Skip to content

Here’s Another Clue for Us All: Glass Onion Is a Multifaceted Mystery

31
Share

Here’s Another Clue for Us All: Glass Onion Is a Multifaceted Mystery

Home / Here’s Another Clue for Us All: Glass Onion Is a Multifaceted Mystery
Movies & TV movie reviews

Here’s Another Clue for Us All: Glass Onion Is a Multifaceted Mystery

By

Published on January 4, 2023

Image: Netflix
31
Share
Image: Netflix

A screaming comes across the internet, and it’s me, yelling about how much I love Glass Onion. Rian Johnson’s newest whodunnit, like Knives Out before it, follows gentleman sleuth Benoit Blanc as he travels into the world of the ultra-rich in search of truth and, if possible, justice. As is tradition in these types of mysteries, this is a whole new adventure—Blanc is the only character who recurs, and you don’t need to have seen Knives Out to enjoy this one. (But go watch Knives Out, it’s incredible.)

My capsule above-the-cut review is that the movie’s a blast. I laughed out loud more than at any recent film since maybe Eurovision Song Contest, and if I had to describe how it feels to watch, the closest I can come is to say it’s like you’re at a party with dear friends and you’ve  drunk a glass of prosecco too fast, and bubbles have gone up your nose, and you’re laughing and sneezing and everyone’s laughing at how ridiculous it is, and suddenly it hits you how lucky you are to have these friends, to be with people who make you laugh so hard you forget time. Watch it with your family on Netflix! Watch it in the theater, if it comes back to theaters and you have a way to do it safely amid the pandemic.

Instead of the New England mansion of the insular Thrombey family, this time out we’re traveling to a private island with an eclectic group of influencers—or, excuse me, Disruptors. Miles Bron (Edward Norton), the de facto leader, is an eccentric, hippie-ish tech billionaire who owns a company called Alpha… except he didn’t exactly found it himself. Andi Brand (Janelle Monáe) was Miles’ business partner, the co-founder of Alpha, and CFO until about two years before we meet everyone. Claire Debella (Kathryn Hahn) is the current governor of Connecticut, but her eyes are fixed on a Senate seat, and her campaign is getting hefty contributions from Miles. Lionel Toussaint (Leslie Odom Jr.) is one of Alpha’s top scientists, and exhausted by trying to turn Miles’ high concepts into reality. Birdie Jay (Kate Hudson) is a supermodel-turned-designer, prone to social media mishaps and scrambling to stay relevant as her long-suffering, be-bucket-hatted assistant Peg (Jessica Henwick) scrambles to keep her boss’ phone locked away. Rounding out the group is Duke Cody (Dave Bautista), a Twitch streamer who ventures further into the MRA cesspool with each new follower, and his girlfriend Whiskey (Madelyn Cline) who has big plans for a post-Duke future.

Ostensibly, they’re on Miles’ private island for their annual reunion/murder mystery party. Really, they’re there to get away from pandemic restrictions and bask in the kind of break from reality that only the absurdly rich can afford. As in Knives Out, the story pivots around a central mystery that spawns all sort of smaller questions. Why are these people friends in the first place? And why did Andi accept an invitation, when she’s barely on speaking terms with the rest of them? And why did Benoit Blanc, the world’s greatest detective, accept an invitation to something that is so clearly a waste of his time?

Image: Netflix

Knives Out called back to Agatha Christie’s cozier mysteries with its tone (rambling mansion, perfect sweaters, autumn vibe) while the upstairs/downstairs class seething nodded to Gosford Park, and Harlan Thrombey’s tchotchkes and literary pedigree were fun riffs on Deathtrap and Sleuth. With Glass Onion, Johnson takes us into the realm of Evil Under the Sun, Death on the Nile, and The Last of Sheila—dazzling Mediterranean sunlight, a tight-knit group of friends who should absolutely break up with each other, a general air of smugness and self-satisfaction just waiting to be punctured, and, best of all, what can only be described as destination murder.

And Glass Onion throws reference after gleeful reference at its audience throughout: Blanc blunders around in an over the top “I’m just happy to be here” manner very much like Poirot in both Death on the Nile and Evil Under the Sun; Maggie Smith’s iconic turn as Miss Bowers in Nile is homaged both with Peg’s role as a bitchy queer-coded assistant and Janelle Monae’s blindingly perfect white suit; there’s a character who probably shouldn’t be drinking, but very much is, à la Angela Lansbury’s turn as Salome Otterbourne (also from Nile); in Andi Brand we get a person whose very presence is a knife-twist, à la Jacqueline De Bellefort (again, Nile); Miles Bron’s “hourly dong” is a ridiculous update on Evil Under the Sun’s “noonday gun”; there are several different brilliant mystery cameos (including the “voice” of the hourly dong). And I’m sure there’s more stuff that I’m missing, but my point is that Glass Onion, as with all of Johnson’s films, is in love with its genre and wants you to know that.

Glass Onion, like Knives Out before it, wholeheartedly embraces its time period. It’s set in May 2020, so there are quarantine pods, status bookshelves, tie-dye projects, sourdough starters, and Zoom meetings. In one scene, COVID infection and death rates tick up the side of a CNN broadcast. As in life, the characters’ masks—or lack of them—tell you a lot about a person. When the characters aren’t drinking Jared Leto’s hard kombucha they’re pounding Coronas.

Image: Netflix

Then there’s just the sheer fun pop culture riffing, like how Andi has done multiple TED Talks, or how, when Miles first meets Andi’s group, he’s dressed as Tom Cruise’s character in Magnolia—several years after that film came out because he’s a huge dweeb. (Between this and Weird’s Boogie Nights-inspired pool scene, Paul Thomas Anderson is having a moment.) Just look at all of Jenny Eagan’s costuming choices, or compare Miles’ art collection with the two paintings we see in Andi’s house, to revel in how much detail went into showing character through stuff.

Before I start spoiling anything, let me try to sum up the aspect of Glass Onion that was the most exciting to me.

One of the most important elements of the film is its commitment to intelligent, thoughtful characters. This is something Johnson has talked about in interviews, how he himself doesn’t really do “mindless” entertainment—things have to have layers for him to dig into. After decades of film characters snapping “Speak ENGLISH” at anyone with any form of expertise, and a couple of generations of people charging into argument and (shudder) Discourse without even the courtesy of a glance at Wikipedia, it feels so fucking good to be able to relax into a world where intelligence is not just begrudgingly tolerated, but celebrated. Where willful ignorance is corrected. Where a lack of empathy is comeuppanced.

From here I think I have to talk in more detail. There will be spoilers for Glass Onion and Knives Out going forward, so get out of here if you haven’t watched yet!

Image: Netflix

You know how Knives Out was a fun mystery that was really about the aftermath of the 2016 election/various types of privilege/responsibility/what kind of country the United States wants to be? Glass Onion is also that, but more so. More fun, yes, and an even twistier mystery. But even more than Knives Out, Glass Onion explores the way decent people can make so many little tiny compromises that they barely notice when they make big ones. When they lose sight of who they are. When they’ve come to think of themselves as objects to be bought—content to be shared for the most clicks.

Will you forgive a brief dodge into Joe Versus the Volcano? There comes a moment in that film when a capable woman, a person who prides herself on her independence and resilience, admits that she has a price. Someone the woman doesn’t trust offered to pay it, and she betrayed herself by accepting a job that compromised her. The scene where she shares all of this—admits it to herself—is one of the hearts of the film. It acts as a turning point, and shapes everything that comes after.

In Glass Onion everyone has a price, even our beloved Benoit Blanc. Sure, his is a bit more nebulous, but so what? It’s still a price.

I’ve been reading stacks of books about Tolkien and C.S. Lewis. I’ve been thinking really hard about Susannah Clarke’s Piranesi and John Darnielle’s Devil House, and why each of them affected me so much. I’ve been thinking a lot about how people bake their moral universes into their fictional universes. And Rian Johnson is a fun one for this. Mysteries are already great for analyzing class conflict—watch any Columbo episode and delight in how the Lieutenant plays up his schlubbiness and uses the rich criminals’ prejudices and snobberies against them, the way he takes the side of the have-nots the rich people are hurting. And Rian Johnson already had a pretty specific POV in his earlier films. For all its slickness, Brick was about a heartsick, well-meaning boy trying to help his troubled ex-girlfriend. Brothers Bloom was about the joy of creativity in the face of grief. Looper is about doing whatever is necessary to save a child. The Last Jedi is about living for the revolution instead of dying for it. And Knives Out is about doing the difficult but caring thing—even if it means your own ruin.

There comes a moment in I think all of Johnson’s movies, when the protagonist has to make a choice. (In Glass Onion there are a couple of these moments, but I’ll get there) I won’t go too far with this because I don’t want to spoil his other films, but there’s usually a point where someone has a choice between self-preservation, or risking themselves to help another person. In The Brothers Bloom the choice happens offscreen, and we see the results. In Looper the choice is the culmination of the film, while in The Last Jedi there are two such choices, one made by the obvious hero and one made by someone who, in most SFF stories, would be a side character at best. (It’s one of the many ways that Johnson honored the original spirit of Star Wars, but that’s a conversation for another day.) In Knives Out the big choice comes when Marta finds Fran overdosing in an abandoned room. Marta is already on the run. All she can see in front of her is a ruined career, a criminal record, her mother thrown out of the country. When she sees Fran she knows how to help her, but finding her there at all seems to reveal her as the blackmailer. If she runs, Fran will die, and Marta might be free. If she stays, she might save Fran’s life, but only at the cost of her own freedom and her mom’s home.

She chooses to stay.

And she’s caught. Her life as she knows it is over; she has destroyed her family’s future. A couple of plot machinations later she’s exonerated and the actual murderer is caught—but she doesn’t know that will happen when she makes her choice. She makes her decision knowing that she’s choosing her own negation, but knowing, too, that it’s the only way to restore the moral universe.

Image: Netflix

In Glass Onion these choices are scattered across the movie like food pellets at a petting zoo. And the thing that I find fascinating is that this time, the most important decisions all happen before the main action of the story. We see Andi’s decision to stop Miles from going ahead with Klear in a flashback, halfway through the movie, and then we watch as Miles and their friends—her friends, originally—unite against her to do the wrong thing. We don’t see the moment of Helen’s resolve to go to Blanc for justice, but we do see Blanc jumping to take the case, only hitting the brakes after Helen asks if it’ll be dangerous.

Of course it’ll be dangerous. But for a moment, Blanc drops his own compass in his eagerness to have real work again. In a way, this is the choice this time. This is the crux of the film, the reason for the film—Blanc’s momentary willingness to use Helen, but also, Helen’s willingness to go through with his ridiculous plan. And to be fair to Blanc, he fixes his moral lapse (if that’s what it is) by the end of the film.

In Glass Onion taking the easy path leads to comfort, wealth, and all the good works you promised yourself you’d do when you were young—but at the cost of other people’s lives. Doing the exciting thing knowing that you’re putting someone else in danger. But also doing the dangerous thing in order to find the truth.

Is there any moment of 2022 more exhilarating than Benoit Blanc yelling “No! It’s just dumb!”? If there is, it’s the moment when he says “It’s a dangerous thing to mistake speaking without thought for speaking the truth.”

Image: Netflix

OK but so here’s the thing. None of that means anything if it isn’t tied to something deeper. Free-floating genius simply leads to “smartest guy in the room” characters, which is what got us in this mess in the first place. (I am, myself, extremely intelligent. But I live in fear of either not being as smart as I need to be, or, worse, being the asshole who thinks I’m smart only to miss some giant obvious point, or, worst yet, being an arrogant prick. I’m smart, great—but what am I going to do with it? Can I use it to make things better, even slightly? And what does better look like?) And I want to reiterate that I don’t have an exhaustive knowledge of the whodunnit genre. I’ve read some Christie books, watched some adaptations, and I think I’ve seen all the classics of the canon. From what I’ve seen, especially in the sun-soaked mysteries (Death on the Nile, Evil Under the Sun, Last of Sheila) every character is awful. Every single person is mean and conniving—even the kids. And this is where Johnson sets himself apart. Going back to Knives Out, Marta isn’t a saint, but you could do worse in life than asking yourself “What would Marta do?”—just maybe don’t panic if you think you’ve given someone a lethal dose of medication. Moving on to Glass Onion, to this world of terrible shallow media elites, Johnson gives us two solid, good people.

Among all the grasping and glad-handing and unimaginable money, Andi is willing to draw a line in the sand—and then has to watch as all of her friends step over it. She’s not just fighting Miles over her own reputation or a severance package, but rather to try to stop Klear from endangering people. Helen is a teacher (already a life choice on par with Marta’s nursing) and it’s important to remember that once she gets to the island, Helen has no idea who the murderer is, or where the danger lies. Going to the island is putting herself at terrible risk. And on top of that she’s in a haze of grief. But even in that she responds to Whiskey’s friendliness in kind. On top of the work she’s doing just by being there, she goes out of her way to urge the other woman to free herself from these people.

Helen isn’t out for revenge. She’s not here to blackmail Miles. If she had walked in, told him who she was, and asked for a few million to keep her mouth shut he would’ve written her a check before she finished the sentence. He wouldn’t even blink. But what she wants is intangible. What revenge can she take that would bring her sister back? She wants the truth. She wants Andi’s friends to admit the truth, and she wants to finish her sister’s final act.

Because the other thing here, the true thing that can get lost in all the fun and explosions of the movie, is that Helen saved the fucking world. All the Disruptors were either ignorant of Klear’s dangers, or gave up arguing so Miles could get his way. Klear wasn’t something that could help Birdie and Duke’s brands, so they didn’t see it. Whiskey and Peg were along for the ride and didn’t even clock its significance until the final showdown. Claire and Lionel could have teamed up to blow the whistle, and it might have worked, but it would have destroyed the lives they’d built, and they quailed in the face of Miles’ legal army. And theoretically, Blanc could have tried to get the truth out after they were all safely away from the island—but then he’d certainly lose his status as an unimpeachable, god’s-eye moral figure as he explained all the events of the weekend. As he says himself: “This is where my jurisdiction ends. I have to answer to the police, the courts, the system. There’s nothing I can do.” Only Helen is willing to burn it all to the ground to save her sister’s name and expose Miles as a dangerous fraud.

Image: Netflix

If you’re willing to follow me to the end of this branch—come on! It’s nice out here, and there’s plenty of soft moss under this tree if we fall—Rian Johnson has repeatedly in interviews teased out the role of the detective in the whodunnit. They’re not the protagonist. As Johnson said in this great Vulture conversation with Nicholas Quah (which also contains a delightful round of F/M/K, check it out):

“I think it can be kind of a trap to start thinking that the detective is your protagonist. That’s actually a mistake. The detective is always at the center of it, but he’s also outside of the realm of the human drama… The detective has to be godlike and sort of outside that realm, which is all to say that the detective always kind of operates according to the needs of the mystery.”

When Helen appeals to Benoit she is, she thinks, at the end of her endurance. She’s just been bested by an idiot, the monster who murdered her sister. A room full of rich shitheads watched it happen. Miles is going to get away with it, the justice that was in her hands has been taken away. And now this rich fuck is smirking at her and telling her that he’s “sorry for her loss”? How can anyone live with that? She goes to Benoit and she tells him “I need you to do something” and he reminds her that he can’t. He’s reached the limit of his authority and without physical evidence he can’t help. As he said he’s not Batman, or for that matter Daredevil, or Punisher, or John Wick. He can’t stalk Miles and murder him in retribution. The law is not his to manipulate—and the entire point here is the idea that truth and justice are beyond being manipulated. So he does what he can. He gives her liquor, and he gives her the piece of Klear that Miles so arrogantly tossed to him earlier in the evening. But it’s up to her to use it. Because, yeah—no one’s coming to save us, right? If we want to live in a better world, if we want to repair our climate, if we want to be led by decent people instead of vapid rich shitheads, we have to be willing to disrupt the system.

And this is very personal but I’m gonna put it here anyway: this movie makes me want to write. All of Rian Johnson’s movies have done that. It’s so fun, so witty, so effervescent that it makes me want to create work. Writing about his stuff, sure, because I want everyone to watch this movie, and talk about it, and love it, and I try to walk this world with the words “What would Ebert do?” on my mind, always. But beyond that—I want to fucking work. I want to write something for the pure joy of it, I want to write something that will make someone else smile as hard as I did watching this movie.

Obviously Leah Schnelbach wants all of Andi Brand’s outfits, but they want Helen’s heart most of all. Now they’ll ironically suggest that you come visit them on the murderous island that is Twitter!

About the Author

Leah Schnelbach

Author

Intellectual Junk Drawer from Pittsburgh.
Learn More About Leah
Subscribe
Notify of
Avatar


31 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Avatar
Punchy
2 years ago

I enjoyed this movie quite a lot. Er, mostly enjoyed it. I didn’t see Knives Out, so the Benoit Blanc character is new to me, but I wasn’t all that impressed with Daniel Craig in this. Well, he’s good in the more dramatic moments when he’s a little more like James Bond. The comedy scenes, however, he seems to have wandered in from a hammy third-rate sketch on SNL. (Alright, any sketch on SNL these days). I just hope he was taking notes in his scenes with Janelle Monae. That is how you do a convincing Southern accent, Mr. Craig. Come on, buddy, the character’s name is Benoit Blanc, not Mel Blanc!

But it’s like if Peter Falk had been passed over and they went with Sean Connery to play Columbo. You need a real character actor for this.

Avatar
MissAnna
2 years ago

100 points to Schnelbach for the Joe VS the Volcano reference. 😍

Your enthusiasm is infectious, great article!

I look forward to a rewatch to see how many clues I missed the first time. 

ChristopherLBennett
2 years ago

I had noticed that in both films, the real protagonist is the female lead Blanc helps rather than Blanc himself. I appreciate the clarification that it comes from Johnson’s view of how mysteries work. Also interesting that both the heroines are working-class women of color, people outside the ranks of privilege. Basically they’re the “Columbos” here as much as Blanc — maybe more so, since Blanc is a celebrity hobnobbing with the stars. (They’re also both staggeringly gorgeous, but that really should be beside the point. It’s awful nice, though.)

But yes, these are both terrific films that have really clever twists that play around with the conventions of the mystery genre. In KO, the very nature of the “murder” turned out to be completely unlike how it appeared, and that was the cover for another twist to come. Here, even Blanc’s involvement in the case isn’t what we thought at first. I’m eager to rewatch it and see the first half in a new light. My one complaint about Glass Onion is that Jessica Henwick is underused.

I’m a little worried for the characters, though, because, given the revelations about Bron, how do we know the magic vaccination spray Ethan Hawke delivered actually worked? Given how reckless several of the “disruptors” were about masking and precautions, there’s a really good chance that everyone on that island was infected with COVID-19 by the end of the movie. And Blanc would be the one most at risk given his age. Though of course he has the infallible immunity of being the series lead character.

Avatar
2 years ago

Someone asked Johnson about a Muppets/Knives Out cross over, and he thought that was a great idea.  Now, I can’t even think about this movie without replacing the characters with Muppets. Batista as Gonzo?  I really enjoyed both movies with their wit and Agatha Christie slyness.  The best news is that Craig’s accent has gotten marginally better.  

Avatar
2 years ago

I just shove Craig’s accent and occasional woodenness into the “tongue-in-cheek” category and then it doesn’t bother me a bit!

ChristopherLBennett
2 years ago

I wouldn’t say Daniel Craig’s Benoit Blanc accent is any broader than Peter Ustinov’s Hercule Poirot accent.

Avatar
David Pirtle
2 years ago

I actually like Craig’s accent. Sure, it’s ridiculous, but so is everything else in this film.

Avatar
Chris Jordan
2 years ago

To my ears, Janelle Monae didn’t really have much of an accent.  Since I grew up near Alabama I suppose that means they got it right.  To me, Benoit Blanc’s accent sounds like upper class New Orleans accents usually sound on TV.  I thought it worked pretty well, although the very few times I’ve been to New Orleans, I didn’t hear anyone who spoke like that.

Avatar
Punchy
2 years ago

#7. And that’s a problem, in my opinion. When everyone is cranked up to 11, it makes it all seem a little unmoored from reality, even a heightened one. I guess that’s why the twin sister twist in the middle of the story felt like a great relief to me. Finally, a real human being has entered Toon Land.

ChristopherLBennett
2 years ago

I think Rian Johnson intended Blanc’s accent to sound artificial, part of the Columbo-ish act he puts on to throw people off. He reportedly considered giving Blanc a different accent in every movie without explanation, but decided or was convinced not to.

Avatar
ED
2 years ago

 May I point out, regarding Mr Blanc’s accent, that it may be rather dangerous to assume that it’s his natural accent and. not one he affects? (Or at least exaggerates, very much in the style of Poirot himself).

 Concerning the film itself, I liked it quite a bit until the Bog Twist, but thought it went a little too crazy with “Here’s what we didn’t tell you earlier” flashbacks thereafter: I’m also deeply, deeply sad we didn’t get to see Mr Hugh Grant tag along as The Watson, but hopefully that’s something we’ll see in the next film.

 Oh, and my favourite joke from this film was the Little Old Lady in the opening scene being quite possibly the cleverest person in the whole production (as is right & proper in a spiritual successor to Agatha Christie): I wonder if the next film will have the nerve to be a Love Letter to Miss Marple and MURDER SHE WROTE? (Apropos of nothing, for some reason I kept thinking Ms. Cynthia Nixon’s character was very Marple while watching THE GILDED AGE).

ChristopherLBennett
2 years ago

@12/ED: I did already mention that Blanc’s accent was meant to be an affectation. Although that’s undermined here by the fact that he still speaks the same way while chatting online with his friends. You’d think he’d drop the persona in that context.

As for Duke’s mom being smarter than him, the best part was that it came right after his insistence to his web audience that men are naturally superior to women. Kind of an obvious joke, but still appreciated.

Avatar
ajay
2 years ago

As well as all the other points LS makes, it’s worth noting that Rian Johnson is using not just a classic Golden Age plot but a really hoary old Golden Age plot cliche in each film so far. Knives Out had a locked room mystery, with a secret door. Glass Onion has a house party murder, with an unsuspected identical twin. It may be that in the next film in the series we will have “a bullet that stops a clock, and a clock that retaliates by stopping the bullet”, as one of Michael Innes’ characters puts it. Or perhaps a butler, who did it? An undetectable Oriental poison? A bullet made of ice?

That being said, I thought this was a weaker film than Knives Out, for one simple reason: it has no likeable characters. In fact, the supposed heroine, Helen, is a terrible person. Marta (I think her name was Marta?) was genuinely nice – as you point out, she tries to save Fran’s life at risk of her own.

Helen commits an atrocity simply out of spite. I think I could construct a story in which destroying the Mona Lisa was the moral thing to do – something contrived like “you have to shoot through it to kill the crazed bomber who’s hiding behind it about to blow up the school” – but she does it purely to put the boot in to Miles. She doesn’t even need to do it to prove that Klear is dangerous. It’s perfectly obvious by this point that Klear is dangerous because it has just blown up most of an island. She does it because she wants to hurt Miles, and destroy his reputation completely. She even risks her life to do it! She’s an immensely wealthy selfish monster, like all the rest of them. (Yes, she’s wealthy. She’s her sister’s heir and her sister, despite her ejection from Alpha, is a multi-millionaire.)

The first time we see Helen, she’s destroying a clever and complicated – and rather beautiful – machine, purely because she can’t be bothered to take a few minutes to solve it. That’s basically her establishing moment. 

Avatar
2 years ago

Did anyone see an explanation for the slacker who “accidentally” shows up a couple of times, and later has a drink with Blanc? Given what a tosser Miles turns out to be, I was wondering whether we were going to find out that the person introduced isn’t even fractionally the inventor but has been hired by the apparent slacker (the real inventor) so he can let himself look however he wants to won’t have to deal with people. I don’t recall any unfired Chekhovian guns in the original Knives Out, but the slacker seems like one here.

ChristopherLBennett
2 years ago

@14/ajay: I was uneasy with the fate of the Mona Lisa, but the case can be made that the destruction of a priceless work of art would be the only scandal huge enough to ruin someone as rich and powerful as Bron. If it had been endangered but survived intact, Bron’s publicists could spin the narrative, even argue that he deserved credit for his foresight in using the protective case. But not only did Bron’s supposed invention destroy the ML, it was the override button Bron insisted on installing that allowed it to happen. So that makes Bron’s recklessness doubly responsible for its destruction, and there’s no way to weasel out of that. (At least in a fictional world where rich and powerful people actually get comeuppance from time to time.)

Also, was Andi still a millionaire? I’d have to rewatch, but I seem to recall her living in a fairly ordinary suburban house, nothing especially upscale, when she was murdered.

Complaining that Helen acted destructively is arguing from a position of privilege. Yes, she destroyed some expensive physical objects, but she did so because it was the only way she could protest an injustice inflicted on actual people, who are more important. Sometimes that’s the only option left for the powerless, because the powerful have systematically deprived them of all other recourse. That was really the point of the story — rich people may make noises about being “disruptors” and breaking the system, but the system is designed to work in their favor and they have a vested interest in preserving it. Helen was the real disruptor, the one who tore down the unjust system. It wasn’t an act of vandalism, it was an act of revolution.

Similarly, her destruction of the puzzle box did not imply that she was intrinsically destructive. She’d discovered her sister’s dead body not long before. She was grieving and justifiably angry, and she suspected Bron had something to do with her death. So she wasn’t going to play some frivolous game that Bron indulged in. She was going to cut right to the heart of the matter. That’s what made her an admirable character — how determined she was to get to the truth and cut through all the garbage that others build around it to conceal it.

At the very least, if you want to blame Helen for what happened, it’s unfair to exempt Benoit Blanc from his share of the blame. He encouraged her to do it and gave her the Klear.

 

@15/chip137: I kept expecting the slacker to turn out to be important in some way, but he was just a cameo of a friend of Rian Johnson’s. I figure it was one of Johnson’s subversions of the mystery genre. We expect every element in a mystery story to be important in some way, so the subversion is that this guy is just randomly there for no reason. Which resonates with the plot, because Blanc and Helen were convinced they were looking for a clever murderer and thus were stymied by how stupid and nonsensical the killer’s actions turned out to be.

Avatar
2 years ago

I liked the story. But Blanc’s “accent” was so inauthentic and inconsistent, it was irritating and unprofessional. I wonder if there is an international version of the movie with voice-over French (or whatever language) and English subtitles.

Avatar
ajay
2 years ago

 I was uneasy with the fate of the Mona Lisa, but the case can be made that the destruction of a priceless work of art would be the only scandal huge enough to ruin someone as rich and powerful as Bron

Then it was too high a price to pay. And, as I say, I can’t see a scenario in which Bron’s miracle fuel destroys his entire island mansion, and everyone goes “oh, but the Mona Lisa was fine, therefore the fuel must be perfectly safe”. Bron has already been completely discredited by this point.

Also, was Andi still a millionaire?

Yes. Look at her clothes, for heaven’s sake. The viewer’s attention is repeatedly drawn to the fact that “Andi” has extremely expensive taste in couture. And Helen was her heir; Andi had no living parents, no other siblings, and no children.

At the end of the film, Helen is walking towards a successful lawsuit against Bron for control of Alpha (because all Bron’s former friends have agreed to testify on her behalf), which will make her incredibly rich. Saying that she has “torn down an unjust system” is simply not accurate. She has displaced one obscenely rich person and will take his place, gaining vast and unjust amounts of wealth and power that she has not earned any more than Bron did. 

Complaining that Helen acted destructively is arguing from a position of privilege.

No, it isn’t.

ChristopherLBennett
2 years ago

@18/ajay: “Then it was too high a price to pay.”

Did you miss the part where she literally saved the world from the mass catastrophe that would’ve resulted if Klear had been put into wide use? Is it better to let a corrupt billionaire go on ruining and endangering lives just so a famous painting survives? Look, I hate the idea of important cultural works being destroyed, but it’s not more important than human life and justice.

 

“And, as I say, I can’t see a scenario in which Bron’s miracle fuel destroys his entire island mansion, and everyone goes “oh, but the Mona Lisa was fine, therefore the fuel must be perfectly safe”. Bron has already been completely discredited by this point.”

The fuel has been discredited, but that’s just one part of the vast corporate ecosystem that exists to prop Bron up. The fuel turning out to be dangerous would’ve hurt Bron badly, but it wouldn’t have ruined him, because someone that rich and powerful has the means to weather even a large scandal, as we’ve seen extensively over the past few years in America. I mean, we saw clearly, right before our eyes, that Bron was able to literally get away with murder, because he was protected by the people who depended on him for their own success. If they were willing to lie to protect him from murder charges, they would’ve been willing to lie to protect him from consequences for the Klear debacle, by pinning the blame on some underling or something, or just spinning a counternarrative that distracted the public from the real issue. The only way to get that support structure to turn against him was to make him so toxic that nobody would defend him anymore.

 

“Yes. Look at her clothes, for heaven’s sake. The viewer’s attention is repeatedly drawn to the fact that “Andi” has extremely expensive taste in couture.”

Even if that’s so, how does that make Helen a bad person for wanting to get justice for her sister’s murder?

 

“At the end of the film, Helen is walking towards a successful lawsuit against Bron for control of Alpha (because all Bron’s former friends have agreed to testify on her behalf), which will make her incredibly rich. Saying that she has “torn down an unjust system” is simply not accurate. She has displaced one obscenely rich person and will take his place, gaining vast and unjust amounts of wealth and power that she has not earned any more than Bron did.”

Even aside from the fact that I find that a cynical interpretation of her motives and one unsupported by the onscreen evidence, I think you’re forgetting the fact you yourself pointed out: She just destroyed the Mona fricking Lisa. Bron may be going down for his part in letting it happen, but she’s the one directly responsible for it, both by starting the fire and by opening its protective case. Okay, maybe the “Disruptors” would be willing to cover it up and let her get away with it, but I’m not sure they’d be able to, given that the destruction of a priceless cultural treasure of this magnitude would prompt an intensive investigation. And Helen might even confess to it freely if it ensures that Bron goes down. I’d say there’s a very good chance that she’s going to jail for a long time. But she was willing to make that sacrifice to get justice for her sister.

 

“No, it isn’t.”

Oh, are we doing Monty Python’s Argument Clinic sketch now?

Joel Fritz
Joel Fritz
2 years ago

I enjoyed the movie.  It was a refreshing take on the country house mystery.  The cast was like a British cast.  The actors could all act.  The only thing that was difficult for me was Daniel Craig’s accent.  It didn’t work as parody or as a serious attempt.  He just can’t do it.  I watched his face carefully and he was clearly trying to play the character.  His accent made his character seem like a creature from another planet.

Avatar
H
2 years ago

Wonderful article!  I love these movies to death, and I really enjoyed seeing you dive into their philosophies!

Avatar
Punchy
2 years ago

Yes, it was hard to watch the Mona Lisa go up in flames, but if it saved many homes from being turned into Hindenburgs, then so be it. Human lives are more important than art. And if you’d like to check out another movie that makes this point, and in a fairly awesome Indiana Jones style way, go watch The Train from 1964. It’s quite good.

As for ruining the reputation of a dumb billionaire, I’d just like to say that here in the real world these people appear perfectly adept at ruining it themselves. So maybe no real masterpieces will have to be lost.

Avatar
JBenal
2 years ago

About the destruction of the Mona Lisa: I don’t believe for a minute it was the real Mona Lisa. Bear in mind that everything out of Miles’s mouth is wrong and that he’s pig-ignorant in general; also, remember the upside-down Rothko. As a friend of mine remarked, 100% the French art authorities talked to him for five minutes and then sent him home with a fake.

And Helen’s point about Miles’s name being linked with the Mona Lisa forever still stands, because he will ever after be a laughingstock.

Avatar
ajay
2 years ago

Did you miss the part where she literally saved the world from the mass catastrophe that would’ve resulted if Klear had been put into wide use?

Yes, I did miss that part, because it wasn’t in the film.

The film – the actual film itself, not the headcanon-enhanced version – ended with a situation where

a) Miles Bron is about to go to prison for the murders of Duke and possibly also Andi, based on Blanc solving both cases;

b) Miles Bron is about to lose control of Alpha to a lawsuit filed by Helen, supported by the rest of the cast as witnesses;

c) the same witnesses are willing to testify publicly that Klear is dangerous and Bron went ahead with deploying it against the advice of his business partner (whom he murdered) and his chief scientist (who is testifying to that effect in person);

d) Klear has exploded and destroyed an entire island mansion.

But in this part that I missed, apparently, despite all of that, Klear gets rolled out worldwide without any further safety testing and causes a mass catastrophe – because everyone shrugs their shoulders and says “oh well, Mona Lisa’s fine, nothing to worry about”. 

Even if that’s so, how does that make Helen a bad person for wanting to get justice for her sister’s murder?

Strawman.

ChristopherLBennett
2 years ago

@23/JBenal: Ooh, that’s a great point. It makes a lot of sense that they would’ve appeased him with a replica.

Although if that’s true, then it scuttles my argument that the destruction of the ML is the only scandal big enough to get his supporters to stop protecting him. If it was just a fake, then it would just be an embarrassment. That would leave only the Klear scandal, and without an actual priceless treasure being destroyed (well, aside from all the other art in the Glass Onion, I guess), that might be a scandal he could still weather if the “Disruptors” and the other people dependent on his wealth closed ranks to protect him, like they were willing to do to protect him from murder charges.

Then again, if they don’t know it was a fake ML, then they might still abandon him long enough to get him charged with murder. So it could still work if they make their statements before the Louvre reveals the substitution. But the Louvre would probably do so as soon as the news broke, to reassure the public that the ML hadn’t been destroyed. So there’s a narrow window for it to happen. And they’d have to stand by their initial accusations even afterward, rather than retracting them.

I suppose the movie deliberately leaves it ambiguous whether Bron is actually ruined for good, or even arrested. It seemed to be saying that his wealth protected him from legal consequences, so Helen’s act was the only way to exact any kind of retribution, even if it was ultimately more a humiliation than anything else. It would be nice to think he was brought down and justice was truly done, but it would also be nice to think the Mona Lisa was safe and intact, and I’m not sure there’s a version where both are true. Maybe that ambiguity is the point, in keeping with the themes of the movie. You can interpret it in more than one way.

Avatar
ED
2 years ago

 @ChristopherLBennett: I’m not going to lie, seeing it pointed out that la Gioconda is painted onto a wooden panel, not a canvas, makes it a little easier for me to swallow the end of this film – the notion of the Louvre basically conning the main villain is quite delightful – since, as I work in the heritage industry, you can imagine my feelings on being told that a private vendetta justifies the deliberate destruction of an object as storied as a Da Vinci (especially as a pre-meditated act of spite, rather than as collateral damage).

 On the other hand if Helen were destroying the Mona Lisa to save a life, instead of ruin an enemy, that would be a different story. 

I would also like to state that categorising the destruction of the Mona Lisa (a painting) as an outright atrocity seems excessive: to murder a person in order to cover up your own selfish folly is unquestionably an atrocity, to destroy a masterpiece is a work of vandalism (I would also heartily agree that Helen’s demolition of that puzzle box is a demonstration that, for her, this challenge isn’t a game rather a display of inherently destructive tendencies).

 

 Also, please allow me to apologise for speed-reading your @10 and misreading it in the process. (-:

 

 @13: That this comes from a bystander, rather than a main character, makes it all the more delicious (On an unrelated note, some part of me wonders if Whiskey has a sister called ‘Brandy’, but that’s pure mischief).

 

 @23: By the way, if it makes you feel any better, given the characterisation of Our Villain, it’s difficult to believe that his business operations aren’t a house of cards mortared together by bull-puckey. After all, how often has History given us Villains that look all-conquering & invulnerable, only for that invulnerability to revealed as the product more of smoke & mirrors than Divine Favour?

Avatar
Steven Hedge
2 years ago

@24 Ajay 

Did you miss the part where she literally saved the world from the mass catastrophe that would’ve resulted if Klear had been put into wide use?

“Yes, I did miss that part, because it wasn’t in the film.”

Except it was in the film. The entire subplot of Klear was that he wanted to put it on a manned rocket, risking people’s lives, and he was going to show it to world leaders in a week, and planned to put it in people’s homes. The movie DID say she saved people’s lives by destroying the Glass Onion. 

 

ChristopherLBennett
2 years ago

I just rewatched the film, and on the subject of Andi’s wealth or lack thereof, Lionel said that Bron left her without a cent in the court case. That’s probably hyperbole, but the house she was living in was a cozy middle-class suburban residence, hardly the kind of place where a multimillionaire would live. The court case was only a few months before, so she could’ve been living off her savings, I guess. Also, we didn’t see Andi in fancy clothing after the trial. We only saw Helen in fancy clothing, and it’s ambiguous whether it’s actually Andi’s clothing or something paid for by Blanc in creating the persona for Helen. (Helen said she couldn’t fit into Andi’s clothes. They may have been twins, but the rich and famous twin would’ve probably been under more pressure to stay excessively thin than a third-grade schoolteacher, and more able to maintain it through diet and exercise.)

With the napkin, Helen could’ve proved Andi’s ownership of the idea behind Alpha, but that’s gone. The disruptors agreed to testify that they saw the napkin, but while that would be part of the case against Miles (along with their false but accurate testimony about seeing him at Andi’s house and seeing him take Duke’s gun), without the actual napkin, it might not be possible to prove Andi’s claim to the company, so we can’t assume Helen would inherit it.

I also don’t agree that the film lacks sympathetic characters. The characters are all compromised, but not without redeeming features. Helen is justifiably angry and grieving, and she’s courageous in being willing to risk her life in pursuit of the truth. (If anything, Blanc’s the unsympathetic one for allowing her to take that risk as part of his machinations.) She’s also allowed humorous vulnerability in getting drunk on the kombucha without realizing it. As for the others, Birdie and Duke are pretty unlikeable, and Claire talks a good leftie game but is a self-serving hypocrite. But Lionel is a pretty decent guy whose one flaw is that he allowed himself to be bought. He’s the only one who looks ashamed of himself when he lies on the stand, and he tries to stand up to Miles about Klear, but is outmaneuvered. Odom’s performance makes him sympathetic. Whiskey turns out to be deeper than she seems, and she and Helen bond somewhat. Peg is hard to get a handle on, but one can’t help but feel sorry for her as the person who has to try to keep Birdie’s excesses and stupidity under control.

 

A couple of other things I noticed, rewatching with knowledge of the full story: We actually do see Miles hand Duke his glass in plain sight, but then when Miles calls attention to the glass, we get a fake flashback of the accidental switch he describes. Also, we hear Blanc address Helen by her real name just before she’s shot, and before we know she’s actually Helen. I didn’t notice that the first time through. Also, the people Lionel is conferencing with at the beginning are warning him about Klear, though I didn’t put that together the first time. So they set that up from the start.

On the beach, after everyone heads up to the Glass Onion and Blanc and “Andi” stay behind, her first line is “Rich people shit is weird.” He then addresses her as if they’re meeting for the first time, and she responds in kind. The first time around, I took that line as Andi acknowledging how weird their rich lifestyle must seem to an outsider like Blanc, but now I realize that Helen was breaking character, and by keeping up the act, Blanc was reminding her to do the same, which she then did. Again, a clue hidden in plain sight.

Avatar
Shelly
2 years ago

Daniel Craig said that his accent was atrocious and the best he could do at any one time, that he had the learn all of his lines phonetically and simply repeat them the way they were read to him.  Johnson said nothing was planned about the accent except to get Craig through the movie with one and he thought the result was funny. So no, there was no higher purpose for the way it was.

I thought the movie cute but not subtle, mostly a bunch of over the top caricatures a la Agatha Christie movies hamming it up. It was nowhere near as good as the first.

Arben
2 years ago

I had a suspicion that Helen might’ve actually been Andi making up the as-yet-unreported story about her death to Blanc, until we see her clearly talking to herself as Helen when alone. We of course get the facts confirmed in narrative later.

Peg didn’t read to me as “bitchy” in the least. Either way, I also think the role was a terrible waste of Jessica Henwick, as Christopher mentioned, even though some Jessica Henwick is of course better than no Jessica Henwick. And I laughed out loud at the gag of her running through the background to literally put out a fire at Birdie’s shindig.

I wonder just who put together the boxes if Bron’s an utter moron. Clearly he can hire people for that stuff but while I appreciated Blanc calling out his would-be highfalutin malapropisms, and he’s clearly a tool, I don’t know whether we’re supposed to assume he was still kind-of an idiot savant who simply believed too much of his own hype or what, because my recollection is that per Lionel’s opening scene he wasn’t entirely striking out on his brainstorms since breaking with Andi.

 

ChristopherLBennett
2 years ago

@30/Arben: Bron mentioned the “puzzle guy” he hired to make the boxes, saying that he apprenticed under Ricky Jay, a well-known magician and actor (who was going to be in Knives Out but passed away and was replaced by M. Emmett Walsh).

 

“per Lionel’s opening scene he wasn’t entirely striking out on his brainstorms…”

The implication there is that the scientists in Bron’s employ, like Lionel, were the ones having the actual brainstorms. But because Bron had a reputation as a genius (based on stealing Andi’s napkin idea), the scientists assumed that Bron was coming up with actual good ideas and they were just deciphering what his faxes meant — when the reality was that the faxes were gibberish and the ideas came from the scientists themselves.

In fact, that scene was a great illustration of how our assumptions can blind us to the truth. Lionel’s monologue about the faxes was basically telling us up front that Bron’s ideas were gibberish. If you reflect on it, it’s easy to see that if he sent out thousands of faxes and the smart people in his employ were only able to get good ideas out of a handful of them, that means his suggestions were nonsense and the few good ideas they sparked were just random luck. Hell, if anything, those are worse results than random chance should have produced. We were also told up front that Bron’s plan to send Klear on a space flight was a terribly reckless and dumb idea that the board members were trying to convince Lionel to talk him out of. Everything in that scene was informing us right off the bat that Bron’s ideas were crap. But because the characters believed Bron was a genius, they rationalized away the clear evidence that he wasn’t. And we, the audience, accepted that he was a genius because the characters asserted it, and so we also missed what the evidence was showing us in plain sight.

Arben
2 years ago

@31. ChristopherLBennett — I appreciate the explanations and memory jog. Once you mentioned the late, great Ricky Jay, that line came back to me. Despite not enjoying it quite as much as Knives Out, I’ve wanted to rewatch the film since the moment it ended but not made time yet.