Summary: “A wealthy art gallery owner is haunted by her ex-husband’s novel, a violent thriller she interprets as a symbolic revenge tale.”
Okay so maybe I just didn’t get it?
Nocturnal Animals juggles the stories of present day Susan, flashbacks of her life with her ex-husband, and the events of the book that he wrote which was apparently inspired by her. That’s a lot to cover for any movie. I feel like a plot like this where there is an entire story within the story can be dangerous because you run the risk of one being wayyy more interesting than the other.
That is exactly what happened here. Throw out the present day, throw out Susan all together and expand a bit upon the “book” and it could have been a really good movie. The three pieces never really came together for me. I’m thinking the final scene is supposed to be some kind of aha moment maybe (?) but it wasn’t. It was a let down.
There was no closure to two of the storylines and really no point to the movie itself other than style and shock value.
If you’re going to watch this one, enjoy the book plot line and ignore the rest of it. Definitely more enjoyable that way. And if you got something that I apparently missed, let me know in the comments!