Eddington
Eddington is the film Ari Aster has been building to since Hereditary. His earlier work destroyed the family as a unit of safety. Midsommar destroyed the romantic relationship. Beau Is Afraid destroyed the male self. Eddington destroys the conservative community.…
Full analysis belowEddington does not qualify as a woke trap. The film's political content is front-loaded and visible from the premise: a COVID-era New Mexico town, political extremism, conspiracy culture. Ari Aster's filmography and A24 distribution are brand signals that alert informed viewers before they buy a ticket. The woke content does not hide until the 50 percent mark; it is the premise. The film presents conservative populism and COVID skepticism as dangerous delusion from frame one. This is openly woke cinema, not a trap. Conservative viewers who attend expecting a traditional western will have missed explicit warning signs. The film's -15.5 margin produces a WOKE verdict. The trap requirement of actually negative margin is met, but the concealment requirement is not.
Eddington is the film Ari Aster has been building to since Hereditary. His earlier work destroyed the family as a unit of safety. Midsommar destroyed the romantic relationship. Beau Is Afraid destroyed the male self. Eddington destroys the conservative community. The target gets larger with each film, and the formal ambition keeps pace.
Joaquin Phoenix plays Sheriff Joe Cross, a small New Mexico town's law enforcement officer navigating the early months of the COVID pandemic. He is likable in the opening sequences. Aster has made him deliberately, specifically likable. This is the trap the film is laying: you are meant to recognize Joe as a decent man before you watch him become something else.
The film argues that Joe's journey from decent local lawman to conspiratorial extremist is not a story of individual failure. It is a story of cultural infrastructure. The conservative small town has no defense against the political viruses the pandemic era releases because its value system, its distrust of expertise, its suspicion of institutions, its prioritization of individual interpretation over collective guidance, is the ideal medium for extremist growth.
This is a cogent argument. It is also a deeply unfair one. The film does not engage with the genuine failures of institutions during the COVID period: the mixed messaging, the over-correcting, the moments when official guidance was demonstrably wrong. It presents institutional distrust as pathology without acknowledging the institutional failures that created reasonable grounds for distrust. The progressive argument is presented as fact. The conservative argument is presented as symptom.
Phoenix is extraordinary in the role. His Joe Cross is the finest performance of his career since The Master, and it is wasted on an ideological project. He inhabits Joe's growing confusion and alarm and grandiosity with a specificity that is devastating to watch. If you can watch this performance while understanding that it is being used as evidence against people with legitimate political concerns, the formal achievement is undeniable.
Emma Stone's Louise is the film's moral center. She watches her husband with a combination of love and horror that Stone plays with remarkable precision. Her scenes with Pedro Pascal's Ted, the couple's educated friend from outside the community, give the film its ideological counterpoint. Ted sees clearly what is happening to Joe. Louise sees it too. We, the audience, are positioned to see it with them.
The problem is that 'seeing clearly' in this film means adopting the progressive framework. The rural community's concerns about the pandemic, about economic displacement, about cultural condescension from educated elites, are not engaged with as legitimate grievances. They are engagement with as fertilizer for extremism.
For VirtueVigil readers, this film needs to be understood clearly: it is a technically masterful, formally extraordinary piece of filmmaking that argues your worldview is a disease. That is what it does. It does not argue against your specific policy positions. It argues that your epistemology, your way of knowing and interpreting the world, produces dangerous outcomes. This is a more fundamental attack than any policy argument, and it deserves a more fundamental response than a simple woke flag.
The film scores WOKE at -15.5 margin. The traditional elements, Joe's initial decency, the film's early affection for small town community, the treatment of the marriage as genuine loss, are not strong enough to counterbalance the severity of the woke content at the film's ideological center.
Ari Aster is brilliant. Eddington is wrong. Both of these things are true.
Formula: Weighted Score = Severity × Authenticity Multiplier × Centrality Multiplier
🔴 Woke Tropes
| Trope | Severity | Authenticity | Centrality | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conservative Populism and COVID Skepticism Depicted as Dangerous Radicalization | 5 | High | High | 6.3 |
| Institutional Distrust Coded as Pathology | 4 | Moderate | High | 7.2 |
| Rural American Community Depicted as Politically Unstable | 4 | Moderate | High | 7.2 |
| Progressive Cosmopolitan Characters as Moral Authorities | 3 | Moderate | Moderate | 3 |
| TOTAL WOKE | 23.7 | |||
🟢 Traditional Tropes
| Trope | Severity | Authenticity | Centrality | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sheriff Attempting to Serve His Community | 3 | Moderate | High | 5.4 |
| Small Town Sense of Community and Place | 2 | High | Moderate | 1.4 |
| Marriage Under Pressure | 2 | High | Moderate | 1.4 |
| TOTAL TRADITIONAL | 8.2 | |||
Score Margin: -16 WOKE
Director: Ari Aster
STRONGLY PROGRESSIVE. Ari Aster's filmography is the most consistently progressive in contemporary American prestige horror. Hereditary (2018) dismantled the nuclear family and its capacity to protect its members from spiritual violence. Midsommar (2019) framed a female protagonist escaping her American boyfriend and embracing a pagan matriarchal commune as an act of personal liberation. Beau Is Afraid (2023) was an exhausting, three-hour psychoanalytic horror that coded the American mother as the source of all masculine damage. Eddington marks Aster's turn away from horror toward political satire, but the ideological framework is identical. Conservative values, rural community, skepticism of official institutions, and COVID caution are depicted as pathological rather than as legitimate positions. The film is the work of a filmmaker who genuinely believes that American conservatism is a form of collective delusion.Ari Aster is an American filmmaker born in New York who built his reputation with two defining horror films that positioned him as the most formally accomplished and thematically ambitious director of his generation. Hereditary was a technical marvel and an ideological statement: the family is a horror movie. Midsommar told the same story in pastoral colors: the American relationship is a horror movie. Beau Is Afraid extended the thesis to its limit: the American male is the horror movie. Eddington extends the pattern outward to American political culture: American conservatism is a horror movie. The formal ambition is undeniable. The ideological consistency is equally undeniable. For VirtueVigil readers, understanding what you are walking into with an Ari Aster film is more important than any single review. You are walking into a film by a director who believes that the traditional American worldview is a disease. Eddington is his diagnosis of that disease applied to the COVID moment.
Adult Viewer Insight
Conservative adults should understand what Eddington is doing and decide accordingly. This is not woke content hidden in entertainment. This is an explicit political argument about conservative culture. The film will be used in progressive circles as evidence for their view of COVID-era American politics. It will be used in conservative circles as evidence for their view of Hollywood's political agenda. Both of these uses are correct interpretations of what the film is doing. If you attend, go with your eyes open. The performance by Joaquin Phoenix is worth engaging with purely as craft. The ideological argument is worth understanding even if you reject it. Eddington takes conservative people seriously enough to argue against them at length, which is more than many progressive films do. That is not praise. It is context.
Parental Guidance
Rated R. Not appropriate for children or teenagers. The film contains strong language, drug use, and political violence. Its more significant concern for conservative families is its explicit political agenda: the film argues at length that conservative political positions are dangerous delusions. This is not content that families can simply filter out. It is the film's entire project. Adult conservatives who wish to understand the most sophisticated progressive cultural argument about the COVID period may find Eddington worth the discomfort. Everyone else should spend their time elsewhere.
Find Eddington on Amazon Prime Video, rent, or buy:
▶ Stream or Buy on AmazonAs an Amazon Associate, VirtueVigil earns from qualifying purchases.
Community Discussion 0
Subscribe to comment.
Join the VirtueVigil community to share your perspective on this review.