Don't Look Up (2021) Netflix

[Mobbd]

Ahaha. "No politics in our house."

[Sebastian Cobb]

I thought it was ok, I enjoyed it and watched it with family who found fun in it as well. I can see the Network analogy (although Network is much, much better). It could've been a lot tighter than it was, but it was ultimately decent fun, and a popular film that ends with a bleak conclusion is a rare thing.

I think it's very funny how blue-ticks are having a collective benny about it mildly pointing the finger at them, and it being rated very highly by 'normies' though.

Although the last 'big' film that came out at Christmas was Knives Out and that was about a million times more fun.

[phantom_power]

I find the criticism that it isn't subtle a bit odd. Satire isn't always meant to be subtle. Dr Strangelove certainly isn't. And also that it is obvious. It may be to us but how many other mainstream films and TV shows are calling out tech bro billionaires, populist politics and complicit media, all towards the same goal?

[TrenterPercenter]

Not really enjoying it.  I get the satire but I don't think it is very funny and seems to be typical American centric "zany" shit.

Strangelove it ain't.

Update.

It's crap, regardless of whatever message it is pushing or whether it actually dishes out to everyone, it's just crap.  Small benefit might be that some people that wouldn't normally engage with the very obvious and clear issue might watch it because they heard Ariana Grande is in it (they will likely think it is about comets though).

anyway 4/10

[jobotic]

I thought it was ok, I enjoyed it and watched it with family who found fun in it as well. I can see the Network analogy (although Network is much, much better). It could've been a lot tighter than it was, but it was ultimately decent fun, and a popular film that ends with a bleak conclusion is a rare thing.

I think it's very funny how blue-ticks are having a collective benny about it mildly pointing the finger at them, and it being rated very highly by 'normies' though.

Although the last 'big' film that came out at Christmas was Knives Out and that was about a million times more fun.

Which blue ticks where?

[Ham Bap]

Thought it was ok and will be largely forgotten about within a week.

[thugler]

Thought it was fairly good. Reminded me of burn after reading a bit.

[TrenterPercenter]

Thought it was fairly good. Reminded me of burn after reading a bit.

Good shout (I didn't like that either).

[kalowski]

Halfway through.
Fucking rubbish.
This shit loves a jump cut.

[up_the_hampipe]

I thought the jump cut running gag was funny, especially when it'd cut to them with bag on head.

[Mobbd]

I thought that was pretty good and I don't relate to the specific criticisms here at all.

The portrayal of Musk and Trump types was spot-on. They didn't strike me as broad takes but right on the money, right down to the details of the President's make-up scheme and the gross too-precise hairline on the Musk guy. The way those two characters (and also the news anchor) dress and generally present themselves communicate precisely the way in which powerful people go mad.

The swipes at conspiracy theorists and the MAGA crowd were very good. They were shown to be clearly part of the problem (no "both-sides are as bad as each other" bullshit) but shown correctly as victims of misinformation, moral panic, status anxiety, and hype. I think that is the correct, objective read on reality and it does not malign anyone or have a high-horse moral or leftist/centrist/democrat political agenda.

The way in which the protagonists were ineffectual was well-observed too. It's the idea seen in a lot of films that "getting the truth out" will help in some way despite the fact that truth coming out in reality barely helps any more (e.g. Windrush scandal, Panama Papers, hostile environment, criminalisation of protest, covid corruption, social media algorithms knowing you better than knowing yourself) because our agency/ability to do anything about it has been so utterly destroyed. The scientists in this film labour under the usual belief among film protagonists that "getting the truth out" will solve something but the film itself does not. That's great.

The choice to make this a Veep/The Thick of It-style production struck me as a good call because the problem of something like a comet (or covid or climate change) becomes a matter of political will and a political conversation. The shorthand of a Veep-like production really helps with this.

A lot of people out there (if talking to my relatives is anything to go by) don't understand the inherent "Chinese finger trap" nature of a collective action problem or their place in it. This film might actually help get that message across without getting their backs up or being too subtle about it.

Sometimes, when I watch Star Trek or similar, and a problem like an asteroid collision is dealt with using science and diplomacy and resourceful intelligence, I wonder if we would conduct ourselves accordingly should it happen to us. I always think "probably not," and now this film plays out that suspicion in an entertaining way.

I guess I went in with relatively low expectations because of the cool reception here and elsewhere, but I quite like Old Man Leo these days and wanted to give it a try. I put it on at breakfast with the intention of watching 20 minutes or so but ended up watching the whole thing. To be actually drawn into something like that doesn't happen very often to me these days.

[checkoutgirl]

Was disappointed in this and felt embarrassed during the Network style meltdowns by both JLaw and Leo. Just meh, why does this exist. Also feels redundant now Forrest Trump is out of office so it's like they missed the boat a bit and it should have been released before 2020 finished.

Idiocracy was better, and shorter.

[TrenterPercenter]

Just seen that TYT has felt compelled to make video about CNNs response to the film.  Obviously I'm not going to listen to 20 minutes of Cenk Uygur talking 'directly' to me in a wrestle mania voice about how "butt hurt" those that have political allegiances and roles in the centrist media are (unnecessary really most people agree with what the film is saying and lampooning).  Isn't the film partly about the online trash talking culture of YTubers embellishing and reacting to things for the dollar??

I think the best comment I've seen about the film was a public reviewer on Rotten Tomatoes who said "it's basically Hollywood enjoying the smell of it's own farts".  Yep I'd say that's about spot on it's not bold in anyway and it uses the overly daft non-realism as a cover for it's lack of bite on anything in particular, it's painfully centrist imo whilst sending up what is ultimately it's own side (in a kind of look how meta we are smug manner).  As such it is instantly forgettable and meaningless.  I suppose for American audiences with generally under developed palettes for satire (#notallmercans) it might pass as something edgy but I'm a bit surprised at the amount of comedic-aficionados on here that don't see it as SFCs.  It also magically seems to have binded people on the right and the left in agreeing it's a ridiculous and unhelpful portrayal of either side, that doesn't mean that these groups shouldn't be parodied just parodies need to be better.

But aside form all that culture war shite the film is tries to make out it is against; it's just not a good film imo; the acting is crap.  Di Caprio is basically wasted playing Michael Shannon playing a anxious scientist, Lawrence isn't very good most of the time regardless what film she is in and the rest of the cast range between second rate rip offs from Veep and the Hunger Games.  It really isn't very funny, well scripted, and is jam packed full of typical film tropes.

Still as mentioned it might be good in that it might draw some people in with its infantile sugar coated cynicism and they might "look up" though what at exactly is unclear.   

[Mobbd]

Just seen that TYT has felt compelled to make video about CNNs response to the film.  Obviously I'm not going to listen to 20 minutes of Cenk Uygur talking 'directly' to me in a wrestle mania voice about how "butt hurt" those that have political allegiances and roles in the centrist media are (unnecessary really most people agree with what the film is saying and lampooning).  Isn't the film partly about the online trash talking culture of YTubers embellishing and reacting to things for the dollar??

I have no idea what a word of this means. It is like another language.

[TrenterPercenter]

I have no idea what a word of this means. It is like another language.

Sorry, I know I struggle sometimes with my grammar/word blindness but I can't see how you've found that hard to understand or that you "can't understand a word of it" or "that it is like another language".

Cenk Uygur (the host of TYT - The Young Turks) has posted a video on YouTube about CNN being upset about the film that is the subject of this thread.  I do not care to listen to this person who makes these videos in which he talks directly to the camera (i.e. directly to you - after he has tried to sell you something of course) in a exaggerated boisterous fashion (a bit like how people talk at wrestle-mania - a simulated fighting show with boisterous commentary).  I am of the opinion, of myself and of most people on CAB that the already agree with what the person whose name is Cenk is already going to say i.e. that CNN are shit. 

However, the film depicts the sensational use of social media to infantilise viewers with pointless exaggerated arguments for clicks and ultimately money.  So to my mind there is some hypocrisy here with this person, Cenk doing exactly this, whilst trying to flog some merchandise.

here you can actually watch the video and tell me if I am wrong about this.

Cheers.

[Mobbd]

Cheers.

Gotcha. Sorry man. I understand you.

Just to return to the "Hollywood enjoying the smell of its own farts" critique from Rotten Tomatoes, I think a person would have to take a very generous interpretation of that statement to agree with it. That sort of thing would be a fair criticism of something that overly honours or mythologises the Hollywood system like La La Land or Once Upon a Time in Hollywood or, simply, any Academy Awards Ceremony.

But this is a sci-fi disaster movie like Independence Day squeezed through a Veep-shaped aperture for topicality and because the climate emergency deserves a bit more gravity and respect as a subject matter than, say, the 2012 (the movie) treatment. I think it works pretty well but, if I didn't, it wouldn't be down to Hollywood loving itself too much. It has famous actors in it like many, many other movies and, as these things go, it's not exactly "look at me! look at me!" territory. It's quite a modest film really.

[TrenterPercenter]

But this is a sci-fi disaster movie like Independence Day squeezed through a Veep-shaped aperture for topicality and because climate emergency deserves a bit more than, say, the 2012 (the movie) treatment. I think it works pretty well but, if I didn't, it wouldn't be down to Hollywood loving itself too much. It has famous actors in it like any other big movie and, as these things go, it's not exactly "look at me! look at me!" territory. It's quite a modest film really.

I would say it is the other way round a veep-shaped commentary on the social-politico culture of USA squeezed through a disaster movie.  It's essentially the retelling of the chicken-licken fable.

The smelling of its own farts comment is on the money because it isn't the subject matter, which you seem to be viewing this through the prism of and therefore seek comparisons with "the type of things Hollywood makes films about" but the manner in which is delivered; which is a smug, why aren't people "looking up" at all of this obvious stuff with the protagonists playing the role of the frustrated knowledgeable voices in our heads.  This elevated position is the one of Hollywood which can make moral decisions about necessary changes because it has the resources and means to do so with minimum disruption; this isn't the same for the masses who are barely given a brain cell between them.  It also ignores the role Hollywood and even the actual film, manifests itself in these problems.  That is pretty self-masturbatory in my book. 

Btw this is incredibly different from Network and Strangelove because both of those films humanise and critique the main characters making them relatable and less preachy.  Lawrences character is relatable because she has a mullet - SFCs sorry.

[thugler]

Eh, how does this not critique the main characters also?

[Mobbd]

The smelling of its own farts comment is on the money because it isn't the subject matter, which you seem to be viewing this through the prism of and therefore seek comparisons with "the type of things Hollywood makes films about" but the manner in which is delivered; which is a smug, why aren't people "looking up" at all of this obvious stuff with the protagonists playing the role of the frustrated knowledgeable voices in our heads.  This elevated position is the one of Hollywood which can make moral decisions about necessary changes because it has the resources and means to do so with minimum disruption; this isn't the same for the masses who are barely given a brain cell between them.  It also ignores the role Hollywood and even the actual film, manifests itself in these problems.  That is pretty self-masturbatory in my book.

It just didn't seem that way to me at all. Don't get me wrong, I don't see this as "great" like Network or anything but it was a pleasant surprise and I thought it was by and large good. I don't relate to to this point of view in the slightest. What would it (or any other mainstream film, especially given the current MCU-dominated context of mainstream cinema) have to do to not be a case of "Hollywood smelling it's own farts"?

What is an SFC? (Not disagreeing with anything here, I just don't know what it means).

[Mobbd]

Eh, how does this not critique the main characters also?

Yes, I also think it does this very successfully. The protagonists are ineffectual because of their naive believe that "getting the truth out" will help. And the antagonists are little but criticisms. Everyone has an ego of sorts, which gets in the way. That's not a script-writing accident, it's all by design.

[Dickie_Anders]

Bottom line: it feels as if the writers of the film thought it was much cleverer and funnier than it actually was. That's where the smug vibes come from. Adding the self-referentiality and meta Hollywood "We know we're cunts too!" aspect to the mix makes a recipe for pure wank I'm afraid

[TrenterPercenter]

Only in very superficial and sfc ways.

Ok let's "blue sky this folks and get into it"

Scientist man is a nerd who can't communicate because he's a little bit n-n-n-n-nervous (despite being a professor), but then oh-oh script change! let's make him not a nerd and a sex object, BOOM! ammIright!? Never saw that one coming.

He literally has an affair realises "home" is actually better than the glitz and glamour of the media and runs off back to his very forgiving wife to die.  This is Hollywood that is selling you that moral story of a 5 year old, Hollywood ffs.

It's split opinion for sure I just didn't think so many on CAB would be on the side of my friends who think Will Ferrell is the funniest man in the world and that Beiber's latest album actually is one of the greatest of the last decade.

[TrenterPercenter]

Hollywood "We know we're cunts too!" aspect to the mix makes a recipe for pure wank I'm afraid

Exactly.


"I'm a right cunt me"

Wow, so edge.

[phes]

Turned off this shit halfway through and banged on night of the comet because it also has a comet

[Mobbd]

I just didn't think so many on CAB would be on the side of my friends who think Will Ferrell is the funniest man in the world and that Beiber's latest album actually is one of the greatest of the last decade.

Well, I wouldn't say that!

What does SFC mean? I've googled it and I still don't know. Doesn't seem to be commonly used. "Southern Fried Chicken" seems to be its most common meaning.

[TrenterPercenter]

It just didn't seem that way to me at all. Don't get me wrong, I don't see this as "great" like Network or anything but it was a pleasant surprise and I thought it was by and large good. I don't relate to to this point of view in the slightest. What would it (or any other mainstream film, especially given the current MCU-dominated context of mainstream cinema) have to do to not be a case of "Hollywood smelling it's own farts"?

What is an SFC? (Not disagreeing with anything here, I just don't know what it means).

Shit For Cunts (a Cabbism for bandwagon stuff that people like that is actually shite).

You are completely missing the point about self-referential, meta social-commentary and satire.  It's a satire, it isn't like every other film, satire and parodies live and die on how well they are crafted (this one isn't).  Nothing to do with these poor comparisons you are making (are seriously thinking that the smelling your own farts comment means all films or any film made in Hollywood?!).

It's quite clear you are watching this film in a very different way to what I think even its creators intended.

[TrenterPercenter]

Well, I wouldn't say that!

Just saying those are the people IRL that have got the hots for this film.  I've already been accused that I didn't like the film because it wasn't "high brow" enough for me.  Which  is generally the big calling card of SFCs stuff.

[Mobbd]

Shit For Cunts (a Cabbism for bandwagon stuff that people like that is actually shite).

Aha!

You are completely missing the point about self-referential, meta social-commentary and satire.

Yes, I am. But not willfully.

(are seriously thinking that the smelling your own farts comment means all films or any film made in Hollywood?!).

I don't know. I still don't really understand that point to be honest. I guess you're just losing an argument with a stupid person who doesn't know he's lost like in that Jam sketch. Sorry about that.

It's quite clear you are watching this film in a very different way to what I think even its creators intended.

I am a post-structuralist. I will eat up my shit for cunts then.

[Vitalstatistix]

I agree with Mobbd. I didn't feel this film was smug and self-congratulatory at all. The tone, at least to me, was clearly angry, exasperated and fearful.

[kalowski]

It was the style that annoyed me most. Jump cuts and strange asides that added nothing.
And the characters were, for me, too extreme for the satire, especially the chief of staff who was ludicrously vile. It was satire painted with wall brushes; no fine detail whatsoever.
Even Cate Blanchett, who was the best thing in it, strayed into too much exaggeration.