Skip to main content

Seriously? I just spat in your coffee.

Promising Young Woman
(2020)

(SPOILERS) I’ve been having little luck finding commendable Oscar-nominated fare this season, and Promising Young Woman is no exception. Heralded as a satire, Emerald Fennell’s movie would be better labelled a polemic, one with all the subtlety of the pillow used to smother protagonist Cassie halfway through the third act.

Attracting adjectives in the “brave” and “audacious” range, the picture comes armed with the loaded dice of a soft target – rapists deserve retribution – no one is likely to disagree with, such that it’s consequent suggestion – all men are potential rapists or at very least complicit in justifying the same, Chris Vernon and Marcus Mumford doubtless honourably excepted – is one the critical cognoscenti are sure to get behind, lest they’re accused of making excuses for those whose behaviour it condemns and so proving its point. And you know, fair call. At least that’s a strong point of view. Unfortunately, this same self-consciously “provocative” quality is in itself a mischaracterisation of daring; Promising Young Woman is more accurately responding to the latest “organic” movement and so “catching” the zeitgeist wholly mechanically, with all the nutritional zeal of reformed ham.

Had Fennell really mined the satirical potential here, then a clever and distinctive commentary might have emerged – perhaps even an audacious or brave one – rather than a tonal misfire. Promising Young Woman dances around disparate objectives, at times straight shooting, at others enjoying heightened absurdity, and others still embracing implausible plotting, before settling on sacrificial eulogising. Avenging angel Cassandra/Cassie (Carey Mulligan) lures potential rapists at clubs through feigning insobriety, only to turn the tables on them back at their places and lecture them on their predatory tactics.

Somehow – because Fennell is suggesting these are all beta males? – Cassie encounters no one who reacts violently to being put in their place (if her notebook is to be believed, she has engaged in this low-key vigilantism on hundreds of occasions). Which is very lucky, until it is not, although that situation represents a significant break with her routine. Would Cassie not go out armed with a Taser at least (no, because then the shock ending wouldn’t be guaranteed)? And are we supposed to assume that, duly chastened, her targets wouldn’t revert immediately to form? Fennell doesn’t explore this, although Sam Richardson’s characters refers to talk of her “psycho” behaviour getting around. Which begs the question. Does she really keep returning to the same bars again and again in different outfits on these numerous occasions?

Perhaps these issues are deliberate. Perhaps we’re supposed to examine Cassie critically in a way Fennell, as a debut feature director, has been unable to convey. If so, were she more of a visual stylist – a few shots of slo-mo gyrating male oafs and cinematographer Benjamin Kracun revealing a sometimes-poppy colour scheme don’t really count – who could suggest irony beyond soundtrack choices, the movie might have landed differently. But the problem with being generous to intention is that the plotting continually deflects assumptions of dexterity.

Cassie isn’t required to be wrong, to reflect on her own morality. Cassandra’s not complex. I suspect Fennell includes women Cassie sees as complicit – Madison (Alison Brie) and Dean Walker (Connie Britton) – partly to deflect accusations of a one-track tract, that Cassie is equal opportunities in denouncing those who perpetuate rape culture. And I assumed the insane lessons Cassie teaches them – leading Madison to think she might have been raped; suggesting the dean’s daughter is likewise endangered – are there to highlight that she may indeed be, as the dean suggests, a sociopath. After all, she is, isn’t she? She’s on a demented revenge spree and flitting between personalities at the drop of a hat. She’s Batman, even to the extent that she briefly hangs up the cowl.

But if that’s the case, is Fennell being sly or facile when she then narratively rebukes any objections to the treatments Cassie prescribes? The dean presents the entirely reasonable argument of presumption of innocence, one firmly demolished after the fact by the incriminating tape ex machina. It’s an introduction of evidence so risible, one kind of hopes Fennell had some other, non-literal intention, but I’m struggling to find it. This comes at a point when Cassie has renounced her wacko behaviour; in plot terms, therefore, it exclaims, “No, she was right, and here’s the proof” (through a hackneyed twist of an order usually reserved for a Joe Eszterhas script). And with it, there’s Madison confirming Cassie’s moral rectitude, shamed as she is into revealing this dark secret (and so providing confirmation that Cassie was right not to let dead friend Nina’s fate lie).

There’s probably a version of Promising Young Woman makes a virtue of this plotting, where the lurches in intent become coherent. If it was straightforward exploitation fare, with no pretensions to artistry, the daft twists and turns would likely have felt of a piece. There’s surely no doubt in any viewer’s mind that Ryan (Bo Burnham) is a bad seed as soon as he sips Cassie’s spit; worse still, he’s an inveterately irritating spit sipper. That he, the guy she was foolish enough to believe was a good egg, should be revealed at the scene of the crime she is haunted by, cheering it on, is as little surprise as it is laughably trite. At least Jodie Foster demanding her dog back or Ellen Page posing as scalpel-wielding minor didn’t attempt to sell themselves as above their genre conventions.

As far as I can tell, Clancy Brown is an undiluted good guy as her dad, but who knows? Certainly, Molina’s repentant lawyer is way too obvious. Again, if Fennell were a better director – or maybe not, and this was exactly how she saw it – this scene might have been better delivered, but the worst-of-the-worst’s epiphany seems much too calculated, and borderline parodic (although, I like the way Mulligan responds to his supplication, genuinely unnerved in a way she never is with those who do mean her harm).

It’s another of the picture’s variable messaging/plotting omissions that it structures the denouement, in which previously vilified justice is served after Cassie meets her end, as even possible. Fennell offers Cassie up as sacrifice to the cause, coding her as both avenger and victim, playing fast and loose with the rules of her fantasy depending on whether she wants to inflict cheap impact (Cassie must die because that’s “real”) or cheap impact (everyone is brought to book, at a wedding, which absolutely is not). As an edgy satire, l was put in mind of nothing so much as Peter Berg’s crude shockfest Very Bad Things.

Maybe Promising Young Woman is simply too acutely clever for me, its clumsy plotting an intentional façade, whereby it wasn’t suggesting any of the things I thought it was suggesting. Maybe we weren’t supposed to think Cassie had won ironically in the end (after all, she’s dead). Rather, that she dies because she’s a crazed sociopath who went too far (anyone in their right mind would have gone to the police with the evidence, or gone to the police with the defence attorney with the evidence. Which, as we know, wouldn’t have been dismissed this time, because the actual ending tells us as much…). I’m unconvinced, though. The only resonance here is cartoonish, in the manner of celebrating last year’s “deep” Best Picture Nominee Joker. Or better still, Harley Quinn; how clever of Promising Young Woman to sell itself with such pop bubble gum mimicry!

Indeed, Birds of Prey is a good point of comparison. Both attempt heightened visuals and fail to carry them through. Both attempt revenging characters but to obvious and sometimes puerile ends. Admittedly, Birds of Prey wasn’t part of any Oscar conversation, but then, neither should Promising Young Woman have been. And Birds of Prey at least had the good grace to demand far less time dissecting its relevance. At least it knew it was puffery. Even Mulligan’s performance isn’t all that special. How could it be? She can only work with what’s available. I’ll grant Fennell’s movie this much; as much as its choices may disappoint, as much as I expected more from it, it avoids a turn towards tedium. Which is more than I can say for most of this year’s Best Picture contenders. On the other hand, Promising Young Woman fits right in with them, in scrupulously woke terms, so full marks to Fennell for shrewd timing. 







Popular posts from this blog

The Illumi-what-i?

Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022) (SPOILERS) In which Sam Raimi proves that he can stand proudly with the best – or worst – of them as a good little foot soldier of the woke apocalypse. You’d expect the wilfully anarchic – and Republican – Raimi to choke on the woke, but instead, he’s sucked it up, grinned and bore it. Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness is so slavishly a production-line Marvel movie, both in plotting and character, and in nu-Feige progressive sensibilities, there was no chance of Sam staggering out from beneath its suffocating demands with anything more than a few scraps of stylistic flourish intact.

What’s so bad about being small? You’re not going to be small forever.

Innerspace (1987) There’s no doubt that Innerspace is a flawed movie. Joe Dante finds himself pulling in different directions, his instincts for comic subversion tempered by the need to play the romance plot straight. He tacitly acknowledges this on the DVD commentary for the film, where he notes Pauline Kael’s criticism that he was attempting to make a mainstream movie; and he was. But, as ever with Dante, it never quite turns out that way. Whereas his kids’ movies treat their protagonists earnestly, this doesn’t come so naturally with adults. I’m a bona fide devotee of Innerspace , but I can’t help but be conscious of its problems. For the most part Dante papers over the cracks; the movie hits certain keynotes of standard Hollywood prescription scripting. But his sensibility inevitably suffuses it. That, and human cartoon Martin Short (an ideal “leading man” for the director) ensure what is, at first glance just another “ Steven Spielberg Presents ” sci-fi/fantas

This risotto is shmackin’, dude.

Stranger Things Season 4: Part I (SPOILERS) I haven’t had cause, or the urge, to revisit earlier seasons of Stranger Things , but I’m fairly certain my (relatively) positive takes on the first two sequel seasons would adjust down somewhat if I did (a Soviet base under Hawkins? DUMB soft disclosure or not, it’s pretty dumb). In my Season Three review, I called the show “ Netflix’s best-packaged junk food. It knows not to outstay its welcome, doesn’t cause bloat and is disposable in mostly good ways ” I fairly certain the Duffer’s weren’t reading, but it’s as if they decided, as a rebuke, that bloat was the only way to go for Season Four. Hence episodes approaching (or exceeding) twice the standard length. So while the other points – that it wouldn’t stray from its cosy identity and seasons tend to merge in the memory – hold fast, you can feel the ambition of an expansive canvas faltering at the hurdle of Stranger Things ’ essential, curated, nostalgia-appeal inconsequentiality.

Is this supposed to be me? It’s grotesque.

The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent (2022) (SPOILERS) I didn’t hold out much hope for The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent being more than moderately tolerable. Not so much because its relatively untested director and his co-writer are mostly known in the TV sphere (and not so much for anything anyone is raving about). Although, it has to be admitted, the finished movie flourishes a degree of digital flatness typical of small-screen productions (it’s fine, but nothing more). Rather, due to the already over-tapped meta-strain of celebs showing they’re good sports about themselves. When Spike Jonze did it with John Malkovich, it was weird and different. By the time we had JCVD , not so much. And both of them are pre-dated by Arnie in Last Action Hero (“ You brought me nothing but pain ” he is told by Jack Slater). Plus, it isn’t as if Tom Gormican and Kevin Etten have much in the way of an angle on Nic; the movie’s basically there to glorify “him”, give or take a few foibles, do

Whacking. I'm hell at whacking.

Witness (1985) (SPOILERS) Witness saw the advent of a relatively brief period – just over half a decade –during which Harrison Ford was willing to use his star power in an attempt to branch out. The results were mixed, and abruptly concluded when his typically too late to go where Daniel Day Lewis, Dustin Hoffman and Robert De Niro had gone before (with at bare minimum Oscar-nominated results) – but not “ full retard ” – ended in derision with Regarding Henry . He retreated to the world of Tom Clancy, and it’s the point where his cachet began to crumble. There had always been a stolid quality beneath even his more colourful characters, but now it came to the fore. You can see something of that as John Book in Witness – despite his sole Oscar nom, it might be one of Ford’s least interesting performances of the 80s – but it scarcely matters, or that the screenplay (which won) is by turns nostalgic, reactionary, wistful and formulaic, as director Peter Weir, in his Hollywood debu

Are you telling me that I should take my daughter to a witch doctor?

The Exorcist (1973) (SPOILERS) Vast swathes have been written on The Exorcist , duly reflective of its cultural impact. In a significant respect, it’s the first blockbuster – forget Jaws – and also the first of a new kind of special-effects movie. It provoked controversy across all levels of the socio-political spectrum, for explicit content and religious content, both hailed and denounced for the same. William Friedkin, director of William Peter Blatty’s screenplay based on Blatty’s 1971 novel, would have us believe The Exorcist is “ a film about the mystery of faith ”, but it’s evidently much more – and less – than that. There’s a strong argument to be made that movies having the kind of seismic shock on the landscape this one did aren’t simply designed to provoke rumination (or exultation); they’re there to profoundly influence society, even if largely by osmosis, and when one looks at this picture’s architects, such an assessment only gains in credibility.

That, my lad, was a dragon.

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013) (SPOILERS) It’s alarming how quickly Peter Jackson sabotaged all the goodwill he amassed in the wake of The Lord of the Rings trilogy. A guy who started out directing deliciously deranged homemade horror movies ended up taking home the Oscar for a fantasy movie, of all genres. And then he blew it. He went from a filmmaker whose naysayers were the exception to one whose remaining cheerleaders are considered slightly maladjusted. The Desolation of Smaug recovers some of the territory Jackson has lost over the last decade, but he may be too far-gone to ever regain his crown. Perhaps in years to come The Lord of the Rings trilogy will be seen as an aberration in his filmography. There’s a cartoonishness to the gleeful, twisted anarchy on display in his earlierr work that may be more attuned to the less verimilitudinous aspects of King Kong and The Hobbit s. The exceptions are his female-centric character dramas, Heavenly Creat

Gizmo caca!

Gremlins (1984) I didn’t get to see Gremlins at the cinema. I wanted to, as I had worked myself into a state of great anticipation. There was a six-month gap between its (unseasonal) US release and arrival in the UK, so I had plenty of time to devour clips of cute Gizmo on Film ’84 (the only reason ever to catch Barry Norman was a tantalising glimpse of a much awaited movie, rather than his drab, colourless, reviews) and Gremlins trading cards that came with bubble gum attached (or was it the other way round?). But Gremlins ’ immediate fate for many an eager youngster in Britain was sealed when, after much deliberation, the BBFC granted it a 15 certificate. I had just turned 12, and at that time an attempt to sneak in to see it wouldn’t even have crossed my mind. I’d just have to wait for the video. I didn’t realise it then (because I didn’t know who he was as a filmmaker), but Joe Dante’s irrepressible anarchic wit would have a far stronger effect on me than the un

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls… dyin’ time’s here!

Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome (1985) Time was kind to Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome . As in, it was such a long time since I’d seen the “final chapter” of the trilogy, it had dwindled in my memory to the status of an “alright but not great” sequel. I’d half-expected to have positive things to say along the lines of it being misunderstood, or being able to see what it was trying for but perhaps failing to quite achieve. Instead, I re-discovered a massive turkey that is really a Mad Max movie in name only (appropriately, since Max was an afterthought). This is the kind of picture fans of beloved series tend to loathe; when a favourite character returns but without the qualities or tone that made them adored in the first place (see Indiana Jones in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull , or John McClane in the last two Die Hard s). Thunderdome stinks even more than the methane fuelling Bartertown. I hadn’t been aware of the origins of Thunderdome until recently, mainly because I was