern with the original explanation by the audience is proportional to its impermeability to the rest of the film. We are inclined to judge the other. Also, we focus our attention on the Slones, on their actions - that we condemn... "naturally" - without realizing that these acts are much more than crimes: they are symbols serving the director's socio-anthropological discourse (our relationship to others) and his expectations (reflexivity work). *Core* Between the two worlds - that of Vernon (where an implacable reasoned instinct prevails, beyond good and evil, beyond morality) AND that of other humans (arbitrarily subjected to laws not chosen, not understood, not followed) -, the sweet Russell Core is painfully moving. His heart and his mind are pushing him to come and help Medora. He thinks he'll take advantage of the trip to reconnect with his daughter. One can well imagine him, before this journey, living perfectly alone with his texts and animal drawings, far from the hustle and bustle of social life. The return to this social life will be synonymous with hurt, temptations, dangers, doubts, pain...