Opus review – John Malkovich plays an evil pop star in a silly horror dud

TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:

"John Malkovich Stars in 'Opus', a Misguided Exploration of Fame and Fandom"

View Raw Article Source (External Link)
Raw Article Publish Date:
AI Analysis Average Score: 5.9
These scores (0-10 scale) are generated by Truthlens AI's analysis, assessing the article's objectivity, accuracy, and transparency. Higher scores indicate better alignment with journalistic standards. Hover over chart points for metric details.

TruthLens AI Summary

In the new film 'Opus', directed by Mark Anthony Green, John Malkovich takes on the role of Alfred Moretti, a reclusive pop star who has invited a select group of media personalities to his secluded desert compound for a listening party of what he claims will be the greatest album ever made. The film begins with a promising setup, exploring the dynamics between Moretti and his guests, which include an influencer, a paparazzo, and a junior writer named Ariel, played by Ayo Edebiri. However, as the story unfolds, it becomes clear that Green's ambition exceeds his storytelling capabilities. The film attempts to navigate themes of fandom and the dark side of celebrity culture but ultimately fails to deliver a coherent narrative. Instead, it becomes a muddled mix of familiar tropes from other thrillers, leaving audiences feeling as if they are witnessing a patchwork of ideas rather than a fully realized story.

Despite Malkovich's compelling performance, which showcases his ability to oscillate between charm and menace, the film suffers from a lack of depth in its character development and plot execution. Edebiri's portrayal of Ariel is initially relatable but becomes increasingly out of place as the film transitions into darker territory. The climax is marked by a series of nonsensical plot twists and an underwhelming resolution that fails to satisfy, leaving viewers frustrated with the film's pretentiousness and lack of clarity. Critics have noted that while the film offers some impressive music from Nile Rodgers and The-Dream, it does not compensate for the overall disjointedness of the narrative. 'Opus' ultimately serves as a cautionary tale about the pitfalls of overambitious storytelling and the challenges faced by first-time filmmakers attempting to tackle complex themes without a solid foundation.

TruthLens AI Analysis

The review of "Opus" highlights various aspects of the film, focusing on its failure to effectively convey its themes. The critique suggests that the writer-director, Mark Anthony Green, struggles with execution despite having a potentially engaging premise about celebrity culture and fandom. This analysis of the film can provide insight into the broader implications of celebrity influence, audience expectations, and the challenges of storytelling in contemporary cinema.

Purpose of the Article

The primary aim of the article seems to be to inform readers about the shortcomings of "Opus," particularly in relation to its narrative and thematic execution. By highlighting the film's flaws, the review sets a tone that may discourage potential viewers from engaging with the film. This approach can be seen as a reflection on the broader issues within the film industry, particularly regarding how stories about celebrity and fandom are presented.

Public Perception and Sentiment

The review aims to shape public perception by presenting a critical viewpoint of the film that may resonate with audiences familiar with the pitfalls of media portrayals of pop culture. It underscores the disconnect between the film's ambitions and its execution, which may lead readers to question the quality of storytelling in films that attempt to tackle complex social issues.

Hidden Agendas or Information

While the review does not explicitly conceal information, it does focus on the negative aspects of "Opus," potentially overshadowing any redeeming qualities the film may possess. This selective critique can influence audience perceptions, steering them toward a more negative outlook without presenting a balanced view.

Manipulative Elements

There is a degree of manipulation in the tone and language used in the review. By describing the film as a "silly horror dud," the writer employs strong negative language that can evoke a dismissive attitude in readers. This choice of words may serve to reinforce a particular viewpoint, suggesting that the film is not worth watching.

Truthfulness of the Review

The reliability of the review hinges on the subjective nature of film criticism. While the reviewer provides valid points regarding the film's execution, personal biases and expectations may color their assessment. The review reflects one perspective within a larger discourse surrounding the film, which could be seen as both truthful and limited.

Cultural Implications

The review touches upon themes relevant to today's society, such as the toxic nature of fandom and celebrity culture. These issues resonate with ongoing discussions around social media, public personas, and the consequences of idolization. The film's premise and the review's critique may contribute to broader cultural conversations about these topics.

Support from Communities

The article appears to cater to audiences who are critical of mainstream cinema and those who appreciate nuanced discussions about media representation. It may appeal to film enthusiasts who enjoy dissecting narrative structures and thematic elements in movies.

Economic Impact on the Film Industry

While the review is unlikely to have a direct impact on stock markets or financial sectors, it reflects larger trends in the entertainment industry. Disappointing films can affect the reputation of production companies like A24, potentially influencing investor confidence in similar projects.

Geopolitical Relevance

There is no significant geopolitical angle to the review, as it primarily focuses on cultural and entertainment aspects. However, the themes discussed may resonate with global audiences facing similar issues related to celebrity and media influence.

Potential Use of AI in Writing

It is possible that AI tools were utilized to assist in drafting the review, particularly in structuring arguments and analyzing elements of the film. AI models might have contributed to the articulation of critiques or the organization of thoughts, although the human touch is evident in the subjective language and personal opinions expressed.

Conclusion on Reliability

In conclusion, while the review provides insightful commentary on "Opus," its reliability is tempered by subjective interpretation and the use of emotionally charged language. Readers should approach it as one perspective among many, considering the broader context of film criticism and audience reception.

Unanalyzed Article Content

Anyone who has written about a much-loved music star with even the vaguest hint of light criticism will be aware of the horrors that can often follow. The tribal intensity of extremely online and extremely sensitive fandoms can lead to either a mild torrent of more tolerable abuse or something far darker, like death threats and sometimes doxing, an unending rage erupting from people who use emojis as avatars. There’s a great thriller to be made about this unpleasant tension, the fans who will do anything for their idol and the idol who will do nothing to stop them, but Opus, a poppy new A24 misfire premiering at Sundance, is not that movie.Sorry, Baby review – a warm, bitingly funny refocus of the trauma plotRead moreIt’s the first film from the writer-director Mark Anthony Green, who, like many before him, is so fixated on what he wants to say that he hasn’t been able to figure out how to say it. There’s maybe a slicker, simpler and more satisfying murder mystery to be told here – an assortment of media types picked off one-by-one at the remote ranch of a reclusive pop star – but he’s challenged himself with something far harder and ultimately too far out of his reach.The pop star is Alfred Moretti (deliciously played by John Malkovich), who retreated from the public eye decades ago and has now returned with what he claims will be the greatest album ever made. In Willy Wonka style, he has invited a select few to his desert compound for an extravagant listening party – an influencer (Stephanie Suganami), a paparazzo (Melissa Chambers), a rock star turned podcaster (Mark Sivertsen), a TV show host (Juliette Lewis), a magazine editor (Murray Bartlett) and, in a surprise twist, his inexperienced junior writer Ariel (Ayo Edebiri). She’s felt a little hemmed in, pitching interviews that then are given to someone else, and is prepared to make the most of a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. Moretti has surrounded himself with a cult-like community of robe-wearing yes men who believe in teachings that prioritise creativity above all else, turning their idol into more of a god. Like many final girls before her, Ariel is convinced something more sinister is at play.Green, a former GQ editor, has created a thriller that’s a little too on-trend to ever truly distinguish himself. It’s The Menu meets Blink Twice meets Glass Onion meets Midsommar meets Nine Perfect Strangers meets A Murder at the End of the World – a film that’s so familiar that even if it had been well-crafted, it would still feel reheated. There’s a pull to the opening scenes though, as Ariel tries to propel herself at work while being reminded by a friend that given her lack of substantive life experience and relatively easy background, her failure to be at a more progressed professional place is down to her being “middle as fuck”. Green also intersperses snippets of real pop culture (cameos from Wolf Blitzer, Bill Burr and Lenny Kravitz), yet they’re lost in a world that quickly feels fake and unmoored, his overly lit, overly quirky visual aesthetic and logic-free escalation taking us out of what could and should have been an involving thriller.The music, created by Nile Rodgers and The-Dream, is unusually impressive, perhaps not quite enough to demand such a fervent following but certainly convincing enough. A magnetic Malkovich fully commits to the bit too, purring and prancing around while his descent into menace is believably modulated. But Edebiri, who can be an incredibly charming comedic presence, is left completely adrift. Her shuffling, in-the-notes performance works initially as an eager yet unsure junior writer but as the film starts to shift into darker genre territory, that same low-energy persona feels distractingly out of place. One never really feels the grand life-or-death stakes from her, mild nervous irritation when full-body fear is needed. It’s most glaring in a final, feeble confrontation with Malkovich where one can sense an unintentional added tension between someone who knows how to handle the material and someone who clearly doesn’t, the two acting as if in wildly different movies.Not that a better actor could have done that much more with such a gentle whisper of a character facing a genuinely what-the-hell finale of absurd, long-winded explanation-giving that still leaves us scratching our heads. The reveals make little to no sense – carnage that’s too sudden and scrappy for something so ritualistic, a plan that requires too many variables to be seen as viable, an allegedly “of the moment” motivation that’s contradicted by the actual moment – and Green seems more focused on “wouldn’t it be sick if …” shocks rather than a plot that holds together. So much of what transpires is maddeningly pretentious yet hopelessly half-sketched as well as being shoddily stitched together as if some major, up-all-night surgery was then required in the editing suite. For a film so high on its own devilish intellect, it’s all incredibly stupid.It’s frustrating to see yet another first-time film-maker overstack their plate in such a way that feels less like the product of impressive ambition and more empty bravado. Like the many films and shows it’s shamelessly, monotonously following, there’s a snappy sellable pitch but again, there’s just no thought-out follow-through and, given how bad this particular example is and isbeing received, one hopes we’re nearing the end of this torturous cycle.Opus is screening at theSundance film festivaland will be in US cinemas on 14 March

Back to Home
Source: The Guardian