Eddington (2025) is written & directed by Ari Aster. It stars Joaquin Phoenix, Pedro Pascal, Emma Stone, Deirdre O’Connell, Micheal Ward, Cameron Mann, Luke Grimes, Matt Gomez Hidaka, Amelie Hoeferle, Austin Butler, William Belleau, Clifton Collins Jr., Landall Goolsby, Elise Falanga, King Orba, and Rachel de la Torre. The story takes place in the fictional small town of Eddington, New Mexico, during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. It follows the town’s emotionally insecure sheriff, Joe Cross (Phoenix), who decides to run for mayor after becoming fed up with the current administration’s liberal policies, which he considers to be highly corrupt. As his attempts to win over the community fail spectacularly, his need to seize power becomes more desperate. As the situation devolves, the citizens of Eddington find themselves in a violent powder keg of political distrust that pits neighbor against neighbor. 

Despite the large ensemble of recognizable names, this is Joaquin Phoenix’s movie through and through. Joe Cross is a consistently frustrating protagonist to follow. He’s consistently impulsive, annoyingly stubborn, and socially awkward, but that’s precisely the kind of character he’s designed to be (especially for left-leaning audiences). He’s not likable, but that doesn’t change the fact that Phoenix’s performance is spot on. Combined with a script that takes its time to humanize Joe, Phoenix’s fantastic performance yields one of his most memorable characters to date. The character’s increasingly unhinged actions throughout the second half of the film are exciting, but unfortunately, only serve to make the character less complex. The film revels in the quiet tension of its various character interactions, so when things go off the rails, it loses any kind of intrigue related to where the story/Joe might be headed. 

 Pedro Pascal is perfectly cast as Ted Garcia, Eddington’s charismatic, forward-thinking, yet politically shady mayor. He’s a likewise soft-spoken character meant to parallel Joe, perfectly displaying that despite their political differences, the two are more similar than they realize. Like Joe, Ted struggles to conceal the less appealing aspects of his political affiliation, resulting in a more deliciously complex character than Pascal typically portrays. 

The supporting cast is likewise strong, so it’s unfortunate that their characters ultimately feel unimportant or, at the very least, receive confusingly little focus. Top-tier actors such as Emma Stone and Austin Butler steal nearly every scene they’re in, but that only turns out to be a total of two, give or take. These performances work in the film’s favor, but primarily feel like a missed opportunity. It kind of just feels like the studio forced Aster to cast these two for the sake of marketing.

This is the kind of film that, quite simply, is not for the faint of heart. If you’ve seen any of Aster’s previous films, you’ll know exactly what I’m referring to. That being said, this is easily his most grounded and therefore accessible movie in terms of subject matter. Audiences are likely to be offended by the script’s numerous jabs at both sides of the political aisle, but I think those people are missing the point. This isn’t a film about satirizing the right or the left; it’s a film meant to display the consequences of political radicalization, regardless of which side it infects. Aster even uses “controversial” activist groups such as BLM to prove his point, framing them here as a heartless, militarized force. Many viewers will find it easy to interpret this as Aster taking shots at liberal social movements (and maybe he is, partly), but what he’s doing is using a recognizable organization to show how even groups whose mission is based on altruism can be susceptible to radicalization, going so far that they begin to propagate exactly what they set out to fight. 

Aster sustains the 2 ½ hour run time by implementing various shifts in the film’s story direction and general tone. As soon as you think it’s going to be one kind of movie, it quickly becomes another. The problem is, the ideas Aster explores don’t necessarily warrant such length. The script constantly revisits the same ideas, padding the run time in a way that makes the film feel like an Epic, but an unnecessary one. In other words, it feels like things are drawn out, but not in a way that supports the slow-burning nature of its first half. This all leads to a memorably shocking, yet unsatisfying climax. Thematically, this ending works to subtle perfection, but disappoints as a more straightforward, surface-level conclusion. It has a lot to say, but it isn’t entertaining enough to compel a person to listen. 

Overall, this is a flawed yet wildly original artistic vision that is guaranteed to be divisive, but for all the wrong reasons. Although mainly a modern Western of sorts, the film might just be the most terrifying film Aster has ever produced. This display of COVID-19 anxieties taken to their darkest possible outcome is truly one-of-a-kind, resulting in a movie that feels timely and important. It’s undeniably tedious, but it’s also uncommonly detailed. If you take away the wrong message (which is admittedly easy), the film will only work to offend you. However, if you’re able to put the pieces together, it’s a mostly rewarding and surprisingly human film. It’s definitely niche, but I have to admit that I enjoyed it more than I expected. B