The Red Lips of the Octopus

The Red Lips of the Octopus is an eccentric surrealist adaptation of the poem by Aleister Crowley that will either utterly confuse viewers or leave them spellbound by the avant-garde ideas.

The short film directed by Lux Kapsaki defies the conventional cinematic narrative with no dialogue and no linear storytelling and instead has a drug-fuelled, stylised aesthetic about nostalgia and memory. The film follows Aleister Crowley’s, played by Jeff Kristian, trip down memory lane as he reminisces about his intense love affair with Herbert Charles Pollitt, played by Brandon Edwards, in 1898. Crowley met Pollitt whilst both were at the University of Cambridge, with Pollitt famously performing as the drag queen Diane de Rougy. Pollitt also maintained a close friendship with Oscar Wilde. Despite the time period, this is no Victorian-era romance biopic such as Pride and Prejudice or Far from the Madding Crowd but instead a maddening sequence of scenes that lend themselves to more of an acid rock aesthetic with multiple dreamlike superimpositions, saturated colours and a hypnotic psychedelic rock score which is also composed by Jeff Kristian. This is what I liked about the film the most, as the visuals and score create a captivating mood that keeps you guessing where the film is heading next. There is so much creativity being thrown at the wall that not all of it sticks, but it is admirable all the same.

Narratively, this film is purposefully ambiguous and does not follow a straightforward plot. It is a labyrinth of the past and present colliding. Scenes are stitched together as if Crowley were drifting in and out of different memories he had with Pollitt. Fragments of memories are thrown upon the viewers with little to no explanation about what is truly happening, and each sequence is like its own short film. This structure allows for the film to feel more dreamlike and realistic to how someone would remember love rather than a standard plot structure that could feel artificial. It also means that the film follows the structure and emotion of the poem more closely.

Due to there being no dialogue in the film, the actors are therefore relying on facial expressions and body language to convey the feelings of the characters. Much like a silent film, it is the actor’s responsibility to portray the emotional hooks of the film with glances and subtle expressions. The job is made harder by how vague the plotting of the film is, so the actors cannot rely on the scripting to give emotional depth. Jeff Kristian manages to portray Crowley with a heavy weight of bittersweetness as he reminisces on his past. The character is happy with his memories that he had, but now as an older man he may wish to be that young, free and in love again.

It is hard to write about the negatives or criticisms of this film purely because this film is so experimental and surreal that it really does depend on the person’s taste. If you want a simple standard film that has dialogue and a traditional plot structure, then this film might not work fully for you. The ambiguity and open-to-interpretation nature of the film means that different viewers may come away with different perspectives on the meaning of the film and the themes it is trying to tell. The film requires patience, but its barrage of abstract ideas may put some viewers off.

Overall Lux Kapsaki’s adaptation of Aleister Crowley’s poem is a swing for the fences that must be admired for its ambition, technical craftmanship and commitment to surrealism. The film will not work for everyone and will be divisive, as many viewers could be confused by the ambiguity of the film and lack of true emotional connection to the characters. The film will appeal to viewers looking for something unconventional and different from a standard film.