Skip to main content

It looks like a digital walkout.

Free Guy
(2021)

(SPOILERS) Ostensibly a twenty-first century refresh of The Truman Show, in which an oblivious innocent realises his life is a lie, and that he is simply a puppet engineered for the entertainment of his creators/controllers/the masses, Free Guy lends itself to similar readings regarding the metaphysical underpinnings of our reality, of who sets the paradigm and how conscious we are of its limitations. But there’s an additional layer in there too, a more insidious one than using a Hollywood movie to “tell us how it really is”.

Matt Lieberman came up with the spec script back in 2016. He has since gone on to deliver mostly shite (and mostly shite remakes). The final screenplay also has Zak Penn’s name on it; he was responsible for several prior meta dives in the form of Spielberg’s forlorn attempt to muster some of his youthful finger-on-the-pulse, crowd-pleasing energy (adapting Ready Player One) and Last Action Hero. The conceit of Free Guy, of a computer game character becoming self-aware, very much lends itself to the red pill/blue pill of The Matrix. So much so, “NPC” has been used to describe the great unwashed for many a moon, those incapable of developing sufficient perception of the “game” to gain autonomy.

Indeed, there are those who take this further, suggesting such individuals aren’t even ensouled (and from thence we veer towards 144,000 Revelation territory). There’s a counterargument to be made that such ideas are intentionally the point, building an alternative paradigm where those with assumptive insight are encouraged to disassociate from the great unwashed, to withhold empathy and consider them irrelevant. Which would be much the way the psychopathic Elite, inveterately absent the tools of empathy, view everyone.

Free Guy’s plot finds Guy/Blue Shirt Guy (Ryan Reynolds) becoming conscious of his NPC status in Grand Theft Auto-esque multiplayer Free City, so infecting other NPCs with similar self-awareness. At the heart of this, it is revealed, is an AI code for the game Life Itself, developed by Millie (Jodie Comer, everywhere suddenly) and Keys (Joe Keery, Stranger Things’ most likeable breakout player) and appropriated by Soonami CEO Antwan (Taika Waititi, who… No, read on). Turns out, it’s Keys’ code (he is “more comfortable with zeros and ones” than words, a classical retreat from the external world) that sparks Guy’s awareness, since Keys holds a torch for Millie, through Guy’s interaction with Millie’s avatar Molotovgirl.

On the level of serviceable summer entertainment (although it was scheduled for winter at one point in currently par-for-the-course rescheduling), Shawn Levy’s movie is agreeable enough. Levy’s hankering to move beyond the limits of straight comedy found its first fruit with Real Steel, allowing him to take the effects savvy he’d developed on the Night at a Museums and invade the recesses of drama. More still, to show he could handle action dynamics. It did okay business, and Free Guy is another step on from that, definably in the comedic wheelhouse, but reliant on abundant scale and effects to sell its world. Levy’s an entirely anonymous moviemaker, but that matters little since, on this evidence, he’s also an entirely competent one.

Free Guy lasts nearly two hours, which is a good twenty minutes beyond its optimum effectiveness. Nevertheless, Levy and Reynolds ensure there’s sufficient enjoyment and amusement to be had from Guy’s growing awareness of and competence at the rules of his environment, after he discovers the “heads-up display” through appropriating the shades of “one of the sunglasses people” (very They Live!) He begins developing an ever-higher score, duly attracting attention from gamer pundits (obviously, I had zero name/face recognition for any of these “luminaries”). Such advances come complete with Groundhog Day-esque resets after he is flattened by a train or otherwise incapacitated. There are also several instances – amongst the modern pop-jumble anthems – of inspired, off-the-wall subjectively happy tunes, including The Greatest American Hero theme, Can’t Take My Eyes Off You and Make Your Own Kind of Music (used to open Lost Season 2, of course).

Reynolds can be highly annoying if not cast to his strengths, as his variable box office clout has proved. He’s an inherently insincere man, so he has immense difficulty selling a sincere character. Here, he’s doing facile facsimile Jim Carrey, but he can’t really pull it off, isn’t as committed as Carrey was, hence letting a horrendous line like “It’s like losing my virginity, but in my mouth” through.

Truth be told, his co-lead isn’t quite right either. Jodie Comer being sold as a winning blockbuster co-lead smacks of Kate Beckinsale all over again (ie it doesn’t quite stick). As such, it’s Keery who fares best, albeit the picture’s peppered with some nice asides and cameos. Channing Tatum is Revenjamin Buttons, avatar of ubergeek Keith (Matty Cardarople), whose mum is Tina Fey’s voice. Chris Evans appears, aghast, when Guy pulls out Cap’s shield as a weapon (“What the shit?!”) There’s also a cameo from Reynolds as Dude, a jacked version of himself that might better have benefited from a star cameo that wasn’t himself.

Millie: How does it feel working for a galactic black hole of frozen shit?

Then there’s Waititi, whose mystifying spell over Hollywood continues unchecked, it seems. Free Guy’s energy flatlines as soon as he enters the building. He proceeds to deliver a horribly unfunny performance, which isn’t anything new from him, of course, although this one is possibly a quite accurate reflection of the actual person, if his rumoured egomaniacal rep is anything to go by (and yet, somehow, everyone loves him. Well, except his ex-wife).

Buddy: There’s nothing to figure out. You go to bed. You wake up. You get some coffee. Then you come to work. And you repeat the same thing tomorrow.

So on the level of Guy as us, or the unawake (as opposed to the un-woke; I’ll come to that). Buddy (Lil Rel Howery) gives a fairly concise summary of the routine of Ahrimanic existence (above), in which there’s no room for higher thought, less still consciousness (this per Steiner's idiosyncratic definitions). Guy, apprised of the truth, concludes “So the entire world is a game. And we’re just players in the game?” Which is pretty much what we’re encouraged to think; the Elite are the players, be those players individuals, entities, Machine City or something else besides. such that we’re hidebound to conclude “It’s all a lie! None of this matters. We don’t matter”.

Guy: You’ve met God, and he’s a dick?

Of course, that’s presuming the veracity of the current laced “truth”, that science’s theorists (who we must trust) suggesting the universe is likely a simulation aren’t doing so because they want us to/have been told to lead us to, think “None of this matters”, in much the way the atheism/evolution theory has laid the groundwork (“You’re 22 and you’re living in my house. There is no God!” exclaims Keith’s mom levelly – Cardapole is actually 38, mind). In the reality of Free Guy, as in The Truman Show, our protagonist is given agency, within limits, by an omniscient creator, a demiurge. There Cristof, here Antwan, who, like the demiurge, is a galactic black hole of frozen shit… which makes Keys and Millie angels/lieutenants thereof; notably, Millie descends to Earth in “human” form and ignites passion/ensouls a mere mortal. All rather Promethean/Nephilim-istic.

Barista: I need more in my life than drip coffee.

That version of reality has been an undercurrent since at least 1945, with the discovery of the Nag Hammadi scrolls conveniently boosting the reading of an alternative account of creation, whereby “We don’t matter” becomes one of stoic endurance, under the encumbrance of a malign/ignorant creator entity and his archonic acolytes. The creator of a copy of the actual reality, a simulacrum or simulation thereof. Cue The Matrix.

Just like The Truman Show, there are limits to Guy’s environment (the sea). Which could be seen to reflect the dome/false universe paradigm, just like The Truman Show. At the end of which, Truman opts to leave his realm, rejecting the “beneficence” of his architect. One might read Free Guy as offering something similar: “What if our world doesn’t have to be so scary? What if we can change it?” asks Guy, rallying his fellow former NPCs. The way to do this? Refuse to take part in the Hegelian conflict (rather like The Dark Knight and its ferry passengers). Of course, it’s very easy to do that in Free Guy, despite threats to crash the system and/or reset it (ah yes, a reset; again, the language used by the World Economic Forum invokes the idea of a simulation, whereby casualties are just zeroes and ones). A digital walkout fails to take account of all those who can’t be persuaded to wake up. Who will, indeed, double down and line up for triple jabs. And then some.

There’s another reading here vying for attention, however. In some respects, it’s a much more literal one, particularly if we are to read the inevitability of AI – and we’re insistently informed it is real and palpable, and Rudolf Steiner, way back when, intimated towards this kind of development – as legitimate. The likes of Whitney Webb have called attention to machine rights as a means to destabilise those in the human workforce, and Free Guy is evidently fully behind such a move.

Indeed, it’s straight in there in announcing – like Blade Runner – that machines are a much more developed, humane and genuine lifeform than actual humans: “I never hurt innocent people” exclaims Guy. Which is, of course, the express purpose of degenerate humans playing the game, a “dumb shooter”. In this warped conception, the AI is benign, keen to preserve life and promote kindness, and humans are not. Indeed, they can show the dumb humans a thing or two: “Maybe we’ve been thinking about NPCs wrong this whole time. Maybe he’s a symbol. Maybe people can be whatever they want” (which is, after all, the woke message, as long as whatever they want is what woke wants). Now, aspirant humans can watch video game characters instead of shoot them – passive observation of a virtual world, with an ultimate view to manifesting within it themselves (“I created this world but I can’t spend my life in it” says Milly).

Keys: Hell, technically he is alive. He is the first real artificial intelligence.

These computer-generated characters can evolve, which is more than humans can. Guy is “Turning heads by being the good guy”. There’s an express discussion that Antwan shouldn’t turn off the game because “This is an artificial life we’re dealing with”. Indeed, but what about Antwan, as its birth parent; shouldn’t he have the right to choose?

Such thinking fits the woke sensibility like a glove, so it should be no surprise nudges and nods validating the same are all over Free Guy. Keys, co-creator of Life Itself, is slumming it in a menial job, and so represents a vilifiable example of “white privilege” (he doesn’t protest the label). Millie notes of Free City, in very Gamergate fashion, “Everyone you meet on here is a sociopathic manchild”. To illustrate the point, she must inform Guy – the best kind of man is a virtual man; “The first time I kiss a non-toxic guy in like, forever, and of course he’s not even real” – “Don’t crib your jokes from the trolls in Free City”, since the one he cribs is particularly offensive (and he doesn’t even reach the punchline). Toxic masculinity, white privilege, characterisation of those guilty of the same as ones who would make gags that are homophobic, mock the disabled and make light of child abuse (sounds like someone’s been reading James Gunn’s deleted Twitter account) – the woke runs strong in Free Guy.

And yes, there’s a balance: “He’s like four” protests Keys of Millie’s romance with Guy. “That’s really creepy” counters Millie. That’s Hollywood (see also The Fly II). There’s even a call for gun control; in the litany of Free City escalations that bear no resemblance to reality – banks robbed, corpses littering the streets, gun violence – Millie must call Guy up on the last one: “Actually, that’s a big problem, Guy. It’s a massive problem”. Just ask Alec Baldwin.

So there’s a lot to pick over in Free Guy. Generally, my take would be that it’s presenting the virtual world as one to be glamoured by, and therefore any positive reading is ultimately suspect. And as glamouring Hollywood movies go, it’s largely pushed the right buttons, earning enough for Disney to request a sequel. Definitely woke enough, in that case.


Popular posts from this blog

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

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

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

Other monks will meet their deaths here. And they too will have blackened fingers. And blackened tongues.

The Name of the Rose (1986) (SPOILERS) Umberto Eco wasn’t awfully impressed by Jean Jacques-Annaud’s adaptation of his novel – or “ palimpsest of Umberto Eco’s novel ” as the opening titles announce – to the extent that he nixed further movie versions of his work. Later, he amended that view, calling it “ a nice movie ”. He also, for balance, labelled The Name of the Rose his worst novel – “ I hate this book and I hope you hate it too ”. Essentially, he was begrudging its renown at the expense of his later “ superior ” novels. I didn’t hate the novel, although I do prefer the movie, probably because I saw it first and it was everything I wanted from a medieval Sherlock Holmes movie set in a monastery and devoted to forbidden books, knowledge and opinions.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) (SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek , but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan . That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013) (SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight ; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.

Maybe the dingo ate your baby.

Seinfeld 2.9: The Stranded The Premise George and Elaine are stranded at a party in Long Island, with a disgruntled hostess.