Critics at Large | The New Yorker
Episode: A Controversial Trump Bio-pic and the Villains We Make
Release Date: October 10, 2024
Introduction and Overview
In this thought-provoking episode of Critics at Large, The New Yorker's staff writers—Vinson Cunningham, Nomi Frye, and Alexandra Schwartz—delve into the intricacies of the newly released biopic, The Apprentice. The discussion navigates through the film’s portrayal of Donald Trump and his complex relationship with his mentor, Roy Cohn, while also exploring the broader cultural fascination with origin stories of villains.
The Apprentice Biopic: Plot and Performances
The Apprentice presents a nuanced look into the early life of Donald Trump, focusing on his aspirations in Manhattan and his influential connection with Roy Cohn. The film stars Sebastian Stan as Trump and Jeremy Strong as Cohn, whose performances sparked considerable attention among the critics.
Alex Schwartz opens the conversation by describing the film's plot:
"The film stars Sebastian Stan as Donald Trump and Jeremy Strong as the infamous lawyer and fixer Roy Cohn."
(Timestamp: 03:45)
The trio discusses the challenges the movie faced, including financing issues after Trump's legal team threatened legal action against the creators. They commend the casting choices, highlighting Strong's portrayal of Cohn as particularly insightful:
"Jeremy Strong as Roy Cohn was kind of ingenious... his desiccated quality really played well to the figure of Cohn."
(Timestamp: 08:59)
Origin Stories in Modern Media
A central theme of the episode is the cultural trend of providing detailed origin stories for villains. Schwartz poses a critical question:
"Is it important to humanize the villain? Or is that dangerously beside the point?"
(Timestamp: 02:24)
The discussion reveals a societal shift towards seeking depth and understanding behind malevolent characters, reflecting a broader desire to comprehend the complexities that forge such individuals.
Roy Cohn: From Reality to Portrayal
Roy Cohn, depicted as a pivotal figure in Trump's rise, is examined through both the biopic and other media representations like the documentary Where's My Roy Cohn?. The critics analyze Cohn’s influence and his own villainous narrative.
Nomi Frye praises the documentary:
"Matt Tiernauer does a really good job of delineating where Roy Cohn came from... how the ethical rot at the heart of that influenced his actions."
(Timestamp: 26:37)
Cunningham adds depth by connecting Cohn’s actions to historical events:
"The trial of the Rosenbergs... cements the public image of him as a villain."
(Timestamp: 28:21)
Literature and Villainy
The conversation shifts to literary portrayals of villains, referencing Paradise Lost by John Milton. Schwartz draws parallels between Satan’s origin story and modern villain narratives:
"Satan is the villain of the story, but he also gets a whole origin story... 'The mind is its own place...'"
(Timestamp: 44:49)
Cunningham reflects on the literary purpose of such narratives:
"It’s entertaining to take the side of someone that you don't like... understand the mental architecture of the wrong is actually very entertaining."
(Timestamp: 46:56)
The Trend of Explaining Villains
Building on the literary discussion, the critics explore why contemporary media emphasizes origin stories for villains. They cite examples from television and film, noting the influence of prestige TV and the Marvel Cinematic Universe's need to flesh out antagonists:
"The antihero era... complicates villains into characters with understandable motivations."
(Timestamp: 41:15)
Schwartz questions whether this trend satisfies the audience’s appetite for understanding malevolence:
"Is it time to hang up the origin story and just rool around in the murk of the present?"
(Timestamp: 50:10)
The Impact on Political Perception
The timing of The Apprentice's release, coinciding with an impending election, prompts discussion on its political implications. Frye contends that the film's political impact is minimal:
"I really don't think it matters... a Trump voter will watch it and be like, hmm, I'm not voting for this guy."
(Timestamp: 17:32)
Cunningham and Schwartz debate whether origin stories influence public opinion, especially among undecided voters, ultimately suggesting limited sway.
Concluding Insights
As the episode wraps up, the critics reflect on the enduring relevance and potential exhaustion of origin stories in media. Schwartz introduces the idea that while origin stories have been pivotal in understanding complex characters, there might be a cultural need to shift focus towards present actions and motivations without delving into past traumas.
"Does someone stand up for literature?"
(Timestamp: 46:30)
Cunningham emphasizes the importance of distinguishing between literary exploration and political analysis:
"Understand which domain you are in."
(Timestamp: 36:38)
The episode concludes with a contemplative note on the balance between humanizing villains and maintaining clear moral distinctions, leaving listeners to ponder the efficacy and necessity of origin stories in contemporary storytelling.
Notable Quotes with Timestamps
- Alex Schwartz (02:24): "Is it important to humanize the villain? Or is that dangerously beside the point?"
- Nomi Frye (08:59): "Jeremy Strong as Roy Cohn was kind of ingenious... his desiccated quality really played well to the figure of Cohn."
- Vinson Cunningham (26:37): "Matt Tiernauer does a really good job of delineating where Roy Cohn came from... how the ethical rot at the heart of that influenced his actions."
- Alex Schwartz (44:49): "Satan is the villain of the story, but he also gets a whole origin story... 'The mind is its own place...'"
- Vinson Cunningham (46:56): "It’s entertaining to take the side of someone that you don't like... understand the mental architecture of the wrong is actually very entertaining."
Conclusion
This episode of Critics at Large offers an incisive examination of The Apprentice biopic and its place within the larger trend of exploring villains' backstories. Through engaging dialogue and critical analysis, the New Yorker’s writers challenge listeners to consider the implications of humanizing notorious figures and the cultural appetite for understanding the making of a villain.