The 75th edition of the Cannes Film Festival is halfway through and the first favorites are emerging. No film in the competition has so far been met with such effusive enthusiasm as the new satirical comedy Triangle of Sadness by Swedish director Ruben Östlundwho won the Golden Palm five years ago with his satire on the modern art world The Square† The film was extremely popular at both the press premiere and the gala audience.
In Triangle of Sadness, his first English-language film, Östlund sets his sights on the gap between professed progressive ideals and the enormous social inequality that lies behind them. Harris Dickinson plays fashion model Carl, who has to watch his girlfriend Yaya (Charlbi Dean) become much more successful than him. As a successful ‘influencer’ she can go on a trip on a cruise ship without paying.
Drunk captain Thomas Smith (Woody Harrelson) appears to be more interested in Marxist theorizing than keeping a course. When his ship gets into heavy weather, the relations between the passengers and the crew completely change.
The boisterous enthusiasm with which the film was received at Cannes does not say it all. At a film festival, a comedy quickly provides welcome relief after a series of heavy and dark films. A comedy can then quickly be slightly overrated.
Triangle of Sadness is certainly Östlund’s most exuberant and energetic film to date, but also his most farcical and least subtle. His films often have a central stunt scene; represented here by a dinner of storm, drunkenness and seasickness, ending in an endless series of puke.
The cruise ship appears to be an effective metaphor for today’s society. Östlund’s social observations are admittedly not really surprising, but they are often sharp. The director continues seamlessly on the path he took with The Square† The lack of innovation is somewhat disappointing. The film is divided into three chapters, of which only the last chapter is fully successful.
The only other outlier so far falls in the Cannes film competition in the ‘heavy and dark’ category. Tchaikovsky’s Wife by the Russian director Kirill Serebrennikov is about the disastrous marriage between gay composer Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky and Antonina Miliukova in 1877.
Cannes could use those two outliers in the competition, because on the whole the offer was below par. James Gray has been a Cannes darling for many years. The American director has previously made epic films, such as Ad Astra with Brad Pitt as an astronaut wandering in space. Of Armageddon Time he works on a smaller canvas with a film based in part on his own childhood in New York in the 1980s. 11-year-old Paul grows up in a Jewish family that, although not rich, has saved enough to send him to a private school when he gets into trouble in public education.
His best friend Johnny comes from an underprivileged black family. He doesn’t have the evasive options. This inequality is constantly rubbed into the viewer. The characters seem to have more to illustrate a social position than to have a full life of their own. The reception in Cannes was nevertheless very positive. A high tolerance for Hollywood’s pedantic tone is a must to appreciate the film.
The Belgian film world achieved a remarkable success at the 75th edition of the festival. Four Belgian films managed to make it to the official selection† From the ‘Belgian Gulf’ was only Le otto montagne by Felix van Groeningen and Charlotte Vandermeersch – based on a bestseller by Paolo Cognetti – can be seen early in the festival. The movie was disappointing.
It is about the friendship of two men, against the background of their shared love for life in the mountains. The film relies very strongly on the well-known stoplap that men never want to talk about their feelings. Le otto montagne is well acted, beautifully filmed, but nothing sparks. Perhaps the problem lies with the sentimentality of Cognetti’s source material.
Cannes is often extremely loyal to filmmakers, once they have penetrated the inner circle. From an ethical point of view, that is perhaps a commendable quality. In any case, Cannes is not a festival that blows with all the winds. But as much loyalty may not always yield the best festival. Hopefully the second half of the festival will be better. It really has to be – if Cannes is to live up to its reputation as the best film festival in the world.