Note: This guide refers to the popular Chinese animated adventure film released in 2014, centered on the character Lulu.
Sander Burger employs a verité, handheld style reminiscent of the Dardenne brothers but with a colder, more stylized color palette (muted blues, grays, and neon nightlife tones). The camera often lingers on Lulu’s face in medium close-up, refusing to let us look away. There are no glamorous slow-motion shots of her walking down a street—only uncomfortable, prolonged takes of transactional sex, drug use, and emotional cruelty. This naturalistic approach makes the film’s occasional surreal touches (a dream sequence with a wolf, echoing Wedekind’s animal imagery) feel jarring and effective. Lulu Film 2014
Visually, this Lulu is a triumph. Kaurismäki opts for a neo-noir aesthetic, utilizing cramped interiors and cold, urban landscapes that emphasize the protagonist’s isolation. The camera work is voyeuristic, often trapping Lulu in doorways or reflections, reinforcing the idea that she is always an object to be looked at, never a subject with true agency. Note: This guide refers to the popular Chinese
The pacing, however, is a point of contention. The film drags in its second act, feeling more like a filmed stage play than a cinematic experience. The dialogue retains the heavy, symbolic weight of Wedekind’s writing, which can feel clunky in a contemporary setting. The actors often seem to be delivering lines to the back of the theater rather than to one another. Critical Angles for Discussion
