Table of Contents Show
Glitz, glamour, and everything in between! When Damien Chazelle released his fourth film, ‘Babylon’ in 2022, critics and audiences were divided. While some applauded and revered the film, others saw it as a jumbled, chaotic mess with a goal too ambitious to complete. Due to its messy box office performance and unique style, many discuss what legacy Babylon may leave, with some even calling it the next cult classic.
Set in the early film age in Los Angeles, the film follows a plethora of rising figures as they navigate a growing industry, alongside the societal and cultural stigmas that surround them. The film primarily follows Manny Torres (Diego Calva) and Nellie La Roy (Margot Robbie) as they are found to be on two sides of the same coin.
The two enter the industry at its most innovative moment (that being the introduction of sound), and adapt to the change uniquely. Overall, it is a story about the rise and, eventually, the fall from grace. The key question is: Does Babylon have the ability to someday hold the title of cult classic? After giving the film a deeper look, it very much seems so. The film does the unconventional regarding visual excess, narrative fragmentation, and tonal volatility.
Defining A “Cult Classic”
Before evaluating Babylon‘s potential legacy, it is important to define what constitutes a cult classic. The term “Cult Classic” is thrown around by many regarding a film that, while underperforming, still gains traction years following.1 A cult classic can really be any film with a dedicated fanbase; however, it is mostly used in regard to how the public views it.
Great examples of this are Rocky Horror (1975) or Donnie Darko (2001).2 Both of these films follow unorthodox plots (Rocky Horror follows a drag mad scientist with a musical flair, and Donnie Darko follows a teenager with a premonition of the end of the world). Other characteristics are covering subjects that are deemed unorthodox or taboo, and a public perception that simply evolves as opposed to being defined.
“Chaos As Style” — Chazelle’s Maximalist Vision
Chazelle is no stranger to hyper conflict in his films. From Whiplash (2014) to La La Land (2018), it’s immensely clear that Chazelle knows how to convey maximalism in many different ways. However, Babylon truly elevated Chazelle’s sense of scale and, therefore, his vision: exploring a pinnacle of film, through unity (mechanically). This is done through a combination of cinematography, audio, and choreography.
This is demonstrated immediately with the first sequence involving an elephant’s defecation and an amazingly choreographed party, complemented by a percussive, jazz-driven score in the first thirty minutes.
Babylon is an energetic movie; with the award-winning Justin Hurwitz composing scores that truly get your heart rushing. The party sequences are absolutely stunning, with an emphasis on crowding the screen for a unity through chaos.
The cherry on top is Linus Sandgren’s cinematography that truly does capture the glamor and glory of the silent film age. The sets are grand and zany, with a level of unpredictability in every scene. The turbulence of the scenes doesn’t feel like a disturbance to Babylon overall.
While production was stressful, Chazelle uses quick cuts and crescendos to convey this. Babylon, as a whole, being a love letter to film, couldn’t be completed without these loud and borderline over-the-top sequences. Even its ending doesn’t stop this momentum it has gained throughout the entire film.
The end montage has been a constant area of discussion for viewers, with some calling it tacky, while others call it a masterpiece. Chazelle seemed to have made the final P.S. on his love letter, and the ending montage is exactly that.
Stardom & Self-Destruction In Early Hollywood
Every character in Babylon either has nothing under control or pretends to have everything under control. This is most evident with the 1927 introduction of talkies with The Jazz Singer.
With the shift from the silent era to the talkies, many of the great stars we see in the film now need to either adapt or fall off the wagon. Jack Conrad and Nellie La Roy embody both of these mindsets. However, that raises the question: why do they both end up in similar circumstances?
Jack Conrad (Brad Pitt) has his entire grand career figured out. Being Hollywood’s star, Jack is shown to have eased up once he’s reached the top. He is always portrayed as unbothered (in many instances, drunk) because, in the grand scheme of things, his job is only through a visual medium.
Post 1927, Jack has trouble with this adaptation, now having to consider a whole new medium. Based on the renowned star John Gilbert, it’s no surprise that Jack tends to mask his true feelings. Following Jack’s realization that he is now “obsolete” in the film world, he doesn’t know what to do, leading to his suicide. While John Gilbert died of a heart attack due to his alcoholism, the overarching theme of being left behind by the industry you helped pioneer remains.
Margot Robbie’s eccentric Jersey girl Nellie La Roy is headstrong from the very beginning of the film. She commands the entire opening party sequence, showing that she’s a star before she even starts her acting career. She’s an unrelenting force when she appears on set, overshadowing Constance Moore (Samara Weaving).
When the world shifts to talkies, she tries to navigate the new factors at play. However, despite having all these means to succeed, Nellie still falls from grace. Not dramatically, not even shown, but silently, with a little obituary in a newspaper.
This film’s depiction of self-destruction is done masterfully. Chazelle truly demonstrates that so many factors are at play, and that one simply needs to be at the right place at the right time. Chazelle shows a side of the glamorous 1920’s Hollywood that many don’t even register, the sad and silent suffering of many stars that were left behind.
Chazelle’s Magnum Opus — The Message Portrayed
As already discussed, Chazelle created this film to not only capture the disorder of the early film age but also to show appreciation to all that came before in the medium.3 The final thirty minutes of the film hammer down the message, with Manny watching Singin’ In The Rain and breaking down in tears.
Manny inherently could be seen as a message himself, mirroring the audience. He is introduced as a novice to this world, and reacts with panic and fear in moments that undeniably give him the right to do so. Manny, while being key in the industry as the film goes on, still ends up sitting in the chair of a movie theater, amongst a crowd of viewers, watching a film.
All of the aspects of film that once took ages and ages even to construct can now be done efficiently. Manny’s emotional revisit to the past leads into a montage of film, starting with 1878’s Horse In Motion by Eadweard Muybridge and spanning across notable films, ending with 2009’s Avatar by James Cameron.4
Chazelle wanted to portray the evolution of cinema, and although the story of the film ends in the 1950’s, the legacy portrayed still lives on to this day.
From Box Office Flop To Future Cult Classic?
There was a wave of obstacles for Damien Chazelle to overcome in order for his vision to be executed.5 With a budget of 80 million dollars and a whole year of delays, it seemed like a losing battle from the start. Regardless of this, Chazelle still released his masterpiece, and with it now readily accessible through streaming, many people look back puzzled at how such a dazzling movie flopped at the box office.6
Chazelle’s vision had so much backing it, with a star-studded cast and a renowned director at its helm. Babylon is still seen by many as a flawed masterpiece, but will it still be viewed as such decades later? It is highly debated as to how this film will be received years later, but the signs point to yes, Babylon is on track to be one of the first “modern” cult classics.
Footnotes
- McGlocklin, Natalie. “The Curator: What Makes a Cult Classic.” Subverse Reads, April 21, 2024.
↩︎ - Ivan-Zadeh, Larushka. “From Withnail and I to El Topo: What Makes a Cult Film?” BBC News, February 24, 2022.
↩︎ - Hellerman, Jason. “Why Damien Chazelle Believes ‘babylon’ Could Not Contain Any ‘Normal Scenes’ | No Film School.” nofilmschool, February 2, 2023.
↩︎ - Rubin, M.H. “The ‘Babylon’ Movie Montage. How Many Have You Seen? | by M. H. Rubin | Cinemania | Medium.” medium, January 23, 2023.
↩︎ - Bergeson, Samantha. “Damien Chazelle Admits ‘Babylon’ ‘didn’t Work at All’ Financially and Worries next Film Might Not Get Made.” IndieWire, March 1, 2024.
↩︎ - Palit, Atreyo. “3 Years Later, This 57% RT Movie’s Failure Still Feels Unfair.” ScreenRant, January 12, 2026.
↩︎