Skip to main content

We need somebody to walk the clones.

Jojo Rabbit
(2019)

(SPOILERS) Not so much the banality of evil as of taking pot-shots at easy targets, Taika Waititi’s typically insubstantial, broad-brush, sketch-comedy approach isn’t the best of fits for the formulation of this self-styled “anti-hate satire”. The issue isn’t so much that it’s inappropriate or insensitive to broach material of Nazi persecution of the Jews comedically as that the manner in which it has been done here is so obvious as to be redundant. Waititi said his inspiration for making the movie was partly the statistics on those Americans who had never heard of Auschwitz; Jojo Rabbit is as cack-handed a way of going about informing them as Life is Beautiful.

The result of his impulse to express himself with explicit commentary is a muddle of tonal awkwardness and narrative lethargy. The Harvey-esque set-up, of ten-year-old Johannes/Jojo (Roman Griffin Davies), a budding young Nazi with an imaginary Hitler friend (played by Waititi himself, mugging shamelessly for the Fatherland) has a seed of potential, one overlaid onto Chrisine Leunens’ 2008 novel Caging Skies, such that Jojo discovers Jewish girl Elsa (Thomasin McKenzie) hiding in his attic (actually hidden there by his mother Rosie, played by Scarlett Johansson).

But humour-wise, Jojo Rabbit is a one-joke premise played to its bluntest and least inventive potential, crystallised by Jojo’s payoff line “Fuck off, Hitler” as he boots his former pal out of a window. We all know Nazis are fuckers, and idiots, beholden to ridiculous, offensive and chilling ideas, which makes satirising them really easy, commendable and a goldmine of mirth, right? No, it makes satirising them largely tedious, predictable and puerile, if attacked from the same lazy starting point. It’s not really satire if it’s glaring and indisputable.

Much of the first hour of Jojo Rabbit is a stir and repeat of the wacky/stupid antics of its Hitler Youth, along with Jojo having the same circular conversation with Elsa about Nazis demonising of Jews (making a joke out of which gets stale the fourth or fifth time, let alone the fourteenth or fifteenth).

Korr is very good, but has very little to work with as she’s simply there to reflect/deflect Jojo’s ignorance and prejudice. Davis has too much placed on his shoulders. He lacks the timing to deliver Waititi’s gags (all of which are in the same self-satisfied style, irrespective of the character delivering them) and the range to make the emotional moments land (notably, when he finds his mother’s hanging corpse, Waititi treats the scene largely as a tableau – his stylistic fall-back – rather than relying on Davis’ performance).

Admittedly, going into a movie with preconceived notions can lead to one looking to confirm them, and I had my doubts on both the premise of Jojo Rabbit and the general wave of adulation that has buoyed Waititi for a few years now. I’ve found his recent films watchable but also infused by an off-putting air of smugness that comes from an unchecked authorial voice prone to smothering the material (so witness the demise of Steven Moffat).

In Jojo Rabbit, that reaches the stage of actually trying the patience, but what surprised me most was how inert large portions of the movie are. Waititi has the mantra of his message preceding him, yet he doesn’t really know what he’s doing with the material beyond waving that flag and a smattering of very elementary gags (there’s even a “one ball” one). He certainly fails to create any resonance, aside perhaps from the aforementioned moment of Jojo finding his mother’s body. Other sequences are painfully misjudged, such as Rosie acting out her husband’s return (Johansson’s limitations as a performer have never been more evident). Waititi doesn’t so much walk a line between sentiment and slapstick as dive into both with careless abandon, so both are equally ill-judged and bereft of effectiveness.

As such, I was surprised, briefly, when the Jojo Rabbit suddenly clicked in and seemed fully engaged during the sequence where Stephen Merchant’s Gestapo agent Deertz comes to inspect Jojo’s house, and Elsa makes the dangerous move of posing as Jojo’s dead sister. Suddenly, the material exhibits purpose and energy, with danger and stakes, and even the comedy clicks into a sure rhythm (the “Heil Hitler” exchanges). There’s even some nuance, courtesy of Sam Rockwell’s one-eyed army officer, evidently aware of the subterfuge being enacted.

But just as quickly, it’s gone again. It’s emblematic of Waititi’s facile approach that the “in” to Rockwell being sympathetic is that he’s secretly gay and therefore has an innate empathy for the persecuted (along with a love of flamboyant fashions and makeup). And that the initially promising soundtrack choices – the use of The Beatles’ German version of I Wanna Hold your Hand – culminate in the most overused of all anthems, Heroes, mimed by now liberated Jojo and Elsa. It’s the icing on a cake of sickly-sweet glibness.

Waititi has little apparent facility for writing or eliciting strong character work – as with the horrors of the Nazi ethos, if he keeps things broad and sufficiently at a distance, he and we can remain broadly, with the emphasis on broadly, comfortable and unchallenged – and his stylistic approach – sub-Wes Anderson tableaus and occasional use of “impactful” and usually-musically-accompanied slow motion – serve to emphasise just how one-dimensional he is as a director. The Nazi “satire” in Jojo Rabbit is about as sharp as your average adolescent activist’s nascent political insights, and the character work not really much more advanced. There are plenty of strong satires of the Nazis out there, from Ernst Lubitsch’s To Be or Not to Be to Mel Brooks’ The Producers, or even Brooks’ To Be or Not to Be. Jojo Rabbit is a long way from their territory, unfortunately.


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Popular posts from this blog

Abandon selective targeting. Shoot everything.

28 Weeks Later (2007) (SPOILERS) The first five minutes of 28 Weeks Later are far and away the best part of this sequel, offering in quick succession a devastating moral quandary and a waking nightmare, immortalised on the screen. After that, while significantly more polished, Juan Carlos Fresnadillo reveals his concept to be altogether inferior to Danny Boyle and Alex Garland’s, falling back on the crutches of gore, nihilism, and disengaging and limiting shifts of focus between characters in whom one has little investment in the first place.

The Bible never said anything about amphetamines.

The Color of Money (1986) (SPOILERS) I tend to think it’s evident when Scorsese isn’t truly exercised by material. He can still invest every ounce of the technical acumen at his fingertips, and the results can dazzle on that level, but you don’t really feel the filmmaker in the film. Which, for one of his pictures to truly carry a wallop, you need to do. We’ve seen quite a few in such deficit in recent years, most often teaming with Leo. The Color of Money , however, is the first where it was out-and-out evident the subject matter wasn’t Marty’s bag. He needed it, desperately, to come off, but in the manner a tradesman who wants to keep getting jobs. This sequel to The Hustler doesn’t linger in the mind, however good it may be, moment by moment.

Doctors make the worst patients.

Coma (1978) (SPOILERS) Michael Crichton’s sophomore big-screen feature, and by some distance his best. Perhaps it’s simply that this a milieu known to him, or perhaps it’s that it’s very much aligned to the there-and-now and present, but Coma , despite the occasional lapse in this adaptation of colleague Robin Cook’s novel, is an effective, creepy, resonant thriller and then some. Crichton knows his subject, and it shows – the picture is confident and verisimilitudinous in a way none of his other directorial efforts are – and his low-key – some might say clinical – approach pays dividends. You might also call it prescient, but that would be to suggest its subject matter wasn’t immediately relevant then too.

I said I had no family. I didn’t say I had an empty apartment.

The Apartment (1960) (SPOILERS) Billy Wilder’s romcom delivered the genre that rare Best Picture Oscar winner. Albeit, The Apartment amounts to a rather grim (now) PG-rated scenario, one rife with adultery, attempted suicide, prostitution of the soul and subjective thereof of the body. And yet, it’s also, finally, rather sweet, so salving the darker passages and evidencing the director’s expertly judged balancing act. Time Out ’s Tom Milne suggested the ending was a cop out (“ boy forgives girl and all’s well ”). But really, what other ending did the audience or central characters deserve?

Your desecration of reality will not go unpunished.

2021-22 Best-of, Worst-of and Everything Else Besides The movies might be the most visible example of attempts to cling onto cultural remnants as the previous societal template clatters down the drain. It takes something people really want – unlike a Bond movie where he kicks the can – to suggest the model of yesteryear, one where a billion-dollar grosser was like sneezing. You can argue Spider-Man: No Way Home is replete with agendas of one sort or another, and that’s undoubtedly the case (that’s Hollywood), but crowding out any such extraneous elements (and they often are) is simply a consummate crowd-pleaser that taps into tangible nostalgia through its multiverse take. Of course, nostalgia for a mere seven years ago, for something you didn’t like anyway, is a symptom of how fraught these times have become.

Listen to the goddamn qualified scientists!

Don’t Look Up (2021) (SPOILERS) It’s testament to Don’t Look Up ’s “quality” that critics who would normally lap up this kind of liberal-causes messaging couldn’t find it within themselves to grant it a free pass. Adam McKay has attempted to refashion himself as a satirist since jettisoning former collaborator Will Ferrell, but as a Hollywood player and an inevitably socio-politically partisan one, he simply falls in line with the most obvious, fatuous propagandising.

Captain, he who walks in fire will burn his feet.

The Golden Voyage of Sinbad (1973) (SPOILERS) Ray Harryhausen returns to the kind of unadulterated fantasy material that made Jason and the Argonauts such a success – swords & stop motion, if you like. In between, there were a couple of less successful efforts, HG Wells adaptation First Men in the Moon and The Valley of the Gwangi (which I considered the best thing ever as a kid: dinosaur walks into a cowboy movie). Harryhausen’s special-effects supremacy – in a for-hire capacity – had also been consummately eclipsed by Raquel Welch’s fur bikini in One Million Years B.C . The Golden Voyage of Sinbad follows the expected Dynamation template – blank-slate hero, memorable creatures, McGuffin quest – but in its considerable favour, it also boasts a villainous performance by nobody-at-the-time, on-the-cusp-of-greatness Tom Baker.

Archimedes would split himself with envy.

Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger (1977) (SPOILERS) Generally, this seems to be the Ray Harryhausen Sinbad outing that gets the short straw in the appreciation stakes. Which is rather unfair. True, Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger lacks Tom Baker and his rich brown voice personifying evil incarnate – although Margaret Whiting more than holds her own in the wickedness stakes – and the structure follows the Harryhausen template perhaps over scrupulously (Beverly Cross previously collaborated with the stop-motion auteur on Jason and the Argonauts , and would again subsequently with Clash of the Titans ). But the storytelling is swift and sprightly, and the animation itself scores, achieving a degree of interaction frequently more proficient than its more lavishly praised peer group.

You just threw a donut in the hot zone!

Den of Thieves (2018) (SPOILERS) I'd heard this was a shameless  Heat  rip-off, and the presence of Gerard Butler seemed to confirm it would be passable-at-best B-heist hokum, so maybe it was just middling expectations, even having heard how enthused certain pockets of the Internet were, but  Den of Thieves  is a surprisingly very satisfying entry in the genre. I can't even fault it for attempting to Keyser Soze the whole shebang at the last moment – add a head in a box and you have three 1995 classics in one movie – even if that particular conceit doesn’t quite come together.

You have a very angry family, sir.

Eternals (2021) (SPOILERS) It would be overstating the case to suggest Eternals is a pleasant surprise, but given the adverse harbingers surrounding it, it’s a much more serviceable – if bloated – and thematically intriguing picture than I’d expected. The signature motifs of director and honestly-not-billionaire’s-progeny Chloé Zhao are present, mostly amounting to attempts at Malick-lite gauzy natural light and naturalism at odds with the rigidly unnatural material. There’s woke to spare too, since this is something of a Kevin Feige Phase Four flagship, one that rather floundered, showcasing his designs for a nu-MCU. Nevertheless, Eternals manages to maintain interest despite some very variable performances, effects, and the usual retreat into standard tropes, come the final big showdown.