Triangle of Sadness Sarcastic T-Shirt

Product Information

TIFF announces films in the Gala and Special Presentations programmes" (Press release). Toronto International Film Festival. Archived from the original on 14 September 2022 . Retrieved 14 September 2022. Beyond Fest 2022 'Triangle of Sadness' review". We Live Entertainment. 5 October 2022. Archived from the original on 4 March 2023 . Retrieved 4 March 2023. Roxborough, Scott (23 January 2023). " 'Triangle of Sadness' Cleans Up at Sweden's Guldbagge Awards". The Hollywood Reporter. Archived from the original on 25 January 2023 . Retrieved 24 January 2023.

Calbert, Yves (8 January 2023). "«Vortex» remporte le Grand prix 2023 des critiques de cinéma belges". Le Soir (in French). Archived from the original on 13 January 2023 . Retrieved 22 January 2023. That question has been asked over and over again,” De Leon says, “but I never get tired of answering it, because it’s really very interesting to answer. It really depends on the day, on what my state of mind is, on where I am as a person. Of course when I was filming it, I had my own ending in mind. But once you put a character on screen, they’re immortalized, and their story can change depending on your interpretation. So it depends on the viewer, and it also depends on me.” What's most frustrating is that the elements for a great movie are right there. The acting is executed well and the movie is styled in a unique yet restrained way. Some of the humour even elicits laughs, a rare trait for a modern comedy. But none of this is enough to fully salvage the film and make it worth watching. Triangle of Sadness is a movie that has the trappings of great cinema, but it's all in service of a wretched, vacuous hole at its center. s satirical approach is a lot like a stand-up comedian's, riffing on a single idea until the gag surpasses the threshold of our expectations and attains some overblown, glorious absurdity.Now, I love a slow burn. I like long films. And I definitely like films that have something to say. But in all honesty, this film could have been cut by 1/3rd and spared the audience a lot of pain. Every scene is too long, starting from the very first one. There certainly is a message of gender-reversed exploitation to be made, but how long does it really need to take? And the awkwardness of Carl and Yaya's evening is excruciatingly drawn out, exacerbated by the dull and fractional dialogue (though this could be mitigated by the characters being dull and fractional themselves). Even the aftermath of the Captain's Dinner is gratuitously long and boring (I won't even bring in 'disgusting', because that frankly isn't even the issue.) It must be meant for an audience unfamiliar with subtlety in film, but there's no way that target audience has the attention span for such a drawn out film.

The first act sets up all the ridiculous things that rich people do. From absurd reasons to dump a romantic interest to how little money they actually have on hand, the audience gets a glimpse into their absurd world of opulence. Once the yacht enters the picture in the second act, we see all the different varieties of rich and how they almost have their own language. Then the tables turn. Wealth cannot control the weather or a person's bodily functions. By the third act, the roles have been reversed and the invisible working-level people prove they have much more worth when money is not involved. You might think you don't need to be told. Östlund sometimes labours his points. But along the way, he also delivers some hilarious absurdity. I am an anti-capitalist myself, so I appreciated what this movie was trying to do, which is to use ham-fisted symbolism to problematize and criticize capitalism. There were some good scenes, mainly during the captain's dinner scene, but unfortunately I just don't think Östlund is much of an accomplished writer or director. Throughout this movie I was bored - esp. By the slowness, which is really unforgivable. Very little really happened in this movie in terms of plot, and it took forever to get to the meatier parts. For a comedy, it also wasn't much fun. 2-3 laughs, tops. Comic timing wasn't good. The political message of the movie was also so heavy-handed that it can hardly be called art; it's more of a didactic tract. At 2 hours and 30 minutes, the movie is far, far, faaar too long - an entire hour could easily be cut.First of all, the movie exaggeratedly tries to criticize contemporary society. The world of modeling is fake and superficial. Influencers are self-consumed and shallow. The rich and famous are greedy and soulless. The poor are jealous and vengeful. This movie brings up so many tired old stereotypes that it doesn't become a satire of contemporary society but rather a satire of its very own kind: pretentiously moralizing films attempting to please trendy prejudices.