06/14/2026
๐ฝ๐๐๐ ๐ง๐ค๐ค๐ข๐จ (2026) was a messโand not the kind of interesting mess that I'll revisit again and again, trying to pinpoint exactly where it all went wrong. (๐๐๐๐ฉ๐ ๐๐ค๐๐จ๐ (2005), I'm looking at you.) The film seemed utterly confident in what it was doing, but I'm not convinced that this confidence was earned. In fact, while I was watching ๐ฝ๐๐๐ ๐ง๐ค๐ค๐ข๐จ, I was reminded of something that Peter Griffin once said on ๐๐๐ข๐๐ก๐ฎ ๐๐ช๐ฎ about ๐๐๐ ๐๐ค๐๐๐๐ฉ๐๐๐ง (1972). โIt insists upon itself.โ While that criticism is unfair to ๐๐๐ ๐๐ค๐๐๐๐ฉ๐๐๐ง, it seems wildly appropriate for ๐ฝ๐๐๐ ๐ง๐ค๐ค๐ข๐จ. This criticism could be leveled at a surprising number of A24 productions. Too often, they feel like films that desperately want to be artful and intellectual rather than films that actually are those things. They paper their walls in profundity, mistaking decoration for design. As a result, I'm often left wondering whether the filmmakers behind these films overthought their concepts or simply failed to think them through enough. In fact, I've often joked that A24 stands for "A 24-year-old guy will think this is the best movie ever." And while this might be a little unfair to both A24 and 24-year-old guys, the joke gets at what bothers me about these films: many seem tailor-made for viewers who desperately want to signal that they've experienced something profound, even when the film itself never allows, as Wallace Stevens put it, โbeโ to become the finale of โseem.โ The concept behind ๐ฝ๐๐๐ ๐ง๐ค๐ค๐ข๐จ was undeniably compelling. Liminal spaces are inherently unsettling. Empty hallways, abandoned offices, endless corridorsโthese environments tap into something deeply uncomfortable. Unfortunately, the film never seems to find anything meaningful to do with that premise. It presents a mystery but struggles to develop it. It creates atmosphere but neglects narrative. It gives us characters but doesnโt make them believableโespecially the main character, whose descent into madness is so sudden that it feels hollow and unearned. Maybe time has simply passed me by. Maybe films like this are a young man's game. When I was younger, I remember spending countless hours watching and rewatching ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ฉ๐ง๐๐ญ (1999) and ๐๐ฃ๐๐๐ฅ๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ (2010) and ๐๐๐ช๐ฉ๐ฉ๐๐ง ๐๐จ๐ก๐๐ฃ๐ (2010), searching for clues, debating interpretations, and trying to unravel the nuances of the films. But with those filmsโand so many othersโit always felt as though there was something there waiting to be discoveredโa thematic core that rewarded close examination. ๐ฝ๐๐๐ ๐ง๐ค๐ค๐ข๐จ, by contrast, left me feeling as though I had reached the center of the maze only to discover that there was nothing there. The film mistakes ambiguity for depth and shadows for substance. It spends two hours suggesting that it has something profound to say, but when the credits roll, all that remains are empty rooms and the buzz of fluorescent lights.
-- ๐ข๐ป๐ฒ ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ ๐ฎ ๐๐ฎ๐น๐ณ ๐ผ๐๐ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐๐ถ๐๐ฒ ๐ฆ๐๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ --
