Review: "Nope" and the Downward Spiral of Excellence

Jordan Peele falls victim to his own success in this intriguing but ultimately disappointing horror flick.

August 11, 2022

On the penultimate episode of America’s Next Top Model’s inaugural season, 26-year-old devout Christian Robin Manning got informed that the final four contestants would partake in a nude photo shoot. Appalled at the idea of showing her naked body, Manning refused to participate, citing her religion’s teachings that her “body is a temple.” As the photo shoot wore on and her fellow competitors opted to partake, Manning stood her ground, quoting her grandmother:

‍

“If you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything.”

‍

Principles are not platitudes on which to stand and exert moral authority over the earth; they are deep-seated ideas about how the world should operate, things that cannot get discarded for anything, even a $100,000 Revlon contract. On the other hand, one must also wonder: if not standing for anything nets you a number-one box office debut and another critical darling in your acclaimed filmography, why not be crippled?

‍

It is the foundational question of Nope, one that strangles the movie. It starts with intrigue as a man on horseback, Otis Haywood, Sr., gets killed by falling debris, the source of which later gets explained as the luggage of a private jet, a claim his son, Otis “OJ” Jr., refuses to believe. A trailer’s job is to compel us to the theater; a movie’s job is to earn our trip on its merit. Few films in the trailer age can match the anticipation its marketing creates, but Nope uses its open farmland and the reserved curiosity of its main protagonist to intrigue. It has a quiet without feeling hushed, a feeling of momentum without forcing its narrative to move too quickly.

‍

Unfortunately, the longer Nope drags on, insisting on sprinkling in commentaries instead of focusing on its narrative, the more aimless it feels. Side-steps into the origins of an Asian actor running a Wild West theme park titillates those who appreciate unexplored threads, but while its concepts are simple to grasp, the simplicity feels empty. Nope wants to be a movie that means something more when it should be satisfied with the initial story. The lesson is too clear: Hollywood can victimize anyone, even those who survive its tragedy. Turning the tables creates a black hole of entertainment exploitation, sometimes to tragic results. If the intention was more interpretive, it damns the film even more.

‍

It is the danger of believing in your hype. A creator should never absorb critique unless sourced from trusted advisors, people who will tell you the truth irrespective of your willingness to listen. The masses adore the work, so it becomes a thing unto itself instead of a carefully-curated product. We think of CinemaSins, a YouTube channel that was once humorous in sniffing out the minor inconsistencies in beloved films and chastising them to the audience.

‍

Its popularity today is undeniable, but it comes at a cost; at one point, their longest video was “Everything Wrong With X-Men: The Last Stand…” at 9 minutes and 15 seconds. Twelve of their last 20 videos on standalone films are over 20 minutes long. Once upon a time, the plot holes were legitimate, or at least tongue-in-cheek. Now, every video ignores the narrative to create “sins” where they do not exist and overflows with running gags and in-jokes. The creators are no longer interested in what they set out to accomplish, only what having accomplished it says about them.

‍

The inverse is equally true: zeroing in on negative feedback compromises one’s willingness to express themselves fully. Allowing others to hold our ideas hostage makes for stunted products; it dulls the blade, and as Shakespeare would tell us, our voice is our sword. We cannot bank on getting understood and appreciated; we must understand and appreciate ourselves.

‍

It's a tricky balancing act. Criticism of all kinds can spur growth, and the most iconic filmmakers’ do not begin their careers in the same place they end them, just as often for the better as for worse. Peele wowed with Get Out, but the acclaim has seen him sterilized. Nope is polished in a way a third-time filmmaker’s work should be, but it rests on reputation.

‍

Nope has many things working in its favor; its characters, though not fully imagined, are developed enough within their archetypes to appreciate how they bounce off of one another. We all know that edgy kid behind the counter at a tech store and believe he’d be just as dismissive of his customers as eager to prove his worth when allowed to forge a social bond. We all know the quiet man who lives the simple life, more attached to the horses on his farm than any person with whom he interacts. We all know the pretentious artiste sneering at anyone with a dream but who leaps into action when that dream could prove beneficial. We all know that person who’s hustling in every way they can imagine. We also know that every moment they share feels like a human contrast to the inhuman mysteries unfolding in the sky.

‍

We also know that these people rarely get the chance to interact; seeing the generalities play out is a whiplash of narrative convenience and thematic resolution. It reminds us that message and motive do not always align. We can strive to make a statement, but if we allow our desire to create something people enjoy to quash creative integrity, the message will get lost.

‍

It cannot help but feel like much of what the movie gives us is unearned, even though the film is enjoyable enough to (mostly) not care. Such is the charm of Nope, which struggles to maintain the aura of mystery all the way through to its payoff: whether it's reveling in its peaks or laboring through its valleys, we always want to see where it’s going. We enjoy watching the people we follow refuse to abandon their purpose. As any person would, they fear the unknown, and like any movie character, they opt to fight instead of fly, but Nope remembers to make sure the fight lacks principle.

‍

After all, the motive was always money, to capture the footage of Jean Jacket, spread it like wildfire, and rake in the dough. The climax, though it does not maximize its open landscape, satisfies because it doesn’t idealize its heroes even after spending an entire film building our complicated adoration for them. Unfortunately, what lessons it could’ve imparted about the cost of seeking fame and fortune get lost in the quest to have everyone come home safely: the only one to perish is the one who does so to extend the movie 20 minutes longer.

‍

At the end of the day, no matter how enjoyable a film is, if it’s too in love with what it wants to be to become anything in particular, we will leave the theater feeling unsatisfied. It is the most difficult type of film to critique and the kind that divides us more than any other; those who love projections will unleash theirs, while those who value a cleaner narrative will roll their eyes. Nope has many elements of a great film, but it also buckles under the weight of its ambition to the point of feeling like it never had any.

‍

If we want to feature the downward spiral into madness of a television chimp as a critique on the forced mental fragility of show business, then it cannot be a feature; something heavy and culturally ingrained deserves a genuine moment in the sun. Nope wishes to shine a light but cannot decide how, when, or why to do it while giving the appearance of knowing all three. It’s a film one can enjoy but not one to get admired. It doesn’t deserve a “nope” but doesn’t earn both of the Haywoods living to see another day. It acts very much like its peculiar villain; much-hyped, sometimes intriguing, occasionally thrilling, ultimately disappointing, and only able to fly as high as a drone from Fry’s Electronics.