Why Jenna Ortega’s new movie Death of a Unicorn shows ‘eat the rich’ has lost its bite

In this current century, as wealth disparity has grown significantly worldwide, there’s ample cause for disdain towards the affluent and influential. This is particularly evident in the cinematic world over the past decade, where movies have increasingly provided viewers with a satisfying sense of schadenfreude at the expense of the top 1%.

We’ve seen the wealthy suffer betrayal at the hands of their employees (as in Parasite), attend a deadly feast unaware (The Menu), be picked off one by one by an innocent-looking guest (Saltburn), and lose their privileged status when they encounter shipwreck (Triangle of Sadness).

To put it another way, there are numerous examples of literature that criticize the wealthy, and we’ve only scratched the surface in mentioning them all.

What to Read Next

Next up is “Death of a Unicorn“, another horror-comedy that fits this genre, featuring the Leopold family: Odell (Richard E Grant), Belinda (Téa Leoni) and Shepard (Will Poulter). They have plans to capitalize on the healing abilities of these mythical beasts for their personal wealth.

By 2025, we’ll be tired and even a bit nauseous from continually witnessing the downfall of wealthy characters on screen.

Or,

By 2025, we might feel like we’ve had enough of watching rich characters experience their fall from grace.

Or,

By 2025, we’ll be saturated to the point of discomfort with observing wealthy characters face their demise on screen.

In the climax of the movie, Ridley, played by Jenna Ortega and the sensible daughter of Elliott (portrayed by Paul Rudd), makes a valiant effort to prevent the Leopolds from performing a complete dissection of the unicorn, from horn to tail, and mailing off its parts to the ones willing to pay the most.

Although we can relate to the humor inherent in this absurd idea and sympathize with Ridley’s righteous purpose, the repetition eventually grows tiresome.

A significant portion of the fatigue stems from the fact that these stories aren’t entirely fresh – the theme of a straightforward, diligent hero standing up against corrupt antagonists has been around for quite some time. Characters like Indiana Jones and Ridley may focus on different topics such as artifact preservation and mythical creature conservation respectively, but upon closer inspection, they have more in common than one might initially assume.

In contrast, Ridley’s character is built on her sense of righteousness (apart from her issues with her father), and viewers often find it challenging to root for a character who seems morally superior because they are always right. Consequently, it becomes difficult to desire the downfall of the antagonists as they become more entertaining to watch compared to our supposed hero.

In Emerald Fennell’s film Saltburn, there were some issues, however, the surprising revelation that Oliver (Barry Keoghan) is not of working-class origin but rather comfortably upper-middle class, challenges the common ‘rich-eating’ trope instead.

In a less formal manner, the cold-blooded ambition displayed by Oliver seems downright thrilling in its psychopathic nature because it isn’t driven by poverty or social strife, but rather an insatiable hunger for wealth characteristic of the nouveau riche. Fennell’s portrayal of Oliver has striking similarities to Fitzgerald’s Gatsby, challenging our preconceived notions about class and making us reconsider what we thought we knew.

As a gamer, I’ve grown tired of seeing the same old cliches on the silver screen. The working-class hero, who seems to be constantly exhausted, and his opposite – the flamboyant billionaire whose greed is seemingly endless – have become as much of a stereotype as the Trump impersonation. Richard E Grant delivers an acceptable acting performance, given his talent, but the recurring gag (if you can even call it that) is how despicable his character is.

The focus on billionaires in “Death of the Unicorn” remains just as static as its portrayal of a family that amassed their fortune in pharmaceuticals.

Over the past few years, multiple interpretations of pharmaceutical dynasties have emerged, often focusing on either straightforward representations (such as “Pain Hustlers”) or subtle criticisms (like “Dead Ringers” and “The Fall of the House of Usher”). However, due to frequent repetition, these portrayals seem less impactful.

The beginning of today’s growing movement against wealth inequality can be traced back to an extraordinary and thought-provoking setting – the depiction of South Korea’s class divide in Bong Joon-ho’s movie “Parasite.

However, as this trend persists, offering a constant stream of stories about billionaires, the topic seems to have reached a saturation point, becoming stale or even unappetizing.

Instead of continuously portraying stereotypical representations of the wealthy elite for entertainment purposes, the audience’s reactions have shifted from laughter to a thoughtful nod and now an exasperated eye roll over the past few years. The persistent existence of class differences has not diminished, but our interest in these types of movies seems to be waning due to their predictable repetition.

However, it’s high time for sharp, sarcastic critiques of billionaires in films. The ‘rich-eating’ film genre should adapt to remain relevant.

Death of a Unicorn is out now in cinemas.

Read More

2025-04-04 15:49