One of Hollywood’s young talents attempts to recover from his previous failed film.
Genre: Drama?
Premise: Set in 2020 in the small New Mexico town of Eddington, Covid restrictions begin to wreak havoc on the mental state of a sheriff, who tries to run for mayor to save the town.
About: We talked about this movie in the most recent newsletter. Eddington is Ari Aster’s (Hereditary) latest movie. It stars Joaquin Phoenix, Emma Stone, Austin Butler, and, of course, Pedro Pascal. The film premiered at Cannes and was one of the few, surprisingly, that failed to get a standing ovation.
Writer: Ari Aster
Details: 147 pages!
I was on the fence about reading this because I don’t like to read scripts anymore that I know I’ll hate. It gives off that Critical Drinker vibe where you’re trying to be a hater. And I don’t like being a hater in reviews. I like reading great scripts. That’s one of the best experiences in the world for me.
But when I do read a script where I think that the writer is being lazy or pretentious or that prioritizes the creator more than the product… that’s when I go hard at scripts. And I sensed that that was going to happen here.
My worries were not alleviated when I read that first page. My pretentious antenna went on full alert when I saw: “A Covid-19 Western.” But, hey, Jaco said he thought the script was interesting and I may be pleasantly surprised. So I’m giving it a shot!
“Eddington” is about the town of Eddington, New Mexico, which is home to 3000 people. It’s early 2020 when Covid is at its height and the talk of the town is about wearing masks and how businesses aren’t allowed to be open.
Sheriff Joe Cross is sick of this. He doesn’t wear masks and he wants people to be able to work. So he decides to run for mayor. Meanwhile, the actual mayor, Ted, is conspiring with the upper crust of the town to bring in a big tech company, which will make all of them richer.
In addition to getting to know Joe, we hang out with some of the kids in town. There’s 18 year old Brian (white) and his best friend, 19 year old Eric (Latino). The two are both trying to land the attention of the super cute, Sarah, who is obsessed with BLM. So they both become BLM spokespeople in hopes of getting laid. There’s also a young cop named Michael who used to date Sara, who hasn’t gotten over their breakup.
(Spoilers) When the locals, led by Sarah, begin a defund the police movement, something snaps in Joe and he kills a local black homeless man and buries the body.
He then sniper kills both Ted, and Ted’s son, Eric, in their home, and tabs the murder on Michael. When a local Native American cop starts suspecting that Joe is the real murderer, Joe will have to improvise in a desperate attempt to save himself.
Let me start by stating the obvious: DON’T WRITE A SCRIPT ABOUT COVID. For many, it is the most frustrating time of their lives. So why would you want to remind them of that? It’s like creating a family night called, “Hey Dad, let’s talk about that year you had cancer.”
So, I don’t get why Aster would pick this as his subject matter. This goes back to something I preach on the site all the time and something all of you should be slurping up in the run-up to Mega-Showdown — Concept is the most important thing of all.
It’s not just that a weak concept results in less people wanting to read your script. A weak concept bleeds its crappiness into every aspect of your screenplay – the characters, the plot, the scenes. Its badness is impossible to escape.
Okay, let’s move on to the screenplay because there’s actually some interesting stuff to discuss. This screenplay is built on top of a delayed first major plot point. This is a long way of saying the first big plot point – the one that introduces the plot of the movie – doesn’t take place for a very long time. In fact, it takes 90 pages for us to get to Joe killing Ted and Eric.
Here’s the thing with delayed first major plot points – the more you delay them, the more powerful they are. This is because the further into the script you get before a major plot point has arrived, the less the audience believes one *will* arrive. Therefore, they’re always shocking.
And this was shocking! I literally jolted my head back and said, “Whoa!” Out loud.
So why not do this all the time if they’re so effective? Because then you gotta fill up all the space ahead of that with enough interesting stuff that we stick around for that plot point. And if you haven’t introduced a plot, like Eddington, this is incredibly difficult. Cause you’re not providing the script with enough form to keep readers invested.
Sure, if Aster places this plot point where it’s traditionally introduced – at the end of the first act – he won’t get that late-script shock. And the script will be more traditional, which Aster hates. But the script will actually have a plot to it. Which means the reader has an actual reason to keep turning the pages.
Moving onto the content, I sort of now understand why Cannes didn’t like this film. It’s low-key conservative. And France is, of course, obsessively progressive. There are so many moments throughout the second act where Aster leans into how ridiculous the militaristic operation was during Covid. I’m guessing that put off a lot of the Cannes audience who are probably still wearing masks to this day.
But it’s a better sign for this movie because I thought the weak Cannes response was because the movie was so bad that even the artiest audience in the world didn’t like it. Turns out it’s more of a political preference. Cause this is easily Aster’s most interesting film.
I’m not saying it’s going to do well. It doesn’t have a single marketable element to it. Aster seems to have forgotten that a huge reason why Hereditary did so well was because it was centered within the most marketable low-budget genre in Hollywood – Horror.
The ONLY way a movie like this does well is if the lead performance is out of this world and it gets Oscar traction. Which is difficult to count on.
With that said, there’s some good stuff in here. One of the areas where a lot of writers rely on cliche is in the backstories of their characters. Every backstory is kind of the same. Something to do with drugs. A car crash. Cancer. I read more backstories about those three subjects than you could possibly imagine.
Here, for Joe’s wife, Louise, we get this really interesting backstory about how Joe had to arrest her (his own wife!) because she tried to steal someone else’s baby. And this ties into Joe and Louise’s current relationship which is uneven to say the least. It’s clear that that arrest destroyed the marriage in a way it could never recover from.
I’m on the fence here about what I should rate this script. It definitely comes together in the end. But the whole second act is so rambling due to it operating without a plot that I don’t think I can endorse it. At the very least, the second act needed to be shortened, even if you are going to introduce your main plot point late. Because Aster is so reckless in that respect, I can’t give this a worth the read.
But it’s definitely an interesting script that takes risks. So, if you like offbeat stuff, check it out.
Screenplay link: Eddington
[ ] What the hell did I just read?
[x] wasn’t for me
[ ] worth the read
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius
What I learned: The way you have to write about politics is through metaphor. Otherwise, nobody’s going to care. If you want to write a movie about systemic racism, you don’t write a true story about the BLM movement. 4 people will show up. You write Get Out. That’s what’s going on here. Aster is directly taking on Covid and BLM as opposed to writing a horror film that explores those things through metaphor. Which is surprising. Cause I think of Aster as an intellectual who would naturally lean into metaphor.
