“Triangle of Sadness” is Anti-Capitalism Sold Back to Us

Ruben Östlund’s second Palme d’Or winner insidiously approaches class commentary from all the wrong angles

Triangle of Sadness, like its eponymous shape, is structured in three distinct and connected acts that are united but not cohesive and are uniformly one-dimensional. The second Palme d'Or winning film by Swedish director Ruben Östlund, it documents the contrasting lives and material circumstances within a rigid class hierarchy aboard a luxury yacht, with the wealthy guests on top, the deck crew and service workers in the middle, and workers of color relegated to the lowest caste below deck. However, when catastrophe strikes the voyage, the hierarchy is turned on its head, and new dynamics are unveiled when the surviving members are marooned on a deserted island.

Triangle of Sadness begins slow but promising, as we spend the first act following Carl (Harris Dickinson), an aspiring model, and Yaya (Charlbi Dean), his more successful girlfriend. Östlund gives us bits and pieces of their life — irritable squabbles over who pays the bill at a restaurant (despite both their comfortable economic statuses), Carl's modeling auditions, and Yaya's runway shows which are dubbed as a part of a "new and changing climate… for fashion". 

The next act is by far the strongest segment in the film, as Östlund throws us into the new environment of the luxury yacht. We are introduced to the all-white deck crew who are told to bend to the guests' whims at any cost; the largely absent captain (Woody Harrelson), an alcoholic and ironically disaffected Marxist; and Abigail (Dolly de Leon), a Filipina maid cast aside by the guests and crew members as an inhuman afterthought. They all serve a small group of obscenely wealthy guests, including a Russian oligarch (Zlatko Burić) and two married British weapons manufacturers who are outsourced by the most powerful imperial forces on the planet. 

Much of this second act reads as Östlund's mumbled complaints about a large swathe of various contemporary social affairs. Some are entertaining, such as the callous pride the British couple takes in their corrupt profession, but much of it is incoherent and superficial (how dystopian that Instagram often consists of fake scenarios!). However, the act crescendos with the previously reclusive captain joining the guests for the Captain's Dinner during a storm, resulting in a seasick-induced scene of en masse vomiting as Woody Harrelson and Zlatko Burić drunkenly debate communism and capitalism over the loudspeaker. It's a beautifully constructed and tight sequence that leaves much to be desired with the rougher and messier remainder of the film. 

The final segment of Triangle of Sadness consists of the aftermath of the shipwreck, in which only a few of the ship's inhabitants have made it safely to shore. They all jockey for power on the island before realizing that their previously existing hierarchy is pointless in a situation of survival. Abigail, the only one whose skills mean anything in this circumstance, becomes a harsh and punishing leader of the group who favors other members based on bribery and sex.

On the surface, Triangle of Sadness's final act seems to be an innocent mockery meant to highlight the cluelessness and lack of skills that the top 1% hold. They claim to be in the upper echelon of society, but they are helpless in a dire situation and must rely on the skills of people whose life is already a means of day-to-day survival. However, the surface-level functions of Triangle of Sadness don't posit an anti-capitalist message with any real meaning. They ultimately point to a theory of the inevitability of class hierarchy and how leadership always results in the abuse of power. 

Triangle of Sadness posits the inevitability of hierarchy which removes responsibility and agency from the current ruling class. It says that those in a position of economic or social power are justified in their position as long as they are responsible with their wealth (only stupid wealthy people are wrong!) and support meritocratic upward mobility of lower castes. It's a theory that removes responsibility from rich people who can deem themselves as moral or ethical — no wonder this film was awarded the Palme d'Or and received a Best Picture nomination.

However, this idea could have a more optimistic outlook — maybe Östlund is trying to tell us that class stratification doesn't always have to be harsh and deadly, even if it will always exist. But the third act of Triangle of Sadness revokes this theory. Abigail's behavior is Östlund telling us that a position of leadership will always result in corrupted power. Hierarchy turned on its head will only result in a new harsh hierarchy rather than an ethical social system. The respective hopes of the captain and the oligarch are fruitless — communal society will never exist, and sooner or later, a brand new hierarchy will form, with the rich suddenly at the bottom once more. Triangle of Sadness is a nihilistic and black comedic vision of economics and social castes that is ultimately self-serving as it exists for wealthy people to pat themselves on the back for doing their part.

In 2009, philosopher Mark Fisher presented the theory of "capitalist realism": the idea that capitalism has become so dense and manipulative that it is impossible even to imagine a real solution outside of it. A new facet of late capitalism is to develop an unattainable concept of an alternative that will never be viable. Capitalism sells anti-capitalism back to us, and Triangle of Sadness is a part of this suffocating puzzle. The film has no substantial hope for a new future, be it communism, socialism, anarchy, or any other form of communal society. Ruben Östlund, the Cannes Jury, the Academy, Hollywood, and the ruling class as a whole sell the idea of anti-capitalism and then reward themselves for it.

OVERALL SCORE: 5/10

Triangle of Sadness was released on October 7 and is currently streaming on demand.