Tennis Is Sex! 'Challengers' Is Zendaya's Movie Star Arrival

#270: "Challengers," "Scoop," "Father of the Bride," "Mad Max Fury Road"

Edition 270:

Hey movie lovers!

This week: The buzzy, sexy tennis drama Challengers gives Zendaya the movie star test. I caught up on a recent Netflix original, found a real world connection for a 90s classic, and am giving myself homework before a blockbuster sequel release in a couple of weeks. In this week’s “Trailer Watch,” didn’t we just see a movie about a war photographer like two weeks ago?

Challengers

For over a decade, the prevailing wisdom around Hollywood was that movie stardom had died, and IP had killed it. If that’s true, someone forgot to tell the next generation: Timothée Chalamet, Glenn Powell, Austin Butler, Sydney Sweeney, Tom Holland and, perhaps more than anyone else, Zendaya.

At 27 years old, she was already super famous. People know her from Disney Channel, “Euphoria,” Spider-Man, and having 184 million (not a typo, 184 MILLION) followers on Instagram — that final stat being so powerful that I think it was one of the primary reason Challengers’ release date was delayed during the actor’s strike, because Zendaya’s inability to promote the movie on social media blocked a fundamental cornerstone of the movie’s strategy.

That’s because Challengers is her movie star arrival. She’s never been the face of a “star vehicle,” a movie that is made because of her involvement and marketed primarily on her appeal. And no, this was never going to be a blockbuster — to be honest, the big budget star vehicle is likely dead forever (Barbie, Wonka, Dune 2…those are all IP-driven, not star-driven) — but still, a $60 million budget with major studio distribution and marketing is a big big deal.

Hers is an unusual screen presence. In the press coverage of this movie I’ve seen a lot of people invoke the name Julia Roberts, but comparing Roberts’ early career effervescence to Zendaya’s dead-eyed aloofness seems like apples and oranges to me. She is the type of matinee idol that everyone wants to be, yet always seems just out of reach…a little too cool, a little too smart, a little too beautiful.

That persona works perfectly for the premise of this movie, in which she plays a young tennis phenom who gets caught in a love triangle between two promising male players. She suffers a career ending injury and then must hitch her wagon to one of the boys, as they take diverting paths.

The hilarious thing about this being “the Zendaya movie star movie” is that really, the narrative construction is built around those two men. Director Luca Guadagnino, who made Call Me By Your Name, knows a thing or two about homoerotic male relationships, and found two perfectly cast leads in Mike Faist (who burst on the scene with his amazing performance in West Side Story) and Josh O’Connor (Prince Charles in “The Crown”).

Thematically, it’s actually one of the simplest movies I’ve seen in quite a long time. It’s almost offensively simple. Faist’s character is a nice guy beta male, O’Connor’s is a shameless, selfish dirt bag. Zendaya is smart enough to know one is better for her, and not strong enough to deny the temptation for the other.

The movie is sold on the promise being “sexy,” or at least “steamy” — and in fairness, there are plenty of scenes to uphold that reputation — but every single one of the intimate scenes gets interrupted or shut down, which then sets up an incredibly obvious metaphor: the tennis is the sex!

Now, on the spectrum of bad sports movies, this one does a commendable job of vaguely passable tennis action (I know I’m a harsh critic here), but there is just way too many scenes of people playing tennis. There’s no need for it from a plot perspective. But Guadagnino wants to make sure you know, five times over, what the grunts and sweating and banging (pun intended) of the ball (pun still intended) and the climactic “COME ONNNN!” really means.

(One quick sidenote on the tennis stuff, just because I’m a big tennis fan and can’t help myself: early in the movie they say that Faist’s character has won SIX grand slams. That would make him no worse than, I don’t know, a top 15 player all-time?! There is no way someone with six grand slams would be going through a crisis of confidence, or ever playing in a challengers tour event. Also, this movie takes place between 2006-2019…so he won six slams during the Federer/Nadal/Djokovic prime?? Andy Murray won three during that time and he’s a first ballot hall of famer. It’s a small thing, but logically it unravels the entire movie. Ok stepping off my soapbox now.)

Either in spite of this simplicity or maybe because of it, the actual construction of the narrative is incredibly complex. We’re in 2019→then flashback to 2006→then 2019, then 2007→then 2019→2006→2012→2009→2019→2012. The timeline is more chopped up than a Christopher Nolan story. I get the purpose of this…details are slowly unspooled to the audience just before they’re needed in the present day timeline, but it took some real concentration to keep time straight.

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, is the score. Not usually something worth commenting on, and we all know by now that Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross are one of the best composing teams in the business (The Social Network, Soul, Gone Girl), and the music here is certainly memorable…because it completely overpowers the movie. It’s actually such an important part of the drama that I can’t imagine what the movie would be like without it. But the way several scenes just completely turn over the reigns to a pounding, pulsing score was, to me, like trying to thread a needle with a blunt force hammer. Way too much.

All in all, the movie was more effective as a meme factory than a cohesive piece of work. There are moments of brilliance, and all three actors represent themselves well, but I found the bells and whistles distracting from a core that was a bit empty (that’s rare from Guadagnino, because I loved his last project Bones And All). For Zendaya as a celebrity and movie star, it will be marked a success. For Amazon/MGM, it’s going to lose money. And for the rest of us, we’ve got to pray that more $60 million star vehicle projects come down the pipeline.

---

Something New

Scoop (Netflix): Journalism movies often portray my profession as heroic protectors of civil society, and sometimes, it’s warranted (She Said or Spotlight, for instance). The BBC reporters in this tale, about the disastrous TV interview Prince Andrew gave about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, certainly think of themselves in that same vein. At the end, there’s a newsroom-wide round of applause and a triumphant producer saying, “This is what Newsnight is about…holding the powerful to account, giving victims a voice.”

If the movie itself believes in that sentiment, it’s a bad movie. But I actually think there’s reason to believe the movie is laying it on thick to make a viewer question whether the journalists are as great as they think they are. Our protagonist, the network’s “booker,” (a job responsible for landing celebrity talent), whines about not being taken seriously as a journalist but is seen needing to Google who the subjects are that she’s assigned to, and when she’s finally let into “the room where it happens” (s/o Hamilton) she has nothing to contribute other than telling the network anchor to take it easier on the Prince. The anchor herself is self-aggrandizing, the producers are blood-thirsty, and the reporters are jealous and petty.

I admit I’ve never been a fan or follower of the British aristocracy, so when I think about the “consequence” of Prince Andrew stepping away from his royal duties, I think….so what? What great deed was done for the world? In what way did you actually help the victims?

The movie is trim, at just 1hr42min, and keeps a viewer’s interest and attention throughout, so there’s a baseline of entertainment there. And if it is stealthily but intentionally constructed to get me to ask these questions, then I think it deserves some credit for being really interesting.

Something Old

Father of the Bride (1991, Disney+ and Hulu): I found out this week that the church I’ve been going to for the past six months is actually the very same building used in this classic Steve Martin family comedy for the final wedding. I found it on streaming, put on the final scene, and sure enough! It looks the exact same. But then I got carried away and ended up rewatching most of the movie, because it’s just about the best execution ever of a sentimental, saccharine story ever creative.

Martin has never been better as a father surprised that his young daughter is engaged after a trip abroad, and Diane Keaton is the perfect compliment as his wife. It’s really funny and really sweet, not in a needy or desperate way like a 2024 version of it would be (for proof, just watch the literal 2022 reboot), but genuinely moving in a timeless sort of way. Always worth a rewatch. And hey, nice church!

Something to Stream

Mad Max Fury Road (Max): We’re just three weeks away from Furiosa, one of those giant, ambitious swings of a movie that could make or break the summer slate. People, especially the film bros, loooooove this 2015 reboot of the franchise, which spawned three Mel Gibson-led entries in the late 70s and 80s. I’m setting this as homework not just for you all but also myself, because I’ll be honest, I didn’t like this movie when it first came out.

The practical action sequences were sick, and in contrast to the CGI slopfest it’s been compared to in the last nine years, I can certainly respect the filmmaking chops of George Miller and acting of Tom Hardy and Charlize Theron. But the utter lack of story, let alone dialogue, gave me very little to latch onto. However, I watched this at the very beginning of my adventure into cinephilia, and I wonder now, some thousand-plus movies later, whether it will seem like a masterpiece upon revisit. You go watch it, I’ll go re-watch it, and then let’s discuss.

---

Trailer Watch: Lee

If you thought to yourself hmmm, you know, I liked Civil War except for the civil war part…boy do I have the movie for you. Kate Winslett stars as the real life WW2 photographer Lee Miller, who is such the inspiration for Kirsten Dunst’s Civil War character that you would’ve thought it was the same role with separate actresses. I see Andy Samberg, Marion Cotillard and Josh O’Connor here, which is good news because the fact this is a “Sky Original” from an unknown first time director would almost have me thinking this is B-movie material. Alas, Winslett has a penchant for delivering must-see performances, so now this movie is on my radar. ‘Tis the year for war photographers!