In Dragon Eats Eagle, a couple of immortal beings play a game while deciding what to do next while nobody seems to be able to win. They have seen and lived through it all, from Biblical events to the founding of America. They are now working for the leaders who have a say in where the country goes. The association between them and the supposedly funny dynamics of a fictional government aren’t fully explained.
The film is a satirical and often outlandish adaptation of an opinion. A director with a decent budget has decided to adapt his own script and stay under the wing of a political view that is far less interesting than he thinks. For takes like that, you only need to log into Twitter and read and read and read.
A movie should have an effect. Always. Even if it’s a bad one, you always should make your audience talk about what they’ve seen. Noah Marks has simply taken ideas he thinks are funny and mashed them up in a film that’s unforgettable, loud, and inconsistent. When those two main characters address themselves in conversations that never sound natural, the political setting is a bit relevant because there’s a way to associate their views with a reality we live in. But then the film starts introducing more absurd characters that have little to no reason in regards to the original message.
It doesn’t matter where you stand in regards to politics. Films trying to make fun of those could be functional in the discussion, if they only were intelligent and weren’t slapstick versions of ridicule displays by current politicians. We are smart enough to understand what Marks is trying to do, but perhaps he didn’t fully cooperate in expressing what he wanted us to do with the film. In my case, I simply wish to forget about it and remember the smarter versions of Dragon Eats Eagle. And yes, they exist.
Founder of Screentology. Member of the OFCS. RT Certified Critic
Dog dad.
Leave feedback about this