I’m not a film critic but I was, for once, very happy to see “Everything, Everywhere, All At Once” washed down by the Oscars. The film didn’t have much circulation in Italy and stayed in theaters very briefly, although I guess it will return after the Oscars. I watched it after reading two very positive (and entertaining) reviews, Jack Butler is on National exam And Kurt Loder is on Raison.
Loder writes:
It’s a film without an ounce of cynicism in its narrative bones. (On the other hand, those looking for timeless human truths might wish there was more here than “You have to be kind” and “We can do whatever we want, nothing matters.”)
And the butler:
All of this is underpinned by a genuine and sincere emotional core. The film not only explores the comic or kinetic implications of multiple realities, but also the philosophical implications. The consequences of paths not taken, the contingencies that have brought us to the moments we inhabit, how to make sense of a world that may seem meaningless – through the lens of the multiverse, Everything Everywhere All at Once illuminates our own reality, raising questions about our own lives and humbly trying to provide their own answers. Are they complete? Is the moral vision of the film totally satisfactory? Maybe not, but it’s an unfair standard.
The production budget was 25 million and the film earned 100 million at the box office. It’s a very small production for a sci-fi/action movie. “Wakanda Forever” cost ten times as much (and grossed over 800 million).
I found “Everything, Everywhere, All At Once” uplifting for two reasons. First of all, I watched “Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness” a bit before and thought nothing particularly interesting could come out of the idea of the multiverse, which turned out to be on a dead track, at least in the hands of Marvel writers. Well, “Everything, Everywhere, All At Once” proved me wrong. But, second and foremost, because sometimes I feel like our creativity is kind of exhausted: that the best Hollywood can do is scrape the barrel of Marvel characters, created in the 1960s or 1970s, to propose a new film. Although entertainment supplies (movies, TV series, etc.) are not lacking, there are few that new, it really goes beyond adding little touches of technology or renovating old stories in a more contemporary way. I liked “Everything, Everywhere, All At Once” less than Butler and Loder (I have a few ounces of cynicism in my blood) but I thought it was something that showed great creative power. I don’t want to sing the praises of David versus Goliath in filmmaking. Small is not always good. But to keep the flame of creativity alive, I think we need, in filmmaking too, brave challengers, who tend to be outsiders and therefore inevitably smaller. It is a good example.
(0 COMMENTS)