I didn't like it. I didn't find particularly shocking either. To me it is a beautiful looking movie, not a bad movie but it is not good either, a few things upset me, but man! Barry Keoghan looks beautiful all throughout the movie LoL
idk, this movie made me like jacob elordi. at least his acting was good. i went into this movie absolutely dogpiling this dude, now i think maybe he's not a bad actor after all. @@marinablack181
if you prefer vibes over plot, check out Chungking Express and its loose sequel Fallen Angels. these are cantonese-language movies made in hong kong. they have simple stories (at least on the surface, when you deconstruct them you'll find more about the movies). they have a nice feel-good plot, but the cinematography and just the environment of hong kong is really something that keeps your eyes glued to it.
Saltburn seems to have been designed to bait the algorithm. Like how labels tell musicians to have a TikTokable hook, Saltburn aims to have numerous of those all loosely stitched together with a vsco filter applied.
I was thinking about this the other day. The film itself is fine, the mystery, vibe and overall plot, its okay. It didn't need to be weird, it didn't need to have shock value. However, my marketing brain made me realise that, without those things, the movie would just be standard and already forgotten thriller type movie. Through it's pretentiousness, that is how it got its hype and marketing. The film itself is standard.
This, exactly this is why people talk about saltburn as you remove the weirdness and pretentious nature and it become a run of the mill thriller movie which could be forgotten easily.
Saltburn is a beautifully-made film that uses shocking moments and the veneer of British classism to hide the fact that it has absolutely nothing to say.
Warning: Anyone who likes and thinks different about Saltburn, I respect their opinion. Do not worry, he did not work on this movie. But wow... This movie feels part of his filmography. Saying that Saltburn seems to take inspiration from The Idol... Is a compliment or an insult? Just my point of view. But for me, the visuals were fire... But the writing leaves much to be desired.@@DogWick
That being the case, I suppose the bigger question is why people got obsessed with Euphoria. Apart from people chasing nihilistic shock value, what is there?
@@Tyler_W As someone who's seen both I think Euphoria is a lot less of a pretentious "tiktok" attention grabber compared to Saltburn. While Euphoria does come off overdramatic and hypersexual shock-value, at its core it is actually conveys the heaviness of struggles such as substance abuse, imposter syndrome and identity issues and ended up actually being an interesting watch imo. Saltburn on the other hand seemed to not have any core meaning or introspective, and tries to trick the audience to think there is by using amazing acting and nice camerawork
Bro the fashion in euphoria is amazing I’ve heard. It’s really influential in that way. It’s NOTHINH like clueless, but it’s influential in the fashion way that clueless was yk?
Saltburn is an attempt at a psychosexual thrillers similar to something like Burt Lancaster's The Swimmper or Deep End. But fails to provide any sort of a meaningful, cathartic third act and a flimsy attempt at a twist.
I didn't even realize the ending was supposed to be a twist until I saw people talking about because I thought it was all pretty obvious for most of the movie. I didn't need every little thing explained. The fact that it did so while practically begging me to be impressed by it feels incredibly condescending and cringe.
Broey Deschanel said in a recent video that Saltburn isn't an 'Eat The Rich' movie, it's a 'Fear The Poor' movie. It's not for us, it's for the 1%. Considering Emerald Fennell's background, I believe that is absolutely right
If you must make it into a class war, then of course it is. I was a bit shocked with this otherwise good video being somewhat blind to the obvious fact that the movie is not "rich bad" ... But it seems that this simplistic, pretentious, judgmental, preconceived and condescending view of "rich bad vs. poor good" has been so embedded in our fabrics that even here people go "it doesn't make sense" basically to have the middle class guy be a psycho (as if it was some sort of twist at end) ... yeah we can't register that it's not a "eat the rich" movie... And I must repeat that the gentleman of this video seems rather articulate.... yet... "It doesn't make sense" ... even when the rich are, at worst, maybe a bit rude at times... Just nuts. I didn't like the movie at all by the way. But this is not about a class war and that was maybe the best part of it, that most seem to miss. It's about a family that do the best they know, towards a stranger. An individual who killed the family that took him him and this lier, killer, self hating, superficial, materialistic, manipulative narcissistic psycho, then dances alone naked as a victory lap for killing a family. And yeah he was middle class (ashamed of who he was) and the innocent victims are very rich. It's about individuals, but if your brain can't see it as not a class war.... of course it's a "fear the poor"
I keep saying this but Saltburn should have been a horror vampire/demon movie…the blood stuff, the horns, the convo at the end talking about eating everyone from the inside, leaving holes etc. would have made so much sense.
it would have taken away the whole point of the movie. In no way would that have made the movie better, it would have cheapened it. Saltburn is a “eat the rich” movie, its a satire of social and economic classes. In no way would it being a supernatural horror make any sense with the plot.
Completely disagree, I feel like people going into this knowing there are "wtf scenes" are more highly critical in a biased way. Each of those scenes have a purpose and help to show us how far our protag is willing to go, the velocity of not an infatuation, but obsession, and focus on the power of desire. Besides the grave scene, the other's aren't even all that "wtf". Barry took a deep dive into the character of Oliver and improved a lot of moments in those scenes, the very gesture of doing so shows that there is a deeper intended meaning than shock value, and to say it is dismissed the craft of the movie and everyone working on it. You don't have to like it, but don't lie
Nope. I found it really funny, and enjoyed the different kind of drama I haven’t seen much of. I understand some of the criticisms, and agree with some of them. But I enjoyed it for those reasons.
@@kylepgames3541 I watched this movie with no context about what it was even about, knew nothing going in, and I found the shock value scenes to be tryhard and pretentious. Added nothing to the character because Oliver as a character is paper thin, there's nothing to him. He's twisted and "evil" and that's it.
My frustration with saltburn can be summed up with the kind of conversation around it. First we have saltburn and strong themes and imagery, it's a seemingly deep movie, but when trying to get into its depth a problem occurs where it's not really saying... anything. Or its at least not saying anything well. The response to this is it's not a deep movie, it's a campy satire. Or the very popular: it's not a movie about class it's about obsession. So then what is the main obsession in the movie? What does Oliver want? Felix. Why? Because we're told everyone does? But then he's obsessed with the family and estate, why? Because we're told everyone wants it. So then if this is a movie about obsession and the obsession is an ultra wealthy person in high class society how is this movie not about class? It's about obsession, what are the goals of this? Unclear. What does anyone really want? Unclear- because it tells us not shows us which is just bad story writing. What IS the story here? What is this film saying? Unclear. Therefore all the stylized aspects don't work, they're attempting to tell a story that dosent hold up.
Yeah, you're right. The "substance" is that Oliver's a middle class stand-in that's envious of the ultra-wealthy class, and Emerald Fennell's a misanthrope who's indicated she sees this as a universal. Oliver's obsessiveness is unconvincing, and the "shocking" content is forced/tryhard, because narratively it's devoid of content or characterization except for this kinda insipid point. I think Fennell throws ideas in there while unsure of how much she wants to commit to them, hence some fans of the movie saying she wasn't trying to say anything, she was just trying to make a fun Gothic movie. If that's the case, give me a real freak writer/director who has some real insight into the nature of obsession, not normie Fennell pretending very hard to be a freak with all the subtlety of a hammer and throwing in last minute reveals that everything we saw beforehand was actually about class envy.
maybe we're supposed to see it as more of an unconscious metaphor on the part of the filmmakers. like they're making a statement about their own tastes and aspirations and desires and maybe they're aware or unaware of their own vapidity. I got ALOT out of the movie "Pearl" which is really just a camp and disturbing slasher character study, because I saw it as a metaphor for Mia Goth and her career. Especially with the audition scene. The artist within her screaming out for attention, validation, and love, and being denied an opportunity even once creates a horrifically excruciated reaction: she reacts with such extremity that it's camp, but I think it's really just a film trying to capture the feeling of rejection and the pleading agony of a wild human's stifled nature. Uh i haven't seen saltburn but could be it was trying to be like that
i still mainly think this movie has no real statement to make but i wonder if that’s the point. when oliver is revealed to be upper middle class, it flips the story and makes it so that he’s just some asshole who wants to get richer. maybe the lack of meaning is the point? although i’ll admit i don’t like how this movie tries to be something and then does nothing
I remember when I finished watching this, I was overwhelmed with a feeling of, 'That's it? This what everyone has been losing their minds over?' It felt like the first draft of a much better, more biting movie. The ideas and themes were planted, but it felt like they were just laid out to dry. If I remember correctly, the director said she didn't want to make a social satire or commentary, and you can clearly see how she just felt short of producing that bite in the film. Maybe my expectations were just way too high? It's an insanely beautiful and a wild ride, but everyone and their mother claimed that it was this cerebral movie, but it really just felt like a popcorn flick to me, which again nothing wrong with that except that I was expecting so much more. Glad to see I'm not the only one underwhelmed by this film. It could've been so much more, but you're right in that her social class probably prevented her, albeit subconsciously, to really take it to eat the rich territory.
I agree, I was really waiting for some hard hitting moments, there were a few enjoyable scenes but I actually found the whole thing quite boring and I feel like the scenes that everyone was talking about was just for shock factor and nothing else
when the movie ended, I wondered what's the purpose of that? the main character isn't deep, he's just a shallow plot twist villain (I mean they didn't justify why he is the way he is). the stupidity of the rich family is so unrealistic and I still don't get how they got played by the main character.
As someone who had to live with upper class people for my first year at University, I can tell you it isn’t unrealistic, it’s like they live in a different world with no understanding of this one.
like when venetia pretty much called ollie out and let on she knew what he did or at least knew that he was trying to crawl his way in, and THEN KISSED HIM?!?! like ?!??
I know right, You would expect at least a social comentary as satire or post-satire but It was just an empty vessel, like, the movie has no identity other than wanting to be a cult film and failed
I was told that it was deep because "he has no reason, he's just a psychopath" like... that was supposed to be deep ? To not have any motivation other than "gnehehehe ! I'm so evil !". But yeah, was a 20yo-ish person who told me that, who probably missed the ridicule of 80-90 action movie vilains that were "big bad evil meanies who liked to do evil things". Seems like we all agreed that it's bad uninteresting writing for long enough that younger people never saw it and it passes as "new and original", when it's just the equivalent of ugly fashion trends coming back when we all agreed it was a mistake back then.
I watched it without knowing anything about it, hadn’t heard of it, and I agree - dark and occasionally rediculous comedy that had some beautiful cinematic moments. And the music was perfect.
I can only see that angle working if it was unintentional dark comedy, like a film that tries to take itself serious but in turns makes you laugh instead.
I went to an advanced screening of Saltburn and really enjoyed it, but didn't think much more about it from there, so I was really surprised to see how much it blew up when it went to Streaming. A part of me feels like people just don't really watch films anymore if this is the kind of thing that blows their minds. I thought it was a really well made, and enjoyable film with some terrific performances, but I don't think it really deserves the hype it's been getting since it landed on Amazon. Likewise, I think some of the people jumping on this as 'pretentious trash' are guilty of just as much hyperbole from the flipside of the coin.
It's absolutely pretentious, but I think calling it trash is a bit hyperbolic. It would have been a good movie if it didn't try to do that "twist" or at least left certain things a little less explicit and more vague for the sake of speculation. It's need for explicit shock value with absolutely no room for subtlety is what hurts it in the end. It's watchable, but at the end of the day, it's just a very okay movie that is technically very well made but doesn't really come together.
I had that realization when The Joker made such a splash. It's an alight movie, but the discussion around it was baffling and made me think "Ok, so nobody has watched any movies by Scorsese, who is arguably the most popular director of all time."
@@Tyler_Wthe twist wasn’t great, I agree. It would have been better yet f it was left up to the viewers imagination since the hints were pretty heavy handed anyways. But I wouldn’t call it pretentious
I think the outward appeal of Nihilism to GenZ is that it removes you of any responsibility towards the choices and outcome of your life. If everything is meaningless, then nothing I do has meaning or consequence. (delusion) When in reality what we desire is a life of meaning. Which in this film, meaning means self gratification. Hedonism.
dude what movie did you watch? you see both sides of the coin, hedonism and utilitarianism. The rich live in boredom, everything at their fingertips but no real human interaction as everyone "puts on a show for felix", everyone wants a piece of their pie thereby denying them any sense of a real relationship. Oliver is the opposite, he puts on the show not just for those he wants to impress but the entire world, his existence is that of a chameleon, even the audience are denied a true origin/backstory for him - he's essentially the embodiment of greed, he had a middle-class family, he could've lived a great life but he had to lie to everyone to get his goal - saltburn. i genuinely can't name any distict nihilistic themes within the movie, each characters actions have consequences for example; felix's blind trust of those around him due to his status, he treats everyone as toys which ultimately kills him as oliver was the toy that would not break.
@@innitbruv-lascocomics9910 Jesus christ died for everyone's sins and if you can't accept him dying for mine you're a hypocrite. The kind of people he despised. If you have no sins cast the first stone.
As I see it, the problem with Saltburn is that it's pure aesthetic without any real depth. Like, it's pretty to look at, almost enthralling, but it leaves you with an incomplete, unsatisfied feeling.
I didn't mind the movie, but I watched some interviews with the director after, and it made me hate it. She thinks it's the most clever movie of all time, and I found her to be very full of herself in multiple interviews
Same! It’s put me off her future work, which is a shame as I enjoyed Promising Young Woman. No wonder the film didn’t have anything to say - she is one of these ignorant, privileged few.
@@GrimalkinsIf you’re interested in exploring the work of a woman director, I highly recommend looking into the films of filmmaker, Miranda July. In particular her debut feature film, “Me You, and Everyone We Know” She’s a very unique voice as an artist and storyteller. Unlike the director of Saltburn where everything is highly derivative.
I think the reason it clicked for me specifically...was pretty much solely the dialogue. It captured conversations in almost every scene in such a realistic manner and I found myself looking on my own life when I've had the same conversations, particularly in the beginning when oliver and farleigh argue abt the validity of an argument...and ESP Rosamund Pike's character had all the best dialogue in terms of realism, I totally saw her in most of my relatives, the way she speaks and presents herself (the gossiping and rambling abt everyone's business), and for this type of narrative the realistic tone of dialogue is extremely hard to come by and that's why I connected with Saltburn
@@theaspiringrecluse Ehh I'm young but not THAT young, but I've seen tonnes of movies, and usually the dialogue is very flashy ig (like I could never imagine myself or anyone else talking in that manner) but this film was the opposite
totally agree with you here. i didn't love the movie, and it felt slightly messy to me, but the moment to moment dialogue was extremely accurate. i've been around these sorts of people and not a lot of movies can get the satire right while also not turning into caricature. that with the performances just made me have a really good time with it, all in all.
It's Instagramified. People critically laud pretty films regardless of content. But the actual issue in the film to me is that the driver for the film, namely why Oliver is who he is, is entirely ignored by the film. So he's a complex character who's also cartoonishly evil...
Thank you someone finally said it! This movie was so much more interesting when it seemed like a cautionary tale about an average man loosing his humanity in trying to climb the social ladder. Or alternatively about the way love, and specifically unrequited love, can become obsession and tear away at our own sense of dignity and self. In the end Oliver has no character arc whatsoever, and looking at it from a distance away from all the flare of movie itself, it just ends with a "oh what a twist aren't you surprised?". It's so beautifully shot, and has some great stuff in it, but its ultimately pointless and meaningless. Even as an eat the rich story it fails since you care more about the family than Oliver himself who btw happens to not be victim of any way of oppression, he's living much more comfortably than most of us are. They could've leaned into his queerness as well and have him be envious of Felix for being able to love freely and be himself because of his privilege, but they do nothing with that either... its just so weird and as you said, it ends up feeling like a boogeyman story to scare the top 1% more than anything else. Great video!
"as you said, it ends up feeling like a boogeyman story to scare the top 1% more than anything else." I haven't seen the film, but, assuming that might have actually been the intended message of the film - is that bad? Does that make it "bad writing" all by itself?
@@roadent217 its mostly that the film seems to be trying to say/be something else at diferentes points and up until the very end when the twist is revealed. But even as a boogeyman story is lacking because of Oliver's inconsistent character althroughtout. And anyway I do feel that the vilification of the middle class in favour of the richest of the rich is really tone deaft regardless of intention, especially in todays climate. But since that all seems to be accidental and even contradictory at times, id say the biggest issue is that the movie itself doesn't seem to know what it is trying to do.
Ugh we have enough cautionary tales about social ladders and obsessive love. It's not meant to be an eat the rich story, so of course it fails as that. Not everything needs to follow a formula just because we're used to boring formulas. Use you imagination a little! Not everything needs to have some deeper meaning behind it or have one that we expect. The critiques on this movie are proof we need to exercise our creative muscles more.
I felt the same way with Saltburn as I did with Promising Young Woman: Its a pretty good movie that leaves a terrible impression with its ending. Oliver was the least empathetic character despite being the focal point of the movie I don't want to see him doing an elated victory lap at the end, or at least this movie did it poorly in a way i cant express exactly...
It's kind of like (and I apologise for this comparison; I swear I've read books other than Harry Potter yadda yadda) The Last Jedi. It's a phenomenally bad movie, but if you view it as dunking on Star Wars and large media franchises in general, it becomes quite bold and great. The sheer audacity on Rian Johnson for pulling it right under the studio's nose! Sadly, I don't think this benefit of the doubt is warranted in either case even if fun to think about.
I thought I was the only one who thought of and kept Farleigh’s point from the beginning closest to heart after seeing the film. Thank you for highlighting it as one of the key pieces.
Yeah, when the film ended that bit took on a completely new meaning for me haha. Because it's like she's aware how you argue something matters more...and yet...doesn't seem to get that she falls victim to it in her own film.
@@kernel-pult it’s a film about social climbing and the things people are willing to do to be rich. Rich people don’t just come out of nowhere someone at some point in time had to exploit others and make it to the top. Yes a lot of wealth is generational but generations before someone somewhere did awful things to get to that point.
Rosamund Pike is by far my favourite aspect of this movie, some of the best jokes came from her. I'd love a spin off of Elspeth's mysterious friendship with Pamela as Pike and Carey Mulligan's chemistry for a short time was excellent (yes, they have worked together before so this shouldn't be a surprise to anyone)
I think I know why Saltburn resonates with so many people my age. To me this "film" represents everything my generation thinks it is, "boundary pushing" / "not afraid to express disturbing truths" but in all reality is nothing but a vapid wasteland, left alone emulating how people would or should act because they themselves really have nothing of substance, to say, just regurgitating the Reel they saw that morning or the tik tok from the night before..... A ridiculous "film" with great actors smh
People always say “Barry Koeghan is a great actor” but I’ve exclusively seen him in some of my least favorite movies/performances within the past years. I cannot get into this dude
Here’s how I see the movie: it is indeed trying to criticize both the rich and the middle class. The ways it criticizes the rich are obvious, but of course, Oliver’s much worse actions do make him the villain. He clearly has an unhealthy, unhinged obsession with this rich family, their luxury, and their status … which, I believe, satirizes the true motivations behind many middle-class crusades against the rich. So many people say, “Eat the rich! Eat the rich!” Hell, so many MOVIES say that. But what I think Fennell is saying here is that those people don’t really want to *eat* the rich … they want to *become* the rich. They’re jealous of what the rich have, and their crusades towards “justice” are more selfish than they seem. The idea that middle-class people are happy with their lives … for many, THAT is a facade. After all, a lot of the anti-rich sentiments come from people who are totally well-off and aren’t suffering because of any wealth imbalance (which, by the way, IS a huge problem that needs to be dealt with, make no mistake). The degree of anger they feel isn’t warranted based on how they live. Maybe they just feel that strongly about helping those who are less fortunate … or maybe they resent the fact that they themselves don’t have more. That’s a harsh pill to swallow. And it goes against the affirmative narrative of “rich people worse than non-rich people.” It may be asking middle-class individuals to look at themselves and ask what’s really driving their anti-rich sentiments. That’s just my own interpretation, but it’s one that I love for looking at an issue from a different point of view. It’s not like the film paints its rich characters as anywhere close to perfect people, after all, so it doesn’t let them off the hook. It just refreshingly puts more of a spotlight on the flaws of a different group.
You’re spot on with this. Tbh, I don’t think too much thought was put into writing this from a middle class perspective. The heinous things Oliver does don’t read to me like a tone deaf insult to the middle class…he’s just a fucked up dude doing fucked up things for the shock of it. There’s not much of an underlying statement Fennell was going for IMO. BUT…I like your take regardless.
THANK YOU, i will be referring ppl to this comment when they insist it’s a eat the rich movie, because that is by far the most superficial and shallow thing to say about this movie
i agreed with you up until the second paragraph. It is a bit disingenious to generalize middle class people as materialistic, greedy, wanna-be's. As well as saying the majority of people saying 'eat the rich' are only middle class. That is tone deaf. The movie is an eat the rich movie, up until the last 7 minutes, then it does a 180 and leaves us with 0 themes to conclude with. The middle class are not the ones causing massive damage to our population, enviorment, and livelyhood. Fennell comes from generational wealth, she does not know what it is like to be middle class. While i can still agree with "eat the rich" truly having selfish motivations to an extent. Your interprotation comes off as someone who has not been middle class and does not know what poor people are like. Which is alot like this films director.
@@redmangoose182 Thanks. I still think there is rhyme and reason to him as a character. He lusts for the wealthy people and their lives, and his motivations throughout the whole film are centered around wedging himself into and taking over that life.
I think most people went into this film for the cool cinematography, hot guys, and the gayness🌈✨️ It hits that special part of the internet AND it's overall competent. I know many people who liked this movie and are now moving on to watch the films that inspired it.
I think this is it. There are attractive people doing naughty steamy taboo things and it’s like you can go and watch it and feel like you lived a part of that lifestyle for a couple of hours. To the middle class, it’s the dream and to the upper class, it’s a thriller/ satire. It’s marketed itself differently towards each demographic and if you sit and switch off you can enjoy the message that it’s saying to your demographic. But if you take it apart and think about it, you will see the inconsistencies
So… I agree with you on most parts, but I’m Gen Z, and I want to weigh in on the “Gen Z loves nihilism” thing. Honestly? That’s more a millennial thing, from what I’ve observed. Gen Z culture is largely based on deconstruction and reconstruction. Making your own meaning out of things, or finding meaning wherever you yourself want to find it. Taking the nihilism that we grew up viewing as sophisticated and cool and saying “no, life DOES have meaning, and I will make that meaning myself.”
True for me as well, but I’m unsure if that’s the case in belief (for some) or if it’s truly embodied in practice. There are some behiavors our gen takes part in that is very nihilistic hedonist that I think deserves to be looked at. And is often promoted somewhat uncritically, esp on the internet
Unfortunately I have to agree. I loved Promising Young Woman, but this time Emerald was so shallow, so superficial. Huge disappointment because I think it's a really well-shot film with amazing performances.
I don't take Oliver's end monologue seriously. I believe that he purposefully pierced Felix's tire and all that to gain access to Felix but I think he is lying to himself, Elspeth and us when he says he hated Felix and everything was preplanned and a big masterminded plot. I think he was in love with Felix, the life he had but i think he wanted to b part of it WITH Felix. So when Felix rejected him I think he went on the defensive and said "if i cannot have him, no one can and actually i have only wanted your life all along so the joke is on you". I frankly don't care if Emerald Fennel intended for the film to be a social critique/satire because I personally enjoy the film more as a small scale, psychological affair with wacky characters and an unreliable narrator.
For the UK anyway, it came out on Prime at Christmas and was trailered as posh people exploit a working class hero type of film. It was one of those films that the whole family (3 generations) watched together as it was over Xmas and they had no idea what was coming cos they thought they were watching brideshead revisited. When you thought you were going to watch a comedy about class with your mum and your gran and you ended watching a film when a guy had sex with a grave it made the scene feel more shocking regardless of how well it was shot. Trying not not to make eye contact with your gran as she said oh dear what do you think he's doing is why the film has stuck in so many minds. I went back to work after Christmas and everyone I spoke to who had seen the film had seen it with their family.
While I don’t agree with everything u said. I think u did a phenomenal job getting ur point across respectfully in a way that made sense and this video was the perfect length. U presented ur argument near perfectly and I wasn’t mad
Saltburn is popular because it's entertaining and well shot/acted. Why do we need to have a clearly defined hero/villain? Oliver is a sociopath (not simply a weirdo) and tries to manipulate everyone around him to get what he wants. Felix and his family are detached aristocrats who toy with people for their own amusement. This makes for an interesting clash between flawed human beings. That's all there is to it. Some will find it entertaining, some will not. Why do we need to have clearly defined social criticism? Eat the rich is a component of this movie, not its main theme. The same goes for what you described as disdain for the middle classes ( Oliver being embarrassed about his parents). He is embarrassed because he built an image of himself based on lies and this facade crumbles during that scene. How does that have anything to do with the director negatively commenting about the middle class? It's just part of the character. Every movie can be depicted as pretentious if we look for deeper meanings where there is none. IMO movies like Saltburn should not be over-analyzed. When we do, that's when we end up in pretentious territories :)
You mean, why should character depth matter or why should the movie have commentary to make? Becuse it sets itself up that way very conspicuously. If it was just going to be a fun sexy movie with some gross out gags then you don't really need an accomplished cinematographer. If the characters are not going to be fleshed out by the writer, then why hire big up and coming actors instead of just anyone. There is no reality in which the director did not want this to be a thought-provoking movie with class commentary--not if its right there in your face, in the first few seconds of the movie. She also wanted it to be about obsession---again, stated verbally this time in the first few seconds of the movie. And at the end she wants us to turn our minds off by saying it was really also a genre film, a campy gothic mystery the whole time --the completely cliched flashback moment. Movies that merged genre and class/social commentary together in a successful way that are thought provoking would be something like Parasite or Get Out. Those movies also manage to be more fun AND more subtle at the same time with their explorations of theme
I found that the more people heard about Saltburn before going to view it, the more disappointed they are in the film. It definitely suffers from being over-hyped. I knew nothing about the movie and none of the "shock value" scenes weren't shocking for me. I'm used to people with fetishes so I just watched it as a self character study by Oliver, an unreliable storyteller. Oliver felt like people I have known in my life. B ut yes, there is a level of pretentiousness in the film especially due to the filmmaker's background. Worried the filmmaker could possibly be heading down the Sam Levinson route.
The film just completely contradicts whatever themes it was trying to develop in its last 7 minutes or so. If it had ended sooner it would have been better, and not so confused and dumb.
I don't think Oliver is meant to be a "quirky weirdo" in this film. I think he's a relatable character out of his depth in a world alien to him, and that makes him a fairly standard relatable character. Also disagree that that's all that the sexual scenes are meant to suggest about him, rather than his lust for the world, his growing power and place within it, and his confused emotional state. I'd also say that something as vague as 'Less wealthy person wants the life of a more wealthy person' with a lustful element is not really enough to warrant all the comparisons to Mr Ripley. I think we as audiences find it easy to spot similarities and compare films but at some point we have to accept that you can still have original films with similarities to one another without everyone defaulting to 'It's just [x film] but with [arbitrary difference]'.
I think, as a film, your points hit the nail on the head. Fenenell's message in Saltburn was vague and muddled and fell super flat, particularly considering how expertly she executed Promising Young Woman- However, I think what Saltburn really nailed was presenting a satire of the upper class of the UK (much like you said, 100% supported by some absolutely stellar acting). When you watch it in scenes, rather than an entire movie, it provides an accurate social snapshot that I don't think scans for the general audience, particularly internationally. I come from a similar background to Oliver, but through my university experience and girlfriend, I have experienced families like the Cattons first-hand- first of all, it was fucking hilarious. My girlfriend and I were in stitches watching the dialogue because it perfectly captured the families of some of my friends and we were fairly certain we had been at actual parties and heard some lines said word-for-word in earnest - However, watching it in a cinema in a working-class area of Lancashire, it felt like we were the only ones getting the joke- the film is definitely made for Fennell's peers and not the general audience, which makes it come off as tone-deaf and elitist, because it kinda is- On another note, I think for the UK, the point you made about the middle class not hating being middle class isn't entirely accurate- I definitely think there is a huge amount of self-criticism and self-loathing in a certain section of the British middle class and some of us have an engrained desire/resentment for the upper classes- I went to Exeter University in the UK, which is famed for its idolisation of the "Saltburn aesthetic" (thetab.com/uk/exeter/2019/11/05/doesnt-everyone-have-a-trust-fund-the-27-poshest-things-ever-heard-in-exetah-43693 is worth a Google just to get the vibe) and it has a lot of otherwise middle-class people doing some pretty ridiculous social performance to try and strive to get in with and eventually be perceived as "upper class" (myself at times regrettably included), so from my experience- perhaps the serial murder was a bit much, but I don't think Oliver's character was wholly inaccurate in a British class narrative. Either way, the film as a whole was muddled and tone-deaf and a little ridiculous- it was made by a woman of the upper-middle class, for an audience of people in the upper-middle classes, (my flatmate is family friends with the Fennells and lo and behold he has a couple cousins playing bit-parts in it) - I have no idea why so many people have latched onto it- probably because it romanticises 'old money' and the "perfect summer"- nevertheless, I think it did have some elements of absolute magic and searing accuracy- That concludes my opinion no one asked for...
Fennel is a rich kid. Says all you need to know. I don't wanna be reductive and say people who come from wealth can't make truthful art, but Fennel's privileged upbringing REALLY shades this film. Its just...fucking shallow. Nothing in Saltburn feels...authentic artistically or thematically.
I'm hard on films, and I agree with what you point out generally, at the same time, seeing it in the theatre was...one of the most unique theatrical experiences I've ever had. Literal audible gasps around me. The reactions were priceless. You and I may be burnt-out on sex-scenes in experiemental, indie or surrealist films - but huge swaths of the population are still truly wigging out over a bit of period sex. If anything it was a massive vehicle for Keoghan to break into movie-stardom, which didn't happen after Eternals. It inspired me to finally watch Killing of a Sacred Deer, and rewatch Talented Mr. Ripley and Cruel Intentions so kudos to Fennel overall. Saltburn was fun both watches, particularly at home where you see more issues and stolen ideas - but if you didn:t see it in theatres you may have missed out a bit.
This movie clicks with so many people because it's about unrequited and impossible desire, and who among us hasn't felt that way? It's exposing the depravity of feeling some of us secretly sink to, and giddily so. It's very cathartic for that reason. And on top of that- just generally- it's decadent, slutty, and full of social drama...it's a very queer experience overall, and who among the chronically online isn't kinda queer, or at the very least- into queer aesthetics? It's en vogue. The popularity and poignance of Saltburn makes perfect sense.
The problem with this breakdown is that you shouldn't try and find an overarching topical message or try and rationalize why a generally unlikable demographic, gen z, resonates with it. It will end up making you hate it just because you don't see what everyone else sees in it, rather than you having your own take on it. The movie is filled with symbolism and takes themes from many great works of art, from Shakespeare all the way to the Shining, and I doubt gen z tiktokers take any of this into account
THANK YOU!! I felt like I was the only one who thought it was unmitigated tripe. When you described Oliver's monologue at the end as like a "supervillian"?? Big "YES!" from me, thats exactly what I felt in the moment.
But the point isn't that Oliver is "middle-class". Well, firstly because he isn't really middle-class, his family is extremely well-off, with a big house and a lot of healthy children in a seemingly good neighbourhood. Secondly, he is the villain. His motivation is just pure greed. That's the point of him being from a wealthy family. At first the audience might not like Felix's family but at the end you feel bad for a lot of them. It's a role reversal as we discover that Olliver is just a greedy, insane individual. Still, I think the main point of the film was to express how shallow the realtionships between extremely rich people can become and how even bigger sociopaths can exploit those relationships to rise to the top. It's not that deep but I wouldn't say it's "all aesthetic, no substance" like many people in the comments claim. On the shock value scenes, they aren't to show that Olliver is a "quirky weirdo" (as you say), they are to show he's an utterly insane sociopath, which by the end of the movie becomes fairly obvious. They are over the top, but they don't feel that out of place by the end of the film. Still, I understand why people think they're only there for marketing reasons, although the movie still has some great and memorable moments aside from that.
Omg thank you! I was looking for a comment that made this point! Like ltrrly it’s not trying to be something it’s not not every movie has to be an intellectual exercise that has to have 100 layers meaning and social implications. Sometimes it’s a well executed movie about a super freak psycho doing whatever means necessary to get the life a super rich family has and, that’s it.
I don’t think it’s meant to be an eat the rich story. The social dynamics are there because they inform character dynamics via power imbalance. To say that Oliver hating being middle class is a slight to the middle class is a weird take. I think she just wanted to make a fun, Gothic movie. It has little substance but is what it is
LOL at your 4:3 aspect ratio and intro, I appreciate your critique, but I LOVED Saltburn. This film's story has flaws, but the performances were Oscar-worthy (still shocked Barry got no love from the Academy), the cinematography was a visual feast, sound track/score is sublime and I thoroughly enjoyed the female/male-desiring gaze. I think movies like Poor Things are the reason we need movies like Saltburn. This movie says more about female desire than Poor Things ever could. Oliver's villain turn could also be read as the revenge of a scorned/rejected lover - he couldn't have Felix, so he'd become him and take everything he ever loved. Fennel claims his initial plan was not to steal Saltburn, but once he realizes he's been rejected, it becomes his plan. So his motives remain complex and ever-shifting, imo. Fennel says this film is about first love, and I think it ultimately becomes the inverse of that intense first love, intense first heartbreak, and the hatred that can be born from rejection. I also think Oliver being the villain doesn't negate the critique of the rich. They can co-exist. Interestingly, Barry Keoghan's real life story is very similar to Oliver Quick's lie - his mom was an addict who died when he was 12 and then he and his brother grew up in 13 different foster homes. For this reason, I wonder if Barry had input on the script's treatment of such a back story, so as to not make it exploitative or poverty-porn. I don't know that him being truly poor would have made the movie a better class critique for me. I liked the fact that Oliver crafted a character he knew Felix would be drawn to - and that the audience would be drawn to. It rings extremely true to me that the classist, gate-keeping institutions - such as prestigious universities like Oxford - love poverty porn and want to pat themselves on the back for helping such unfortunate souls, even if they never truly let those people in the door. I think the movie makes that point very well. I also think his villainy critiques the idea of striving to BE the wealthy, and what we're willing to do to attain this, almost to an absurd, satirical level. Think he's the patriarch in Succession, not the generations later that have lost their ability to hunt because they have never felt hunger. He's the start of another problem. He's literally willing to kill so he can be in the 1% - I'd say that's pretty true of real life, just look at pharma or our for-profit prisons or the military-industrial complex. That may be a reach, but I think it's a valid read. It's not worth it - his is a hollow victory, driven by a capitalist plutocracy that is rotten at every rung of the ladder. His ascension to the upper class is not a victory, the system itself is broken. I think the message to the middle class is perhaps stop trying to be the new upper class and start trying to destroy the class system itself. Aside from these potential critiques, psychopathic serial killers do tend to be middle class white men, that's just the stats. And theory aside, it's just fun. Yes it's a rip off of existing IP like Brideshead Revisited or Talented Mr. Ripley, but those similarities to successful films of the past may be *why* she was able to make this movie with zero actual IP. And you can say what you will about the script, but I think Fennel shines as a director precisely because she allowed the cast to have a say and improvise. The grave scene, for example, was an improvisation by Keoghan. A few of Rosamund Pike's best lines were her own. She allowed the actors to become true collaborators in writing the story, which may have made the story weaker, but it made the performances better. Weirdly, Emerald Fennel said if she did her job right, you're rooting for Oliver in the end. And I do find myself rooting for him, despite his psychopathy. Maybe it's Barry's dazzling, chameleon performance, maybe it's the manipulative script, maybe it's the revenge fantasy of anyone who's ever been rejected by someone they loved as much as Oliver loved Felix, maybe it's that ending - that glorious ending - but the trick worked. I've seen it 4 times, the first time I had mixed feelings - the ending felt rushed and unearned, the logic holes bothered me. But it stayed with me, so I watched it again. On the second viewing, the plot stood up better than I remembered and I caught things I hadn't in the first viewing. I liked it more each time. It's clear Fennel put love into every frame of this movie, even if she failed to deliver a deep "eat the rich" critique. She entertained the hell out of us. And a quote comes to mind, that the mark of a great film is not a perfect story, but great moments. There are so many great moments in Saltburn that audiences won't soon forget - whether you like it or not lmaooo.
I think the reason behind Saltburn success is the fact that it combines two of the most important and popular problems of our generation. Firstly the money, glam and aesthetic problem and secondly the old money and eat the rich craze . We don’t know what we want more. Do we want to be a part of them, the elite, the inside circle of never ending fun and glam, or we want to destroy them. Truth of the matter is, most of us are searching of a way out, but just like the maze in the film there is no way out. It’s a dark and pessimistic take wrapped in a beautiful and aesthetic packaging. Just like social media, celebrities and other forms of entertainment. I personally enjoyed the movie because of this. For as long as I can remember I haven’t seen similar, contemporary take on the matter. I can agree that the ending wasn’t the best. The pace was too fast competed to the build up.
Was this movie supposed to be a deep and profound artsy film full of clever subversion? I just saw it as a movie about the weird quiet kid in the corner of every school ever actually going out and enacting their psychotic fantasies and taking full advantage of how stupid and up their own ass that some high class people are that some nobody could just decide one day to infiltrate their lives and completely destroy them, an interesting concept with a decent execution in my opinion. Also this film is pretty hilarious to me.
I honestly felt like we were missing so much from oliver and that he got his wishes waaaaay too early, like how felix and his mom have horrible savior complexes (omg you mention it) which oliver immediately understood and played into. That made at least to me that oliver was on their level, which made the end kinda like... Okay now what
I went into this movie completely blind, having never heard of it. I did really enjoy the movie, but I was absolutely unaware of the “eat the rich” message it was trying to send. I just thought this was a movie about a sociopath who felt nothing, leached onto someone to stimulate him (Felix), got caught in his lie, murdered his hyper-fixation as to avoid leaving behind the lifestyle he became attached to, and then killed the rest of them out of boredom. I thought his dance at the end was meant to sorta just enjoy what he won in his game. I truly thought this movie was a commentary on how easily sociopaths can manipulate others, and how dangerous that is.
"I will never understand why this movie clicked with so many people" It's dark academia bro. But other then that, I haven't watched it yet, but I think the obsession with class likely appels to the economically insecure majority of the folks, especially gen z. You can say 'majority of middle class people are happy to be middle class' - but what middle class means is very dependent on the context... and I also don't believe that's true for everyone or even the majority, especially when they have a direct comparison around them (and Oliver is in Oxford and friends with a rich kid). Maybe you just don't fully grasp that hunger, that longing to have more and be equal amongst your peers and that's what makes the movie seem worse. It can still be shallow though.
This! Gen Z are some of the most dissatisfied groups of people today. Socially, financially, sexually, it's tragic. This movie is definitely dripping in gen z sentiments. The eagerness to throw away everything you are to experience the "more desirable" lifestyle. By the time they get there, it's a hollow victory because of what they had to do to maintain the facade.
I don’t think I’d necessarily call Oliver the antagonist. I think what fennel was trying to go for with the ending was in a very demented way a “good for you”. I think however fennel’s choice to make Oliver lie about his families past. It’s also when the film kinda get’s bad. I think it definitely picks up again after a certain character dies but it definitely takes away from A LOT of the social commentary fennel was trying to make.
I think having it as a twist was quite misguided. For one thing, by the time it comes up we already know that Oliver is a weirdo, so that’s not a revelation. And then some of what see was: “He wasn’t actually typing in the coffee shop. Dum dum dum.” Like, who was shocked by this? No one who’d seen The Talented Mr. Ripley, which this is effectively a rip off from.
I completely disagree that " what fennel was trying to go for with the ending was in a very demented way a 'good for you'". I can't tell you what she WAS trying to go for, but "good for you" is certainly not it imo.
I think what you said about aesthetic over substance being the film's main problem is also its core theme, at least that is how i saw it when i watched the film and discussed with a few friends. After watching this video, I do think that Oliver's motivations are... Weird. I initially viewed his motivations as "self-class-loathing, wealth jealousy, and a need to fit in meets a psychopath." I don't think the film is perfect, but I dont think it's bad, either. I think the two strong points of the narrative are: 1) how it could make batshit insane billionaires appear sympathetic, while also making it feel like their death was kind of justified. I.e., they were using and abusing people. However, Oliver ended up using those exact same methods, which I thought was a very interesting character parallel. 2) aesthetic over substance (a double edged sword). Oliver is, fundamentally, empty. He's cold, calculating. The family is empty, operating almost entirely off of a collectively corrupt savior complex and a rich aesthetic. Ultimately, in the same way stupid people play stupid games to win stupid prizes, empty people play at empty games to win empty prizes. At the end of the movie, what does Oliver have? He is an empty man with an empty aesthetic in an utterly empty home. And so the cycle (probably, is my guess) repeats. So, I think the message of the movie that I interpreted the most is "emoty people play empty games to win empty prizes." (Which still makes so many tiktok fans completely tone deaf.) At least, thats the best way i can think of right now to put it. I'm sure there's a better way. Maybe it wasn't intended as the core idea, but i dont really care. Death of the Author and all that.
I can only speak for myself but I know this; no matter how much someone can call my taste in a movie is “shit”, I disregard their opinion since the movies I watch and talk about to others are movies that made me feel emotion, absorbed me into a story, and my picky little preferences about cinematography and how shitty the actors often goes out the window; because the film made me feel an emotion. To each their own, just remind yourself why you are fighting so hard to push your opinion on others and whether or not it’s a big deal.
It's an aesthetically pleasing movie with the hottest up and coming actors queer baiting in it. That's why it "clicked" for so many people - those who have never seen a movie before and lack critical thinking skills got ahold of it. And yes, this is the most "old man yells at cloud" thing I've ever said😅 great video, thanks!
“Moments that are supposed to shock you!” My thoughts exactly. It’s nothing I haven’t seen before. Like the movie was beautiful but it did as you said, weird for the sake of being weird. Promising young woman was amazing and this movie thought it was more clever than it was.
contrarian. it wasn’t a masterpiece, but it certainly wasn’t bad, by any means, or by any “critics” standards. at best it was marvelous entertainment and at worst it was a good film, but people love a good roast, i suppose🤷🏽♂️
That's what this video feels like. Nothing more than Griffin taking a piss, because everybody else seems to love it. I usually agree with this guy's takes, but this one is just not it.
That's your opinion. I thought it kinda sucked. Just because the guy in the video disagrees with you doesn't mean he's not sharing his genuine opinion.
I really enjoyed Saltburn, the spiralling circle of obsession and control engaged me. I went in knowing nothing about it, other than Tiktok announcing it as having some disgusting scenes - that I didn't find shocking. But, I took those scenes with a pinch of salt, it's very much akin to something like Visitor-Q or (a more nuanced) Theorem.
Hollywood movies with angel faced multimillionire casts and teams behind them making fun of rich people's excess and debauchery is just the media version of playboys and barbies who want the underdog anti-establishment aesthetic.
i truly agree with everything you said!! and i also wanna add that even though most of the film is certainly beautiful in terms of cinematography (which is the carrying element since the story lacks nuance altogether), we are truly seeing the euphoria lighting and its consequences which is upsetting. someone please save jacob elordi...
what felt disrespectful to me from the wealthy director was casting an actor with a working class background to say “but the poors are also bad 😩” when she could have said literally anything else about class lol i hated this film
i think saltburn was shallow, but fun. i like to think of it as a modern interpretation of midsummer night's dream - a wild, feverish power fantasy, satirical and saturated. if you want something deeper, watch parasite. if you want something funnier, watch knives out.
"Pretentious" and "try hard" are not valid critiques for any movie, let alone this one. This movie is being talked about like it's a social satire, when that's not the point of the movie at all. The whole point is that Oliver is a creepy weirdo who succeeds in tricking the audience at the beginning of the film, only for his manipulative nature to be revealed slowly as the film goes on, leaving the audience with a feeling of betrayal and bizarre satisfaction. It's entirely a character study --" look at how fucking odd this guy is." Oliver being middle class is completely central to his character. His obsession with upward social mobility is completely unjustified, because his life is fine -- which is, of course, the point. His greed and envy are not grounded in reality because he is completely delusional. He does not represent the middle class thematically, and it's weird to imply that? His character is not a slight against middle class people. You're not meant to relate to his shame, his feelings are supposed to feel kind of alien. I guess where we'd agree is that Saltburn "has nothing to substantial to say about class." This is a weird requirement for a movie to have in my opinion. Saltburn isn't obligated to be a perfectly Marxist piece of work or whatever, it's okay to make a simple movie about one fucked up little guy. Not every movie about rich people needs perfect social commentary in order to work. Saltburn works because it refuses to justify Oliver's actions, not in spite of it.
The worst part is the grave scene wasnt in the script the actor just "improvised" and decided to do that🥲 taking the role is ONE thing improvising fucking a grave is ANOTHER
![[FULL EP.16] เซียนพาลุย "เผือก-ฟรอยด์" กรี๊ดลั่น จนปูหนี | เฮ็ดอย่างเซียนหรั่ง | One Playground](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/FsqUvwS3b-Y/mqdefault.jpg)
What did YOU think of Saltburn? 🧂🔥 Do you get why it's so popular? Comment below! 💥
yeah, that ending revelation was so poorly executed and written. But well, at least we had with this one the Euphoria season 3.
I liked it but I can absolutely understand why some people don't
I don’t get why it’s popular I guess it’s just people’s first art house like film
I didn't like it. I didn't find particularly shocking either. To me it is a beautiful looking movie, not a bad movie but it is not good either, a few things upset me, but man! Barry Keoghan looks beautiful all throughout the movie LoL
The best part was when he looked at the camera and said "better call salt", that just burned me to my core
saltburn is an aesthetically pleasing well acted movie that has nothing to say about anything
idk, this movie made me like jacob elordi. at least his acting was good. i went into this movie absolutely dogpiling this dude, now i think maybe he's not a bad actor after all. @@marinablack181
A private school hack and her illusion of grandeur.
Barry, Rosamund, and Richard grant are the only people in this movie who are aware of what acting is
@@rilesroo1 Agree 100%
A pure tumblr / tik tok movie. Pretty pictures with cute boys being rich and gay=great.
The power of aesthetic is wildly understated when it comes to what people actually like/choose to like
So true. Saltburn had a great vibe to me, not every movie has to be good for super profound reasons. It just felt enjoyable to watch.
The medium ist the message.
@@vau_st the medium is the mouthpiece for the message
if you prefer vibes over plot, check out Chungking Express and its loose sequel Fallen Angels. these are cantonese-language movies made in hong kong. they have simple stories (at least on the surface, when you deconstruct them you'll find more about the movies). they have a nice feel-good plot, but the cinematography and just the environment of hong kong is really something that keeps your eyes glued to it.
art for art’s sake mama
Saltburn seems to have been designed to bait the algorithm. Like how labels tell musicians to have a TikTokable hook, Saltburn aims to have numerous of those all loosely stitched together with a vsco filter applied.
yeah, it's all style and flashy ideas without actual substance
Here we go with the "Everything is a conspiracy" Trope. Ugh.
@@Markyajv …what
@@Markyajvuhhh no that’s just how the industry works
@@Markyajvhere we go with the “you just don’t get it 😒” trope. Ugh.
I was thinking about this the other day. The film itself is fine, the mystery, vibe and overall plot, its okay. It didn't need to be weird, it didn't need to have shock value. However, my marketing brain made me realise that, without those things, the movie would just be standard and already forgotten thriller type movie.
Through it's pretentiousness, that is how it got its hype and marketing. The film itself is standard.
We could prise a regular good film
This, exactly this is why people talk about saltburn as you remove the weirdness and pretentious nature and it become a run of the mill thriller movie which could be forgotten easily.
Nuhhh it’s one of my favourite movies without the shock value stuff I would of liked it more 💀💀💀
By "standard" you mean "mid".
Another mediocrity put off by "weird".
Saltburn is a beautifully-made film that uses shocking moments and the veneer of British classism to hide the fact that it has absolutely nothing to say.
SAM LEVINSON STOP TOUCHING EVERYTHING.
Oh... knowing this i'm avoiding this movie now lmao Levinson is such a weirdo
Warning: Anyone who likes and thinks different about Saltburn, I respect their opinion.
Do not worry, he did not work on this movie. But wow... This movie feels part of his filmography. Saying that Saltburn seems to take inspiration from The Idol... Is a compliment or an insult? Just my point of view.
But for me, the visuals were fire... But the writing leaves much to be desired.@@DogWick
Sam made Saltburn?
I was just kidding, do not worry.@@IVNHYPRFNK
This movie looks like "the idol" 😂
"I will never understand why this movie clicked with so many people"
Promotion... and Euphoria and easy access.
That being the case, I suppose the bigger question is why people got obsessed with Euphoria. Apart from people chasing nihilistic shock value, what is there?
sex@@Tyler_W
@@Tyler_W As someone who's seen both I think Euphoria is a lot less of a pretentious "tiktok" attention grabber compared to Saltburn. While Euphoria does come off overdramatic and hypersexual shock-value, at its core it is actually conveys the heaviness of struggles such as substance abuse, imposter syndrome and identity issues and ended up actually being an interesting watch imo. Saltburn on the other hand seemed to not have any core meaning or introspective, and tries to trick the audience to think there is by using amazing acting and nice camerawork
Bro the fashion in euphoria is amazing I’ve heard. It’s really influential in that way. It’s NOTHINH like clueless, but it’s influential in the fashion way that clueless was yk?
the only promotion i got was my friend telling me you will love the mc hes a sicko and truth i love the movie AHAH
Saltburn is an attempt at a psychosexual thrillers similar to something like Burt Lancaster's The Swimmper or Deep End. But fails to provide any sort of a meaningful, cathartic third act and a flimsy attempt at a twist.
I agree. I would add Bad Influence with Rob Lowe & James Spader and Masquerade 1988, also with Rob Lowe, to your film suggestions
I didn't even realize the ending was supposed to be a twist until I saw people talking about because I thought it was all pretty obvious for most of the movie. I didn't need every little thing explained. The fact that it did so while practically begging me to be impressed by it feels incredibly condescending and cringe.
The Swimmer is a masterpiece. Saltburn, not so much.
why does it need to be cathartic at all?
@@Tyler_W what twist?
Broey Deschanel said in a recent video that Saltburn isn't an 'Eat The Rich' movie, it's a 'Fear The Poor' movie. It's not for us, it's for the 1%. Considering Emerald Fennell's background, I believe that is absolutely right
She's a trust fund baby. Shocking that she wrote a movie like this.
If you must make it into a class war, then of course it is. I was a bit shocked with this otherwise good video being somewhat blind to the obvious fact that the movie is not "rich bad" ...
But it seems that this simplistic, pretentious, judgmental, preconceived and condescending view of "rich bad vs. poor good" has been so embedded in our fabrics that even here people go "it doesn't make sense" basically to have the middle class guy be a psycho (as if it was some sort of twist at end) ... yeah we can't register that it's not a "eat the rich" movie...
And I must repeat that the gentleman of this video seems rather articulate.... yet... "It doesn't make sense" ... even when the rich are, at worst, maybe a bit rude at times... Just nuts.
I didn't like the movie at all by the way. But this is not about a class war and that was maybe the best part of it, that most seem to miss.
It's about a family that do the best they know, towards a stranger. An individual who killed the family that took him him and this lier, killer, self hating, superficial, materialistic, manipulative narcissistic psycho, then dances alone naked as a victory lap for killing a family. And yeah he was middle class (ashamed of who he was) and the innocent victims are very rich.
It's about individuals, but if your brain can't see it as not a class war.... of course it's a "fear the poor"
OMG!!! that is a perfect description!
Not sure if this is who you were talking about, but I saw this said in Broey Deschanel's video "Saltburn: The Tumblr-ification of Cinema"
@@nisio7320 Yes! That's exactly the video I was thinking of. Thank you! I'll edit my comment
I keep saying this but Saltburn should have been a horror vampire/demon movie…the blood stuff, the horns, the convo at the end talking about eating everyone from the inside, leaving holes etc. would have made so much sense.
I like this comment. If this was an actual horror movie with supernatural elements, would have made more sense
it would have taken away the whole point of the movie. In no way would that have made the movie better, it would have cheapened it. Saltburn is a “eat the rich” movie, its a satire of social and economic classes. In no way would it being a supernatural horror make any sense with the plot.
@@miaboaler2968no it is not an “eat the rich” movie 🤦
Barry keoghan as Edward Cullen, that’s a pitch
@@miaboaler2968 it's a satire by somebody who doesn't know how to write satire lolol
This movie just exists for shock value and unfortunately a lot of people think “what the fuck” moments equate to something being good
Completely disagree, I feel like people going into this knowing there are "wtf scenes" are more highly critical in a biased way. Each of those scenes have a purpose and help to show us how far our protag is willing to go, the velocity of not an infatuation, but obsession, and focus on the power of desire. Besides the grave scene, the other's aren't even all that "wtf". Barry took a deep dive into the character of Oliver and improved a lot of moments in those scenes, the very gesture of doing so shows that there is a deeper intended meaning than shock value, and to say it is dismissed the craft of the movie and everyone working on it. You don't have to like it, but don't lie
Exactly thank you
Nothing wrong with shock value. It's a worthy endeavor in and of itself.
Nope. I found it really funny, and enjoyed the different kind of drama I haven’t seen much of. I understand some of the criticisms, and agree with some of them. But I enjoyed it for those reasons.
@@kylepgames3541 I watched this movie with no context about what it was even about, knew nothing going in, and I found the shock value scenes to be tryhard and pretentious. Added nothing to the character because Oliver as a character is paper thin, there's nothing to him. He's twisted and "evil" and that's it.
You changing the aspect ratio of the video is what tickles me the most. 😂
My frustration with saltburn can be summed up with the kind of conversation around it.
First we have saltburn and strong themes and imagery, it's a seemingly deep movie, but when trying to get into its depth a problem occurs where it's not really saying... anything. Or its at least not saying anything well.
The response to this is it's not a deep movie, it's a campy satire. Or the very popular: it's not a movie about class it's about obsession.
So then what is the main obsession in the movie? What does Oliver want? Felix. Why? Because we're told everyone does? But then he's obsessed with the family and estate, why? Because we're told everyone wants it.
So then if this is a movie about obsession and the obsession is an ultra wealthy person in high class society how is this movie not about class? It's about obsession, what are the goals of this? Unclear. What does anyone really want? Unclear- because it tells us not shows us which is just bad story writing.
What IS the story here? What is this film saying? Unclear. Therefore all the stylized aspects don't work, they're attempting to tell a story that dosent hold up.
All style, no substance.
Yeah, you're right. The "substance" is that Oliver's a middle class stand-in that's envious of the ultra-wealthy class, and Emerald Fennell's a misanthrope who's indicated she sees this as a universal. Oliver's obsessiveness is unconvincing, and the "shocking" content is forced/tryhard, because narratively it's devoid of content or characterization except for this kinda insipid point. I think Fennell throws ideas in there while unsure of how much she wants to commit to them, hence some fans of the movie saying she wasn't trying to say anything, she was just trying to make a fun Gothic movie. If that's the case, give me a real freak writer/director who has some real insight into the nature of obsession, not normie Fennell pretending very hard to be a freak with all the subtlety of a hammer and throwing in last minute reveals that everything we saw beforehand was actually about class envy.
maybe we're supposed to see it as more of an unconscious metaphor on the part of the filmmakers. like they're making a statement about their own tastes and aspirations and desires and maybe they're aware or unaware of their own vapidity.
I got ALOT out of the movie "Pearl" which is really just a camp and disturbing slasher character study, because I saw it as a metaphor for Mia Goth and her career. Especially with the audition scene. The artist within her screaming out for attention, validation, and love, and being denied an opportunity even once creates a horrifically excruciated reaction: she reacts with such extremity that it's camp, but I think it's really just a film trying to capture the feeling of rejection and the pleading agony of a wild human's stifled nature.
Uh i haven't seen saltburn but could be it was trying to be like that
In the simplest terms, it's about how unmet and unmediated desire turns us into cruel, vain people.
i still mainly think this movie has no real statement to make but i wonder if that’s the point. when oliver is revealed to be upper middle class, it flips the story and makes it so that he’s just some asshole who wants to get richer. maybe the lack of meaning is the point? although i’ll admit i don’t like how this movie tries to be something and then does nothing
I remember when I finished watching this, I was overwhelmed with a feeling of, 'That's it? This what everyone has been losing their minds over?' It felt like the first draft of a much better, more biting movie. The ideas and themes were planted, but it felt like they were just laid out to dry. If I remember correctly, the director said she didn't want to make a social satire or commentary, and you can clearly see how she just felt short of producing that bite in the film. Maybe my expectations were just way too high? It's an insanely beautiful and a wild ride, but everyone and their mother claimed that it was this cerebral movie, but it really just felt like a popcorn flick to me, which again nothing wrong with that except that I was expecting so much more. Glad to see I'm not the only one underwhelmed by this film. It could've been so much more, but you're right in that her social class probably prevented her, albeit subconsciously, to really take it to eat the rich territory.
I agree, I was really waiting for some hard hitting moments, there were a few enjoyable scenes but I actually found the whole thing quite boring and I feel like the scenes that everyone was talking about was just for shock factor and nothing else
why is "not taking it to eat the rich territory" your ultimate interest here?
@@mummyjohnnvm i misread ur comment
The Talented Mr. Rip-Off
TTMR was such a good movie, damnit
Or the UNtalented Mr Ripoff. Terrible film.
I had to watch that movie again just to exorcise me after Saltburn, tbh.
I guess i can thank this movie for finding out about the talented mr ripley from a comment
Deadass lmao
when the movie ended, I wondered what's the purpose of that? the main character isn't deep, he's just a shallow plot twist villain (I mean they didn't justify why he is the way he is). the stupidity of the rich family is so unrealistic and I still don't get how they got played by the main character.
As someone who had to live with upper class people for my first year at University, I can tell you it isn’t unrealistic, it’s like they live in a different world with no understanding of this one.
like when venetia pretty much called ollie out and let on she knew what he did or at least knew that he was trying to crawl his way in, and THEN KISSED HIM?!?! like ?!??
Maybe you just don't know any aristocrats.
I know right, You would expect at least a social comentary as satire or post-satire but It was just an empty vessel, like, the movie has no identity other than wanting to be a cult film and failed
I was told that it was deep because "he has no reason, he's just a psychopath" like... that was supposed to be deep ?
To not have any motivation other than "gnehehehe ! I'm so evil !".
But yeah, was a 20yo-ish person who told me that, who probably missed the ridicule of 80-90 action movie vilains that were "big bad evil meanies who liked to do evil things".
Seems like we all agreed that it's bad uninteresting writing for long enough that younger people never saw it and it passes as "new and original", when it's just the equivalent of ugly fashion trends coming back when we all agreed it was a mistake back then.
When I first watched this movie I had no idea how popular it is but I really liked it. I didn't see it as a thriller...I saw it as a dark comedy.
Same! It’s so funny
Same here, there were some intentionally funny scenes especially from Elspeth
Me too I thought it was funny!
I watched it without knowing anything about it, hadn’t heard of it, and I agree - dark and occasionally rediculous comedy that had some beautiful cinematic moments. And the music was perfect.
I can only see that angle working if it was unintentional dark comedy, like a film that tries to take itself serious but in turns makes you laugh instead.
I went to an advanced screening of Saltburn and really enjoyed it, but didn't think much more about it from there, so I was really surprised to see how much it blew up when it went to Streaming. A part of me feels like people just don't really watch films anymore if this is the kind of thing that blows their minds.
I thought it was a really well made, and enjoyable film with some terrific performances, but I don't think it really deserves the hype it's been getting since it landed on Amazon. Likewise, I think some of the people jumping on this as 'pretentious trash' are guilty of just as much hyperbole from the flipside of the coin.
It's absolutely pretentious, but I think calling it trash is a bit hyperbolic. It would have been a good movie if it didn't try to do that "twist" or at least left certain things a little less explicit and more vague for the sake of speculation. It's need for explicit shock value with absolutely no room for subtlety is what hurts it in the end. It's watchable, but at the end of the day, it's just a very okay movie that is technically very well made but doesn't really come together.
I had that realization when The Joker made such a splash. It's an alight movie, but the discussion around it was baffling and made me think "Ok, so nobody has watched any movies by Scorsese, who is arguably the most popular director of all time."
@@Tyler_Wthe twist wasn’t great, I agree. It would have been better yet f it was left up to the viewers imagination since the hints were pretty heavy handed anyways. But I wouldn’t call it pretentious
I think the outward appeal of Nihilism to GenZ is that it removes you of any responsibility towards the choices and outcome of your life. If everything is meaningless, then nothing I do has meaning or consequence. (delusion) When in reality what we desire is a life of meaning. Which in this film, meaning means self gratification. Hedonism.
dude what movie did you watch?
you see both sides of the coin, hedonism and utilitarianism. The rich live in boredom, everything at their fingertips but no real human interaction as everyone "puts on a show for felix", everyone wants a piece of their pie thereby denying them any sense of a real relationship. Oliver is the opposite, he puts on the show not just for those he wants to impress but the entire world, his existence is that of a chameleon, even the audience are denied a true origin/backstory for him - he's essentially the embodiment of greed, he had a middle-class family, he could've lived a great life but he had to lie to everyone to get his goal - saltburn.
i genuinely can't name any distict nihilistic themes within the movie, each characters actions have consequences for example; felix's blind trust of those around him due to his status, he treats everyone as toys which ultimately kills him as oliver was the toy that would not break.
Why we need god
@@SP-mf9sh just a God or a specific one?
@@innitbruv-lascocomics9910 Jesus christ died for everyone's sins and if you can't accept him dying for mine you're a hypocrite. The kind of people he despised. If you have no sins cast the first stone.
What in the world are you on about
As I see it, the problem with Saltburn is that it's pure aesthetic without any real depth. Like, it's pretty to look at, almost enthralling, but it leaves you with an incomplete, unsatisfied feeling.
I didn't mind the movie, but I watched some interviews with the director after, and it made me hate it. She thinks it's the most clever movie of all time, and I found her to be very full of herself in multiple interviews
Same! It’s put me off her future work, which is a shame as I enjoyed Promising Young Woman. No wonder the film didn’t have anything to say - she is one of these ignorant, privileged few.
@@GrimalkinsIf you’re interested in exploring the work of a woman director, I highly recommend looking into the films of filmmaker,
Miranda July.
In particular her debut feature film,
“Me You, and Everyone We Know”
She’s a very unique voice as an artist and storyteller.
Unlike the director of Saltburn where everything is highly derivative.
@@KrazyKat007 Thank you! I shall give it a watch tomorrow.
@@Grimalkins If you do watch it some time soon, please do comment again and let me know what you thought of it.
you say this yet you probably indulge in films by men like christopher nolan, quinton tarentino, etc
I think the reason it clicked for me specifically...was pretty much solely the dialogue. It captured conversations in almost every scene in such a realistic manner and I found myself looking on my own life when I've had the same conversations, particularly in the beginning when oliver and farleigh argue abt the validity of an argument...and ESP Rosamund Pike's character had all the best dialogue in terms of realism, I totally saw her in most of my relatives, the way she speaks and presents herself (the gossiping and rambling abt everyone's business), and for this type of narrative the realistic tone of dialogue is extremely hard to come by and that's why I connected with Saltburn
@@theaspiringrecluse Ehh I'm young but not THAT young, but I've seen tonnes of movies, and usually the dialogue is very flashy ig (like I could never imagine myself or anyone else talking in that manner) but this film was the opposite
totally agree with you here. i didn't love the movie, and it felt slightly messy to me, but the moment to moment dialogue was extremely accurate. i've been around these sorts of people and not a lot of movies can get the satire right while also not turning into caricature. that with the performances just made me have a really good time with it, all in all.
I could not disagree with you guys more
@@MEGAgamerboyblue so u liked the movie but hated the dialogue?
Samee the dialogue was great
It's Instagramified. People critically laud pretty films regardless of content. But the actual issue in the film to me is that the driver for the film, namely why Oliver is who he is, is entirely ignored by the film. So he's a complex character who's also cartoonishly evil...
The grave scene was improvised. That alone should tell you that nobody knew what the point of this movie was.
I prefered it the first time when it was called "The Talented Mr.Ripley".
I found it hilarious when the director was asked in an interview was she influenced by it and she was like "The Talented Mr what now?"
Thank you someone finally said it! This movie was so much more interesting when it seemed like a cautionary tale about an average man loosing his humanity in trying to climb the social ladder. Or alternatively about the way love, and specifically unrequited love, can become obsession and tear away at our own sense of dignity and self. In the end Oliver has no character arc whatsoever, and looking at it from a distance away from all the flare of movie itself, it just ends with a "oh what a twist aren't you surprised?". It's so beautifully shot, and has some great stuff in it, but its ultimately pointless and meaningless. Even as an eat the rich story it fails since you care more about the family than Oliver himself who btw happens to not be victim of any way of oppression, he's living much more comfortably than most of us are. They could've leaned into his queerness as well and have him be envious of Felix for being able to love freely and be himself because of his privilege, but they do nothing with that either... its just so weird and as you said, it ends up feeling like a boogeyman story to scare the top 1% more than anything else. Great video!
"as you said, it ends up feeling like a boogeyman story to scare the top 1% more than anything else."
I haven't seen the film, but, assuming that might have actually been the intended message of the film - is that bad? Does that make it "bad writing" all by itself?
@@roadent217 its mostly that the film seems to be trying to say/be something else at diferentes points and up until the very end when the twist is revealed. But even as a boogeyman story is lacking because of Oliver's inconsistent character althroughtout. And anyway I do feel that the vilification of the middle class in favour of the richest of the rich is really tone deaft regardless of intention, especially in todays climate. But since that all seems to be accidental and even contradictory at times, id say the biggest issue is that the movie itself doesn't seem to know what it is trying to do.
Ugh we have enough cautionary tales about social ladders and obsessive love. It's not meant to be an eat the rich story, so of course it fails as that. Not everything needs to follow a formula just because we're used to boring formulas. Use you imagination a little! Not everything needs to have some deeper meaning behind it or have one that we expect. The critiques on this movie are proof we need to exercise our creative muscles more.
@@Jess-uz5vwIf it's a movie, it SHOULD have a deeper meaning behind it. Why make a movie that has nothing to say? It's a valid criticism.
I felt the same way with Saltburn as I did with Promising Young Woman: Its a pretty good movie that leaves a terrible impression with its ending. Oliver was the least empathetic character despite being the focal point of the movie I don't want to see him doing an elated victory lap at the end, or at least this movie did it poorly in a way i cant express exactly...
My buddy doesn't know if it's a terrible movie, or the most brilliant satire of arthouse films ever.
It's kind of like (and I apologise for this comparison; I swear I've read books other than Harry Potter yadda yadda) The Last Jedi. It's a phenomenally bad movie, but if you view it as dunking on Star Wars and large media franchises in general, it becomes quite bold and great. The sheer audacity on Rian Johnson for pulling it right under the studio's nose! Sadly, I don't think this benefit of the doubt is warranted in either case even if fun to think about.
@@smarttravel3144 Yep. It's the ultimate shit post. Saltburn is the most douchey shit I've tried to watch.
I thought I was the only one who thought of and kept Farleigh’s point from the beginning closest to heart after seeing the film. Thank you for highlighting it as one of the key pieces.
Yeah, when the film ended that bit took on a completely new meaning for me haha. Because it's like she's aware how you argue something matters more...and yet...doesn't seem to get that she falls victim to it in her own film.
It was tone-deaf, probably because she comes from a rich family and subconsciously she fears the working class.
That’s not what the film is at all
Interesting take to say the least
agreed
@@f.airy.x explain
@@kernel-pult it’s a film about social climbing and the things people are willing to do to be rich. Rich people don’t just come out of nowhere someone at some point in time had to exploit others and make it to the top. Yes a lot of wealth is generational but generations before someone somewhere did awful things to get to that point.
Rosamund Pike is by far my favourite aspect of this movie, some of the best jokes came from her. I'd love a spin off of Elspeth's mysterious friendship with Pamela as Pike and Carey Mulligan's chemistry for a short time was excellent (yes, they have worked together before so this shouldn't be a surprise to anyone)
this spinoff mindset is killing movies
Spin off this spin off that how about you just get off the computer?
spin off the director's chode and watch better movies that aren't bait.
I think I know why Saltburn resonates with so many people my age. To me this "film" represents everything my generation thinks it is, "boundary pushing" / "not afraid to express disturbing truths" but in all reality is nothing but a vapid wasteland, left alone emulating how people would or should act because they themselves really have nothing of substance, to say, just regurgitating the Reel they saw that morning or the tik tok from the night before.....
A ridiculous "film" with great actors smh
People always say “Barry Koeghan is a great actor” but I’ve exclusively seen him in some of my least favorite movies/performances within the past years. I cannot get into this dude
Here’s how I see the movie: it is indeed trying to criticize both the rich and the middle class. The ways it criticizes the rich are obvious, but of course, Oliver’s much worse actions do make him the villain. He clearly has an unhealthy, unhinged obsession with this rich family, their luxury, and their status … which, I believe, satirizes the true motivations behind many middle-class crusades against the rich.
So many people say, “Eat the rich! Eat the rich!” Hell, so many MOVIES say that. But what I think Fennell is saying here is that those people don’t really want to *eat* the rich … they want to *become* the rich. They’re jealous of what the rich have, and their crusades towards “justice” are more selfish than they seem. The idea that middle-class people are happy with their lives … for many, THAT is a facade.
After all, a lot of the anti-rich sentiments come from people who are totally well-off and aren’t suffering because of any wealth imbalance (which, by the way, IS a huge problem that needs to be dealt with, make no mistake). The degree of anger they feel isn’t warranted based on how they live. Maybe they just feel that strongly about helping those who are less fortunate … or maybe they resent the fact that they themselves don’t have more.
That’s a harsh pill to swallow. And it goes against the affirmative narrative of “rich people worse than non-rich people.” It may be asking middle-class individuals to look at themselves and ask what’s really driving their anti-rich sentiments. That’s just my own interpretation, but it’s one that I love for looking at an issue from a different point of view. It’s not like the film paints its rich characters as anywhere close to perfect people, after all, so it doesn’t let them off the hook. It just refreshingly puts more of a spotlight on the flaws of a different group.
You’re spot on with this. Tbh, I don’t think too much thought was put into writing this from a middle class perspective. The heinous things Oliver does don’t read to me like a tone deaf insult to the middle class…he’s just a fucked up dude doing fucked up things for the shock of it. There’s not much of an underlying statement Fennell was going for IMO. BUT…I like your take regardless.
THANK YOU, i will be referring ppl to this comment when they insist it’s a eat the rich movie, because that is by far the most superficial and shallow thing to say about this movie
If that’s Fennell’s true message behind the movie, then she really is truly and extremely out of touch 😅
i agreed with you up until the second paragraph. It is a bit disingenious to generalize middle class people as materialistic, greedy, wanna-be's. As well as saying the majority of people saying 'eat the rich' are only middle class. That is tone deaf. The movie is an eat the rich movie, up until the last 7 minutes, then it does a 180 and leaves us with 0 themes to conclude with. The middle class are not the ones causing massive damage to our population, enviorment, and livelyhood. Fennell comes from generational wealth, she does not know what it is like to be middle class. While i can still agree with "eat the rich" truly having selfish motivations to an extent. Your interprotation comes off as someone who has not been middle class and does not know what poor people are like. Which is alot like this films director.
@@redmangoose182 Thanks. I still think there is rhyme and reason to him as a character. He lusts for the wealthy people and their lives, and his motivations throughout the whole film are centered around wedging himself into and taking over that life.
ugh i didnt like how it ended and plot wasn’t what i wanted but god i love the cinematography
Saltburn is basically a wattpad fanfic of the talented mr ripley
I think most people went into this film for the cool cinematography, hot guys, and the gayness🌈✨️ It hits that special part of the internet AND it's overall competent. I know many people who liked this movie and are now moving on to watch the films that inspired it.
Lmao
why not watch pornography then
I think this is it. There are attractive people doing naughty steamy taboo things and it’s like you can go and watch it and feel like you lived a part of that lifestyle for a couple of hours. To the middle class, it’s the dream and to the upper class, it’s a thriller/ satire. It’s marketed itself differently towards each demographic and if you sit and switch off you can enjoy the message that it’s saying to your demographic. But if you take it apart and think about it, you will see the inconsistencies
So… I agree with you on most parts, but I’m Gen Z, and I want to weigh in on the “Gen Z loves nihilism” thing. Honestly? That’s more a millennial thing, from what I’ve observed. Gen Z culture is largely based on deconstruction and reconstruction. Making your own meaning out of things, or finding meaning wherever you yourself want to find it. Taking the nihilism that we grew up viewing as sophisticated and cool and saying “no, life DOES have meaning, and I will make that meaning myself.”
True for me as well, but I’m unsure if that’s the case in belief (for some) or if it’s truly embodied in practice. There are some behiavors our gen takes part in that is very nihilistic hedonist that I think deserves to be looked at. And is often promoted somewhat uncritically, esp on the internet
So you guys are discovering post modernism? I'm so sorry.
I'm kinda surprised that the TickTokers gave it enough of their already lacking attention to watch a 2 hour movie, given... you know what.
Unfortunately I have to agree. I loved Promising Young Woman, but this time Emerald was so shallow, so superficial. Huge disappointment because I think it's a really well-shot film with amazing performances.
The same thing as euphoria, people now think good movies are just about the aesthetic
I don't take Oliver's end monologue seriously. I believe that he purposefully pierced Felix's tire and all that to gain access to Felix but I think he is lying to himself, Elspeth and us when he says he hated Felix and everything was preplanned and a big masterminded plot. I think he was in love with Felix, the life he had but i think he wanted to b part of it WITH Felix. So when Felix rejected him I think he went on the defensive and said "if i cannot have him, no one can and actually i have only wanted your life all along so the joke is on you".
I frankly don't care if Emerald Fennel intended for the film to be a social critique/satire because I personally enjoy the film more as a small scale, psychological affair with wacky characters and an unreliable narrator.
“Lost their vision”
*shows Vision dying* lmao
For the UK anyway, it came out on Prime at Christmas and was trailered as posh people exploit a working class hero type of film. It was one of those films that the whole family (3 generations) watched together as it was over Xmas and they had no idea what was coming cos they thought they were watching brideshead revisited.
When you thought you were going to watch a comedy about class with your mum and your gran and you ended watching a film when a guy had sex with a grave it made the scene feel more shocking regardless of how well it was shot.
Trying not not to make eye contact with your gran as she said oh dear what do you think he's doing is why the film has stuck in so many minds. I went back to work after Christmas and everyone I spoke to who had seen the film had seen it with their family.
While I don’t agree with everything u said. I think u did a phenomenal job getting ur point across respectfully in a way that made sense and this video was the perfect length. U presented ur argument near perfectly and I wasn’t mad
They shouldve went over the top and made Felix and his family vampires or blood ritual practitioners or something
Ah yes, the old Ari Aster 3rd act turns into a cartoon movie
Saltburn is popular because it's entertaining and well shot/acted.
Why do we need to have a clearly defined hero/villain? Oliver is a sociopath (not simply a weirdo) and tries to manipulate everyone around him to get what he wants. Felix and his family are detached aristocrats who toy with people for their own amusement. This makes for an interesting clash between flawed human beings. That's all there is to it. Some will find it entertaining, some will not.
Why do we need to have clearly defined social criticism? Eat the rich is a component of this movie, not its main theme. The same goes for what you described as disdain for the middle classes ( Oliver being embarrassed about his parents). He is embarrassed because he built an image of himself based on lies and this facade crumbles during that scene. How does that have anything to do with the director negatively commenting about the middle class? It's just part of the character.
Every movie can be depicted as pretentious if we look for deeper meanings where there is none. IMO movies like Saltburn should not be over-analyzed. When we do, that's when we end up in pretentious territories :)
You mean, why should character depth matter or why should the movie have commentary to make? Becuse it sets itself up that way very conspicuously. If it was just going to be a fun sexy movie with some gross out gags then you don't really need an accomplished cinematographer. If the characters are not going to be fleshed out by the writer, then why hire big up and coming actors instead of just anyone. There is no reality in which the director did not want this to be a thought-provoking movie with class commentary--not if its right there in your face, in the first few seconds of the movie. She also wanted it to be about obsession---again, stated verbally this time in the first few seconds of the movie. And at the end she wants us to turn our minds off by saying it was really also a genre film, a campy gothic mystery the whole time --the completely cliched flashback moment. Movies that merged genre and class/social commentary together in a successful way that are thought provoking would be something like Parasite or Get Out. Those movies also manage to be more fun AND more subtle at the same time with their explorations of theme
I am with you here. I love the originality for sure, and the soundtrack is fun, but I’m not blown away by the movie.
Great video! I never looked at the film as pretentious. Truthfully the film felt so unserious to me that I couldn’t catch the pretentiousness.
I found that the more people heard about Saltburn before going to view it, the more disappointed they are in the film. It definitely suffers from being over-hyped. I knew nothing about the movie and none of the "shock value" scenes weren't shocking for me. I'm used to people with fetishes so I just watched it as a self character study by Oliver, an unreliable storyteller. Oliver felt like people I have known in my life. B
ut yes, there is a level of pretentiousness in the film especially due to the filmmaker's background. Worried the filmmaker could possibly be heading down the Sam Levinson route.
The film just completely contradicts whatever themes it was trying to develop in its last 7 minutes or so. If it had ended sooner it would have been better, and not so confused and dumb.
I don't think Oliver is meant to be a "quirky weirdo" in this film. I think he's a relatable character out of his depth in a world alien to him, and that makes him a fairly standard relatable character. Also disagree that that's all that the sexual scenes are meant to suggest about him, rather than his lust for the world, his growing power and place within it, and his confused emotional state. I'd also say that something as vague as 'Less wealthy person wants the life of a more wealthy person' with a lustful element is not really enough to warrant all the comparisons to Mr Ripley. I think we as audiences find it easy to spot similarities and compare films but at some point we have to accept that you can still have original films with similarities to one another without everyone defaulting to 'It's just [x film] but with [arbitrary difference]'.
i disagree with your entire comment have a good day
ok you 2 @@FateXO
guys i don’t think Griffin likes this movie
Idk chief, you might be off on this one
I don’t
I think, as a film, your points hit the nail on the head. Fenenell's message in Saltburn was vague and muddled and fell super flat, particularly considering how expertly she executed Promising Young Woman- However, I think what Saltburn really nailed was presenting a satire of the upper class of the UK (much like you said, 100% supported by some absolutely stellar acting). When you watch it in scenes, rather than an entire movie, it provides an accurate social snapshot that I don't think scans for the general audience, particularly internationally.
I come from a similar background to Oliver, but through my university experience and girlfriend, I have experienced families like the Cattons first-hand- first of all, it was fucking hilarious. My girlfriend and I were in stitches watching the dialogue because it perfectly captured the families of some of my friends and we were fairly certain we had been at actual parties and heard some lines said word-for-word in earnest - However, watching it in a cinema in a working-class area of Lancashire, it felt like we were the only ones getting the joke- the film is definitely made for Fennell's peers and not the general audience, which makes it come off as tone-deaf and elitist, because it kinda is-
On another note, I think for the UK, the point you made about the middle class not hating being middle class isn't entirely accurate- I definitely think there is a huge amount of self-criticism and self-loathing in a certain section of the British middle class and some of us have an engrained desire/resentment for the upper classes- I went to Exeter University in the UK, which is famed for its idolisation of the "Saltburn aesthetic" (thetab.com/uk/exeter/2019/11/05/doesnt-everyone-have-a-trust-fund-the-27-poshest-things-ever-heard-in-exetah-43693 is worth a Google just to get the vibe) and it has a lot of otherwise middle-class people doing some pretty ridiculous social performance to try and strive to get in with and eventually be perceived as "upper class" (myself at times regrettably included), so from my experience- perhaps the serial murder was a bit much, but I don't think Oliver's character was wholly inaccurate in a British class narrative.
Either way, the film as a whole was muddled and tone-deaf and a little ridiculous- it was made by a woman of the upper-middle class, for an audience of people in the upper-middle classes, (my flatmate is family friends with the Fennells and lo and behold he has a couple cousins playing bit-parts in it) - I have no idea why so many people have latched onto it- probably because it romanticises 'old money' and the "perfect summer"- nevertheless, I think it did have some elements of absolute magic and searing accuracy- That concludes my opinion no one asked for...
Fennel is a rich kid. Says all you need to know.
I don't wanna be reductive and say people who come from wealth can't make truthful art, but Fennel's privileged upbringing REALLY shades this film. Its just...fucking shallow.
Nothing in Saltburn feels...authentic artistically or thematically.
God, I'm so sick of depraved, tryhard taboo bullshit in modern media.
I'm hard on films, and I agree with what you point out generally, at the same time, seeing it in the theatre was...one of the most unique theatrical experiences I've ever had. Literal audible gasps around me. The reactions were priceless. You and I may be burnt-out on sex-scenes in experiemental, indie or surrealist films - but huge swaths of the population are still truly wigging out over a bit of period sex. If anything it was a massive vehicle for Keoghan to break into movie-stardom, which didn't happen after Eternals. It inspired me to finally watch Killing of a Sacred Deer, and rewatch Talented Mr. Ripley and Cruel Intentions so kudos to Fennel overall. Saltburn was fun both watches, particularly at home where you see more issues and stolen ideas - but if you didn:t see it in theatres you may have missed out a bit.
This movie clicks with so many people because it's about unrequited and impossible desire, and who among us hasn't felt that way? It's exposing the depravity of feeling some of us secretly sink to, and giddily so. It's very cathartic for that reason. And on top of that- just generally- it's decadent, slutty, and full of social drama...it's a very queer experience overall, and who among the chronically online isn't kinda queer, or at the very least- into queer aesthetics? It's en vogue. The popularity and poignance of Saltburn makes perfect sense.
The problem with this breakdown is that you shouldn't try and find an overarching topical message or try and rationalize why a generally unlikable demographic, gen z, resonates with it. It will end up making you hate it just because you don't see what everyone else sees in it, rather than you having your own take on it.
The movie is filled with symbolism and takes themes from many great works of art, from Shakespeare all the way to the Shining, and I doubt gen z tiktokers take any of this into account
THANK YOU!! I felt like I was the only one who thought it was unmitigated tripe.
When you described Oliver's monologue at the end as like a "supervillian"?? Big "YES!" from me, thats exactly what I felt in the moment.
But the point isn't that Oliver is "middle-class".
Well, firstly because he isn't really middle-class, his family is extremely well-off, with a big house and a lot of healthy children in a seemingly good neighbourhood.
Secondly, he is the villain. His motivation is just pure greed. That's the point of him being from a wealthy family. At first the audience might not like Felix's family but at the end you feel bad for a lot of them. It's a role reversal as we discover that Olliver is just a greedy, insane individual.
Still, I think the main point of the film was to express how shallow the realtionships between extremely rich people can become and how even bigger sociopaths can exploit those relationships to rise to the top. It's not that deep but I wouldn't say it's "all aesthetic, no substance" like many people in the comments claim.
On the shock value scenes, they aren't to show that Olliver is a "quirky weirdo" (as you say), they are to show he's an utterly insane sociopath, which by the end of the movie becomes fairly obvious. They are over the top, but they don't feel that out of place by the end of the film. Still, I understand why people think they're only there for marketing reasons, although the movie still has some great and memorable moments aside from that.
Omg thank you! I was looking for a comment that made this point! Like ltrrly it’s not trying to be something it’s not not every movie has to be an intellectual exercise that has to have 100 layers meaning and social implications. Sometimes it’s a well executed movie about a super freak psycho doing whatever means necessary to get the life a super rich family has and, that’s it.
Unrelated I just watched the holdovers and holy shit it’s good like crazy good
The Holdovers is the perfect antidote to Saltburn!
@@TheCinemaDetective I wasn’t necessarily belly laughing at the jokes but the scene where angus is talking about his dad it got me emotional.
@@BBest1996 I didn't so much mean it's an antidote for the humour, though it is funny, but more for the human spirit and kindness
2:17 "lost their vision along the way." You're dead wrong for that
I don’t think it’s meant to be an eat the rich story. The social dynamics are there because they inform character dynamics via power imbalance. To say that Oliver hating being middle class is a slight to the middle class is a weird take. I think she just wanted to make a fun, Gothic movie. It has little substance but is what it is
LOL at your 4:3 aspect ratio and intro, I appreciate your critique, but I LOVED Saltburn. This film's story has flaws, but the performances were Oscar-worthy (still shocked Barry got no love from the Academy), the cinematography was a visual feast, sound track/score is sublime and I thoroughly enjoyed the female/male-desiring gaze. I think movies like Poor Things are the reason we need movies like Saltburn. This movie says more about female desire than Poor Things ever could.
Oliver's villain turn could also be read as the revenge of a scorned/rejected lover - he couldn't have Felix, so he'd become him and take everything he ever loved. Fennel claims his initial plan was not to steal Saltburn, but once he realizes he's been rejected, it becomes his plan. So his motives remain complex and ever-shifting, imo. Fennel says this film is about first love, and I think it ultimately becomes the inverse of that intense first love, intense first heartbreak, and the hatred that can be born from rejection.
I also think Oliver being the villain doesn't negate the critique of the rich. They can co-exist. Interestingly, Barry Keoghan's real life story is very similar to Oliver Quick's lie - his mom was an addict who died when he was 12 and then he and his brother grew up in 13 different foster homes. For this reason, I wonder if Barry had input on the script's treatment of such a back story, so as to not make it exploitative or poverty-porn. I don't know that him being truly poor would have made the movie a better class critique for me.
I liked the fact that Oliver crafted a character he knew Felix would be drawn to - and that the audience would be drawn to. It rings extremely true to me that the classist, gate-keeping institutions - such as prestigious universities like Oxford - love poverty porn and want to pat themselves on the back for helping such unfortunate souls, even if they never truly let those people in the door. I think the movie makes that point very well.
I also think his villainy critiques the idea of striving to BE the wealthy, and what we're willing to do to attain this, almost to an absurd, satirical level. Think he's the patriarch in Succession, not the generations later that have lost their ability to hunt because they have never felt hunger. He's the start of another problem. He's literally willing to kill so he can be in the 1% - I'd say that's pretty true of real life, just look at pharma or our for-profit prisons or the military-industrial complex. That may be a reach, but I think it's a valid read. It's not worth it - his is a hollow victory, driven by a capitalist plutocracy that is rotten at every rung of the ladder. His ascension to the upper class is not a victory, the system itself is broken. I think the message to the middle class is perhaps stop trying to be the new upper class and start trying to destroy the class system itself. Aside from these potential critiques, psychopathic serial killers do tend to be middle class white men, that's just the stats.
And theory aside, it's just fun. Yes it's a rip off of existing IP like Brideshead Revisited or Talented Mr. Ripley, but those similarities to successful films of the past may be *why* she was able to make this movie with zero actual IP. And you can say what you will about the script, but I think Fennel shines as a director precisely because she allowed the cast to have a say and improvise. The grave scene, for example, was an improvisation by Keoghan. A few of Rosamund Pike's best lines were her own. She allowed the actors to become true collaborators in writing the story, which may have made the story weaker, but it made the performances better.
Weirdly, Emerald Fennel said if she did her job right, you're rooting for Oliver in the end. And I do find myself rooting for him, despite his psychopathy. Maybe it's Barry's dazzling, chameleon performance, maybe it's the manipulative script, maybe it's the revenge fantasy of anyone who's ever been rejected by someone they loved as much as Oliver loved Felix, maybe it's that ending - that glorious ending - but the trick worked.
I've seen it 4 times, the first time I had mixed feelings - the ending felt rushed and unearned, the logic holes bothered me. But it stayed with me, so I watched it again. On the second viewing, the plot stood up better than I remembered and I caught things I hadn't in the first viewing. I liked it more each time. It's clear Fennel put love into every frame of this movie, even if she failed to deliver a deep "eat the rich" critique. She entertained the hell out of us. And a quote comes to mind, that the mark of a great film is not a perfect story, but great moments. There are so many great moments in Saltburn that audiences won't soon forget - whether you like it or not lmaooo.
The ending killed the entire movie made it feel pointless 😂😂
Oddly enough, this is the most pretentious video essay I’ve ever seen
I think the reason behind Saltburn success is the fact that it combines two of the most important and popular problems of our generation. Firstly the money, glam and aesthetic problem and secondly the old money and eat the rich craze . We don’t know what we want more. Do we want to be a part of them, the elite, the inside circle of never ending fun and glam, or we want to destroy them. Truth of the matter is, most of us are searching of a way out, but just like the maze in the film there is no way out. It’s a dark and pessimistic take wrapped in a beautiful and aesthetic packaging. Just like social media, celebrities and other forms of entertainment. I personally enjoyed the movie because of this. For as long as I can remember I haven’t seen similar, contemporary take on the matter. I can agree that the ending wasn’t the best. The pace was too fast competed to the build up.
Was this movie supposed to be a deep and profound artsy film full of clever subversion? I just saw it as a movie about the weird quiet kid in the corner of every school ever actually going out and enacting their psychotic fantasies and taking full advantage of how stupid and up their own ass that some high class people are that some nobody could just decide one day to infiltrate their lives and completely destroy them, an interesting concept with a decent execution in my opinion. Also this film is pretty hilarious to me.
I honestly felt like we were missing so much from oliver and that he got his wishes waaaaay too early, like how felix and his mom have horrible savior complexes (omg you mention it) which oliver immediately understood and played into. That made at least to me that oliver was on their level, which made the end kinda like... Okay now what
I have literally never heard anyone say anything about this film, in real life or online. Are we on the same planet?
Finally. More people are speaking up about how horridly bland and messy this film is…
That’s their opinion, do not act like things are “objectively bad but you’re allowed to like it”
I went into this movie completely blind, having never heard of it. I did really enjoy the movie, but I was absolutely unaware of the “eat the rich” message it was trying to send. I just thought this was a movie about a sociopath who felt nothing, leached onto someone to stimulate him (Felix), got caught in his lie, murdered his hyper-fixation as to avoid leaving behind the lifestyle he became attached to, and then killed the rest of them out of boredom. I thought his dance at the end was meant to sorta just enjoy what he won in his game. I truly thought this movie was a commentary on how easily sociopaths can manipulate others, and how dangerous that is.
"I will never understand why this movie clicked with so many people"
It's dark academia bro. But other then that, I haven't watched it yet, but I think the obsession with class likely appels to the economically insecure majority of the folks, especially gen z. You can say 'majority of middle class people are happy to be middle class' - but what middle class means is very dependent on the context... and I also don't believe that's true for everyone or even the majority, especially when they have a direct comparison around them (and Oliver is in Oxford and friends with a rich kid). Maybe you just don't fully grasp that hunger, that longing to have more and be equal amongst your peers and that's what makes the movie seem worse. It can still be shallow though.
This! Gen Z are some of the most dissatisfied groups of people today. Socially, financially, sexually, it's tragic. This movie is definitely dripping in gen z sentiments. The eagerness to throw away everything you are to experience the "more desirable" lifestyle. By the time they get there, it's a hollow victory because of what they had to do to maintain the facade.
I don’t think I’d necessarily call Oliver the antagonist. I think what fennel was trying to go for with the ending was in a very demented way a “good for you”. I think however fennel’s choice to make Oliver lie about his families past. It’s also when the film kinda get’s bad. I think it definitely picks up again after a certain character dies but it definitely takes away from A LOT of the social commentary fennel was trying to make.
I think having it as a twist was quite misguided. For one thing, by the time it comes up we already know that Oliver is a weirdo, so that’s not a revelation. And then some of what see was: “He wasn’t actually typing in the coffee shop. Dum dum dum.” Like, who was shocked by this? No one who’d seen The Talented Mr. Ripley, which this is effectively a rip off from.
I completely disagree that " what fennel was trying to go for with the ending was in a very demented way a 'good for you'". I can't tell you what she WAS trying to go for, but "good for you" is certainly not it imo.
I think what you said about aesthetic over substance being the film's main problem is also its core theme, at least that is how i saw it when i watched the film and discussed with a few friends. After watching this video, I do think that Oliver's motivations are... Weird. I initially viewed his motivations as "self-class-loathing, wealth jealousy, and a need to fit in meets a psychopath."
I don't think the film is perfect, but I dont think it's bad, either. I think the two strong points of the narrative are:
1) how it could make batshit insane billionaires appear sympathetic, while also making it feel like their death was kind of justified. I.e., they were using and abusing people. However, Oliver ended up using those exact same methods, which I thought was a very interesting character parallel.
2) aesthetic over substance (a double edged sword). Oliver is, fundamentally, empty. He's cold, calculating. The family is empty, operating almost entirely off of a collectively corrupt savior complex and a rich aesthetic. Ultimately, in the same way stupid people play stupid games to win stupid prizes, empty people play at empty games to win empty prizes. At the end of the movie, what does Oliver have? He is an empty man with an empty aesthetic in an utterly empty home. And so the cycle (probably, is my guess) repeats.
So, I think the message of the movie that I interpreted the most is "emoty people play empty games to win empty prizes." (Which still makes so many tiktok fans completely tone deaf.) At least, thats the best way i can think of right now to put it. I'm sure there's a better way. Maybe it wasn't intended as the core idea, but i dont really care. Death of the Author and all that.
I can only speak for myself but I know this; no matter how much someone can call my taste in a movie is “shit”, I disregard their opinion since the movies I watch and talk about to others are movies that made me feel emotion, absorbed me into a story, and my picky little preferences about cinematography and how shitty the actors often goes out the window; because the film made me feel an emotion.
To each their own, just remind yourself why you are fighting so hard to push your opinion on others and whether or not it’s a big deal.
It's an aesthetically pleasing movie with the hottest up and coming actors queer baiting in it. That's why it "clicked" for so many people - those who have never seen a movie before and lack critical thinking skills got ahold of it. And yes, this is the most "old man yells at cloud" thing I've ever said😅 great video, thanks!
YESS I WAS WAITING FOR ALL OF THESE VIDS TO COME OUT IM SO HAPPY
ME TOO LMFAO
shut up nerds
So many people were hyped on it that I watched it waiting for the shoe to drop. Then credits rolled and I was still waiting.
Man, this OC show sounds interesting. Maybe you guys should do an essay all about that 🤔?!?!
Okay but ACTUALLY...👀
“Moments that are supposed to shock you!” My thoughts exactly. It’s nothing I haven’t seen before.
Like the movie was beautiful but it did as you said, weird for the sake of being weird. Promising young woman was amazing and this movie thought it was more clever than it was.
contrarian. it wasn’t a masterpiece, but it certainly wasn’t bad, by any means, or by any “critics” standards. at best it was marvelous entertainment and at worst it was a good film, but people love a good roast, i suppose🤷🏽♂️
That's what this video feels like. Nothing more than Griffin taking a piss, because everybody else seems to love it. I usually agree with this guy's takes, but this one is just not it.
That's your opinion. I thought it kinda sucked. Just because the guy in the video disagrees with you doesn't mean he's not sharing his genuine opinion.
I really enjoyed Saltburn, the spiralling circle of obsession and control engaged me.
I went in knowing nothing about it, other than Tiktok announcing it as having some disgusting scenes - that I didn't find shocking. But, I took those scenes with a pinch of salt, it's very much akin to something like Visitor-Q or (a more nuanced) Theorem.
Hollywood movies with angel faced multimillionire casts and teams behind them making fun of rich people's excess and debauchery is just the media version of playboys and barbies who want the underdog anti-establishment aesthetic.
i truly agree with everything you said!! and i also wanna add that even though most of the film is certainly beautiful in terms of cinematography (which is the carrying element since the story lacks nuance altogether), we are truly seeing the euphoria lighting and its consequences which is upsetting. someone please save jacob elordi...
I still like this movie but I appreciate your analysis of it. You did bring up some good points that I had not considered.
Its interesting how pretentious reviewers get when talking about a pretentious film.
When the FilmSpeak is so f***ing pretentious.
it's true I probably am!
what felt disrespectful to me from the wealthy director was casting an actor with a working class background to say “but the poors are also bad 😩” when she could have said literally anything else about class lol i hated this film
Ridley Scott’s Napoleon was more pretentious than Saltburn.
I get where you're coming from but can't say I agree. There was a cheekiness to Napoleon that felt very self aware.
I thought he was waaayyy too old casting wise. Everyone else is in their 20s and it shows he looks like he should not be in college
i think saltburn was shallow, but fun. i like to think of it as a modern interpretation of midsummer night's dream - a wild, feverish power fantasy, satirical and saturated. if you want something deeper, watch parasite. if you want something funnier, watch knives out.
Man, that aspect ratio is so fuckin cool. Also, I've been consistently procrastinating watching it & I think you've just added to that habit.
This movie is very much "I'm 14 and this is deep"
"Pretentious" and "try hard" are not valid critiques for any movie, let alone this one. This movie is being talked about like it's a social satire, when that's not the point of the movie at all. The whole point is that Oliver is a creepy weirdo who succeeds in tricking the audience at the beginning of the film, only for his manipulative nature to be revealed slowly as the film goes on, leaving the audience with a feeling of betrayal and bizarre satisfaction. It's entirely a character study --" look at how fucking odd this guy is."
Oliver being middle class is completely central to his character. His obsession with upward social mobility is completely unjustified, because his life is fine -- which is, of course, the point. His greed and envy are not grounded in reality because he is completely delusional. He does not represent the middle class thematically, and it's weird to imply that? His character is not a slight against middle class people. You're not meant to relate to his shame, his feelings are supposed to feel kind of alien.
I guess where we'd agree is that Saltburn "has nothing to substantial to say about class." This is a weird requirement for a movie to have in my opinion. Saltburn isn't obligated to be a perfectly Marxist piece of work or whatever, it's okay to make a simple movie about one fucked up little guy. Not every movie about rich people needs perfect social commentary in order to work. Saltburn works because it refuses to justify Oliver's actions, not in spite of it.
The worst part is the grave scene wasnt in the script the actor just "improvised" and decided to do that🥲 taking the role is ONE thing improvising fucking a grave is ANOTHER
please make a video about "poor things"🙏
When you're given a budget from your past successes and not based on the film you're about to make.