“The Drama” is an unsettling dark comedy

By Alfie Eville

Robert Pattinson and Zendaya have cordially invited us to one of the weirdest and most unsettling films about marriage that I have ever seen. “The Drama” is director Kristoffer Borgli’s third feature film, and follows in a similar pattern to his other two. Borgli has a certain style that is very “The Twilight Zone”-esque, in that everything on the surface feels fine and functioning, but the more you look, the weirder and worse it gets. His newest work exemplifies that, as the two main characters are quite representative of his style as a filmmaker. Pattinson and Zendaya play Charlie and Emma, respectively, a soon-to-be married couple, days before their wedding. They are a quirky couple that seem so unassuming and charming, but as the trailer alluded to, there hides beneath them a terrible secret — one so damning that it could put their relationship in shambles. 

I want to offer a brief note to those that have not seen the movie, but still wish to: the first half of this review will be spoiler-free, as this film is best enjoyed with no knowledge of the core plot. The second half will then dive into a more spoiler-heavy discussion.

The film works so well at making you feel nothing but discomfort. Be it the dialogue, the weird decisions being made or the editing and sound, Borgli makes sure that the audience is squirming in their seats. The most effective tool used is the way the film is edited, oftentimes cutting in between interactions to enunciate certain things said or implied, or cut between real and imagined life; it makes for a jarring watch, and succeeds greatly. This, along with the camera work, often utilizing dutch angles and uncomfortably close or wide-angle shots of character’s faces, is amazing to see and elevates that aspect of the film. 

I think, altogether, the film works very nicely, but still does have its flaws, some being minor criticisms, but others rather glaring. The smallest of flaws is that the first act is essentially just the trailer, with very little changed. It was very noticeable, and made me want to skip through the first 20 minutes, since I had already gotten the gist from a two-minute trailer. That is not to say that the first act is bad, but just poor marketing, I suppose. The second act, though, dragged in several parts, with some scenes contributing very little or restating what had already been shown. It made for poor pacing, as the first half or so is pretty quick, but then grinds to an abrupt halt for a good 20 minutes. The last act is good, however, with the ending tying things together neatly. One final thing I must mention is that, for a cast that is almost entirely just Pattinson and Zendaya for most of the film, I thought they were just … fine. These are two A-List actors that were nearly 90% of the attraction to this film, but once you actually see their performances, it is lackluster for what they have shown in their past work. This is especially true for Pattinson, who has a fantastic range and has been in so many shining roles in the past. In short, their acting feels replaceable, which is a pity. Zendaya had some good moments in the film, showing a wide array of emotion, but in other spots, she felt flat and out of it. This can not be said for Alana Haim, who had a starring role in Paul Thomas Anderson’s “Licorice Pizza.” She was great in that film, but even better in a supporting role as Rachel here. She was spectacular in playing the vindictive and deeply unlikeable Rachel. Every scene that featured her had my skin crawling, even boiling down to the small gestures or glares she would signal. An outstanding and unexpected standout performance from Haim. 

For that, I would say this film is a strong three and a half out of five stars, providing some great bits of entertainment and shock-value, but lacks substance in some other key departments. 

Warning: spoilers ahead

Now, before the next portion of this review I want to offer a brief aside regarding upcoming spoilers and content warnings: this movie’s heavy discussion of gun violence and school shootings is jarring to hear at first. The wine tasting scene is done expertly, with the reveal of Emma’s plot to commit such an act being so appalling, it caught me heavily off guard. 

Some would point to the writing decision for it to be a school shooting as unnecessary and tasteless, but I disagree. I think it works very well and stirs up an interesting debate between, not only the characters, but also the audience watching. She almost did this, but then went on to change and grow, becoming a staunch anti-gun activist. Rachel is outraged and comes at Emma’s throat for contemplating doing such a thing. But, is Emma in the right? Is anyone? Is Emma a bad or dangerous person for almost doing this? Borgli makes audiences ask a very good question: Can someone be defined so much by their past, or can we accept that people are capable of change? If it were something more black and white, such as actually killing someone, then there is no room for this great philosophical discussion between theater go-ers.

With that being said, I do not think “The Drama” is trying to be overtly political or revealing — it is not 2002’s “Bowling for Columbine” or 2003’s “Elephant.” These heavier themes are much more in the backdrop and are a catalyst for the devolving relationship between Emma and Charlie. 

Alfie Eville is a freshman history and secondary education major