Fleck’s nemesis, billionaire mayoral candidate Thomas Wayne, is a laughably injudicious politician, who whips up the economically-deprived section of the votership he has already branded “clowns” by declaring “they may not realise it, but I’m their only hope.” It may be a small thing, but, as some have wryly pointed out on social media, the fact that one of the loutish Wall Street bankers who is Fleck’s first victim is apparently au-fait with Stephen Sondheim, taunting Fleck as he does by singing Send in the Clowns, is an absurdity that shows up this film’s failure to create credible characters. The rampaging ‘have nots’ are patronisingly, incuriously characterised as an amorphous mob, while, by the same token, the ‘haves’ are shoddy cartoons. Not only does the decision to set it in the early 1980s keep any alleged social commentary at a safe distance, but it is so crashingly obviously an homage to films of the era – chiefly Martin Scorsese’s The King of Comedy – that its whole imagined world feels thoroughly synthetic.Īnd then there is the story’s lack of detail. Nobody thinks what it's like to be the other guy…”)īut for all the conversation there has been about it somehow reflecting our current moment, the film bears hardly more relation to political reality than the superhero product it so obviously wants to transcend. That much is clear from the way Fleck galvanises riots among Gotham’s disaffected citizens, sporting clown masks in tribute to him – and the overwritten monologue he delivers about the breakdown of the common good (“Nobody's civil anymore. This origin story for the DC villain – presented as one Arthur Fleck, a mentally-ill clown turned murderous by his social marginalisation and economic disenfranchisement – clearly wants to be seen as some kind of political allegory. In the latter camp certainly is one of Parasite’s key Oscar rivals: Joker, that box office colossus that also dominated critical discourse through the autumn – which is ironic, given it has so little, in fact, to say. But before anyone gets too excited about any supposed ‘war on capitalism’ being enacted by an industry that is, arguably, ever more fixated, itself, on the bottom line, it’s worth sorting the genuinely penetrating works from the mere charlatans. Looking beyond Parasite itself, its victory would also seem to represent the distillation of a cultural moment, as identified by many commentators over the last few months – when mainstream cinema decided to raise its placards and confront the inequality and divisions at the heart of capitalist society. Telling the story of a working-class family scamming their way into a rich household, it is a film that deals with the gap between the haves and the have nots in such trenchant terms, it would surely shame many attendees of the ceremony on Sunday evening – should they be endowed with self-awareness, at least.
Secondly, the South Korean film would be the first ever non-English-language production to claim the top award – a watershed moment that would be a symbolic step towards ending the perceived global dominance of US cinema.Īnd thirdly, subtitles aside, it would arguably be the most subversive best picture winner yet. First of all, it will be a best picture winner that is, in fact, the best picture among the nominees – very far from a given, looking at the history of previous victors. Should it clinch it, there are a number of reasons why it will be a remarkable choice. Do the Oscars reward the best costumes? According to the betting, Bong Joon-ho’s comedy-horror parable is second favourite to scoop the top prize this weekend after World War One drama 1917. Warning: this article contains spoilers for Joker, Knives Out, Hustlers, Us and ParasiteĪfter another awards race both retrograde and predictable, one thing could truly make the 2020 Oscars one to remember: a best picture win for Parasite.
0 kommentar(er)
