One of the main problems that any spectator who sits in a theater to watch a very “talked-about” film is forced to face is theexpectation. Cinema is a type of art that foresees a certain idea of community and sharing, feelings that increase in conjunction with the Oscar Awards, which become a real unmissable event. This causes when a much talked about film like Everything Everywhere All At Once even spectators who are not particularly avulsed to the seventh art run into the hall to be able to see with their own eyes. The problem is that when you expect a lot from a film, the risk of being disappointed is very high.
Born as an outsider – and passed very quietly on his first visit to theaters on Italian soil – Everything Everywhere All At Once is now the film that travels directly to victory at the next Academy Awards in the category Best Film, even after winning the PGA, the awards given by the Hollywood Producers Union usually are a clear indicator of what’s to come on Oscar night. But what is this success due to? And most importantly, the film directed by Daniel Kwan and Daniel Scheinert (known collectively as Daniels) really deserves the success it’s getting?
What is Everything Everywhere All At Once about?
The film directed by the Daniels is a film that investigates the world of the multiverse, which is increasingly fertile ground for stories and adventures, especially after customs clearance thanks to the Marvel Cinematic Universe. The story concerns a Chinese immigrant (Michelle Yeoh), married for years to Waymond (Ke Huy Quan) to whom life does not seem to smile. He grappling with a rebellious daughter and with whom he can not create a connection (Stephanie Hsu), the protagonist will find herself traveling through the multiverse, knowing the infinite possibilities that hide behind the choices and will have the task of saving the world.
Oscar Awards, does the Daniels film really deserve the win because it is a genre film?
One of the reasons why the nomination of Everything Everywhere All At Once has caused discussion (even in a positive sense), filling the front pages of international newspapers, is the fact that for decades the Academy Awards have always snubbed the so-called genre cinema, favoring dramatic films with structure ad hoc and themes that are always very similar to themselves. Beyond the value of the single awarded film, in the decisions of the Oscars there is in any case a sort of pattern that has been repeating itself and which allows insiders to understand well in advance which films could be in the sights of the Academy Awards. At first glance, Everything Everywhere All At Once seems to destroy this stereotype: with the pulp tones of a cinecomic, belonging to genre cinema and the choice to face the multiverse the Daniels’ film seemed to have on paper all those subversive elements that seemed to suggest a sort of rejuvenation of the organ that awards the film industry’s most important awards.
A lack of originality and courage
Too bad these promises and premises are not fully kept when it comes to the big screen. Beyond a truly crazy editing – this certainly deserves recognition – and the excellent interpretation of the protagonists and non-lead actors, Everything Everywhere All At Once it is a chaotic miscellany that does not tell anything new – we are facing the usual film about the family and the importance of one’s choices – and that behind an almost psychedelic staging hides the lack of courage to be truly subversive, to really tell something capable of create a spark in the viewer. Adherence to today’s cultural models is not enough, nor the easy pomposity of generational misunderstandings seasoned with immigration issues and adherence to the LGBTQAI+ community to create a subversive film. On the contrary, the film ends up being irritating at times precisely because of its clear desire to cater to all palates, to satisfy any type of taste and not to offend anyone. In this sense, the Daniels’ film is not a revolutionary film, it is a crafty movie.
Rhythm problems and the use of trash
Timing and pacing management doesn’t help either. Everything Everywhere All At Once it lasts about two hours and twenty minutes, but the time management is so unbalanced that the second half of the film gives the sensation of dragging oneself, of stretching, of tending almost as if to test the endurance of those sitting and watching. Perhaps the intent was to explore as many parallel universes as possible, but the result is something a-narrative, something that only serves to juxtapose sequences and shots to demonstrate that you know how to do your job. Added to this is also a certain recourse to vulgarity and to trashy completely free: both the grotesque and the trashy can be weapons to revolutionize a certain modus operandi in the cinematographic sphere – as happened, for example, with Thor: Love and Thunder – but to work they must be used with a clear intention. Instead, the film offers only scenes made with the intention of making people laugh and which instead leave you stunned. And it’s not a question of upsetting a system of values or of playing on the fake respectability of the average spectator: they are gratuitous scenes, put there once again to fill one of the many voids created by too many delays.Everything Everywhere All At Once it’s a film that’s perfect to be enjoyed one evening, in a collective vision with friends and it doesn’t lack very interesting flashes and, as we said at the beginning, some unassailable technical elements. But none of this is enough to define it as the best film of the year, nor to justify its hypothetical victory at the Oscars 2023.
