Remember 2020? The film Eddington sure does. That’s the entire premise of the movie, one that markets itself as a trip down memory lane. Remember how crazy things were back then? It’s been five years, and one could argue that the world hasn’t quite recovered. Unfortunately, Ari Aster’s latest effort does nothing more than remind without adding context, nuance, or commentary.

Eddington Badly Misses the Mark

We all, unless you are a literal child, remember what 2020 was like. Protests against racial injustice were highly prominent. COVID-19 was the backdrop of literally everything, and political unrest ran wild. Eddington seeks to showcase just what that was like in a small Western town. Sadly, it never does anything but that, and it often puts the focus in the wrong places.

Sherriff Joe Cross is our protagonist, played appropriately if not impressively by Joaquin Phoenix. He refuses to wear a mask to go anywhere despite there being a mandate for it. On the flip side, Ari Aster seems to want to dip his feet in both pools, as he also throws in plenty of ridiculous pro-masking instances. Cross sits alone in his car on his phone at the beginning of the movie, and law enforcement from the immediate neighboring town accost him for not masking up in a car by himself in the middle of nowhere.

This is an unfortunate refrain throughout the entire movie. Aster’s political thriller, if it can really be called that, vacillates between criticizing both sides of the political aisle, which in 2020 and 2025 is just plain cowardly. With Cross as the protagonist, however, his side of things is much more prominent.

To make matters worse, the lack of context, criticism, or nuance in much of the film’s run time only serves as a way to platform idiocy, which we have enough of in the world as it is. There’s a character who spins a tale about an underground ring of evil people connected to or working in the government, which is not an unpopular real conspiracy theory.

That makes the movie a little realistic, but without adding any commentary, Aster only gives these wild, inappropriate things a platform. Someone watching the movie would have no idea if that’s a sentiment that the director finds ignorant or supports. Playing both sides only allows for some of the more insane ideas presented to have room to breathe, which is probably not wise in today’s climate.

What was Aster’s Intent

Aster may have wanted to make some sort of political commentary. If he did, he missed the mark badly. He missed it so badly, that I begin to wonder if there was a mark to begin with. Maybe he just wanted to reminisce about that year, which is odd to say the least.

But what purpose does that serve? To remind us how crazy 2020 really was with a punched-up political conflict and explosive climax? We were there! We lived it and presenting it all without comment does absolutely nothing. It says nothing, which is perhaps the worst crime a film can commit.

Art, a term that can really only loosely be applied to Eddington, is inherently political. And by removing politics from the conversation in this movie, or at least attempting to promote both political sides, Aster has made his own politics fairly clear. It’s the same as saying you aren’t with either political party when asked by a friend or saying you prefer to stay out of politics. It sends a message even though the attempt was to avoid doing that.

There are very few decent people in the movie, too. Maybe that’s Aster’s message, that there are bad people on both sides. That doesn’t do much, either, because there’s no nuance to Eddington. A more skilled hand (and I thought the director of Midsommar and Hereditary would be deft at handling something like this) could’ve made this film with this setting good.

Another attempted message is that violence begets violence, which eventually leads to big problems. Sadly, that message is delivered so sloppily that it fails to resonate. We see plenty of violence, but it comes with ignorance on the part of the characters. The film wants us to think it’s retaliation for a bad thing, but the characters don’t know that they’re just part of a devolving protest, a narrative point that helps leave the movie feeling hollow.

Left with a Half-baked Effort

Instead, what we have is a spineless, cowardly take on the most politically charged time in our lives. And with how everything is portrayed, it’s as if Aster feels like he’s above it. Remember all those outrageous conflicts you people had in 2020? And there will be unfortunate side effects.

So much happened in 2020 that it feels like it was in itself a decade. It deserves a good movie someday, but a failure like this might only turn prospective filmmakers and storytellers away from it. Speaking of all that happened in 2020, the movie is overstuffed. A political election, COVID-19, Black Lives Matter, and more is all crammed into one movie, and the result is uneven attention devoted to each one. The election quickly takes a backseat, as does COVID-19, which were the central ideas presented in the movie’s marketing.

Speaking of, the movie markets itself as a Joaquin Phoenix vs. Pedro Pascal political drama. Phoenix, who is the main character and gets by far the most screen time, is a capable, fine actor himself, but suggesting to audience-goers that Pascal will be a potential co-lead and then pulling the rug out feels slightly malicious.

There are some consequences for actions, which is maybe the one thing the film does clearly say. Doing bad things will eventually catch up to you. Unfortunately, that message is lost within a jarring, rapidly increasing flip-flop of a climax. The movie switches from “criticizing” one side to the other about three or four times in its last 25 minutes.

The run time is also a problem. Despite having so much potential ground to cover, the two-and-a-half hour run time drags a ton. There’s no reason for it to be this long while simultaneously leaving so many plot points and story threads underdeveloped or outright abandoned.

Conclusion

Eddington is not all bad, though. There’s some good direction here from Ari Aster. The cinematography is at times really impressive. There is a lot of realism and accuracy involved, too. The score is great, although it sometimes feels so good that it forgot what movie it was in. Joaquin Phoenix and Pedro Pascal are good opposite one another, too.

Those positives just don’t outweigh the mountain of negatives in a misguided attempt to explore one of the most interesting times in history. It’s one of the worst movies of the year, so maybe consider seeing Superman or even F1 instead.

Score: 2/5