2022 Sight & Sound Preliminary Run-Through (#243-225)

This was actually one of the initial projects I had in mind when starting this Patreon, or at least some means of covering/beginning to reckon with the latest edition of the Sight & Sound poll. Despite running an entire account dedicated to the individual lists, I feel I’ve been a bit negligent with this task, and this preliminary run-through feels like as good a place to start as any. Originally, when this Patreon was going to be more audio-focused (and thus easier to formulate without editing), I was just going to ramble on about all these films for as long or short as I wanted; hopefully writing will encourage some brevity.

I’ll be tackling the entire top 250 (technically 264 thanks to ties) in somewhat irregular fashion, gathering up films according to the other ones in similar tiers, starting from the end of the list. No particular research — apart from tracking the film’s previous placement, in the 2012 poll, which I’ll note in brackets — should be expected; these are gut reactions, and I think I’ve only seen about half of these films anyways.

243. Born in Flames (1983, Lizzie Borden) [894]

One of many odd films that, given the ascension of Jeanne Dielman in particular, feels preordained to be in this list, despite just one critic (B. Ruby Rich) voting for it last time around. It is a film I love (though not as much as some) and I know has a wide following, not just among queer critics, for its concatenation of so many influences including genre filmmaking; happy to see it here.

243. Pandora’s Box (1929, G. W. Pabst) [235]

A film I’m both surprised and not to see in this list; it’s always held a canonical place in my mind (I haven’t seen it) despite no real movement from a restoration and zero day-to-day discussion, the Criterion DVD remains un-upgraded too.

243. Sullivan’s Travels (1941, Preston Sturges) [235]

Definitely going to run into the problem throughout this short-ish project of films I haven’t seen and have held steady; haven’t been able to identify any trend with screwball comedies in particular, though I wouldn’t necessarily have thought of this as *the* consensus Sturges.

243. Annie Hall (1977, Woody Allen) [127]

Was inevitable this was going to drop hard, though I’m glad it’s still clinging on in the top 250; don’t recall whether there were any other Allens like Manhattan or Crimes and Misdemeanors before.

243. Earth (1930, Alexander Dovzhenko) [171]

Definitely dismaying to see this drop, though it’s true that there still hasn’t been a great copy available in North America or elsewhere; it’s not true that silent films dropped throughout the list, but it’s certainly a trend.

243. My Darling Clementine (1946, John Ford) [235]

The first of three semi-inconsistent results for Ford, no truly significant change here; obviously it’d be a surprise to see something like Stagecoach in here at this point but this being his only pre-1955 film is a little odd.

243. Mouchette (1967, Robert Bresson) [117]

Somehow not the biggest or most disappointing drop for a Bresson film; not my favorite of his but still extremely significant and beautiful, and I wonder if the subject matter helps or hurts it.

243. A Clockwork Orange (1971, Stanley Kubrick) [235]

Surprised that this has held on fairly well despite renewed challenges from the likes of Eyes Wide Shut; only seen this once and pretty sure I’d detest it if I got around to rewatching it.

243. A Canterbury Tale (1944, Michael Powell & Emeric Pressburger) [117]

Don’t know whether to be more surprised that it was so high in the first place or that it’s fallen so far; in general the variance in Powell and Pressburger results is one of the most interesting throughlines in this list.

243. Videodrome (1983, David Cronenberg) [202]

Would have guessed that this wasn’t in the top 250 last time but I was wrong; very fascinating to see this drop while another Cronenberg pops up towards the end of this entry.

243. Possession (1981, Andrzej Żuławski) [447]

One of those no-brainer rises, thanks partly to a restoration (though one more than six years old at this point) and much more to this film’s continual meme status; very much doubt On the Silver Globe for example did better though.

243. Soleil Ô (1970, Med Hondo) [N/A]

The first totally new entry to the Sight & Sound poll, definitely one of the prime examples on the renewed focus on Black and African cinema throughout this top 250; for some reason I had it in my head that this, not West Indies, was the canonical Hondo.

243. Distant Voices, Still Lives (1988, Terence Davies) [154]

One of the sadder drops, don’t really know how British film fared generally but would have thought, with Davies’ queer cachet and continually renewed interest due to subsequent films great films, he would have done better.

243. Nostalgia for the Light (2010, Patricio Guzmán) [447]

Pleasantly surprised to see this, obviously it isn’t a film that’s been forgotten and Guzmán has done more well-received work before and in the interim, but it’s one I never hear discussed.

243. Syndromes and a Century (2006, Apichatpong Weerasethakul) [447]

My favorite Apichatpong and one beloved as an alternative pick, so it’s not the biggest surprise to see this hanging on in the top 250, but still not a selection I expected to see.

243. L’Intrus (2004, Claire Denis) [377]

This actually did better in 2012 than I had realized, and I suppose it fulfills a similar Syndromes niche, but it’s very strange that this might be the second most popular Claire Denis film (thought it certainly is one of the *most* Denis films).

243. Morvern Callar (2002, Lynne Ramsay) [894]

Don’t know exactly how Ramsay’s other films did; I’ve only seen You Were Never Really Here and hated it but definitely look forward to catching up with this one, which received a (very recent) Blu-ray and I know has always had admirers, and seems like a signal one to rally around for this sort of list.

243. In Vanda’s Room (2000, Pedro Costa) [323]

This is a surprise at least to me; for some reason I’ve always thought of Colossal Youth as the canonical Costa (maybe it’s the title), despite how well this has done in decade polls and its significance as his first digital film, but it did well in 2012 too. Couldn’t be happier to see him here.

243. Werckmeister Harmonies (2000, Tarr Béla and Hranitzky Ágnes) [171]

Wonder how this would have done had the restoration come out a few years earlier, though Tarr is always one of those filmmakers that perennially seems both in and out of fashion.

243. Taste of Cherry (1997, Abbas Kiarostami) [283]

Very nice to see this get a slight but crucial bump, I honestly don’t think the restoration had much to do with it though; Kiarostami in general did quite well in this edition.

243. The Quince Tree Sun (1992, Víctor Erice) [283]

Another unexpected inclusion, though it was already just outside the top 250; I don’t know how well El Sur, the only Erice not to make it, did.

243. The Last Laugh (1924, F. W. Murnau) [127]

Murnau in general took an even greater beating than most other silent cinema directors, and this drop was especially egregious; his most significant film I haven’t yet seen I should point out.

225. Harlan County U.S.A. (1976, Barbara Kopple) [894]

Haven’t yet gotten a sense of exactly how well documentaries improved (my friends on the Wiseman Podcast seem to suggest not much as all), but this is practically an expected jump up, especially considering the timeliness of the subject matter and the filmmaker.

225. Cries and Whispers (1972, Ingmar Bergman) [154]

Fortunately (for me) Bergman didn’t do as well as in past editions, this is the biggest drop, though don’t think it’s the most significant or important.

225. Star Wars (1977, George Lucas) [171]

A little surprised both by seeing this on these sorts of lists and that it dropped so much; I’d wager that the sequel trilogy and myriad TV shows didn’t actually have too big an effect though.

225. Intolerance (1916, D. W. Griffith) [93]

Here it is, the lowest placing previous top 100 film and only one not in the top 200. Obviously basically everything is working against it: the ongoing rejection of Griffith, the slight bias against silent films; it’d be terrible if it didn’t have some place in this list, though I still haven’t gotten around to it.

225. The Hour of the Furnaces (Fernando Solanas & Octavio Getino) [447]

An inclusion that’s surprising but obvious in hindsight; now makes me realize that The Battle of Chile seems like a more expected inclusion than Nostalgia but the three-part construction undoubtedly worked against it.

225. Europa ’51 (1952, Roberto Rossellini) [377]

Absolutely zero idea why this of all Rossellinis jumped up so high even though it is pretty great; definitely worth noting the worse placing of the other Rossellini-Bergman on this list.

225. Napoléon (1927, Abel Gance) [144]

A very unfortunate drop despite the relative recency of the apex of Kevin Brownlow’s restoration; other than the silents and maybe the ardent royalism I don’t know why this happened.

225. The Crowd (1928, King Vidor) [283]

Another sort of baffling entrant into the top 250; Vidor always feels in the process of rediscovery but relative recognizability of this one aside, it’s a bit strange to see here.

225. A Touch of Zen (1971, King Hu) [183]

The first of these that I voted for myself, and of course this was when it dropped; still the highest wuxia *or* martial arts representative but really disheartening to see, almost felt like an obvious pick to me.

225. Je, tu, il, elle (1974, Chantal Akerman) [N/A]

Honestly stunned that, as far as I can tell, this received absolutely zero votes in 2012, for sheer recognizability and its significance as her narrative debut alone, though this is a trend for Akerman.

225. Petite Maman (2021, Céline Sciamma) [N/A]

I like this one a lot more than its even more grotesquely overhyped predecessor, and I remembered it as being higher than it actually is, but still a baffling inclusion on here, especially because of how forthrightly minor it is (perhaps a benefit after all).

225. As I Was Moving Ahead, Occasionally I Saw Brief Glimpses of Beauty (2000, Jonas Mekas) [588]

I had no clue that this was so low (relatively speaking) on the past list, and I don’t know how well Mekas did otherwise. Experimental film did better in sum total, but this was a nice surprise.

225. Flowers of Shanghai (1998, Hou Hsiao-hsien) [235]

A nice modest gain, probably helped just the tiniest of bits by the restoration, though it doesn’t seem to have done a ton for Hou otherwise.

225. Happy Together (1997, Wong Kar-wai) [323]

A little surprised this appears to be the consensus third favorite Wong (justice as ever for Days of Being Wild) but a definite sign of the constant uptick in his reputation and beloved status.

225. Crash (1996, David Cronenberg) [894]

I don’t know whether I’m more surprised at the fact that this got a vote at all in 2012 or that it actually surpassed Videodrome to become the favorite Cronenberg; it really feels like it only became widely loved in the past few years (pre-Blu-rays mind you) so for it to achieve this status so quickly is really something, definitely has to do with its inherent foregrounding of queerness.

225. Blue (1993, Derek Jarman) [894]

This was a real shock, a film seemingly destined to be canonized instantly that nevertheless received just one vote in 2012; could certainly chalk this up to the better appreciation of experimental film generally; very much doubt that Jarman otherwise got much love.

225. Grave of the Fireflies (1988, Takahata Isao) [588]

I wonder how Takahata’s other films did; a little surprising that this jumped up so much, the placement of two Miyazakis in the top 100 notwithstanding. It’s the one of his I don’t like but very much need to revisit.

225. The Green Ray (1986, Éric Rohmer) [283]

Seems to have become not just a consensus Rohmer but perhaps his most beloved film period, eclipsing My Night at Maud‘s; obviously I feel he should have at least five films in the top 250 instead of just one, but this is a great representative nonetheless.

Road to Nowhere [ASTEROID CITY & SPIDER-MAN: ACROSS THE SPIDER-VERSE]

Asteroid City

Rating *** A must-see

Directed by Wes Anderson

Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse

Rating * Has redeeming facet

Directed by Joaquim Dos Santos & Kemp Powers & Justin K. Thompson

A few points of coincidence connecting these two films ruled in many ways by their creators’ tight, almost stifling grasps over the possibility of chance: both films opened in Taipei (where I’m staying for the next few months) on the same day and formed the first films I’ve seen overseas in many years over the course of a cross-town double feature, both films feature animation as a key component of their appeal, both films pinball between different aesthetic styles, and both films star Jason Schwartzman, though the one I saw at the SPOT cinema was *not* the one where he plays a character called The Spot.

The two films also find the particular “brands” to which they belong to at a certain point of crisis. On the one hand, Wes Anderson remains as alternatively beloved and derided as ever, seemingly having made a nigh-irrevocable advance/retreat into worlds of his own imagination, whether they be futuristic Tokyo, a provincial French town, or the eponymous Southwestern hamlet (population size: 87, filmed entirely on sets in the Spanish desert), piling on further structural and metafictional challenges for himself. In contrast to Anderson’s benevolent intractability, the forces on the other side are eager to cast their work as a superior, if not entirely separate entity from the sinking ship that appears to be the superhero mega-blockbusters that have very nearly swallowed Hollywood filmmaking whole. Where the MCU and DCEU appear to be faltering at last, Sony Pictures Animation, as marshaled by Phil Lord and Christopher Miller, aims to pick up the slack. Not only does the studio run with the conceit of super-powered beings aiming to prevent the end of the world for the umpteenth time, but also with the concept of the multiverse that has paid dividends both financial — making for boffo box office of the otherwise middling grosses of the MCU Spider-Man and Doctor Strange sub-franchises — and critical, with the Russo Brother-co-produced Everything Everywhere All at Once earning Oscar glory off of its own gussied-up multiverse riff.

The trends have remained steady with these latest entries. Asteroid City was fairly tepidly received at its premiere at Cannes, only to get a rapturous near-unanimous reappraisal upon its stateside release. Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse has been even more beloved than its predecessor Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse — reports of abominable crunch-time overwork notwithstanding — almost wholly escaping the sharp critical downturn in the wake of Avengers: Endgame and its (for better and worse) summative cap on a certain era of superhero filmmaking; while everything else is accurately seen as desperate flailing, the further extended adventures of Miles Morales and company continue to attract acclaim, including from many who swore off superhero films close to a decade ago.

It’s probably already clear where my sympathies lie; Anderson has been and remains one of my favorite American directors, even as my ardor for any given one of his films can vary wildly, while I remember quite liking Into but have since cooled on it, the extravagance of some of its images slipping away while the bad aftertaste of the gobsmackingly formulaic narrative became less and less obscured. It’s certainly worth noting that none of the three directors of that film returned to this one, at least in the same role; I never saw the Jump Streets or Clone High and barely remember anything of The Lego Movie, so I can’t speak to exactly how strong Lord and Miller’s voices are apart from these very linked films (though I still suspect that I’d prefer Ron Howard’s version of Solo to theirs).

With all that being said, it’s worth examining in conjunction why one aestheticized unreality works (to me) and the other ultimately doesn’t. After all, Anderson could reasonably be said to be working in, if not the multiverse, then in alternate planes of fiction in a similar way. The central conceit of Asteroid City (completely hidden in the trailers) rests on parallel tracks: a play about a group of civilians, juvenile scientific geniuses, residents, and military personnel who are quarantined in a tiny town in the Southwestern United States when they come into contact with an alien in a meteorite crater, shot in rather lovely 2.39:1 pastel color; and a television recreation of scenes from the mounting of that play in 1.37:1 black-and-white (all shot on Anderson’s customary 35mm by Robert Yeoman). While the film largely stays in that former realm, the boundaries are porous, even moreso than the storytelling devices that Anderson’s previous film The French Dispatch of the Liberty, Kansas Evening Sun used; where that film largely let the reminiscences of Swinton, McDormand, and Wright’s characters remain on that level (with Bill Murray’s editor one tier up and remaining at a slight remove from the action) and explicitly situate the “base” narrative as flashback, the inherent fictiveness of play and production alike — “Asteroid City is not real,” as Bryan Cranston’s Rod Serling-esque television host intones — displace the viewer, leaving them to reckon with the mystery of the relationships between play and production, which, if they do illuminate each other, often do so in oblique fashion.

Asteroid City, to a greater degree than any Anderson film, is about its filmmaker’s belief in the power of the performative gesture, of the ability of artifice to get at something contradictory and thus deeper in the heart of its character and setting. Perhaps it’s for this reason that I connected with it to a greater degree than any of his films since his 2014 masterpiece The Grand Budapest Hotel, whose situating of adventure and the beauty of personal storytelling against the sweep of history still feels leagues ahead of anything he has done before or since. The ambition of Asteroid City, necessarily, lies in smaller, more furtive gestures; Jason Schwartzman’s Augie Steenbeck is the closest thing to an anchoring presence like Hotel’s M. Gustave or Royal Tenenbaum, and the film (or at least the play) begins and ends with him, but it truly is, depending on how generous you want to be, a communal or an overstuffed film, and thus there is less room for the sort of reveries that Hotel was filled to bursting with.

Anderson’s directorial command can be taken for granted these days, such is the recognizability of his frames, albeit not just his frontal symmetrical close-ups: one look at the striking arrangement of faces at perpendicular angles in both Academy and Scope ratios reveals a still galvanizing eye that remains at all times his own while refusing to be pigeonholed. It’s not just enough that, in an emotional split-screen phone call, Schwartzman and (brilliant first-time Anderson player) Tom Hanks are placed as if they are looking at each other; little stripes at the top-left and the bottom-right (the former, if I’m remembering correctly, is from the edge of the phone booth) accentuate a visual symmetry that might be wholly unnecessary if it wasn’t immensely pleasurable to spot it and productive to speculate why it might be there. Similarly, the inclusion of a few shots of Academy ratio footage in the play scenes call attention to themselves; it can be easily surmised that these are meant to be from the camera on hand to film the ceremony during which these shots take place, but the perfect framing, at extreme angles that the camera couldn’t possibly find from its locked-down place in the back of the proceedings, emerges as artifice-within-artifice-within-artifice, with too many potential readings to explicate.

In a sense, such gestures, especially the second microphone that Jeffrey Wright’s military officer or Tilda Swinton’s scientist stride towards during their ceremonial speeches, demonstrate how much performance factors into all of these unfamiliar situations that the temporary denizens of Asteroid City find themselves in. The close encounter is more than anything a device, an Act 1 deus ex machina in the most existential of senses, where people locked into their routines suddenly find themselves confined with each other, having to confront how they relate to strangers in strange lands. This is not to say that the means by which this is achieved is at all secondary: the initial sighting, an extended, seemingly stop-motion UFO landing, is conducted with an awe that’s of a piece with the climax of The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou or the wolf in Fantastic Mr. Fox. Redolent of Space Race/Cold War anxieties — the town is also periodically rocked by nuclear testing, with the distant mushroom clouds recalling the controversial atomic bomb invocations found in Isle of Dogs — the alien is a tangible representation of everything that is unknowable and ungraspable, love (familial and romantic) chief among them.

Lest that sound like a trite summation, Anderson’s metafictional structure constantly destabilizes, not least because of the opportunity for alternate characterizations, surface non-sequiturs (an acting workshop led by Willem Dafoe’s Method-espousing Saltzburg Keitel chief among them), and appearance changes it provides. One of the signal moments in the film comes at the tail end of an early scene between the play director Schubert Green (Adrien Brody) and his ex-wife Polly Green (Hong Chau), where, as she exits, she mentions that at the end of a specific scene in Act 3, Scarlett Johansson’s Midge Campbell should say a line after she leaves the room and not before; after Schubert takes that advice, Polly leaves the set where he currently resides and then says goodbye, a literal and figurative echoing across narrative levels. If that wasn’t enough, unless I’m forgetting, there is no moment when Campbell actually does that in the play; Act 3 is specified in the intertitles (heretofore regularly broken up into sections of scenes) to be played continuously without break, though at least one scene is likely omitted. One could even construe as this early “non-diegetic” scene as being essentially an airlifted substitute for the emotion of that scene, which is deliberately curtailed otherwise.

At the end of the day though, Anderson has never relied solely on his aesthetic to carry his films; it’s not for nothing that each of his films has had absolutely magnetic, screen-commanding performances, extending to the audio-only stylings of George Clooney in Fantastic Mr. Fox or Liev Schreiber in Isle of Dogs. Even amidst the parade of faces, plenty of people stand out, old and young, large roles and small; the shaken poise of Maya Hawke’s schoolteacher, the affability of Steve Carell’s motel manager, the ornery searching of Edward Norton’s Tennessee Williams-esque Conrad Earp, the playwright of Asteroid City. And Anderson’s greatest non-Murray or Wilson stalwart, Schwartzman, stands atop them all. His greatest moment comes during an already celebrated scene with Margot Robbie, his deceased wife in the play whose scene was cut. Heavily bearded in the play, he removes his fake facial hair and gets a close-up without encumbrance for the first time, and the effect is chilling: the defiance of Max Fisher is still there but wizened, even weathered, an almost wolfish, hollowed stare into the camera lens as his struggles with how to play his character reach across time. Not unlike Jean-Pierre Léaud with François Truffaut or even Lee Kang-sheng with Tsai Ming-liang, Schwartzman has been in roles small and large for Anderson, and the effect of that gaze as it has evolved over the years pierces the artifice.

It is true that Anderson’s films tend not to be tectonic shifts in style or in ultimate purpose, but that speaks to the enduring appeal of his concerns, and Asteroid City both makes that text and complicates it. The former comes in the play itself: after the quarantine is lifted, Augie and his family awake to find everyone, including Midge (who he had embarked on a tentative fling with), gone without another word. The nuclear tests resume, the charmingly absurd police-criminal gun-blazing car chases streak through town once more, and everyone picks up their routines which the span of a week did little to disrupt. The whole extraterrestrial event feels, if not completely hushed-up, then left on the backburner, something to marvel at for a few moments then abandoned in favor of more quotidian concerns. Asteroid City all but compares it to a fantasy: in the acting workshop, Earp wants the play to, among other things, get at the sensation of dreaming. In electrifying, unprecedented-for-Anderson canted angles, the actors spring up and begin reciting the line “You can’t wake up if you don’t go to sleep.” It is stated that this experience helped shape the formulation of the play, yet no such equivalent utterance appears. Rather, it is the concatenation of sensations and invocations that predominates: obscure yet haunting; lullaby-like yet foreboding (as accentuated by an unnerving Jarvis Cocker end-credits song); unrelated yet defiantly — by dint of an almost Hongian play with two narratives clanging off each other in often successful, always daring ways — vital.

Would that such complexity were afforded to the film that actually made narrative, and in particular the fungibility of superhero storytelling itself, the explicit subject. To its credit, Across initially switches up its focus: the first fifteen minutes or so take place in the dimension where Gwen Stacy (Hailee Steinfeld) resides, the single most visually bewitching realm in the film that seems to simulate watercolors dripping off the walls in deep blues and purples. These, like the rest of the film, can be inconsistent (some frames play much more with abstracted environments and people than others), but much of the charm of the Spider-Verse films, like Dash Shaw’s underrated My Entire High School Sinking Into the Sea, is their hodgepodge nature, giving different characters and environments a corresponding look that speaks to the mutability and creativity of the animated comic-book form.

But for the first of many, many times, the basic plot, always digging itself into holes then taking the easiest way out, comes to dominate the proceedings. While (at least initially) Across avoids the staid self-actualizing of Into, content to leave Miles and Gwen to deal with day-to-day life, the film quickly devolves into the ratcheting up of personal dramatic stakes between child and parent(s) that become numbing when played out for the umpteenth time. Across, across its numerous acts, withers amid its almost unceasing rising tension; fun and reasonably diverting when it allows itself little moments of Miles by himself or with Gwen, or his parents discussing their child together, but disastrous when it has to go through the motions of a teen unable to communicate with his parents. It certainly doesn’t help that Miles’s universe, and thus the dominant aesthetic of the film, is stultifyingly bland in comparison. Without engaging interpersonal relations, this large chunk of the film feels like a holding pattern until the multiverse hijinks ensue. Of course one could say this is meant to be the point, that, after experiencing universe-altering events, ordinary life must seem like even more of a slog than it already is, but it only partly ameliorates that issue.

This isn’t to say that Across isn’t pretty funny or engaging in this early section, which ends up being by default the post-opening highlight, not least because The Spot, one of the main villains of the film, is an inherently amusing idea whose ability to open inter-dimensional wormholes leads to some funny fight scenes, with limbs and bodies sprawled across a series of portals. The early glimpses at other worlds, encompassing, among other things, live-action and Lego stop-motion, are delightful in their media mixing. In general the Spider-Verses are best at bemused affability, at leaning into the comedy inherent in seeing people from different walks of life awkwardly interact, something which, for example, a scene where Miles-as-Spider-Man tries to talk with his father and convince him that Miles is a good son adroitly gets at. And the eagerness with which Miles and Gwen act upon reuniting, the ability to enjoy each other’s presences and feel like they have true companionship in the world, is quite touching.

But in the age of go-ahead hell-bent apocalyptic superhero filmmaking, nothing can “just” be frivolous, and a series of subterfuges ultimately lands Miles among the Spider-Society, a vast array of Spider-People dedicated to tracking down villains unstuck in spacetime and restoring them to their proper place, headed by Miguel O’Hara (Oscar Isaac). From here, all pretense of complexity or flexibility basically goes out the window, with every character too locked into their ways of thinking to budge, with typically destructive results. It’s basically impossible to see Miguel as anything other than a misguided villain, someone so obsessed with doing the right thing that our hapless, headstrong protagonist gets caught in the crossfire.

The main contention is the head-slappingly literal term “canon events,” those moments which come to define any Spider-Person’s life, centered almost always on death: that of an Uncle Ben-like figure, a cop relative of a loved one, and so on and so forth. These are displayed in a hologram simulation, with an array of Spider-People crouched solemnly over a dying corpse, including the live-action MCU-precursor Spider-Men. I won’t go into further plot detail than this, except to note that the ludicrously distended film (140 minutes, the longest mainstream American animated feature ever) takes what feels like 20 minutes after the climax to get to its final, offensively reductive twist, a lugubrious stretch well after I had soured on the film.

That sudden downturn is linked more than anything to those images of death, which in a charitable reading would be an indictment of this whole multiverse concept that numerous films have attempted to make a viable device to no success. It speaks to a fundamental issue with the supposed ambition of this idea, of having putatively unlimited options only to arrive at the same characters and scenarios, only done up with a palette swap. Sure, it’s funny when it’s a Spider-Horse or baby Spider-Girl or whatever, but such changes run only skin-deep, and the lack of imagination becomes grotesque and moribund when there’s an insistence on retaining the same tropes, where the same great powers can only lead to the same great responsibilities.

I could talk about many other things that bothered me: the vagueness with which each person’s powers and fighting ability are treated, the muddled representation, the roteness of some of its humor. But I’d like to mention my favorite part of Across: brief editorial explanation text boxes that appear a few times in the film, which almost reminded me of the “(Historical)” notes on the intertitles for Abel Gance’s Napoléon. Those text boxes, enmeshed as they are within all the action, can sometimes be difficult to read and quick to go away, yet they epitomize a certain spirit of fun and innovation that much of the rest of the film sorely needs, a clear nod at a comic book art tradition that nevertheless challenges the viewer to think and slow down in a way that the general slapdash shock-and-awe of the rest of the shifting aesthetics rarely allows for. Meanwhile, in Asteroid City, where even the beginnings of a freeway built in the air inspires thought, that sense of searching, resonant ambiguity lies everywhere.