Sexuality/Nudity Mature
Violence Mature
Vulgarity Mature
Anti-Catholic Philosophy Mature
Rian Johnson is a talented writer and director who could be great if he didn't think he was such talented writer and director.
Glass Onion is the second film in what is now the Knives Out franchise. Johnson is trying to create an iconic fictional detective in the pantheon of Sherlock Holmes, Hercule Poirot, and Father Brown. And his character Benoit Blanc (Daniel Craig) is interesting enough to potentially make it... if he is placed in better quality films.
The movie carries with it some familiar elements in the genre. An eccentric billionaire Miles Bron (Edward Norton) invites a closer circle of friends to a private island:
-Claire Debella (Kathryn Hahn): a politician who is running for senate
-Lionel Toussaint (Leslie Odom Jr.): Miles' chief scientific advisor
-Birdie Jay (Kate Hudson): a vapid, aging model and clothing entrepreneur
-Peg (Jessica Henwick): Birdie's grounded assistant
-Duke Cody (Dave Bautista): the muscle-bound anti-feminist you-tuber.
-Whiskey (Madelyn Cline): Duke's eye-candy girlfriend.
-Andi Brand (Janelle Monae): Miles' former business partner with whom he shares great animosity.
The island is completely isolated from the rest of the world, with no staff on hand. It is filled with lavish amenities, security sensors, and it even has the original Mona Lisa on loan to Miles.
Somehow Benoit Blanc also receives and invitation, even though Miles has never met him before. However, Miles insists that Blanc remain because he is planning on putting on a murder mystery. And as you can imagine, what begins as game turns into a real whodunit.
The best thing about this movie is that there is a strong element of fun. It is no secret that Daniel Craig hated playing James Bond in the last few entries in the franchise. Here, you can tell that he is enjoying himself immensely as he chews the scenery with his ridiculously over-the-top accent. In the hands of a lesser actor, this would be too cartoonish. But in Craig's control, Blanc is endearing and fun. You cannot help but want to imitate his drawl as you watch him. Watching Blanc piece together the clues and lay them all out are the highlights of the film.
The other actors to a decent job as well. They do not take themselves too seriously as the bite into the awfulness of their characters. Each one of them has a motivation to commit murder and they lean heavily into it so that all of them become amiable suspects.
As I said at the beginning, Johnson is a talent director. The angles, color, and lighting are all excellent in this film. The island feels almost magical in the way it is shot in the daytime and full of shadows and menace in the darkness.
With all of this going for it, why doesn't the movie work?
There are two main problems with the film and both of them have to do with Johnson.
The first problem is that Johnson thinks you are stupid. A good murder mystery should be one where you are shocked by the outcome, but you say to yourself "Of course!" All of the elements should be laid out with a subtle eye so that it rewards those who pay attention. But you cannot make it too obvious or too obscure or the audience will feel cheated either way.
The problem is that Johnson does not trust his audience. Without spoiling anything, once the murder occurs, Johnson uses a visual cheat into his film. Once this occurs, he has ruined the entire mystery. He thinks that he is tricking you. He thinks his audience wouldn't be clever enough to pay close enough attention to the events. So he uses a storytelling trick that instead of obfuscating the killer, puts a gigantic spotlight on him or her. What is frustrating is that this trick is totally unnecessary. But Johnson thinks that you are too stupid to see his sleight-of-hand.
The second problem is difficult to describe without getting into a major spoiler about the ending. I will not reveal the killer, but this will give away one of the finale elements. MAJOR SPOILER AHEAD: SKIP THIS PARAGRAPH IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO HAVE THE MOVIE SPOILED. One of the things that leaves a horrible aftertaste about the movie is that the "hero" of the film intentionally burns the Mona Lisa. This is not done as some act of life or death. Instead, out of pure vengeance, the hero destroys one of the most beautiful and important paintings in the history of mankind. This is supposed to be an applause moment and it goes over like a lead balloon with me. It reminds me of those horrible political activists who try to destroy great works of art to get attention. I am convinced that those people's actions are not rooted in love for their cause but in hatred of the beautiful. I think that Rian Johnson hates art that is more beautiful than his own. The gleeful destruction of the Mona Lisa is Exhibit B. Exhibit A is his gleeful destruction of Star Wars with The Last Jedi.
END MAJOR SPOILER
Speaking of The Last Jedi, there is a part of the movie that I found rather repulsive. Miles describes to Blanc the joy of being a "disruptor." Please excuse this extended quote from the movie, but Miles says:
Okay. If you want to shake things up, you start with something small. You break a norm or an idea or a convention, some little business model, but you go with things that people are kind of tired of anyway. Everybody gets excited because you're busting up something that everyone wanted broken in the first place. That's the infraction point. That's the place where you have to look within yourself, and ask: Am I the kind of person who will keep going? Will you break more things? Break bigger things? Be willing to break the thing that nobody wants you to break? Because at that point, people are not going to be on your side. They're going to call you crazy. They're gonna say you're a bully. They're gonna tell you to stop. Even your partner will say you need to stop. Because as it turns out, nobody wants you to break the system itself. But that is what true disruption is, and that is what unites all of us. We all got to that line, and crossed it.
Listening to this speech, I could not help but hear Johnson justifying what he did with The Last Jedi. He took something that people absolutely loved and he upended it. He intentionally broke it. Now, I am not someone who thinks that The Last Jedi is irredeemably bad (in fact, there are some parts that are very good). But I cannot argue with the fact that this film broke Star Wars in a way from which is has not yet recovered. And Johnson did it because he could. He was interested in breaking beautiful things that other people love. And I think part of the reason is that he cannot stand that he will never be at that level. So by breaking it, he has a kind of immortal infamy. Think about this: Richard MarQuand directed the best of the Star Wars movies and very few people (even Star Wars fans) remember his name. But all Star Wars fans remember Rian Johnson.
This digression has a point. Johnson prides himself on being some kind of iconoclast, breaking the conventions of others. And yet, after watching two Knives Out films, Johnsons is a prisoner to his own conventions. All of the wealthy people are bad, vain, and without moral compass. After watching the first Knives Out, I was able to determine within literal seconds who the "hero" of this movie was going to be: the strong, female outsider. There are other elements that repeat as well, but I will refrain from giving away the mystery. It is ironic that Johnson cannot apply his trademark iconoclasm to his own films. As a result, the sharp edge of the mystery is dulled with repetition. And again, this is a shame, because his skills as a writer/director could elevate this material to become a better-than-average mystery.
Thematically, Johnson wants to deal with big issues of fame, power, money, celebrity, and politics. And as he occasionally is able to turn out the real gem of a quote like, "It's a dangerous thing to mistake speaking without thought for speaking the truth." But ultimately, Johnson does not have the maturity to deal with all of these ideas in a sophisticated way. As in Knives Out, characters become mouthpieces for certain ideologies to be held up for ridicule and refutation.
Returning one more time to The Last Jedi, I cannot help feel a connection between Johnson and his version of Kylo Ren. You have a person with the potential for a great deal of good. But he has such an intense hatred of all the things that better than him that it spoils everything he touches. This "Dark Side" remains with Johnson in Glass Onion. But hold on to hope that one day Johnson can free himself from this darkness and live up to his artistic potential.
 |
No comments:
Post a Comment