There are those who mourn the loss of spontaneity in Jim Jarmusch's cinema, arguing that some time ago he opted for the elaboration of a thick film much more mainstream than he raised at the beginning of his career. However, and far from stating that his latest film, The Dead Don't Die is as independent or even extravagant as Stranger than Paradise.
From his beginnings in the world of feature films, the filmmaker has been using the new and vintage to give his work that air of cool fascination with which he is associated, thus generating a democratization of independent cinema to the point that , resorting to the same cinematographic schemes as always and its semantic chaotic of the transitory and the reflective, the appreciation and acceptance of each one of its films have made a leap from one extreme to the other in the appreciative interpretation of its aesthetics. The only change has been the use of their usual collaborators, although what was previously novel, such as the incendiary lyrics of Wu-Tang Clan, the apathy of Bill Murray or the decadent glamor of Iggy Pop, is now used as a vintage icon and, therefore, the new has to be redirected towards emblematic modern actors such as Adan Driver or Selena Gomez. As for the theme, Jarmusch continues to satirize about what he considers a product of easy consumption and mass acceptance, as in the current film: the resurgence of zombie movies.
Without a doubt, this film could be interpreted by means of a Deleuzano canon of connectivity, since in it we can find the constant reappearance of a kind of elements and resources already known in his previous filmography. This rhetorical game reaches its paradigmatic point in the outcome, through the narration in off of a “post-everything” voice that provides that rocky air of unavoidable disenchantment towards society, with sententious phrases said in a pessimistic whisper that force us to disconnect from the complete previous delirium and focus for a moment on the present desolator because, again, Jarmusch has once again created a film based on the transitory spaces, in that small and insignificant dramatic moment, ignored until now, which leads us from the forced utopia to the cruel reality.
The reference to Deleuze does not remain in the simple denotative terrain, but through the multiple perspectives of the film and the dialectical confrontation of the scarce dialogues, we find the implicit connotation in the changes of style, gender, form and, finally, message. Everything is conjured up as an elaborate joke to convince us that the ideal fiction does not stop feeding on the exteriority, the natural world and the interactive presence of people. Hence, each character accepts the apocalypse in a very different way: resignation, panic, excitement, condescension, hatred or penance.
It is not surprising that the appearance of a comic gag is the favorite way to end each scene. The weight of the dialogue does not fall, on this occasion, both in rhetoric and in parody. The director has managed to laugh at everything, starting with himself, and ending with each of the social clichés, fans or culture as we face every day.
In the end, we are all zombies, all, with the exception of Bob the hermit, that well-known half-man who lives in a reality and at a different speed from the rest of society, we go in a lethargic state ¬ (or liturgical) towards sources of inspiration and prayer : whether he belongs to the group of the new, tireless persecutors of the trend, controversy, and popularity, as if we already embody the old glories that resist, of course, to die in anonymity, flocking to his parish habitual in search of a good dose of nostalgia.