Quote:
Originally Posted by Sculpt
I thought Don't Look Up does a great job with that, in that I think it takes aim at the destructive dogma attitude and process rather than specifically "naming names" that would otherwise make it miss the forest for the trees. I think the film does lose focus in wacky ways and should have been edited down, especially the ending, but overall, I thought it was pretty strong. What did you think of it? (if you saw it)_
|
I have seen it - and written a pretty lengthy review
One of the interesting things about this film is the division in opinions and the negative reviews.
Personally, I found it entertaining. It's perhaps not a genuine masterpiece (like Dr Strangelove), but for me, it worked as a a satire.
When it comes to the criticism, there is nuance to be added. For example, take the lack of subtlety: When things are too subtle, they can go over peoples' heads. It reminded me of Doug Walker's sketch where he represented The Matrix as a dumbed down, yet more successfull version of Dark City. Plus, it also fits a time where even country leaders don't seem capable of subtlety (or not as much as they used to be).
You could say that it's a bit all over the place. Then again, that sort of storytelling somehow fits the "interesting times" we are currently living in with a lot going on. Wether it's covid, climate, anti-vaxxers, polarisation,... We are so divided that we cannot even agree on what facts are or wether facts are even worth taking seriously. Which is what DiCaprio pointed out in his enraged monologue, an updated version of Howard Beale in Network.
On some level, we are pretty much involved in one way or the other (or one of the previous topics) and so we are all the butt of the joke at one point.
The people paid to review the film are represented by Tyler Perry, of all people (surprisingly well as the superficial TV host). Or the moments when the makers poke fun at on line comments being completely beside the point, stupid and/or petty.
Or take the politicians. Having read op-ed pieces in my neck of the woods on the farce of politics, where people don't even listen to each other, I can sort of relate to Jennifer Lawrence's line on how they're "not smart enough to be this evil". Or how they are too obsessed with polls and elections to excute a genuine policy.
I'm not sure where they wanted to go with Isherwell. Is he supposed to be a charicature of Bezos and Zuckerberg? Or is he supposed to be some sort of cult leader? Or how some brands look like half cults? On that note, I thought the legal disclaimer on the info line's add was a nice touch. It represents the kind of cynicism that some companies are capable of these days.
In a way, I liked how the main characters were flawed, with Kate losing her shit when confronted with the backlash and the unwillingness. Or Randall as a scientist so obsessed with his work that he becomes socially awkward/handicapped and does not know how to handle attention from other women. There was something sweet to the ending and how they all gathered for dinner. Though I understand how you would need a big spoon of suspension of disbelief to skip past the quick forgiveness of the infedilty.
So was it them and a case of a story not well told? Or is it us and have we become too jaded? Have not quite worked that out yet.