Skip to main content

Oh wow. Ava DuVernay just liked one of my posts.

The Hunt

(SPOILERS) Damon Lindelof’s satire arrived with many presumptions made of its content – some accurate and some way off – and typically inept “sensitivity” to public events (if you aren’t cynical about mass shootings – and Lindelof clearly isn’t – then the picture would surely be upsetting, or alternatively influential, depending upon what the studio thinks it’s responding to, whenever it was released). What The Hunt is, though, is your classic Hollywood reductivism in full effect, redefining the world through the limiting prism of the dominant (liberal) paradigm while virtue-signalling (if you want to call it that) that it’s an equal-opportunities attack on all (but hey, lest we forget, South Park always has first dibs on such Tinseltown-sanctioned cynicism). The picture’s woke-critique is negligible because it perfectly overblows the premise, while its “conservative” hero turns out to be nothing of the sort (so excusing Lindelof and Nick Cuse of sleeping with the enemy). She is, in fact, simply affirming the industry’s current favourite go-to: the Mary Sue.

Don: How did you know he was lying?
Crystal: Because everyone is lying.

Including Damon Lindelof. Don’t get me wrong, I think Lindelof’s a talented guy – many who have seen Prometheus and experienced the last season of Lost do not, I hasten to stress – but the more he feels the need to address politics directly, the shallower his capacities reveal themselves. Whether he buys it or simply espouses it, what he’s feeding the proles in The Hunt simply serves to underpin rather than challenges Hegelian dialectics, even when he’s “critiquing” both sides. That he overtly uses Animal Farm as a reference point evidences how constrained and enclosed his thinking is. There shouldn’t be any expectation otherwise, of course, regardless of whether he went unchallenged by the suits for his screenplay; the reason he went unchallenged is because The Hunt isn’t really challenging anything, aiming for soft targets on both sides of the spectrum and so flunking the “daring” and “provocative” test, whichever way you cut it.

The movie takes its cues from the likes of The Running Man and Battle Royale, and wayyyy before them, Richard Connell’s The Most Dangerous Game. Most recently, The Cabin in the Woods, from cancelled Joss Whedon – the sort of guy occupying very similar lofty-populist, painfully-politically-correct territory to Lindelof, albeit the latter lacks vocally discontented co-workers – delivered a supernatural take that also lent itself to a reading of an essentially predatory realm in metaphysical terms. In The Hunt’s scenario, Lindelof and Nick Cuse – son of Carlton – posit a group of liberal “elite” (the movie shows them to be nothing of the sort, one of Lindelof’s many dodges) kidnapping and hunting to the death a selection of right-wing types who have incurred their wrath. These liberals are, naturally, incredibly progressive and careful in their language, while showing through their thoughts and actions utter hatred and contempt for less enlightened humanity. Clever, eh?

But these “elite” are also not culpable until they are. Lindelof presents this as a slippery joke (“You wanted it to be true so you decided it was. This was your idea” accuses Hilary Swank’s Athena Stone of the implied culpability of her fake-news accusers and ruiners of her life). But in so doing, he renders his premise trite and ineffectual. He and Cuse overtly invoke Pizzagate in their Mansiongate premise, while following the mainstream line of exonerating the former in their text (albeit, to transpose Lindelof’s premise literally, those “falsely” accused in the former case would then be inspired to actually go and do what they’re accused of). Cuse attestedthe thing that we kept finding most interesting was Pizzagate. It’s really amazing as a story, because the further you get into it, the more amazing details there are to it”. 

And yet, somehow, despite these “amazing details” – doubtless he’s referring to all those entirely coincidental code-word emails, entirely non-existent basement and entirely disgusting artwork – they were persuaded there was nothing in the story. Another example might be James Gunn and his “off-colour” jokes and attestations on home video footage. Would it be surprising if he went all Super or Slithered all over those who condemned him (again, assuming there was no smoke with the fire)?

Not only do Lindelof and Cuse pussy out of their conspiracy premise – there’s no hunting children in the Black Forest here; they aren’t going full Eli Roth on their material – and in so doing “bring justice” to a few disparate high-earning blue staters, they also completely sidestep the transgressive idea of fashioning themselves a redneck, Trump-voting protagonist. But again, how could we expect Lindelof ultimately to do otherwise, as a self-identified “white, cisgendered, hetero male”?

Swank’s Athena “cancels” Gilpin’s Crystal without trial or due process – she kidnaps the wrong Crystal, and instead of the redneck she thought, discovers an educated southern girl who has even read Animal Farm. Indeed, as noted above, Crystal is your archetypal Mary Sue, astonishingly capable and proficient, overcoming everything thrown at her. A slim, photogenic war veteran who can deal with anything thrown at her and outsmart anyone in the room (or Eastern European country). Crystal having been in Afghanistan, if anything, makes her even more Mary Sue-ish; instead of a vampire slayer, she’s a mythical super veteran. A super soldier.

Such flawless skill sets are not in themselves so outlandish in the action genre (if we’re talking the Arnie or Stallone, as opposed to the vulnerable John McClane). But in conjunction with the fully trained-up head-girl Athena, Lindelof can be found self-identifying as fully on board the woke train and applying current Hollywood ground rules on gender and equality; women are better than men, not only in and of themselves, but in terms of lethal prowess, so usurping the traditional gender rules of the action genre wherever possible. Indeed, refashioning women as men (which is the real impulse of this Hollywoodisation, lest we are in doubt) comes predominately from men, prodding and pushing women towards the new way to be as the current stage of the NWO plan (if Lindelof was really smart, he’d have self-reflexively mentioned this). “John Wick in a Nancy Meyers movie” indeed.

When Lindelof draws attention to the gender roles (or tropes), they’re back-handed. So violence against women is refracted through the lens of traditional southern courtesy: “Hey, miss. Do you think you should be afforded mercy just because you’re a girl?” asks Crystal, before blowing her brains out. Much to the horror of Don (Wayne Duvall). How much more daring would hit have been had Lindelof truly baited the trap, made his hero everything he personally disassociates from but someone who is nevertheless in the right in the context of the circumstances he presents? But he couldn’t do that. So he cops out.

All of this is so much inconsequentiality, however, per the basis of Lindelof’s basic position. You see, he doesn’t believe in conspiracies – or says he doesn’t, which is the key part to remember. Thus, the content of The Hunt is overridingly informed by such denialism, whatever he may seem to be doodling between lovingly captured political polarisations. The validity of the conspiracy hypothesis – any conspiracy hypothesis, as Tony Blair once espoused – becomes “we use belief as a coping mechanism”. As a consequence, The Hunt’s purpose is to rationalise and therefore devalue any integrity conspiracy theory has. Such fictionalisation is exactly Hollywood’s intent. Does Lindelof really believe “conspiracy theory is an emotional coping mechanism for the world”? Has he had both his shots? He’s a clever guy, but is he so clever that he’s disappeared up his own bespectacled asshole? He draws the most by-the-book (and therefore Psychology 101) full stop under the conversation:

It’s actually more comforting for us to believe that there is an Illuminati controlling everything, because the truth is much more unsettling, which is: it’s chaotic, and sometimes really bad things happen to really good people. Sometimes lone nutters assassinate presidents, but it’s easier for us to believe that they were a pawn in a scheme, because that gives us structure and it makes us feel sort of more comfortable in this weird way.

Obviously, he’s read his Jon Ronson, who has investigated this kind of thing and, as a respectable mainstream journo, has affirmed it to be the case. And to be fair to Lindelof, as noted above in respect of wokeness, he really couldn’t say anything else. Not as someone who wasn’t going to be damned as a fringe nutter, the next Randy Quaid (somehow, however, his colleague and co-writer Robert Orci has managed to get away with being a 9/11 conspiracy theorist. Or perhaps it’s no coincidence talentless hack Alex Kurtzman is getting all the work right now).

This, to a greater or lesser extent, is where Hollywood always comes from. Even one of the best conspiracy movies of the last few decades, Enemy of the State – complete with its satellite-lore porn – corrals the architects into a rogue government operation, whose bringing to book sees order restored. I mean, sure, there are still some – too many – who believe, in the post plandemic world, that life is chaotic in just the way Lindelof sets out, with nefarious germs poised to strike randomly, but his “comfort” blanket rationalisation is the most facile and learned of all attacks on conspiracy theory (and fair’s fair, it’s remarkably effective, as it’s cited by almost anyone who has “looked into” the subject and emerged affirming the status quo).

Staten Island: We’re getting goddam hunted.
Ma: But you all have guns.
Staten Island: Yeah, to defend ourselves.

The above, in concert with Athena’s “You started it”, is a prime example of Lindelof’s ham-fisted satire. The back and forth he and Cuse are engaging in, and their mealy-mouthed, middle-of-the-road “cancel culture is bad but sometimes people deserve cancelling and sometimes they don’t”, is entirely pedestrian. It’s the kind of party-line position that leaves him smiling vacuously at his own cleverness just before the cull.

Lines like “I don’t believe in hell. As you so eloquently put it, I’m a godless elite” and “For the record, asshole, climate change is real” – obviously not coming from a real elite, so obviously they don’t actually know, but it certainly sounds Lindelof’s authorial voice of God, and certainly would be in a Whedon screenplay – are as lacking in bite as the reverse (“He probably uses the n-word… on Twitter”; “It’s perfectly fine to call him black again”; “I’m sorry. I gendered it”; “If we don’t have at least one person of colour in this, it’s going to be problematic”).

Some might suggest even mentioning the idea of crisis actors in a Hollywood movie is daring, particularly when the one mentioning it (Don) is proved right (kind of). But Don also asserts “So? There are crisis babies” and most damningly “I have podcasts. I’ve been exposing these people”; the icing on the cake that he is objectionable at his core is the Mad Mel mustering “Sayonara, sugar tits” (Cuse and Lindelof doubtless high-fived when they came up with that zinger). Crystal spends much of her time in Don’s company, but she is notlike Don. In fact, Lindelof scrupulously avoids lending her any clear political opinion (you know, because Mary Sue).

On a straightforward filmmaking level, The Hunt is more than proficient. I liked Zobel’s last movie, Z for Zachariah, and he delivered some of the series’ best work on several of The Leftovers’ best episodes. Which doesn’t excuse the copious use of digital blood here, including digital head explosions (Not the sort of thing that usually annoys me very much, but when it’s this obvious). The performances are decent, although only Gilpin really stands out. As soon as Emma Roberts appears centre stage in the first few minutes, you know she’s going to be the Janet Leigh early kill. There’s a Whedon-esque larkiness to these dispatches that doesn’t really serve the overall tone, however, since they emphasise that The Hunt isn’t seriously attempting to satirise its targets or get under the viewer’s skin. Compare it to something like Straw Dogs, and it takes about the safest stand imaginable. Lindelof even ends with a Dusty Springfield number; The Hunt lives in the same universe as Lost’s church. It’s likely somewhere adjacent to Athena’s kitchen.

Of course, Lindelof has the cheek to critique woke while having made the wokest series of recent years in Watchmen, or Wokechmen. So woke, it ended up choking on its woke: “The most dangerous people are the people who identify as woke, because it’s not a permanent state that you achieve, right? It’s a practice”. Perhaps, Damon, the most dangerous people are those who delude themselves that they aren’t woke, when really, they are? Regardless, The Hunt is an attempt at disguising an actual slaughter of conspiracy culture, its motives and adherents beneath a critique of cancel culture’s excesses and MAGA hat wearers’ least appetising affinities. The elite in The Hunt aren’t really elite, because Lindelof doesn’t believe in the elite. He’s much better being non-commitally metaphysical than woke-stirringly socio-political. Which is a problem, since he finally seemed to get his act together as a writer on The Leftovers; since then, he has become a born-again proselytiser.

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.

This risotto is shmackin’, dude.

Stranger Things Season 4: Volume 1 (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.

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the

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

All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a Thousand Enemies.

Watership Down (1978) (SPOILERS) I only read Watership Down recently, despite having loved the film from the first, and I was immediately impressed with how faithful, albeit inevitably compacted, Martin Rosen’s adaptation is. It manages to translate the lyrical, mythic and metaphysical qualities of Richard Adams’ novel without succumbing to dumbing down or the urge to cater for a broader or younger audience. It may be true that parents are the ones who get most concerned over the more disturbing elements of the picture but, given the maturity of the content, it remains a surprise that, as with 2001: A Space Odyssey (which may on the face of it seem like an odd bedfellow), this doesn’t garner a PG certificate. As the makers noted, Watership Down is at least in part an Exodus story, but the biblical implications extend beyond Hazel merely leading his fluffle to the titular promised land. There is a prevalent spiritual dimension to this rabbit universe, one very much

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.

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

Get away from my burro!

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948) (SPOILERS) The Treasure of the Sierra Madre is beloved by so many of the cinematic firmament’s luminaries – Stanley Kubrick, Sam Raimi, , Paul Thomas Anderson and who knows maybe also WS, Vince Gilligan, Spike Lee, Daniel Day Lewis; Oliver Stone was going to remake it – not to mention those anteriorly influential Stone Roses, that it seems foolhardy to suggest it isn’t quite all that. There’s no faulting the performances – a career best Humphrey Bogart, with director John Huston’s dad Walter stealing the movie from under him – but the greed-is-bad theme is laid on a little thick, just in case you were a bit too dim to get it yourself the first time, and Huston’s direction may be right there were it counts for the dramatics, but it’s a little too relaxed when it comes to showing the seams between Mexican location and studio.

If that small woman is small enough, she could fit behind a small tree.

Stranger Things Season 4: Volume 2 (SPOILERS) I can’t quite find it within myself to perform the rapturous somersaults that seem to be the prevailing response to this fourth run of the show. I’ve outlined some of my thematic issues in the Volume 1 review, largely borne out here, but the greater concern is one I’ve held since Season Two began – and this is the best run since Season One, at least as far my failing memory can account for – and that’s the purpose-built formula dictated by the Duffer Brothers. It’s there in each new Big Bad, obviously, even to the extent that this is the Big-Bad-who-binds-them-all (except the Upside Down was always there, right?) And it’s there with the resurgent emotional beats, partings, reunions and plaintively stirring music cues. I have to be really on board with a movie or show to embrace such flagrantly shameless manipulation, season after season, and I find myself increasingly immune.

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