Eden Review | Ron Howard’s Star-Studded Island Thriller Is a Bummer

by

As a seasoned cinephile with a penchant for unraveling the threads of complex narratives, I must confess that I found myself both captivated and disillusioned by Ron Howard’s latest offering, “Eden.” The film, set against the breathtaking backdrop of the Galápagos Islands, initially promises to be a visually stunning, intellectually engaging tale. With a star-studded cast led by Jude Law, Vanessa Kirby, and Ana de Armas, it seemed poised to deliver on all fronts.

Have you ever come across a real-life tale that seems so bizarre you doubt its rationality? Ron Howard has demonstrated a knack for adapting such extraordinary stories to the big screen, as evident in films like Apollo 13, In the Heart of the Sea, and his latest release, Thirteen Lives. However, Eden stands apart – it’s an untamed beast let loose in a scenario reminiscent of Lord of the Flies, where resources diminish and self-interest begins to dictate actions for expediency.

In Howard’s latest movie, titled “The Origin of the Species” at first, it was intended to depict Darwin’s research site, the Galápagos Islands, a setting that is visually stunning. The star-studded cast includes Jude Law, Vanessa Kirby, Daniel Brühl, Sydney Sweeney, and Ana de Armas. Initially, it offers both visual pleasure and intellectual stimulation. However, as the plot unfolds with its conflicts emerging, the movie seems to lose control in the hands of director Howard and writer Noah Pink, much like a train without a destination, eventually leading to feelings of disappointment.

Eden Is a True Story About the Impossibility of Utopia

To put it simply, Eden informs the audience at the start that the story is built around an unusual event that transpired on Floreana Island, with various survivor accounts contributing to its narrative. In 1929, a time marked by economic and political upheaval, Dr. Friedrich Ritter (played by Jude Law) and his wife Dore Strauch (Vanessa Kirby) set sail for the uninhabited Floreana in the Galápagos archipelago armed with a typewriter. Their mission was to develop an innovative philosophy aimed at guiding humanity out of the post-World War I darkness, with Ritter sharing some of his ideas through letters sent back from this utopian island for three years. The German press would subsequently praise these writings.

A key aspect of creating a supposed paradise is separating it from disruptive forces that might cause discord, as seen in 1932 when Heinz Wittmer (Brühl), his wife Margret (Sweeney), and their son Harry (Jonathan Tittel) set foot on the island of Floreana. Faced with hardships on the mainland, they sought a fresh start here, but life proved challenging. Competing for scarce food resources with wild animals such as boars and dogs, and dealing with water scarcity, were just some of their immediate hurdles.

A more crucial aspect lies in Friedrich and Dore, who refuse and decline to offer aid to their neighbors. Their perverse delight stems from the expectation that the Wittmer family will face substantial hardships, as they force them to establish a campsite in a cave and rock formation rather than extending the use of their farmstead.

Ana de Armas Is the Secret, Unruly Ingredient as the Baroness

As a movie enthusiast, I must say that the delicate naivete portrayed by Brühl and Sweeney in their roles stands in stark contrast to the sly, manipulative vibe exuded by Law and Kirby. This sets the stage for an intriguing tale. If four characters weren’t already enough, the enigmatic Baroness Eloise Bosquet de Wagner Wehrhorn (de Armas) enters with objectives entirely distinct from saving humanity. The Baroness has grander aspirations – transforming Floreana into a lavish resort. Nothing will deter her from achieving this goal. In her world, people flock to her presence due to her beauty and wealth. With her record player, books, and lovers (Kammerer and Wallace) at her side, what could possibly go awry?

In a more relaxed phrasing: De Armas shines particularly well in her role due to the dynamic nature of her character’s motivations. As the Baroness, she’s playful yet slightly delusional, skillfully manipulating those around her with cunning. Ritter, on the other hand, gives off an immediate vibe of being out of sorts. His narration romanticizes suffering, particularly in the early part of Eden, which serves as a concerning warning sign. When all characters are established, Howard and Pink intentionally create numerous subplots to avoid repetitively hitting the same apocalyptic tones.

The Ending of Eden Lets Down Whatever It Built

For a time, the world within Eden undergoes turmoil as if it were a snow globe being shaken, introducing fresh disorder that the story can leverage. Envy flares up among the Baroness’ suitors. The bond between Ritter and Strauch weakens, crumbling over time. Wittmer grapples with worsening PTSD symptoms. A surprise pregnancy is announced, and other events unfold as well.

The intricate flaws among these characters are astonishingly overshadowed by how straightforward the resolution turns out to be, ultimately undoing everything that Eden had established. The film sheds most of its philosophical depth, opting instead for sensational shock and action-driven conclusions. This leaves one questioning whether it squandered all its prior intelligence or if intelligence is rendered irrelevant. On its own, the movie keeps you engaged (perhaps even amused) with its numerous plot twists and attractive cast. However, thematically it feels hollow. If Eden had fully explored its more complex ambitions, it could have been something truly distinctive.

Eden was first shown to the public at the Toronto International Film Festival; further details can be found here.

Read More

2024-09-23 23:34