Bodies consumed by capitalism: The Whale

Çağatay Yıldız

Aronofsky has often been a director who focuses on societal collapse in his cinema. He has presented powerful stories that illustrate how the individual is trapped within society and how the system crushes them. The Whale follows a similar trajectory, but this time our character is not represented by drug addiction or the corrosive nature of fame, but by someone isolated by the capitalist system who has lost both their health and their human connections.

The film is adapted from Samuel D. Hunter’s 2012 play of the same name. While the single-location narrative structure helps the film maintain its theatrical atmosphere, it is also powerfully translated to cinema through its character-driven storytelling. As in stage plays, the narrowing of the space in the film is used to make the character's inner world felt more deeply. Its theatrical origins pull the film toward a more intense and dialogue-centered narrative, making Charlie’s isolation from the world and his sense of entrapment even more pronounced. 

Although the film appears on the surface to be telling the personal tragedy of one man, The Whale contains a profound critique of how capitalism consumes the individual. Throughout the film, Charlie is portrayed as a character trapped between economic hardship, the inadequacy of the healthcare system, and individual alienation. Access to healthcare in the U.S., economic insecurity, and the breakdown of social ties, combined with religion, further deepen the individual's sense of helplessness.

Charlie, once an academic, has become a figure who now teaches online classes, unable to form a real connection with his students, existing only as a voice. The education sector is portrayed as part of a system where individuals are evaluated solely on their productivity, and Charlie's situation symbolizes the collapse of this mechanism. His physical absence from the workplace serves as a metaphor for a life that has already become invisible.

Cinematography: Narrow Space, Great Isolation 

The cinematographic language chosen by Aronofsky is one of the most important elements deepening the film's narrative. The film is shot in a 4:3 aspect ratio, which further emphasizes Charlie's massive body and his confined life. From beginning to end, the audience remains in almost a single location: Charlie's house. This narrow space represents his detachment from the outside world and the structure of capitalist society that traps the individual. The use of low light and dark tones appears as a visual reflection of depression and hopelessness. The camera movements also support Charlie's desperation and lack of escape; wide-angle shots are avoided, and close-ups that convey the character's emotional collapse are preferred. Making such a fluid film with this difficult technique is a tremendous achievement by the director.

Healthcare System and Economic Inequality 

Charlie's inability to access any treatment despite his health problems is one of the film's most striking social critiques. In countries like the US, where healthcare services are dependent on the private sector, access to basic health services for the poor is limited. However, throughout the film, we see that Charlie is not actually completely helpless financially; on the contrary, he has some savings. This shows that the healthcare system is not just an economic problem, but also distances individuals from services through the feelings of guilt and hopelessness it imposes on them. 

Charlie chooses to leave his money to his daughter instead of using it for his own treatment. This shows that in the capitalist world, money is seen as a tool not only for individual welfare but also for repairing relationships. However, there is another important point here. The system offers solutions to individuals only through economic means. The fact that Charlie chooses to give the money to his daughter because he has no other way out, even if it is the most humane option offered by the system, still relies on his individual sacrifice. This shows us another side of the wheel.

Religious and Moral Pressures

In the film, the character of the missionary Thomas stands out as an element showing how religious structures interfere with an individual's life. Thomas, who tries to 'save' Charlie, is a figure who reinforces the idea in capitalist society that the individual is solely responsible for their own fate. This can be read as an indication of how religious structures are intertwined with the existing order. It is felt throughout the film that the feeling of guilt is one of the system's mechanisms for controlling the individual, and that Charlie is struggling with the guilt he has internalized.

However, the film also demonstrates that the effects of social pressures on individuals do not fit into a single mold. While Charlie's partner Alan commits suicide by starving himself as a result of the depression he suffered due to his family's religious pressure, Charlie, conversely, enters a process of self-destruction by overeating. These contrasting reactions reveal how trauma can affect individuals in different ways. While Alan completely rejects his physical existence under the pressure of religious dogmas, Charlie tries to occupy space in the world by literally expanding his own body. In both cases, it is evident that the system pushes individuals into despair and accelerates their destruction.

Conclusion: Is There a Way Out Beyond Capitalism and Individualism? 

At the end of the film, Charlie's effort to reach his daughter can be seen as a search for hope in the face of individualism and systemic pressure. However, the film does not offer a true salvation. Charlie's story shows how helpless people who are excluded and left alone by the system become. The lack of solidarity and collective struggle, and Charlie's attempt to find a way out by seeking solutions only within himself, reveal an inevitable consequence of capitalist individualism.

However, at this point, the only person by Charlie's side is Liz, a healthcare worker who is also the sister of his former partner. Liz, in complete contrast to this individualism, displays an example of human solidarity. She supports Charlie not only physically but also emotionally. Yet, there is a limit to Liz's efforts. Even though she tries to keep Charlie alive with the solutions offered by the system, the inadequacy of healthcare services and the fact that Charlie has completely severed himself from the system make her help insufficient as well. 

While Liz's presence emphasizes the importance of solidarity between individuals, it also shows how powerless this solidarity can remain in the face of major systemic problems. In a world where capitalism isolates individuals, it is clearly seen that even if characters like Liz carry a glimmer of hope, this light cannot be enough on its own unless it evolves into a social transformation.

Charlie's feeding of the birds also shows that he is still trying to establish a connection with the outside world. Although he is an outcast and lonely person who cannot form deep bonds with humans, he wants to care for someone else—this time birds—even with a small gesture. This is one of the rare moments in the film that contains crumbs of hope. However, even this act hits the hard walls of the system. While Charlie avoids forming relationships with people, he seeks solace in a small world he has created within himself.

The Whaleis not just the tragedy of an individual, but serves as a mirror showing how capitalist society consumes its most vulnerable members. Presenting this collapse in an impressive way through its cinematographic narrative, the film invites the audience to question the cruelty of the system.