Writer-director Ari Aster’s latest film, Eddington, delves into a political drama set against the backdrop of the fictional town of Eddington, New Mexico, during May 2020, a period marked by turbulence and unrest. The narrative centers on Joe Cross, portrayed by Joaquin Phoenix, a right-wing sheriff clashing with a self-serving liberal mayor, Ted Garcia, played by Pedro Pascal. As their ideological battle escalates, the town spirals into chaos, reflecting the real-world crises that characterized 2020, including the COVID-19 pandemic, social injustices, and rising political tensions.
The film presents a microcosm of a year defined by a multitude of issues: the outbreak of COVID-19, widespread protests against police violence following George Floyd’s murder, economic struggles exacerbated by government responses, and the political upheaval leading to the insurrection on January 6, 2021. Aster has openly acknowledged that the film is drawn from his experiences navigating a fraught social media landscape during this time, aiming to capture a sense of disconnection and distrust among people.
Unfortunately, Eddington has drawn criticism for its portrayal of these complex issues. The film exhibits a sense of confusion and cynicism, lacking a coherent examination of the societal dynamics in play during this pivotal moment. Cross’s opposition to COVID-19 measures and Garcia’s contradictory liberalism are played out in a manner that suggests a simplistic binary, without delving into the deeper implications or the varied motivations behind the characters’ actions.
As the film progresses, Cross’s increasingly reckless behavior leads him to run for mayor on an anti-mask platform, while also confronting the public fallout from an allegation he makes against Garcia involving Cross’s wife, Louise, portrayed by Emma Stone. While Cross’s journey is marked by personal turmoil and societal conflict, the overall narrative risks reducing the complexity of the political climate to a series of chaotic events without meaningful exploration.
Critics argue that the film misrepresents the larger societal movements, especially the protests sparked by George Floyd’s death. Instead of portraying the multi-faceted nature of the protests, which were driven by a genuine desire for systemic change, Eddington positions its younger characters as performative activists, diluting their motivations to superficial portrayals of privilege and confusion.
Moreover, Aster’s exploration of political dynamics seems to fall short of offering a substantive critique or understanding of the factors that led to such a divisive atmosphere. The film implies a sense of universal disillusionment, suggesting that both political spectrums are entrenched in their respective bubbles of misinformation and outrage. However, in reality, many people clearly united in mass protests against systemic oppression, a point that Eddington seems to overlook.
Despite the film’s artistic intentions, some argue that it fails to engage profoundly with the societal challenges it seeks to depict. Aster’s portrayal of Eddington reflects a moment of opportunity for insightful commentary on the interconnected crises of 2020 but instead lands in murky territory, leaving viewers to grapple with unanswered questions about the state of political and social discourse in modern America.
In the current climate, where voices advocating against oppression are beginning to emerge louder, the film serves as a reminder of the complexities of narrative and representation in times of upheaval, highlighting the importance of nuanced storytelling in reflecting the real challenges facing society.