Eddington

When I first saw the trailer for Eddington, I knew right away this was not a movie I was eager to watch. Whoever cut that trailer should probably reconsider their career; it made the film look painfully dull. Unfortunately, the first half of the movie proved the trailer wasn't entirely misleading.

The story spends far too much time bogged down in political debates set during the pandemic era. These conversations are supposed to be thought-provoking, but most of them go in circles, leading nowhere. The dialogue feels both heavy-handed and oddly hollow, as if the writers wanted to capture the tension of the time but instead ended up rehashing tired talking points.

The one saving grace of the film is its impressive cast. A true ensemble of talent, they do their best to elevate the material, injecting nuance and gravitas where the script falls short. And yet, even they are not immune to the weight of the sluggish pacing; brilliant actors lost in a swamp of slow-moving scenes and clumsy political commentary.

Then, around the halfway mark, something shifts. The narrative finally sparks to life with an unexpected turn that injects suspense and gives the story much-needed momentum. For a while, it feels like Eddington has found its footing. There are moments of genuine intrigue and emotional impact, and you start to see glimpses of the great film it could have been.

But just as things get interesting, the movie stumbles again at the finish line. The ending is anticlimactic, not entirely out of place given the tone, but still unsatisfying and awkward. It leaves you with the feeling that the film simply didn't know how to wrap up its ideas, so it settled for an ending that is "understandable," yet underwhelming.

Final verdict: Eddington is a film of two halves; the first painfully slow and weighed down by misguided political chatter, the second finally engaging but ultimately leading to a disappointing conclusion. With a weaker cast this movie would have been a complete miss, but thanks to the performances and a few sparks of suspense, it manages to scrape by with a middling 6/10.

In 2019, Ari Aster struck many film fans as the new face of horror and quickly attached him to the genre. In 2025, Ari Aster has departed from that stereotype and is now seen (at least in my opinion) as a director who makes very polarizing and ambitious films that he wants to make. I gotta respect the guy for going out and doing that. Eddington, much like his 2023 film "Beau is Afraid" is that kind of film. It's ridiculously ambitious, busy, and absolutely bonkers. It's something that I feel only Aster could make. I'll agree with the critics when they say Aster covers a lot of subjects but doesn't really commit to most of them. He seems to kind of get lost in the moment of trying to satirize and summarize too many subjects of the COVID pandemic to the point of exhaustion. It's not his most successful film and it's certainly not going to please everyone, but I greatly admire the drive he put into it.

Not a biopic of the late English actor Paul Eddington (although I think this would be more exciting and taken less time to tell!).

Ari Aster offers a laborious, talky and self important dark comedy /drama that has moments of funny comedy - the over the top hysteria of lockdowns and the breakdown of society that it can bring is a perfect springboard to set up a piece of work in any form.

Joaquin Phoenix continues to dazzle in his brave choices of roles and like Aster's previous film Beau Is Afraid is not afraid to add a pitiful depth, physical comedy and a vulnerability that marks him out in his generation of actors.

Emma Stone is given nothing to do.

Aster adds claustrophobia, breakdown in human behaviour (the excessive use of mobile phones documenting events ),is used in nightmarish qualities.

The pitfalls of conspiracy theories and the lonely (mainly American) victims is shown in all its rabid ,verbose hysteria.

At 149mins it's way too long for such a slim story,90mins would be better. I was bored after 45mins ,the story only kicks in in the last third after then most of the audience has checked out.

I give Aster plaudits in making original,thought provoking films that certainly test the audiences (if not patience).

He needs a judicious editor,and a word count dictator on his computer when writing the script.

Eddington is not a place worth visiting.

It's a meticulously crafted powder keg, and Aster lights the fuse with the precision of someone who knows exactly how long the fuse burns. The man doesn't make movies-he engineers experiences. This one? A contemporary western that hums with unease, like a desert wind carrying whispers of something off.

Aster's got a reputation for unsettling audiences, but here he trades pagan rituals and family trauma for the sun-bleached nihilism of New Mexico. The tension isn't in the jump scares-it's in the silence between glances, the way a sheriff's badge catches the light just a little too sharply. His camera lingers like a vulture circling, and the editing? Tight. No wasted movement. You'll feel every minute of its 148 runtime, but not because it drags. Because it grinds.

Joaquin Phoenix as the sheriff? He's all coiled ambition and swallowed rage, a man who's mastered the art of smiling without it touching his eyes. Emma Stone? She's in her element here, shifting from warmth to withering skepticism like a switchblade flicking open. And Pedro Pascal-quiet, calculating, a performance that says more in a raised eyebrow than most do in monologues.

If you're expecting another Midsommar, adjust your sights. This is a different breed-a dark comedy dressed in cowboy boots, where the jokes land like gut punches. The humor's bone-dry, the violence matter-of-fact, and the existential dread? Oh, it's there. Lurking in the background like a bad habit you can't quit.

Is it perfect? No. The third act's ambition occasionally outpaces its grip, and not every metaphor sticks the landing. But perfection's overrated. Eddington's a ride-a nasty, hypnotic, memorable ride. Aster's not asking you to like it. He's daring you to look away.

My advice? Don't.

Describing Eddington as a neo-western might be the most fitting way to summarise Ari Aster's 2025 dark comedy-drama-though even that hardly scratches the surface.

That said, I felt I needed a full ten minutes of silence after the credits rolled, just to process what I'd witnessed.

It's an Ari Aster film, after all, so if you're familiar with his work, you'll know to expect a whirlwind of emotional and thematic disarray. But Eddington isn't just messy-it's exquisite, unfiltered chaos.

If you've seen the trailer, don't be misled. It barely teases the disorienting spiral that unfolds. The story kicks off in May 2020, amidst the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.

What begins as a snapshot of public hysteria-conspiracy theories, anti-vaxxers, and the fear-soaked atmosphere-rapidly morphs into something darker and more disturbingly real.

We've spent the past five years collectively unmoored-adrift in chaos, where appearances deceive and identities dissolve. It sometimes feels like a failed social mutation-one born from freedom pushed to its breaking point-an evolutionary misstep we fought to achieve, only to have it turn against us.

Let's be clear: freedom is a vital human right. But when it becomes indistinguishable from anarchic self-destruction, something has clearly gone awry.

At its core, Eddington follows a standoff between small-town sheriff Joe Cross (Joaquin Phoenix) and Mayor Ted Garcia (Pedro Pascal), set in the fictional town of Eddington, New Mexico.

Their clash is both personal and political-complicated by Garcia's fraught history with Cross's wife, Louise (Emma Stone), and mother-in-law, Dawn (Deirdre O'Connell).

Aster revisits his obsession with overbearing maternal figures, folding that tension seamlessly into the wider conflict as the two men find themselves on opposing sides of the mask debate.

The film is deliberately provocative, often hollow by design, and it's a difficult piece to review. You'll laugh, you'll wince, you'll question what you're watching-and you certainly won't find it comforting.

Aster touches on themes like racial division, though arguably without much new to say. The Black Lives Matter movement is clearly present in the film's DNA, but its representation feels muddled-more gestured at than fully explored.

Before it can fully engage with those ideas, the film veers off into another subplot filled with irrationality, violence, and distraction-perhaps intentionally mirroring how public attention shifted in real time.

What he does capture is the paranoia, anxiety, and social fragmentation that exploded when lockdowns began and the world collectively panicked. He blends it into a fever dream of confusion and satire, offering no answers-just raw sensation.

Much of the chaos is filtered through the lens of social media, which becomes the film's true stage. It's where the news is curated, where lies take root, and where misinformation thrives.

To emphasize this aspect, the film extensively employs the screenlife technique, blending traditional storytelling with found-footage and mockumentary styles. And let me tell you, it works remarkably well, enhancing the overall sense of realism.

Paranoia spreads like wildfire, jokes mutate into threats, and morality dissolves into a game of psychological warfare, disinformation, and mass manipulation.

Unsurprisingly, Eddington has sharply divided critics-and will likely do the same with audiences. Expect fiery debates. Some will praise its fearless ambition; others will dismiss it as bloated, incoherent, or pretentious. And honestly, that may be exactly what Aster intended.

As always, his visual storytelling is exceptional. Darius Khondji's cinematography (Uncut Gems, The Immigrant) balances the film's absurdity and dread with a sharp, immersive eye. Lucian Johnston's editing keeps the pacing surprisingly taut, especially for a film that thrives on disorientation.

Aster's visual language for violence remains as potent as ever. When revenge time comes, it hits with darkly funny moments-especially during 'The Antifa Massacre,' which delivers shocking laughs and gory satisfaction in true Ari Aster fashion.

But after all that-did I like it?

There's brilliance in Eddington-but perhaps brilliance trapped in a maze of its own ambition, leaving something essential just out of reach.

The ride remains undeniably compelling. Ari Aster remains one of the most fascinating directors working today.

But, as with Beau Is Afraid, he tests the limits of narrative and patience. There's brilliance in Eddington, but there's also a sense of something missing-maybe too much of everything, all at once.

This isn't a comfort film to watch. It won't leave you with a clear head. In fact, you'll probably leave the cinema clutching your skull, trying to piece together the fragments.

My advice? Watch it with a good friend-or a few-who appreciate psychologically demanding cinema.

Because once the screen fades to black, the real film begins-in your head, and in the conversations that follow.