Who's Seen ‘I Saw the TV Glow'? [Review]

Who else has seen Schoenbrun’s film? It’s now widened into more cities, beyond L.A. and NYC, and will no doubt pave the way for passionate responses and debate from audiences.

Even after just two films, director Jane Schoenbrun’s cinematic obsession is quite clear: young people in the digital age. After “We’re All Going to the World’s Fair,” Schoenbrun yet again tackles media consumption overload, and the moving images that possess young minds in “I Saw the TV Glow.”

Set in the ’90s, “I Saw the TV Glow” is certainly a better film than ‘World’s Fair,’ it can sometimes be a hypnotic experience, but also gets carried away by its own wild ambitions. What initially feels like a fresh statement on teenage angst is concluded, in its final 20 or so minutes, by scenes that feel like watered-down David Lynch.

If anything, it’s the more straightforward moments that work best in “I Saw the TV Glow” which finds Schoenbrun tackling the coming-of-age genre, before going for full-on nightmare-infused ambiguity.

Owen (Justice Smith) and Maddy (Brigette Lundy-Paine) are mid-90s loners, alienated by a suburban setting that glows in purple colors, beautifully shot by cinematographer Eric Yue. They somehow find meaning and connection in a campy creepy late-night TV show called “The Pink Opaque.” Issues start to arise as they obsessively immerse themselves in this show; reality blends with fiction, and we eventually can’t distinguish one from the other.

Although initially set in 1996, the film spans a few decades, at some point we’re sent 20 years into the future, as both of out protagonists are fully grown adults. Still, for Owen, the world makes more sense inside the screen than out of it. It doesn’t help that Maddy suddenly disappears. Where did she go? Her disappearance comes with Owen’s life slowly slipping away from him, he loses his mom to cancer and has to deal with an uncommunicative, and creepy, stepdad (played by Fred Durst).

So, what is “I Saw the TV Glow” actually about? That’s where things get a tad more opaque as there really isn’t a clear consensus as to what the accumulation of all of its ambiguous moments results in. The film is filled with metaphorical imagery. There are hinted themes about gender dysphoria —Schoenbrun is a trans filmmaker — and we do see, in a brief second montage, Owen wearing a dress, but it’s all just barely hinted at.

There’s an aching vulnerability to Smith’s performance. The entire movie could have just been one sad-infused character study about Owen, but Schoenbrun must interfere. The film soon turns into a surrealist nightmare, always keeping the viewer at a distance. The mumbled form by which Schoenbrun chooses to take the film, sadly, overruns our initial fascination .

Schoenbrun tries very hard for ‘TV Glow’ to be a singular vision, and the effort painstakingly shows. It lacks the craftsmanship that, say, a Cronenberg or Lynch would install into their films. The problem is that Schoenbrun’s film isn’t as hypnotic as it believes to be. The ambiguity isn’t transfixing, but rather devoid of intrigue. If anything, it plays like a David Lynch movie, but for Gen Z-ers.

With that said, and with my initial thoughts on the film now published, I do look forward to revisiting this film. It’s the kind of statement that should probably be given a second chance. It’s visually ravishing and occasionally piqued my interest, hinting at a much better film hidden somewhere in its messy contours. [B-]