At a time when the financial disparity between the rich and poor is widening by the day, and the world’s wealthiest corporations line their pockets while those in economic hardship struggle to heat their homes and feed their children, Ruben Östlund brings us the hilarious, socially-conscious satire,Triangle of Sadness. A light-hearted yet politically-fueled exercise that sheds light on the increasing polarity between the elitist mega-rich and everyone else, but even with its socioeconomic focus, the film never takes itself too seriously.
WithCannes' Palme d’Oralready to it’s name, a second for director Östlund after the critical success of his 2018 movieThe Square, it’s fair to presume expectations forTriangle of Sadnesshave been adjusted accordingly. The Euro-satire springs into life as a group of male models, including central protagonist Carl (Harris Dickinson), are put through their paces, slipping effortlessly between the happy-go-lucky look of H&M and the stern, ice-cold exterior of Balenciaga at the behest of the flamboyant model scout. Model Carl, and his supermodel and influencer partner, Yaya (Charlbi Dean), are at loggerheads over their restaurant bill, as Carl objects to the double standards of gender expectations, with him expected to pick up the check by his more affluent girlfriend.
After a hilariously frank exchange between the pair, they embark on an exclusive cruise on a European super-yacht alongside the rich and powerful, from a self-proclaimed seller of “sh*t” in a Russian fertilizer distributor, to unlikely international arms dealers Winston and Clementine.
A Lesson in Disparities Between Social Classes
Triangle of Sadnessis a lesson in social class, wealth distribution, and the conflicting, often contradictory messages of the people and corporations occupying those societal positions. Itflips capitalism on its head, dissects its unpalatable innards, and exposes its true nature of self-interest and propensity toward narcissism. The film brilliantly balances a political statement with dark satirical elements; it’s like a hidden camera prank show gone horrifically wrong. Written and directed by Östlund,Triangle of Sadnesspoints fun at how the silly-rich ostentatiously view themselves, and those that they deem to be beneath them in social standing.
Related:Ruben Östlund: How the Director Annihilates Bourgeois Values With Satire
The film occasionally achieves this, in a silly, bordering on slapstick manner with arguably the most memorable scene coming in the form of an en masse vomiting session among the guests while attempting to fine-dine at the Captain’s dinner only to succumb to the nausea of seasickness. The alcoholic, grossly incompetent captain (played excellently by Woody Harrelson) goes down with his ship while unceremoniously educating the largely capitalist occupants on the wonders of Marxism via the yacht’s Tannoy loudspeakers; Harrelson puts in a truly emphatic, potentially career-defining display.
As the remaining shipwreck survivors wash up on a “deserted” island’s shores, the hierarchical structure which was enforced on the cruise is ripped up, and the positions of social status and power are reimagined with Abigail, the cruise-liner toilet cleaner (played bythe scene-stealing Dolly De Leon), going from the bottom of the pile to the top due to her possessing a very particular set of survival skills (noTakenreference intended…). The movie breaks downthe social construct of classby means of wealth and status, and rather than material riches the focus is purely dependent on what society adjudges to be of the most importance.
The film is as grandiose, grotesque, and excessive as those on-board. It’s the modern-dayTitanic, where “paint me like one of your French girls, Jack” is replaced with “take a picture of me for my Instagram, Carl,” and where the capsizing of the ship is down to a group of pirates, and not inadvertently crashing into an iceberg.
Explaining Triangle of Sadness' Mixed Reviews
“It’s like marmite” is a nationally known saying in the UK, a phrase that has Americans collectively squint and tilt their heads in confusion; it simply implies something or someone that divides opinion. Like the divisive delicacy,Triangle of Sadnessis a movie critics have either loved or hated. Yet, what is it about thePalme d’Or winnerthat has proved so discordant?
Related:Cannes 2022 Winners: A Survey of the Films and Filmmakers
Östlund’s narrative has been criticized for being too surface-level, telling the audience what we already know, and revealing very little in the way of new ideas. Some critics have accused the movie of being predictable in nature and possessing pretentious, almost smug undertones.
The rather extensive plot has been vacuum-packed into a relatively standard, 140-minute runtime. So much happens that at times,Triangle of Sadnessfeels like separate movies (though, debatably, that’s the point of it being divided into three parts). It’s certainly a film that is excessively excessive; it runs jokes, political points, and themes to their absolute limit, and then adds a sprinkle more for extra measure. Admittedly, it can at times feel as thoughTriangle of Sadnessdoesn’t know when to restrain itself, with jokes frequently going overboard (if you pardon the pun). But perhaps excess is part of the point. This is, after all, a film critiquing the excesses of late capitalism.
All in all, the talented auteur Östlund delivers a memorable picture full of personality, exuberance, and a lesson in social injustice (regardless of how sturdy and credible that teaching proves to be).
