Everything Everywhere at Once (2022)

Avengers, Batman, Superman, etc Discussion about comic mainstream movies and TV shows.
Post Reply
User avatar
shevek
Producer
Producer
Posts: 3744
Joined: 11 years ago
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Contact:

Is this a "superhero" movie? I think so. I mean, it stars Michelle Yeoh (known for her incredible martial arts movies in the 90s)
as the heroine, and she has powers. (namely, the power to jump between universes, and to tap into the skills of her other selves)

Did I like it? Not really. It was overly long, and for me it was basically a waste of time. I stuck through it, though, just to see what would happen. And pretty much nothing did.

This "multiverse" idea has been played out, and this movie did come out at the right time to capitalize monetarily on the concept (anyone who enjoyed the multiverses in Dr Strange would surely love to have more of it here). But unlike some people, I've seen way more than my share of movies and TV shows where there is some kind of "controlling spacetime authority" (in this movie, it's called the Alphaverse) which tries to manage and control the permutations of various universes, and then there are the heroes (or heroines) who leap through the dimensions to save the day.

This article discusses the eventual tedium which results from repeating this concept over and over (either that, or the inability to really do justice to the idea onscreen, anyway). https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-ente ... 83441.html

But the article fails to mention just how much this has been flogged to death: Legends of Tomorrow, Doom Patrol, Umbrella Academy, and Loki all centered around this idea, as did (to some extent) the Crisis crossover on the CW. And then you add in Spiderverse, No Way Home, and Dr Strange, and it just gets to be a lot.

But now let's address this specific movie. As you might imagine, I observed that the movie seemed like it had several *points* to prove. Four, in fact. They went for the grand slam intersectional statement: age, race, sexuality, and body type.

So there's that. What did I think about the aesthetic of the movie? It's visual clutter. From the messy table full of tax receipts in their apartment....to the dozen or so kung fu adversaries which clutter the screen...to the constantly changing variety of multiverses...to the scene with the packed office cubicles where furniture constantly needs to be shoved around for the action to take place...everything is about visual overload. I could take that for 90 minutes, but a movie over two hours with that kind of clutter is just too long. And to compound it, I really didn't like any of the characters that much. Raymond might be the most interesting, though, for the way he switches back and forth between simperingly feminized and a suddenly macho-and-in-control "secret Asian man".

And yes, I do understand that this movie is supposed to be "absurdist". I can appreciate good absurdist approaches over the decades, whether we're talking about growing up with Clockwork Orange and Monty Python and Zardoz and Mel Brooks, or Buckaroo Banzai and Brazil, I'm not at all against that kind of content. But this was a bit much. And I think they're very lucky that they didn't overlap with anything that Marvel did in Loki or Dr Strange - even one alligator would have caused a serious problem. :)

So, even though I was impressed by the technical aspects of the production to some extent (which they seemed to have pulled off on a lower budget), the story and plotting made the whole thing drag quite a bit. I would skip it unless you can see it for free.

Your opinion will probably vary, which is why we have this board, so that everyone can say their piece. C'est la vie.
Danorian
Sargeant 1st Class
Sargeant 1st Class
Posts: 231
Joined: 15 years ago

I think the first mainstream "multiverse" movie I had ever seen was "The One" with Jet Li and Jason Statham.
Maybe there had been others, but this one stood out for me.
User avatar
Mr. X
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 4598
Joined: 11 years ago
Contact:

What about Sliders. I think that came way before "The One".

Also Star Trek TOS had multiverse.

Lost in Space had an episode.
User avatar
shevek
Producer
Producer
Posts: 3744
Joined: 11 years ago
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Contact:

Danorian wrote:
1 year ago
I think the first mainstream "multiverse" movie I had ever seen was "The One" with Jet Li and Jason Statham.
Maybe there had been others, but this one stood out for me.
Right, and there is once again a "Multiverse Authority" (MVA) in that. This goes back all the way to Timecop's "Time Enforcement Commission" (1994) and probably well before that, as well.

And yes, Mr. X, TOS and Lost in Space had alternate universes, but no "authority" policing them as of yet.

There was, of course, Gary Seven in TOS who was policing history, after investigating the disappearance of two previous agents,
but I don't think he ever mentions the authority he works for, although one is obviously implied. Later, in the recent Picard show,
Tallinn refers to these agents as "Watchers" but again does not mention the name of her supervisors.
User avatar
Mr. X
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 4598
Joined: 11 years ago
Contact:


Critical Drinker on it. He liked it.
heroinehunter
Sargeant 1st Class
Sargeant 1st Class
Posts: 221
Joined: 7 years ago

Spoilers (a lil' bit):
Saw this film in the movie theater due to positive reviews and word of mouth from those that have seen it. I admit it is rather bizarre or absurd in a couple of places (ex. martial arts fight involving an adult toy. Hot dog fingers, etc.) However, it may have taken a some time to tell the tale, but the overall story had a lot of heart exploring themes of philosophy, acceptance, and self indentity. The imagination is off the charts. A complete attack on all the senses. And entertaining!! The individual and collective performances were utterly fantastic - Ke Huy Quan (Short Round from the Indiana Jones) will literally break your heart in two scenes, Stephanie Hue had the most complex interesting part and handled it beautifully (jumping in last minute because original actress bowed out), an unrecognizeable Jamie Lee Curtis in a character performance you will not believe (didn't realize it was her until the credits rolled at the end), the immortal James Hong (nuff said), and the incredible Michelle Yeoh holding the entire storyline all together.

The film may not be for 'everyone, everywhere' (a little joke), but it's the most creative, original, entertaining, full of heart, thought-provoking film I have seen in a very long time. Go see it if you haven't already. :ss:
Damselbinder

shevek wrote:
1 year ago
Is this a "superhero" movie? I think so. I mean, it stars Michelle Yeoh (known for her incredible martial arts movies in the 90s)
as the heroine, and she has powers. (namely, the power to jump between universes, and to tap into the skills of her other selves)

Did I like it? Not really. It was overly long, and for me it was basically a waste of time. I stuck through it, though, just to see what would happen. And pretty much nothing did.

This "multiverse" idea has been played out, and this movie did come out at the right time to capitalize monetarily on the concept (anyone who enjoyed the multiverses in Dr Strange would surely love to have more of it here). But unlike some people, I've seen way more than my share of movies and TV shows where there is some kind of "controlling spacetime authority" (in this movie, it's called the Alphaverse) which tries to manage and control the permutations of various universes, and then there are the heroes (or heroines) who leap through the dimensions to save the day.

This article discusses the eventual tedium which results from repeating this concept over and over (either that, or the inability to really do justice to the idea onscreen, anyway). https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-ente ... 83441.html

But the article fails to mention just how much this has been flogged to death: Legends of Tomorrow, Doom Patrol, Umbrella Academy, and Loki all centered around this idea, as did (to some extent) the Crisis crossover on the CW. And then you add in Spiderverse, No Way Home, and Dr Strange, and it just gets to be a lot.

But now let's address this specific movie. As you might imagine, I observed that the movie seemed like it had several *points* to prove. Four, in fact. They went for the grand slam intersectional statement: age, race, sexuality, and body type.

So there's that. What did I think about the aesthetic of the movie? It's visual clutter. From the messy table full of tax receipts in their apartment....to the dozen or so kung fu adversaries which clutter the screen...to the constantly changing variety of multiverses...to the scene with the packed office cubicles where furniture constantly needs to be shoved around for the action to take place...everything is about visual overload. I could take that for 90 minutes, but a movie over two hours with that kind of clutter is just too long. And to compound it, I really didn't like any of the characters that much. Raymond might be the most interesting, though, for the way he switches back and forth between simperingly feminized and a suddenly macho-and-in-control "secret Asian man".

And yes, I do understand that this movie is supposed to be "absurdist". I can appreciate good absurdist approaches over the decades, whether we're talking about growing up with Clockwork Orange and Monty Python and Zardoz and Mel Brooks, or Buckaroo Banzai and Brazil, I'm not at all against that kind of content. But this was a bit much. And I think they're very lucky that they didn't overlap with anything that Marvel did in Loki or Dr Strange - even one alligator would have caused a serious problem. :)

So, even though I was impressed by the technical aspects of the production to some extent (which they seemed to have pulled off on a lower budget), the story and plotting made the whole thing drag quite a bit. I would skip it unless you can see it for free.

Your opinion will probably vary, which is why we have this board, so that everyone can say their piece. C'est la vie.
The average Independent (the newspaper, not the adjective) columnist is barely going to be aware of the existence of CW shows. We should be happy that they live in such blissful ignorance, not critical. For shame, Shevek.

For shame.
User avatar
shevek
Producer
Producer
Posts: 3744
Joined: 11 years ago
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Contact:

heroinehunter wrote:
1 year ago
Spoilers (a lil' bit):
Saw this film in the movie theater due to positive reviews and word of mouth from those that have seen it. I admit it is rather bizarre or absurd in a couple of places (ex. martial arts fight involving an adult toy. Hot dog fingers, etc.) However, it may have taken a some time to tell the tale, but the overall story had a lot of heart exploring themes of philosophy, acceptance, and self indentity. The imagination is off the charts. A complete attack on all the senses. And entertaining!! The individual and collective performances were utterly fantastic - Ke Huy Quan (Short Round from the Indiana Jones) will literally break your heart in two scenes, Stephanie Hue had the most complex interesting part and handled it beautifully (jumping in last minute because original actress bowed out), an unrecognizeable Jamie Lee Curtis in a character performance you will not believe (didn't realize it was her until the credits rolled at the end), the immortal James Hong (nuff said), and the incredible Michelle Yeoh holding the entire storyline all together.

The film may not be for 'everyone, everywhere' (a little joke), but it's the most creative, original, entertaining, full of heart, thought-provoking film I have seen in a very long time. Go see it if you haven't already. :ss:
Seems hard to believe you wouldn't recognize Jamie Lee Curtis immediately, heroinehunter - I did. Took a second to place her because I wasn't expecting her, that's all. Plus, I don't think the acting is bad. The acting is probably the biggest plus. James Hong is obviously a legend, as is Yeoh, but (just as an example) there were lots of acting legends in The Eternals, too, and that didn't help.
I just didn't feel connected to any of the characters in Everything Everywhere, and the story was such a mess and took so long to unfold that I didn't get immersed in the film's world, either.

Is it really *that* 'thought-provoking', per se? I mean, the whole theme boils down to "just when you think nothing matters, family matters." It's not some kind of revelatory new idea or anything - dozens of sitcom episodes convey the same lesson.

Mr. X, I saw the Critical Drinker video as well as a couple of other videos which enjoyed the film (Nerdrotic among them, I think), and my opinion just doesn't automatically always align with the consensus I see among Youtube critics. I also heard positive word of mouth from some Facebook friends. I trust them, and that's why I made sure to see it as soon as possible. It's OK if all these people liked it - I just didn't. Some elements of it kept taking me back visually to Birds of Prey, and I didn't like that one, either.

And I don't know what "for shame" means in this case, Damselbinder, but I wasn't *criticizing* that Independent article for not mentioning the CW shows (or Umbrella Academy)..obviously there are a ton of people who never watch the CW shows, or they wouldn't have been cancelled (heh). I was just adding to the long list of multiverse flogging in the recent years of pop culture/superhero products.

So sure, go see the film if you feel confident about these various recommendations from friends and critics.

I'm not trying to use any "whatabouts" here, but I felt a lot more immersed and involved in "The Northman". But that movie apparently lost money while Everything Everywhere did well - not blockbuster well, but well enough to enter the top echelon of releases from its distribution service, A24. I had no idea what "A24" was before seeing this movie, but I recently looked at their output and their upcoming release schedule, and there is almost *nothing* on it that seems of any interest. So maybe I just don't like the kinds of things that company bankrolls. Fair enough.

Carry on with discussion of movie.
User avatar
Maskripper
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 1091
Joined: 7 years ago
Contact:

How about just the trailer?


-
Hmh, looks quite bizarre.... and like a fun watch.
Will keep an eye out on that one.
Vist my blog and its Youtube channel:
http://www.maskripper.org
https://www.youtube.com/c/MaskripperOrg

Masked women in action! Superheroines, burglars, villainesses are waiting for you...
Damselbinder

shevek wrote:
1 year ago
heroinehunter wrote:
1 year ago
Spoilers (a lil' bit):
Saw this film in the movie theater due to positive reviews and word of mouth from those that have seen it. I admit it is rather bizarre or absurd in a couple of places (ex. martial arts fight involving an adult toy. Hot dog fingers, etc.) However, it may have taken a some time to tell the tale, but the overall story had a lot of heart exploring themes of philosophy, acceptance, and self indentity. The imagination is off the charts. A complete attack on all the senses. And entertaining!! The individual and collective performances were utterly fantastic - Ke Huy Quan (Short Round from the Indiana Jones) will literally break your heart in two scenes, Stephanie Hue had the most complex interesting part and handled it beautifully (jumping in last minute because original actress bowed out), an unrecognizeable Jamie Lee Curtis in a character performance you will not believe (didn't realize it was her until the credits rolled at the end), the immortal James Hong (nuff said), and the incredible Michelle Yeoh holding the entire storyline all together.

The film may not be for 'everyone, everywhere' (a little joke), but it's the most creative, original, entertaining, full of heart, thought-provoking film I have seen in a very long time. Go see it if you haven't already. :ss:
Seems hard to believe you wouldn't recognize Jamie Lee Curtis immediately, heroinehunter - I did. Took a second to place her because I wasn't expecting her, that's all. Plus, I don't think the acting is bad. The acting is probably the biggest plus. James Hong is obviously a legend, as is Yeoh, but (just as an example) there were lots of acting legends in The Eternals, too, and that didn't help.
I just didn't feel connected to any of the characters in Everything Everywhere, and the story was such a mess and took so long to unfold that I didn't get immersed in the film's world, either.

Is it really *that* 'thought-provoking', per se? I mean, the whole theme boils down to "just when you think nothing matters, family matters." It's not some kind of revelatory new idea or anything - dozens of sitcom episodes convey the same lesson.

Mr. X, I saw the Critical Drinker video as well as a couple of other videos which enjoyed the film (Nerdrotic among them, I think), and my opinion just doesn't automatically always align with the consensus I see among Youtube critics. I also heard positive word of mouth from some Facebook friends. I trust them, and that's why I made sure to see it as soon as possible. It's OK if all these people liked it - I just didn't. Some elements of it kept taking me back visually to Birds of Prey, and I didn't like that one, either.

And I don't know what "for shame" means in this case, Damselbinder, but I wasn't *criticizing* that Independent article for not mentioning the CW shows (or Umbrella Academy)..obviously there are a ton of people who never watch the CW shows, or they wouldn't have been cancelled (heh). I was just adding to the long list of multiverse flogging in the recent years of pop culture/superhero products.

So sure, go see the film if you feel confident about these various recommendations from friends and critics.

I'm not trying to use any "whatabouts" here, but I felt a lot more immersed and involved in "The Northman". But that movie apparently lost money while Everything Everywhere did well - not blockbuster well, but well enough to enter the top echelon of releases from its distribution service, A24. I had no idea what "A24" was before seeing this movie, but I recently looked at their output and their upcoming release schedule, and there is almost *nothing* on it that seems of any interest. So maybe I just don't like the kinds of things that company bankrolls. Fair enough.

Carry on with discussion of movie.
This one time I was literally just completely joking.
Dogfish
Legendary Member
Legendary Member
Posts: 934
Joined: 10 years ago

I might have to check this out but I am genuinely exhausted with Multiverse stuff. It felt like it was running on creative fumes even by the Pickle Rick stage of Rick and Morty and that feels like a lifetime ago.
Post Reply