Triangle of Sadness (2022)

The critic calls the film a dark but uproarious provocation and class-war Gilligan’s Island, praising its slick mix of physical and verbal farce along with sharp observations of human behavior under capitalism.

Praises it as Östlund’s best yet, a wild, gross, hilarious and incisive satire that shifts sympathies and hits a sweet spot between entertainment and commentary.

Triangle of Sadness is blisteringly funny, narratively intrepid and spitting mad, with pointed satire on the idle super-rich that arrives acutely at Cannes. Its three-part structure and riotous characters deliver an invigorating festival highlight despite lacking subtlety.

Östlund delivers a farcical yet searing satire of the wealthy, with blunt, enjoyable comedy centered on class upheaval after a yacht disaster. The scatological set-piece and grotesque characters provide cathartic, if unsubtle, entertainment.

Östlund’s Palme d’Or winner is a violently entertaining drama that skewers the rich with extreme, precise satire and dynamic camerawork. The third act on the island is tense and urgent, highlighting inverted hierarchies.

The critic finds the over-the-top satire enjoyable with stomach-churning scenes and visual creativity, though it gestures at big questions on class and gender without bold statements and ends abruptly.

The critic calls it a bold and brilliant scatological Lord of the Flies set among the super-rich, full of explosive gross-out humour and epic schadenfreude that edges into sympathy.

The critic praises the ambitious, consistently entertaining fable about the super-rich that uses one-liners, Woody Harrelson and gross-out gags to show the dehumanising essence of free-market capitalism.

The critic calls it a wildly funny takedown of the super-rich that goes all the way with bodily-fluid humour, praising its clarity, economy and combination of sledgehammer and scalpel satire.

The absurdist wealth satire offers little new insight on greed but excels through sharp comic observation and strong performances, especially Harrelson and De Leon. It turns into a comedic Lord of the Flies on an island with tongue-in-cheek tone.

Östlund expands on the formula from 'The Square' with wickedly funny absurdist situations that make the privileged squirm and test ideas about beauty and wealth as currency. The meticulous precision in constructing scenes creates agonizing unease and makes viewers think.

The critic describes an erratic new comedy about the indignities of success and a messy satire about wealth that occasionally uses a scalpel but more often a scattergun, stretching length and cranking volume.

The critic finds Östlund's takedown of the super-rich has more style than substance, with grotesque caricatures and a gloriously cathartic second-act climax that gives way to a flabby third act and an obvious message.

The overstuffed satire strains with obvious, blunt critiques of the one percent and excessive vomit sequences that tax patience. It singles out Dolly de Leon's sensational performance as the most memorable element and endorses self-sufficiency in the island section.

The critic finds flashes of caustic insight but wishes for a lighter touch, noting that the laborious satire on capitalism lacks the ironic cool of Östlund’s prior work while praising brisk ensemble acting.

The critic finds the film high on rhetorical acrobatics but lacking the humanist curiosity of Östlund's earlier work, with a heavy narrative hand that makes characters cartoonish and removes room for surprise. The opening modeling-industry vignette stands out for its improvisatory performances and exploration of equality rhetoric versus retrograde power dynamics.

The critic finds the satire disappointingly blunt and glib, self-indulgent with easy digs at wealth and privilege, though the opening and central couple provide some sly humor.

The film shoots fish in a barrel with facile political stances that flatter the art-house audience rather than challenging assumptions, resulting in a mechanical and crass satire. The fine cast, especially Charlbi Dean, lends life to the superficial caricatures amid stiff direction.

Finds the class satire smug and nihilistic, with broadly drawn characters, though early scenes on models are good; overall a slog with hazardous levels of smug.

The critic finds the satire obvious, preening, and complacent, with surface cleverness that fails to expose hypocrisies and instead advertises the status quo. He singles out the meandering plot and visual polish as elements that fool some viewers but ultimately make it a very bad movie.

The critic finds Östlund’s class satire fun and ridiculous despite being occasionally blunt and long, praising the director’s framing and shot composition as a highlight.

The film is a bitter, clever satire that delivers a mission statement on how equality does not and cannot exist. It singles out the rigid hierarchy of shipboard life and the behavior of the ultra-wealthy survivors for sharp observation.

The critic calls the film an utterly hilarious satire in three acts with biting class commentary that explodes into chaos. They single out Woody Harrelson's standout performance as the Marxist captain for praise.

Östlund delivers a deliciously vicious satire that takes a sledgehammer to the global elite in three increasingly satisfying chapters, with outrageously funny sequences like the Captain's Dinner standing out. The targets may be low-hanging fruit and the critique unsophisticated, but the gags remain deliriously funny.

The critic finds the broad class satire faltering and overly cynical, with underdeveloped ideas and tedious stretches. They single out the physical comedy in the capsizing sequence as one of the few redeeming elements amid the heavy-handed messaging.

The critic views the film as a mostly tedious and surface-level class satire that lacks novelty or depth, though it is entertaining at times and features strong performances from Dickinson and de Leon.