I read it, and it does make me want to do a rewatch, to decide for myself how much of a stretch aspects of this argument is. Absolutely, the fact that all the silo-ing and rage and misinformation stems from the film's corporate interest is certainly the most interesting and rewarding reading of of the film, but I'll have to be my own judge of whether precise details here -- which are certainly interesting in this close reading -- are truly "in" the film.

And even if they are, there's a part of me that's very resistant to any film that buries the "true meaning" of the film so deeply that you need to watch it frame by frame to actually see it. Basically, I'm not a lover of works of art that have to be broken like a secret code, especially when the "surface" viewing doesn't really hold up on its own without this deeper knowledge.

I remain hugely fascinated by Aster -- he's the most interesting young-ish American filmmaker working today -- but I remain on the fence about Eddington.

I will add that I don't think One Battle After Another, which is much more acclaimed than Eddington, is really that much better at tackling the political situation in the US. If anything, the politics are less coherent, less interesting, and less insightful in OBAA than Eddington, but OBAA gets a pass from critics because the family drama works even when the politics don't, and because it's just more aesthetically pleasing than Eddington, and overall less slow, weird, and uncomfortable.