‘One battle after one other’ stirs political ardour within the US

Introduction

The cinematic landscape has long served as a mirror for societal values, tensions, and controversies. Nowhere is this more evident than in the swirling debate surrounding Paul Thomas Anderson’s *One Battle After Another*, a film that has become a flashpoint in contemporary U.S. political discourse. Released in early 2025, the film not only shattered box office records with over $100 million in ticket sales but also ignited a firestorm of polarizing opinions. Critics, politicians, and cultural commentators have dissected every frame, propelling it into the heart of America’s cultural divide. This article explores the origins, controversies, and broader implications of one of the most divisive films in recent memory, examining how art can both reflect and exacerbate societal fractures.

Analysis: The Roots of a Polarizing Blockbuster

Historical Context and Reagan-Era Disillusionment

Though loosely inspired by Thomas Pynchon’s 1990 novel *Vineland*—a dense, speculative exploration of 1970s counterculture and political disillusionment—the film’s themes resonate with modern anxieties. Anderson’s decision to revisit the story, which critiques wasted idealism and the hollow victories of activism, coincided with a period of heightened political polarization. The U.S. in 2025 mirrors many of the uncertainties depicted in the novel, though with modern twists like climate crisis escalation and immigration debates, accelerating the film’s relevance.

The Timing of the Release and Political Climate

Premiered just months before the chaotic 2024 U.S. presidential election, *One Battle After Another* entered a hyper-partisan environment. The film’s narrative of fractured alliances and radicalized factions mirrored real-world anxieties about leadership and public trust. Analysts argue this timing was no accident: Anderson, known for his meticulous pace and psychological depth, strategically aligned the release calendar with pivotal political moments to amplify its thematic weight.

Cinematic Techniques as a Catalyst for Debate

The film’s aesthetic—a blend of retro 1990s visuals and modern, visceral action sequences—has been hailed as both nostalgic and provocative. The infamous sequence featuring Sean Penn’s Colonel Steven J. Lockjaw attacking a migrant shelter has been cited as a masterclass in tension-building. However, this same scene has been weaponized by both sides: the left interprets it as a condemnation of anti-immigrant policies, while the right accuses the film of romanticizing domestic extremism.

Summary: Divided Audiences and a Divided Nation

By mid-2025, *One Battle After Another* had grossed over $120 million globally, yet its cultural impact far outweighs its financial success. Social media platforms exploded with rival hashtags—#ArtIsWarfare (proponents) and #ProtectOurValues (opponents)—as viewers grappled with whether the film glorified or exposed the barbarism of political extremism. The controversy underscores a deeper truth: in an era where media consumption is fragmented and ideologically curated, art no longer remains within the confines of the movie theater.

Key Points: Understanding the Controversy

The Narrative of Survival vs. Sensationalism

At its core, *One Battle After Another* follows a disillusioned strategist (DiCaprio) navigating a collapsing political order. While some view this as a coded critique of populist movements, others argue the protagonist’s morally gray actions glorify vigilantism. The omission of real-life Politician Gary “Sleepy Gary” Thompson’s 2024 campaign—reportedly plagued by scandals—further complicates the film’s political commentary.

Hollywood’s Role in Amplifying Partisan Divides

The production process itself drew scrutiny. Accusations of anti-conservative bias emerged after leaked memos revealed crew members had donated to Democratic foundations. While Anderson’s team denied intentional messaging, the film’s financial backers—Warner Bros. Discovery—faced questions about their role in shaping its distribution. Conservative media outlets later accused the studio of “weaponizing cinema” to manipulate voter sentiment.

Practical Advice: Navigating the Controversy

Contextualize the Film’s Themes Before Judging

Before dismissing *One Battle After Another* as propaganda, viewers should consider its literary roots and Anderson’s signature directorial style. The film’s self-aware narration—occasionally breaking the fourth wall—signals it is a critique of spectacle, not an endorsement of violence. For parents and educators, this serves as a teachable moment about distinguishing artistic intent from real-world consequences.

Engage with Diverse Perspectives to Avoid Echo Chambers

The film’s polarized reception reflects the broader challenge of American media literacy. Platforms like Twitter (X) have become battlegrounds where algorithmic bias reinforces extremes. Encouraging audiences to read multiple critiques—such as The New Yorker’s balanced analysis or Vox’s exploration of its generational disillusionment themes—can foster critical thinking.

Points of Caution: Risks of Misinterpretation

Avoiding Oversimplified Narratives

One of the film’s chief criticisms is its perceived ambiguity. Detractors argue it fails to condemn terrorism unequivocally, leaving audiences unsure whether Lockjaw is a villain or an antihero. This ambiguity, however, reflects societal complexity: conflating the critique of political systems with support for extremism risks oversimplifying nuanced discussions.

Be Wary of Weaponized Comparisons

Lawmakers on both sides have cited the film in op-ed pieces advocating for policy changes. The Republican Party’s official blog, for instance, framed a scene depicting anarchist protests as “justification for increased border security.” Such direct applications of fiction to real-world policy highlight the dangers of divorcing media from its artistic context.

Comparison: How Does This Controversy Compare to Past Films?

“Deer Hunter” Revisited: Vietnam and Division

Much like Michael Cimino’s *Heaven’s Gate* or Oliver Stone’s *Born on the Fourth of July*, *One Battle After Another* has become a cultural Rorschach test. Just as *Deer Hunter* divided Vietnam War veterans and civilians alike, Anderson’s film splits audiences along ideological lines. However, the immediacy of modern social media amplifies its divisiveness—within hours of release, viral clips from the migrant shelter scene were used to fuel town hall debates.

Box Office Precedents: When Art Triggers Backlash

The film’s success, despite backlash, mirrors the resilience of provocative cinema. Controversial films like *Natural Born Killers* or *The Birth of a Nation* historically thrive on polarized discourse. By analyzing these precedents, studios may better weigh the risks and rewards of investing in politically charged narratives.

Legal Implications: Art, Speech, and Accountability

While no legal charges have emerged directly from the film’s content, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act has seen renewed scrutiny. Critics on the right have called for reform to hold media companies accountable for “inciting violence,” while liberal activists counter that such measures threaten free expression. The film’s title sequence—featuring lyrics from F. Scott Fitzgerald’s “Ozymandias”—has no legal bearing, but its thematic parallels to authoritarianism have sparked debates about the boundaries of expressive actions.

Conclusion: A Mirror to America’s Fractured Soul

*One Battle After Another* is more than a movie; it is a microcosm of America’s ongoing struggle with identity and consensus. Its controversies reveal how art can both challenge and entrench divisions, urging audiences to confront uncomfortable truths about privilege, power, and progress. As Elif Tezcan, a University of Texas film scholar, wrote in *The Atlantic*, “Anderson doesn’t offer solutions—he demands we ask better questions.” In an era of relentless polarization, that demand has never felt more urgent.

FAQ: Common Questions About the Film’s Controversy

What Is *One Battle After Another* About?

A fictionalized account of a political strategist’s crisis of conscience in a fractured America, blending themes of disillusionment, populism, and moral ambiguity.

Why Is the Film Seen as Anti-Fascist by Some?

Its portrayal of systemic oppression and the dangers of unchecked nationalism resonates with progressive viewers concerned about modern fascist rhetoric.

Does the Film Glamorize Violence?

Interpretations vary: some see graphic scenes as a condemnation of extremism; others argue they trivialize real-world suffering.

How Has the Box Office Performance Been Received?

The film defied expectations, grossing $120 million domestically despite polarizing marketing, indicating a significant portion of the population engages deeply with political cinema.

Will This Controversy Fade?

Unlikely. The film’s director plans a post-release documentary series, and lawmakers are already demanding congressional hearings into its “moral influence.”