From the first frames it becomes clear that the director expects his viewer to get acquainted with the film of the same name Argento.
From this, the first scenes are somewhat upset and shocking - instead of a bright game of red and blue shades, we are offered to enjoy the views of gray and shrapnel Berlin of the 70s. There are many plot lines in the film, they randomly begin to fall out from the very beginning, and by the middle they form a little-understood semantic mush on a gray background. Metaphysically, all this stands at a stake in the throat and provides suffocation, after which the film is named.
Guadagnino does not spare the viewer and puts symbolism above the cinematography of his work. The horror component is broken due to the constant insertions of side lines that do not allow the viewer to keep in suspense. Some moments with close-ups caused laughter, because it would have been more suitable for Argento’s film. Perhaps this is a kind of homage, but it turned out not very successful.
On the other hand, if you look at everything purely symbolically, everything falls into place. This is a film about wine, love and its triumph over hate. The failure of hatred is dedicated to the news inserts with the RAF, which greatly annoyed and made the immersion in the world of Berlin of the 70s cardboard. Guilt and love of conjugal and paternal - the line of the professor. Mother's love is the line of ballet school. As a result, special attention is paid to the feminine principle, so even the old professor was played by Tilda, who in school personified love.
The result was a horror, not a horror, but a metaphysical manifesto that love, even if sometimes in unexpected manifestations, will always conquer hatred, no matter what.
The puzzle is solved, composed amusingly, but when the plot of the film is sacrificed to the beauty of meta-history, the question arises, is it worth it? I don't think so.