theguardian.com
Anderson's "One Battle After Another": A Pynchonesque Action Thriller
Paul Thomas Anderson's new film, "One Battle After Another," adapts elements from Thomas Pynchon's "Vineland," creating a bizarre action thriller focused on a dishevelled revolutionary, Bob, his pregnant partner Perfidia, and their daughter Willa, amidst a backdrop of political turmoil and border conflicts.
- What is the film's central conflict, and what are its immediate implications?
- The film's central conflict revolves around a heavily armed activist cell, including Bob and Perfidia, attacking migrant holding prisons and confronting the reactionary Col. Steven Lockjaw. This action directly results in Perfidia using Lockjaw's infatuation to control military opposition and raises questions about the morality of their tactics within the context of political resistance.
- What are the film's broader implications regarding family, identity, and the American Dream?
- The film uses the central paternity crisis and Willa's questioning of her family's past to symbolize broader questions about identity and belonging within a fractured society. This mirrors a larger societal struggle over the American Dream and who gets to define it, highlighting themes of dissent and the challenges of navigating conflicting political and personal loyalties.
- How does the film connect the counterculture of the 1960s with contemporary American politics?
- Anderson bridges the gap between the 1960s counterculture and the present day by depicting a continued struggle against a secretive ruling class and oppressive forces like ICE. The film doesn't explicitly mention MAGA or BLM, but the conflict between the activist cell and the military clearly reflects current political divisions and the ongoing fight for social justice.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The review frames the film as a bizarre, pulpy action thriller with a serious political message, emphasizing its unique blend of genres and the director's creative vision. The description of the film's tone – 'serious and unserious, exciting and baffling' – highlights its unconventional nature, potentially attracting viewers who appreciate such a style. However, the focus on the film's 'crazy fizz' and 'addictive' qualities might overshadow the film's political commentary for some readers. The headline could be improved to better reflect the film's political message if that is the main focus, instead of simply describing the film as an action movie.
Language Bias
The review uses strong, evocative language ('pulpy comic-book energy,' 'toxic new Vichyite Trump enthusiasm,' 'nerve-shredding score,' 'badass Deandra,' 'creepy, cartoony unwholesomeness') to describe the film and its characters. While engaging, some terms might be considered subjective or loaded, potentially influencing the reader's perception. For example, 'toxic' and 'Vichyite' carry strong negative connotations. More neutral alternatives could include 'controversial,' 'authoritarian,' or simply describing the specific aspects of the film that provoke those feelings. Similarly, 'badass' could be replaced with 'skilled' or 'competent'.
Bias by Omission
The review focuses heavily on the plot and characters, potentially overlooking other aspects of the film's production, such as cinematography, editing, and sound design. While these are mentioned briefly, a more in-depth analysis of their contribution to the overall effect would provide a more complete picture. Furthermore, alternative interpretations of the film's themes and symbolism are not explicitly addressed. The omission of diverse critical viewpoints could limit the reader's understanding of the film's complexities and impact.
False Dichotomy
The review doesn't explicitly present a false dichotomy, but the emphasis on the film's unique blend of 'serious' and 'unserious' elements might inadvertently suggest that these are mutually exclusive categories. A more nuanced approach might acknowledge the possibility of films successfully integrating serious themes with lighter tones without positioning them as opposing forces. The review could mention that the film's exploration of serious issues is done in a way that is neither overly simplistic nor lacking in levity.
Gender Bias
The review highlights strong female characters like Perfidia, Willa, and Deandra, showcasing their agency and capabilities. However, the description of Perfidia's actions ('captures and humiliates,' 'toy with Lockjaw's infatuation') could be interpreted as bordering on objectification. While her actions are framed positively within the context of the film's narrative, it's worth considering alternative phrasing that emphasizes her strategic intelligence and leadership without emphasizing her interaction with the male antagonist's sexual excitement. More focus should be placed on the roles of the supporting female characters to balance the presentation of gender dynamics within the plot.
Sustainable Development Goals
The movie directly addresses themes of social injustice, particularly concerning immigration and the treatment of marginalized communities. The depiction of migrant detention centers and the resistance against oppressive forces speaks to the struggle for equality and human rights, key aspects of SDG 10. The film critiques power structures and highlights the disproportionate impact of policies on vulnerable populations, thereby contributing to a discussion crucial for reducing inequality.