Reviews TV + Movies

Smashing Rackets And Sharing Churros; A Queer Win With Challengers

The characters in themselves are very grey, and isn’t that the fun of a film like Challengers? Watching any relationship unfold from a third person’s view makes it very easy to assign morals. But once you forego the heteronormative lens about relationships, you see three people who want nothing more but a win. The feedback that was critically focused on the morality of the film and the “strangeness” of the shared dynamic of the three leads misses out on the opportunity to open their minds to new possibilities. Regardless of how the director intended the dynamic to be understood, you cannot experience the film with a closed mind. The thrill of the film is rooted in their competitive, destructive and primal survival instincts. It simply doesn’t get more basic than this!

First off, I must admit that I’m a bit late to the Challengers watch-party and should’ve been more of a go-getter with writing this review sooner on what I consider the serve of the decade!

With Luca Guadagnino’s vision and the country club-inspired music score by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, Challengers stars Zendaya (as Tashi Duncan), Mike Faist (as Art Donaldson), and Josh O’Connor (as Patrick Zweig). The movie swings between breathtaking shots of countryside scenery and the actors in their glorious racket-smashing moments. Styled in J.W. Anderson by Kate Abraham, Zendaya smashes through as the initial villain, foreseeing her future as the “homewrecker” of Zweig and Donaldson’s relationship. As the movie progresses, we find Art meddling and playing the homewrecker to his closest friends, breaking through not just Zendaya’s main ambition but the downfall of his best friend Patrick.

All three of them manage to break each other’s spirits, all in the name of settling scores and “playing tennis”.

What truly stuck out for me was how the story unfolded and the inevitable polyamorous situation between the three of them as they dealt with their individual dreams, responsibilities, and desires. Zendaya does a phenomenal job at playing the unapologetic female lead who finds herself leading and living her dreams vicariously through her “two white boys”. It’s very clear that Tashi is not here for love, but for winning and a “good tennis match”. No matter who or how it takes her to get there. We are also able to see a softer side to her every time she is around her daughter, mother or other people. She’s hard on Art and Patrick as both a partner and coach, but harder on herself, making her the true game-changer. Till the end, we find Art struggling to find his voice and actual dreams, but his passive actions contribute to his image of the “nice guy”. On the other hand, Patrick, who takes it upon himself to be the victim and villain of his circumstances, is never ashamed to be the stereotypical “bad boy”. It’s very easy for semi-seasoned watchers to blame everything on either Tashi’s ambition or Art’s passiveness.

Besides the obvious polyamory situation, the male leads, according to many opinions (mine included), shared sexual chemistry that has been largely missing on-screen all these years. There is a comfort and the typical “inseparable” element to the fire and ice duo. They balance each other out but also push each other further. One may be used to the idea of two guys competing for a girl’s attention, but are we prepared to see them also fighting their desire for each other? It’s very evident that they desire Tashi, but they missed one another. It’s not clear if Patrick was ready to kiss Art to please Tashi or needed her as a catalyst to do something he had always thought about. The competition for desire is not exploited as the men compete for Zendaya and also loathe her at the same time, for ruining things for them.

Appreciating Luca Guadagnino for his diverse portrayal of queer chemistry that has not been replicated in English films in a long time. All in all, it is the bisexuals who won this round of serving music, looks and fashion in a tense cinematic experience. The movie’s storyline will keep you up at night and make you rethink how you understand greed in its rawest and most corrupt form. BRB, listening to the Challengers’ background score.

However, I do want to share something about the criticism the film has received, specifically the one about its “toxic” dynamic. The characters in themselves are very grey, and isn’t that the fun of a film like Challengers? Watching any relationship unfold from a third person’s view makes it very easy to assign morals. But once you forego the heteronormative lens about relationships, you see three people who want nothing more but a win. The feedback that was critically focused on the morality of the film and the “strangeness” of the shared dynamic of the three leads misses out on the opportunity to open their minds to new possibilities. Regardless of how the director intended the dynamic to be understood, you cannot experience the film with a closed mind. The thrill of the film is rooted in their competitive, destructive and primal survival instincts. It simply doesn’t get more basic than this!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Neurodivergent queer writer who can be found either reading or sleeping. Can also be found painting occasionally.
Read more by
Jhanvi

We hate spam as much as you. Enter your email address here.