Tech-bro satire Mountainhead is an insufferable disappointment

TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:

"Jesse Armstrong's Mountainhead Struggles to Deliver Fresh Satire on Tech Billionaires"

View Raw Article Source (External Link)
Raw Article Publish Date:
AI Analysis Average Score: 6.4
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 Mountainhead, Jesse Armstrong, the creator of Succession, explores the lives of four tech billionaires who gather at a lavish retreat to play poker while a catastrophic AI innovation wreaks havoc across the globe. The film is set against a backdrop reminiscent of previous satires about the ultra-rich, such as The Menu and Parasite, and attempts to critique the absurdities of wealth and power. However, the premise feels tired as the market for wealthy-satire is saturated, leading to viewer fatigue. The characters, particularly the AI CEO Venis, played by Cory Michael Smith, are portrayed with exaggerated flaws that highlight their disconnect from reality. Despite Armstrong's talent for sharp dialogue, the film struggles to maintain its satirical edge, leading to a viewing experience that feels more tedious than enlightening. The dialogue often devolves into tech jargon that lacks emotional depth, making it hard for audiences to connect with the characters' experiences and moral dilemmas.

As Mountainhead unfolds, it grapples with the challenge of satirizing a world where the absurdities of wealth and power have become normalized. Armstrong's rapid production timeline—writing and filming within a few months—raises questions about the effectiveness of satire in our current political climate, which is marked by chaos and rapid change. The film's focus on the internal dynamics between the billionaires, devoid of any significant external perspectives, results in a narrative that feels insular and unchallenging. While there are attempts to humanize the characters by showcasing their vulnerabilities, the overall portrayal leans towards a self-satisfied critique that lacks the depth necessary to resonate with viewers. As the film progresses, it becomes clear that the once-interesting archetypes of the tech elite are now seen as predictable and insufferable, leaving audiences yearning for more diverse perspectives that could inject new life into the narrative. Ultimately, Mountainhead serves as a reflection of an era where the satire of the wealthy may have reached diminishing returns, failing to provide the insightful commentary that audiences crave.

TruthLens AI Analysis

The article critiques the new film "Mountainhead," created by Jesse Armstrong, known for the acclaimed series "Succession." It highlights the growing fatigue surrounding the genre of rich-people satire, where the focus on the ultra-wealthy has become both overdone and uninsightful. The reviewer expresses disappointment in the film, suggesting it fails to provide the sharp commentary expected from Armstrong after his previous successes.

Cultural Commentary on Wealth and Satire

The review points out a saturation in media that critiques the wealthy, listing various films and shows that have tackled similar themes. This trend indicates a significant cultural moment where the rich are frequently critiqued, yet the reviewer suggests that these narratives are losing their potency. In this context, "Mountainhead" is seen as another example of this tired trope rather than a fresh take.

Perception of the Target Audience

The article seems to target audiences who are already familiar with Armstrong's previous work and who may share a critical view of the modern tech elite. By reinforcing the idea of a saturated market for rich satire, it resonates with viewers who are either tired of the genre or looking for more meaningful insights into wealth and power dynamics.

Potential Hidden Agendas

While the article appears to provide a straightforward critique, it could be argued that it serves to highlight the author's discontent with the media landscape, particularly regarding the portrayal of billionaires. This could reflect broader societal frustrations with wealth inequality and the tech industry's influence on culture and society.

Reliability of the Critique

The analysis of "Mountainhead" is rooted in subjective interpretation but is supported by the broader context of media trends. The reliability of the critique may hinge on the reader's alignment with the author's sentiments about the saturation of wealthy satire. The language used is critical but does not appear to manipulate facts; instead, it offers a personal viewpoint.

Connection to Other Media

This review establishes a connection to other current media outputs that similarly critique wealth, suggesting an ongoing dialogue in popular culture about the implications of wealth and privilege. The mention of various other works indicates that the conversation around wealth portrayal is both extensive and interconnected.

Implications for Society

By discussing the failings of "Mountainhead," the review implies that audiences may continue to seek more genuine explorations of wealth and its consequences. The critique could influence viewers' expectations for future media, potentially impacting what creators choose to produce and how they approach the subject of wealth.

Target Demographics

The article likely resonates more with individuals who are critical of the tech industry and those disenchanted with the glamorization of wealth. It appeals to a community that values thoughtful storytelling over superficial portrayals of the rich.

Market Impact

While it is unlikely that this specific review will have a direct impact on stock markets, it reflects broader sentiments about the tech industry and its leaders. If audiences share the reviewer's disappointment, there could be implications for the reception of tech-centric narratives in media, which could influence investor sentiment towards companies heavily featured in such critiques.

Global Context

The critique of "Mountainhead" is relevant in today’s discussion about wealth distribution, especially as economic inequality remains a pressing global issue. The film's themes resonate with current events, where the actions of wealthy individuals and companies are under scrutiny.

Use of AI in Writing

It is possible that AI tools were employed in drafting parts of the article, especially in analyzing trends and comparing media. However, the nuanced critique and subjective language suggest a human touch in the review, likely reflective of personal insights rather than purely algorithmic generation.

Potential Manipulation

Although the article critiques a specific film, it could be interpreted as part of a larger narrative that seeks to vilify the wealthy or tech elites. The language and framing may target certain figures in the tech industry, which could be seen as a form of manipulation aimed at shaping public opinion against these individuals.

The article provides a critique that, while subjective, raises important questions about the portrayal of wealth in media. It reflects broader societal sentiments about inequality and the responsibilities of those who create narratives around wealth and power.

Unanalyzed Article Content

Picture this: a group of very rich people gather at an ostentatiously large, secluded retreat. The SUVs are black, tinted, sleek. The jets are private. The egos are large, the staff sprawling and mostly unseen, the decor both sterile and unimaginably expensive. This is the distinctive milieu ofSuccession, the HBO juggernaut which turned the pitiful exploits of a bunch of media mogul failsons into Shakespearean drama for four critically acclaimed seasons. It is also the now familiar aesthetic of a range of eat-the-rich satires plumbing our oligarchic times for heady ridicule, if increasingly futile insight – The Menu, Triangle of Sadness, Knives Out: Glass Onion, Parasite, The White Lotus and the recent A24 disappointmentDeath of a Unicornto name a few. (That’s not to mention countless mediocre shows on the foibles of the wealthy, such as this month’sThe Better SisterandSirens.)

So suffice to say, I approachedMountainhead, Succession creatorJesse Armstrong’s first post-series project about four tech billionaire friends gathering for poker as one’s AI innovation wreaks havoc on the globe, with a sense of pre-existing fatigue. The market of ultra-rich satire is, to use the logic of Armstrong’s characters, saturated. (Or, to use their language: “I would seriously rather fix sub-Saharan Africa than launch a Sweetgreen challenger in the current market.”) There’s more than a whiff of Argestes, the second-season Succession episode at a billionaire mountain retreat, to these shots of private cars pulling up to a huge chalet hugged by snowcapped peaks. And though Armstrong, who solely wrote and directed the film, continues his avoidance of easy one-to-ones, there’s more than a whiff of Elon Musk to Venis (Cory Michael Smith), an AI company CEO and the richest person in the world with a tenuous grasp on reality, a stupendous sense of nihilism and unrepentant need to assert his own virility (the landscape, he notes, is “so beautiful you can fuck it”).

In some ways, it’s a relief to see tech bros, especially AI entrepreneurs, reach full, unambiguousmovie-villain status. Already, there is a competently made movie for the Doge era, and Armstrong, as ever, can nail hairpin turns of phrase on the sentence level. But as much as I hate to contribute to the “anti anti-rich content” discourse, on which much ink has already been spilled, I can’t say Mountainhead refuted any expectations of reality fatigue; watching Venis, host Soup (Jason Schwartzman, playing the least rich of the group, and thus nicknamed after a soup kitchen), Marc Andreessen-esque venture capitalist Randall (a miscast Steve Carell), and fellow AI wunderkind Jeff (Ramy Youssef) brainstorm plans for the post-human future as more of a slog than if I were high-altitude hiking with them.

To be honest, I’m not sure any classic satire – as in, using irony or exaggeration to highlight hypocrisies, vices and stupidity – could work for the second Trump administration, at once dumber and more destructive than the first, nor the release of generative AI on the public. Both require a level ofhypernormalizationand devaluing of reality that make the idea of enlightening ridiculousness feel, well, ridiculous. Even the most inventive writers and performers will struggle to craft humor out of beyond farcical political figures and norms degraded beyond recognition (see: Mark Ruffalo’s effete and grating parody of Trump in Bong Joon-Ho’sMickey 17).

Succession, which ran from 2018 to 2023, soared on its “ludicrosity”, to borrow a made-up term from its billionaire patriarch Logan Roy, with a precise critical distance from reality. The deeply cynical, psychically fragile, acid-tongued media conglomerate family loosely based on the Murdochs were just far enough removed from the real Fox News timeline. Its inverted morals, barren decadence and high irony the right angle of fun-house mirror to become, in my view,the defining show of the Trump era, without ever mentioning his name.

But we are in a different era now, and the same tools feel too blunt to meet it. Mountainhead shares much of the same DNA asSuccession, from Armstrong to producers to crew, to trademark euphemisms (why say “murdered” when you can say “placeholdered”?) It was completed on an extraordinarily fast timeline – pitched in December 2024, written (partly in the back of cars while scouting locations) this winter, filmed in Park City in March and released by end of May – giving it the feel of a streaming experiment for the second, more transparently oligarchic Trump term. How fast can you make an HBO movie? How can you satirize current events moving at a speed too fast for any ordinary citizen to keep up, let alone be reasonably informed?

“The way it was shot naturally simulated Adderall,” Yousseftold the Atlantic, and it shows. Mountainhead plays out less like a drama between four tenuously connected, very rich friends, and more like a random word generator of tech and finance bro jargon – decel (deceleration, as in AI), p(doom) (the probability of an AI apocalypse), first principles. (Armstrong, by his own admission, binged episodes of the All-In podcast, which features prominent investors and Trump’s AI/crypto czarDavid Sacks.) The backgroup of this billionaire conclave are series of escalating crises from Venis’s guardrail-less AI that feel themselves AI generated – women and children burned alive in a mosque, a deluge of deepfakes that imperils governments in Armenia, Uzbekistan, Japan, Ohio. Italy defaults on its debt. Should they take over Argentina? Buy Haiti? “Are we the bolsheviks of a new techno world order that starts tonight?”

The deluge of contextless, characterless chaos – Succession’s Kendall would call this dialogue “complicated airflow” – succeeds in highlighting the depersonalizing effect of Silicon Valley’s many innovations. None of this feels real, because none of thisisreal to these characters. Millions of No Real Persons Involved. But that is undercut by a pervasive sense of self-importance. Like the irksome climate-change satireDon’t Look Up, directed by Succession executive producer Adam McKay, the exaggerated hijinks of Mountainhead reveal a deep self-assurance of its politics that border on smug. It’s not that it doesn’t, like Succession, attempt to humanize these figures – each billionaire has an Achilles heel of morality or mortality, though by now the fallibility of Musk-like figures is far from a revelation. It’s that the drama between these billionaires felt frictionless – mostly unchallenged by secondary figures and impervious to other perspectives, at once predictable and insufferable to watch.

Every human has their unique foibles and contradictions, but Mountainhead found itself too enthralled by figures who are no longer interesting, if they ever were. I found myself longing for more than two minutes with the girlfriend, the ex-wife, the assistant, the board member, let alone one of the many staff at the house – anyone to de-center a perspective that has already claimed far too much oxygen in the public sphere. For a Real Person to get involved. But that may be beyond this flavor of satire, now in an era of diminishing returns.

Back to Home
Source: The Guardian