Fresh Starts

FILM: Don't Worry Darling Style vs Substance (Warning! Spoilers)

Since its announcement in 2019, Olivia Wilde’s new psychological thriller Don’t Worry Darling, has not failed to keep making headlines – for all the wrong reasons.

From what seemed to be an ever changing cast line up, to reported on set conflicts, it is safe to say that the production and release of Don’t

Worry Darling has been anything but smooth sailing.

After the critical success of her first feature film ‘Booksmart’, Wilde’s new project was highly anticipated by both critics and fans. The film was even thrown into a bidding war between 18 studios, all wanting to acquire what they assumed was going to be another success.

Whilst the film should by no means be called a failure, it has not been met with the critical success many thought it would. Wilde’s direction is relatively strong, yet unfortunately there are so many issues within the film that have prevented it from reaching its potential. The main problem Don’t Worry Darling faces is that it attempts to deal with too many plot points and themes. The basic story is one that deals with the outcomes of a heavily patriarchal society tied in with ideas of female suffocation. Whilst this is the overarching theme of the film, it also attempts to comment on feminism, incel culture and consent. The latter is one which unfortunately is handled poorly. Prior to the release of the film, director Olivia Wilde did an interview with Variety, in which she commented on some of the more explicit scenes in the film, she says, “the focus on men as the recipients of pleasure is almost ubiquitous [in film].” Whilst the point

Wilde makes is objectively correct, she later implies that Don’t Worry Darling focuses on female pleasure. 14 On the outside, it may appear to many to do just that, however, thinking about these scenes after discovering that Jack (Harry Styles) had kidnapped Alice (Florence Pugh) to bring her into this simulation without her knowledge or consent, the scenes in question cannot and should not be thought of as ‘showcasing female pleasure’, but as rape. Pugh’s character Alice was entered into the Victory simulation without consent, therefore none of the actions that take place can be seen as consensual. With this in mind, the ‘feminist’ tones in the film feel misguided. When the plot returns to the real world, Styles’ character Jack, embodies this newfound concept of an ‘incel’. This hostility towards women that is presented unfortunately mirrors reality, and whilst in ways the film offers a fresh perspective on this type of person through the use of the simulation – when looking at the film contextually with comments made by Wilde, it no longer feels genuine. Aside from director Olivia Wilde, something else which has drawn media attention is the cast. Florence Pugh shines in the main role as Alice. At only 26, she is beginning to solidify her status as a leading lady of Hollywood. Every single time she is on screen, her performance is magnificent. Alice as a character is undoubtedly a challenging one - due to the perplexing nature of the film, yet Pugh’s performance is one that is raw and emotional. This performance is a genuine highlight of her career so far. Whilst the media have circled this film, and its associated cast and crew for the past two years, Pugh has handled it with nothing but class and dignity, she deserves every bit of praise that comes her way, it will be exciting to see what the future has in store for her career. Unfortunately, much of the same cannot be said about Harry Styles’ performance. Although not Styles’ first film role – having had a small role in Nolan’s Dunkirk – this is a huge step up. To put it simply, Harry Styles was not ready to take on the role of Jack. His performance

Image: James Vaughan via Flickr falls flat, at this point in his acting career, he lacks the range to take on such a demanding role. Whilst on screen with Pugh, the difference is staggering. Spending the majority of his scenes opposite Florence Pugh, only highlights Styles’ own weaknesses. Whilst not being given masses of screen time, supporting characters played by Gemma Chan, Chris Pine and Kiki Layne respectively gave strong performances. However, the lack of time given to thesecharacters sadly added to the lack of continuity within the script. The aesthetics and visuals of the film appear to have taken a front seat, whilst the plot and its continuity have been left aside. Although a positive feature of the film is its ability to leave the audience with questions – such as what happened to Alice when she woke up? The film leaves the audience with too many questions, many stemming from holes within the plot. This ties into the lack of screen time given to the supporting cast. A prime example is the relationship between Shelley (Chan) and Frank (Pine). At the end of the film, in what appears to be a sudden turn of events, Shelley stabs her husband, Frank. If the relationship was given more screen time, this event could have made sense to

Daisy Clarkson

the audience. This is one overarching problem with Don’t Worry Darling; its complicated plot leads to an inability to fully tie up all the loose ends within the film – resulting in a messy storyline. Don’t Worry Darling is an example of cinema that has both entertaining and engaging potential. Its glamorous and stylish appeal is supported by the excellent cinematography; however, clearly this focus on aesthetics has left the film flawed and lacking any real substance. Nevertheless, since it has been surrounded by such drama and conflict, it will continue to do relatively well at the box office - all publicity is good publicity, right?

TELEVISION: True Crime Does Not Exist In a Vacuum, So Perhaps Proceed With Caution

True Crime stories are currently experiencing somewhat those who would be most impacted by the show were never affordof a renaissance – with FX’s ‘The People v. O.J. Simpson’, Netflix’s ‘The Trial of the Chicago 7’, HBO’s ‘The Staircase’, and, of course, Netflix’s ‘Dahmer – Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story’, all reaching millions of households worldwide. However, it is imperative that audiences understand the weight of the trauma they are witnessing, and in particular, how that trauma may relate to the living people affected by these stories. Recently, the family members of Jeffrey Dahmer’s victims have spoken out about how they have been re-traumatised by seeing frequent depictions of their loved ones’ deaths – as it forces their family members to be continually viewed as victims, with their deaths depicted as ‘plot points’ within a narrative story arc. These family members were never contacted by Netflix when they decided to dramatise Dahmer’s crimes, and therefore ed the opportunity to respectfully explain their distaste towards it. There is also an argument to be made that fictionalising real-life serial killers can lead to memorialising them – it allows them to gain sympathy and empathy from viewers, while continuing to keep their names within the public eye. Most of the western world is aware of who Dahmer was, but many are unable to name his victims. Though True Crime documentaries and podcasts have existed for decades, these non-fiction works tend to maintain factual integrity and emphasis upon explaining how, when, and why these disturbing events occurred. However, when True Crimes is dramatised, it begins to follow a storyline, focusing on a protagonist, an antagonist, and a running story arc.

Shannon G r a y Netflix’s ‘Dahmer – Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story’ centres itself around Dahmer as a protagonist, ASSOCIATE CULTURE EDITOR detailing his life from an early age. By placing the killer in a central role, his victims are viewed as side characters – and therefore the emphasis is clear: this is Dahmer’s story, not theirs. This allows viewers to understand and perhaps even sympathise with the killer, which has led to many young and easy influenced viewers memorialising and even relating to Dahmer. Thus, it can often be disrespectful to the victims and their loved ones to approach True Crime from the killer’s point of view. Therefore, while True Crime fiction may be compelling viewing, audiences should acknowledge that these shows do not exist within a vacuum. These stories are not mere entertainment, and possibly it is time that we stop re-traumatising the very real living family members of victims to dramatise the lives of people who should perhaps be forgotten by all self-respecting members of society. 15