Korea
Hong Kong
In the age of inequality, rich and poor can fall in love,
but maybe it’s all in an incel’s mind.
In the age of inequality, rich and poor can fall in love,
but maybe it’s all in an incel’s mind.
Korea
Hong Kong
A disturbing aspect of JOKER is its protagonist’s imaginary romance with a neighbor: his subjectivity as a textbook incel provides the film with its unreliable narrator, and the audience first assumes the romance to be true based on his account of the events. The cross-class element to this fantasy relationship is displaced onto his mother Penny, whose belief that her fling with the billionaire Wayne as his secretary resulted in Arthur’s birth may not be borne out by the facts but reflects rather her mental illness.
There is a sense of urgency to BURNING’s treatment of romance as an allegory for class relations in the age of inequality. As in other key contemporary films on the subject, political anxieties about the economic divide are translated into a kind of psychological terror or paranoia about how cross-class romance can ultimately only be illusory, and that a more sinister conspiracy of exploitation or prostitution lurks behind the fantasy, as imagined by the writer protagonist and fueled by his speculations as an incel.
A disturbing aspect of JOKER is its protagonist’s imaginary romance with a neighbor: his subjectivity as a textbook incel provides the film with its unreliable narrator, and the audience first assumes the romance to be true based on his account of the events. The cross-class element to this fantasy relationship is displaced onto his mother Penny, whose belief that her fling with the billionaire Wayne as his secretary resulted in Arthur’s birth may not be borne out by the facts but reflects rather her mental illness.
I’M THINKING OF ENDING THINGS likewise views cross-class romance in the age of inequality through an incel’s subjectivity. Here the incel’s inferiority complex is situated within the context of American social antagonisms: urban vs. rural, intellectuals vs. the working class, liberals vs. conservatives…. Can the self desire the other in a polarized society, or does it end in failed social climbing? Meeting the parents is as nightmarish a crossing of the social divide as it is in GET OUT, although here it’s all in the mind.
I’M THINKING OF ENDING THINGS likewise views cross-class romance in the age of inequality through an incel’s subjectivity. Here the incel’s inferiority complex is situated within the context of American social antagonisms: urban vs. rural, intellectuals vs. the working class, liberals vs. conservatives… Can the self desire the other in a polarized society, or does it end in failed social climbing? Meeting the parents is as nightmarish a crossing of the social divide as it is in Get Out, although here it’s all in the mind.
There is a sense of urgency to BURNING’s treatment of romance as an allegory for class relations in the age of inequality. As in other key contemporary films on the subject, political anxieties about the economic divide are translated into a kind of psychological terror or paranoia about how cross-class romance can ultimately only be illusory, and that a more sinister conspiracy of exploitation or prostitution lurks behind the fantasy, as imagined by the writer protagonist and fueled by his speculations as an incel.
I’M THINKING OF ENDING THINGS likewise views cross-class romance in the age of inequality through an incel’s subjectivity. Here the incel’s inferiority complex is situated within the context of American social antagonisms: urban vs. rural, intellectuals vs. the working class, liberals vs. conservatives…. Can the self desire the other in a polarized society, or does it end in failed social climbing? Meeting the parents is as nightmarish a crossing of the social divide as it is in GET OUT, although here it’s all in the mind.
The premise of meeting the parents from Guess Who's Coming to Dinner gets a body snatcher makeover for the age of inequality in GET OUT, a black satire that goes for the jugular in its attack on white liberal elites. The protagonist’s subjectivity is again the focal point, as the audience shares his perspective, and in the absence of narrative omniscience, we are offered no reassurances of a definitive account of the truth, but must piece together the horrific vision of a conspiracy.
The premise of meeting the parents from Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner? gets a “body snatcher” makeover for the age of inequality in GET OUT, a black satire that goes for the jugular in its attack on white liberal elites. The protagonist’s subjectivity is again the focal point, as the audience shares his perspective, and in the absence of narrative omniscience, we are offered no reassurances of a definitive account of the truth, but must piece together the horrific vision of a conspiracy.
There is a sense of urgency to BURNING’s treatment of romance as an allegory for class relations in the age of inequality. As in other key contemporary films on the subject, political anxieties about the economic divide are translated into a kind of psychological terror or paranoia about how cross-class romance can ultimately only be illusory, and that a more sinister conspiracy of exploitation or prostitution lurks behind the fantasy, as imagined by the writer protagonist and fueled by his speculations as an incel.
The premise of meeting the parents from Guess Who's Coming to Dinner gets a body snatcher makeover for the age of inequality in GET OUT, a black satire that goes for the jugular in its attack on white liberal elites. The protagonist’s subjectivity is again the focal point, as the audience shares his perspective, and in the absence of narrative omniscience, we are offered no reassurances of a definitive account of the truth, but must piece together the horrific vision of a conspiracy.
There is a sense of urgency to BURNING’s treatment of romance as an allegory for class relations in the age of inequality. As in other key contemporary films on the subject, political anxieties about the economic divide are translated into a kind of psychological terror or paranoia about how cross-class romance can ultimately only be illusory, and that a more sinister conspiracy of exploitation or prostitution lurks behind the fantasy, as imagined by the writer protagonist and fueled by his speculations as an incel.
There is a sense of urgency to BURNING’s treatment of romance as an allegory for class relations in the age of inequality. As in other key contemporary films on the subject, political anxieties about the economic divide are translated into a kind of psychological terror or paranoia about how cross-class romance can ultimately only be illusory, and that a more sinister conspiracy of exploitation or prostitution lurks behind the fantasy, as imagined by the writer protagonist and fueled by his speculations as an incel.
There is a sense of urgency to BURNING’s treatment of romance as an allegory for class relations in the age of inequality. As in other key contemporary films on the subject, political anxieties about the economic divide are translated into a kind of psychological terror or paranoia about how cross-class romance can ultimately only be illusory, and that a more sinister conspiracy of exploitation or prostitution lurks behind the fantasy, as imagined by the writer protagonist and fueled by his speculations as an incel.
In the age of inequality, rich and poor can fall in love, but maybe it’s all in an incel’s mind.
Korea
Hong Kong
In the age of inequality,
rich and poor can fall in love,
but maybe it’s all in an incel’s mind.
Korea
Hong Kong
BEYOND THE DREAM is Hong Kong’s take on the incel’s imaginary romance. The protagonist is a psychiatric patient who falls in love with his counselor – a graduate psychology student resembling the imaginary girlfriend in his hallucinations – only to learn that she is using him for personal gain and social advancement. The paranoia with which he views the relationship is framed explicitly in terms of class: is it a conspiracy of the rich exploiting and prostituting the poor? The proof is all in the mind.
BEYOND THE DREAM is Hong Kong’s take on the incel’s imaginary romance. The protagonist is a psychiatric patient who falls in love with his counselor – a graduate psychology student resembling the imaginary girlfriend in his hallucinations – only to learn that she is using him for personal gain and social advancement. The paranoia with which he views the relationship is framed explicitly in terms of class: is it a conspiracy of the rich exploiting and prostituting the poor? The proof is all in the mind.
There is a sense of urgency to BURNING’s treatment of romance as an allegory for class relations in the age of inequality. As in other key contemporary films on the subject, political anxieties about the economic divide are translated into a kind of psychological terror or paranoia about how cross-class romance can ultimately only be illusory, and that a more sinister conspiracy of exploitation or prostitution lurks behind the fantasy, as imagined by the writer protagonist and fueled by his speculations as an incel.
There is a sense of urgency to BURNING’s treatment of romance as an allegory for class relations in the age of inequality. As in other key contemporary films on the subject, political anxieties about the economic divide are translated into a kind of psychological terror or paranoia about how cross-class romance can ultimately only be illusory, and that a more sinister conspiracy of exploitation or prostitution lurks behind the fantasy, as imagined by the writer protagonist and fueled by his speculations as an incel.
There is a sense of urgency to BURNING’s treatment of romance as an allegory for class relations in the age of inequality. As in other key contemporary films on the subject, political anxieties about the economic divide are translated into a kind of psychological terror or paranoia about how cross-class romance can ultimately only be illusory, and that a more sinister conspiracy of exploitation or prostitution lurks behind the fantasy, as imagined by the writer protagonist and fueled by his speculations as an incel.
A disturbing aspect of JOKER is its protagonist’s imaginary romance with a neighbor: his subjectivity as a textbook incel provides the film with its unreliable narrator, and the audience first assumes the romance to be true based on his account of the events. The cross-class element to this fantasy relationship is displaced onto his mother Penny, whose belief that her fling with the billionaire Wayne as his secretary resulted in Arthur’s birth may not be borne out by the facts but reflects rather her mental illness.
There is a sense of urgency to BURNING’s treatment of romance as an allegory for class relations in the age of inequality. As in other key contemporary films on the subject, political anxieties about the economic divide are translated into a kind of psychological terror or paranoia about how cross-class romance can ultimately only be illusory, and that a more sinister conspiracy of exploitation or prostitution lurks behind the fantasy, as imagined by the writer protagonist and fueled by his speculations as an incel.
There is a sense of urgency to BURNING’s treatment of romance as an allegory for class relations in the age of inequality. As in other key contemporary films on the subject, political anxieties about the economic divide are translated into a kind of psychological terror or paranoia about how cross-class romance can ultimately only be illusory, and that a more sinister conspiracy of exploitation or prostitution lurks behind the fantasy, as imagined by the writer protagonist and fueled by his speculations as an incel.
I’M THINKING OF ENDING THINGS likewise views cross-class romance in the age of inequality through an incel’s subjectivity. Here the incel’s inferiority complex is situated within the context of American social antagonisms: urban vs. rural, intellectuals vs. the working class, liberals vs. conservatives.… Can the self desire the other in a polarized society, or does it end in failed social climbing? Meeting the parents is as nightmarish a crossing of the social divide as it is in GET OUT, although here it’s all in the mind.
There is a sense of urgency to BURNING’s treatment of romance as an allegory for class relations in the age of inequality. As in other key contemporary films on the subject, political anxieties about the economic divide are translated into a kind of psychological terror or paranoia about how cross-class romance can ultimately only be illusory, and that a more sinister conspiracy of exploitation or prostitution lurks behind the fantasy, as imagined by the writer protagonist and fueled by his speculations as an incel.
There is a sense of urgency to BURNING’s treatment of romance as an allegory for class relations in the age of inequality. As in other key contemporary films on the subject, political anxieties about the economic divide are translated into a kind of psychological terror or paranoia about how cross-class romance can ultimately only be illusory, and that a more sinister conspiracy of exploitation or prostitution lurks behind the fantasy, as imagined by the writer protagonist and fueled by his speculations as an incel.
BEYOND THE DREAM is Hong Kong’s take on the incel’s imaginary romance. The protagonist is a psychiatric patient who falls in love with his counselor – a graduate psychology student resembling the imaginary girlfriend in his hallucinations – only to learn that she is using him for personal gain and social advancement. The paranoia with which he views the relationship is framed explicitly in terms of class: is it a conspiracy of the rich exploiting and prostituting the poor? The proof is all in the mind.
There is a sense of urgency to BURNING’s treatment of romance as an allegory for class relations in the age of inequality. As in other key contemporary films on the subject, political anxieties about the economic divide are translated into a kind of psychological terror or paranoia about how cross-class romance can ultimately only be illusory, and that a more sinister conspiracy of exploitation or prostitution lurks behind the fantasy, as imagined by the writer protagonist and fueled by his speculations as an incel.
There is a sense of urgency to BURNING’s treatment of romance as an allegory for class relations in the age of inequality. As in other key contemporary films on the subject, political anxieties about the economic divide are translated into a kind of psychological terror or paranoia about how cross-class romance can ultimately only be illusory, and that a more sinister conspiracy of exploitation or prostitution lurks behind the fantasy, as imagined by the writer protagonist and fueled by his speculations as an incel.
The premise of meeting the parents from Guess Who's Coming to Dinner gets a body snatcher makeover for the age of inequality in GET OUT, a black satire that goes for the jugular in its attack on white liberal elites. The protagonist’s subjectivity is again the focal point, as the audience shares his perspective, and in the absence of narrative omniscience, we are offered no reassurances of a definitive account of the truth, but must piece together the horrific vision of a conspiracy.
There is a sense of urgency to BURNING’s treatment of romance as an allegory for class relations in the age of inequality. As in other key contemporary films on the subject, political anxieties about the economic divide are translated into a kind of psychological terror or paranoia about how cross-class romance can ultimately only be illusory, and that a more sinister conspiracy of exploitation or prostitution lurks behind the fantasy, as imagined by the writer protagonist and fueled by his speculations as an incel.
There is a sense of urgency to BURNING’s treatment of romance as an allegory for class relations in the age of inequality. As in other key contemporary films on the subject, political anxieties about the economic divide are translated into a kind of psychological terror or paranoia about how cross-class romance can ultimately only be illusory, and that a more sinister conspiracy of exploitation or prostitution lurks behind the fantasy, as imagined by the writer protagonist and fueled by his speculations as an incel.
There is a sense of urgency to BURNING’s treatment of romance as an allegory for class relations in the age of inequality. As in other key contemporary films on the subject, political anxieties about the economic divide are translated into a kind of psychological terror or paranoia about how cross-class romance can ultimately only be illusory, and that a more sinister conspiracy of exploitation or prostitution lurks behind the fantasy, as imagined by the writer protagonist and fueled by his speculations as an incel.
There is a sense of urgency to BURNING’s treatment of romance as an allegory for class relations in the age of inequality. As in other key contemporary films on the subject, political anxieties about the economic divide are translated into a kind of psychological terror or paranoia about how cross-class romance can ultimately only be illusory, and that a more sinister conspiracy of exploitation or prostitution lurks behind the fantasy, as imagined by the writer protagonist and fueled by his speculations as an incel.