•
Rating:
“There are no rules” (Michelle Yeoh)
What prompted the always so conservative members of the Academy to award 7 Oscars to a film as innovative as it is "young" (it might be that, once past 30, you might appreciate it less, I say might because I found it hilarious at 40) and so complicated? A mystery. 7 heavyweight Oscars, practically the main ones: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actress, Best Supporting Actress, Best Supporting Actor, Best Original Screenplay, Best Editing. But also 2 Golden Globes and a host of awards of all kinds that brought the total to 21 trophies for a work that was quietly released in the U.S. in March 2022 and surprisingly exploded a few months later, raking in 77.2 million euros in its home country alone. It quickly became a cultural phenomenon, and everyone started talking about it. Practically an instant cult movie like we hadn't seen in a while.
Describing the plot is impossible, also due to unavoidable spoilers, given the mix of twists reserved by the brilliant screenplay. In short, a family of Chinese people settled in the U.S., owners of a laundromat up to their necks in debt, goes to the tax office to try to sort out their issues. As far as I’m concerned, I can’t say more, in the sense that we quickly discover that the entire film is based on the concept of the multiverse, meaning there are an infinite number of planets and worlds where the same people from the first universe, that of the laundromat and taxes, move in other areas and contexts. But if, for example, in “Spiderman” (meaning the latest cartoons released between 2018 and 2023) the multiverses were at most 3, and each was characterized by similar but distinguishable characters, here it’s the opposite: each character in their multiverse is always themselves, sometimes a kung-fu teacher, sometimes a chef, sometimes a movie star, but they don’t change appearance or psychology. Their encounters, and the film is essentially a continuous interweaving of worlds that stack upon one another, are complex and difficult to understand (compared to this, “Inception” was a walk in the park). The pace is so frenetic and relentless that at times it’s hard to quickly grasp which multiverse we’re in. Don’t worry, just pay a little attention, and if you get into the right mood, you’ll have a blast, and the two hours and fifteen minutes will fly by like a light spring breeze.
The point is that, as the protagonist says, there are no rules. The Daniels, who are not related but two directors with the same first name, Daniel (Daniel Kwan, Daniel Scheinert) have a blast directing a film that can do anything and where anything is possible. Cinema has no boundaries: they go beyond. They constantly change the image format (from 16:9 to widescreen), come up with trivial but hilarious narrative solutions (to shift from one universe to another, everyone has their methods, including inserting trinkets into the sacred orifice), and explore all, absolutely all, cinematic genres: in essence, the film is a fantasy, a comedy, a musical, a thriller, a drama, and it doesn’t even shy away from animation, albeit briefly. There’s everything from the style of wuxia film to the aesthetics of oriental cinema in an American guise; worlds where individuals have learned to use their feet instead of their hands because the latter are too large and sausage-shaped, to fighters slapping opponents with rubber phalluses; from talking stones, alone, in a barren (possibly) American desert to a series of surprisingly erudite citations: it's not surprising to find the "heretical" reference to "2001: A Space Odyssey," but it’s jaw-dropping to see one from Terrence Malick and the concept at the base of “It’s a Wonderful Life” by Frank Capra, no one is useless, we all live for something. Not surprisingly, the ending is a hymn to fighting for good, not for killing.
In the end, yes, if we want to break down the concept of the work, it is: adolescent issues to be resolved between daughter and mother. Only that instead of solving them like everyone else, the Daniels came up with the idea of the multiverse and a cinema so free and anarchic that in a production of such high budget leaves one bewildered. The two started writing the screenplay in 2010, and only in 2018 the film went into production, but in 2010 thinking of a work of such lineage was honestly unthinkable. And it is also inspired by a video game, Everything, so some nitwitted critics' accusations that it is more of a video game than a film go out the window (if all films inspired, even vaguely, by a video game were like this, there would be reason to rejoice).
The all-star cast is, classically, the cherry on top: Michelle Yeoh, the unforgettable protagonist of "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon," is, as is known, a marvel, and she proves it extensively here as well, but also astonishing are those around her, starting with the husband played by Ke Huy Quan (he was the little kid from “Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom”) in great shape, and a playful, heavily made-up, and vicious (but only to a point) Jamie Lee Curtis, a mix between an old spinster and a very sour martial arts fighter, who won her only Oscar swiping it from the young Stephanie Hsu who portrays the bad guy here, in a versatile costume and demeanor change.
The American critics openly praised it:
“a lush and anarchic genre whirlwind" (The New York Times);
the Italian critics were more lukewarm, perhaps stunned by such excess of whirlwind, and they indeed, backward-looking with their heads turned backward. See the review by Paolo Mereghetti (https://www.corriere.it/spettacoli/cinema-serie-tv/23_gennaio_29/01-spettacoli-apretxtcorriere-web-sezioni-84530034-9fc4-11ed-a89a-ab57ad67871c.shtml), acidic in its way.
Sure, no producer wanted to put in money. No one willing to spend on a film of his own, to explain it, and maybe read it, very convoluted, written by two directors who only had one film under their belt, a colossal flop at that (“Swiss Army Man,” 2016). It took A24 and the “guarantee” from the Russo brothers (those of “Avengers Endgame”) to create a masterpiece of fantasy and originality that stands out (almost) everything in the asphyxiating film scene of recent times despite multiverse’s not being new itself. But is it, as many claim, the ultimate film on the subject?
And now, if you’ll allow me, a small personal note: I have submitted many reviews lately, some written in distant times and revised and corrected, others, like this one, brand new. From now on, due to pressing work commitments, I won’t have time to write reviews anymore (especially long ones like this), so for a while, I will step aside. Thanks to those who wanted to read me up until now.
Loading comments slowly
