









































Regardless of their subgenre, crime 
films share the fundamental element 
of presenting audiences with 
society’s intricate executions of law 
and punishment. Because of this 
relationship, crime films are able to 
use their genre-specific elements to 
include social commentary within 
their storylines. Using their victims, 
suspects, and crime resolutions, 
modern crime fiction pieces such as 
Rian Johnson’s 2019 film Knives Out 
and Halina Reijn’s 2022 film Bodies 
Bodies Bodies both implement the 
larger conversations of class division 
within their stories. In Knives Out, the 
audience follows the mystery behind 
the sudden death of the renowned 
author, Harlan Thrombey—the suspects 
being his family and staff. Within the 
film’s mystery, Johnson uses elements 

of the story to recognize and critique 
those in power who benefit from 
privilege, suggesting America should 
change the bias system it currently 
upholds. Bodies Bodies Bodies focuses 
on couple Bee and Sophie as they join 
Sophie’s upper-class influencer friends 
for a weekend of partying, but mystery 
ensues when one of the friends is 
found dead, leaving only those within 
the house as suspects. Throughout the 
film, Reijn critiques the privileges of 
modern influencers and their often 
problematic culture, using the critique 
to warn younger generations about 
utilizing technology harmfully. This 
essay will use these pieces of modern 
crime fiction to explore how fictional 
crime narratives can use their stories 
to include social commentary.

“Realistic Villains”: Examining 
Social Commentary in Crime Films 

through Knives Out and Bodies Bodies 
Bodies

Caitlin Davis, Ball State University

96



Regardless of their subgenre, crime films share the fundamental element of 
presenting audiences with society’s intricate executions of law and punishment 
within their elaborate storylines. This is the subject that Sociology and Law professor 
Ferdinando Spina introduces in the article “Crime Films”’ by recognizing that crime 
films “dramatize the uncertainty of moral categories and the ever-present tension 
between the social order and its violation” (2-3). Crime films explore society’s “social 
order and its violation,” and by doing so, they become representational of society—
their elements and themes becoming reflective of relevant societal topics. Spina 
concurs, analyzing the relationship between crime films and society:  

On one hand, crime films reveal something important about the social context 
that they represent and from which they have been fashioned. On the other, they 
themselves have an effect on the social context, since their representation of crime, 
law, justice, and punishment itself becomes culture, acquires meaning, and provides 
an interpretation of reality. (3)  

Within the reflective relationship between crime films and society, these films are 
able to use their genre elements to include various types of social commentary, 
creating larger conversations and developing new “interpretations” of pertinent 
topics within society. In her novel Shots in the Mirror: Crime Films and Society, 
criminologist Nicole Rafter expands on the specific effects of these “interpretations,” 
explaining that they “sculpt our assumptions about the nature of reality and fill 
our mental reservoirs with a vast supply of imagery for thinking about crime, 
criminals, and the role of criminal justice institutions in society” and “guide us in 
defining justice, heroism, and the illicit” (179). Because of the meaningful societal 
representations crime films create, they can inform and educate audiences, producing 
and reshaping how they interpret significant topics that play roles in how they define 
elements such as “crime” and “justice”—vital elements that likely will determine 
future perceptions of the justice system itself.   
 After establishing the relationship between crime films and society, recognizing 
social commentary within crime films, and acknowledging its importance, it is vital 
to exemplify these points with recent crime films that epitomize certain types of 
social commentary using their story elements. Both Rian Johnson’s 2019 mystery 
Knives Out and Halina Reijn’s 2022 thriller Bodies Bodies Bodies are exemplary 
models of the subject as they comment on a perpetual and relevant topic within 
modern society—class division. As films structured as whodunit stories, both pieces 
use their specific genre and story elements—victims, suspects, and crime resolutions—

Davis

97



to examine the different positions members of society are placed in based on their 
socioeconomic status. Knives Out depicts and critiques America’s prejudice system 
that seems grounded in benefitting the privileged upper class by focusing on the 
class differences between a wealthy family and their staff, hoping to exhibit and 
propose a new society that America should stray toward. Bodies Bodies Bodies 
similarly criticizes this same system, using the privileged positions of modern 
influencer characters to exhibit class divisions, working to ultimately caution 
younger generations about the harmful use of technology and influencer culture 
they see online. This essay will analyze how these pieces of crime fiction use their 
story elements to include social commentary regarding class divisions within their 
storylines, expanding on their crime narratives to not only depict socio-economic 
issues within modern society but also to help audiences recognize and form 
newfound perceptions regarding this particular societal issue. 

The victim in a fictional crime story is a vital element as they are what ignites the 
mystery—the circumstances of their death often being used to symbolize deeper 
meanings. In Knives Out, the film’s central victim is the renowned and wealthy 
author Harlan Thrombey; however, because of the particular decisions Johnson 
makes revolving around Harlan’s death, it is plausible to interpret Harlan as both 
the victim and the killer within the film’s story. Specifically, under the belief that 
his nurse, Marta, has made a fatal mistake with his medications, Harlan refuses to 
seek medical attention and instead insists that they hatch a plan to cover up the 
incident—one of which involves him killing himself (Johnson 00:40:25).  

Establishing Harlan as both the victim and instigator, Johnson seemingly uses his 
passing to depict the figurative death of the long-established systems that have bred 
the current prejudiced class system society continues to implement today. In the 
moments the audience sees Harlan, it is obvious that he detests his family’s greedy 
and egotistical behavior, desperately wanting them to change their ways. In an 
attempt to do so, he confronts the family about their behaviors by threatening his 
unfaithful son-in-law, cutting off funds to his daughter-in-law, and firing his son. 
Harlan explains his sudden choices in a flashback scene by saying, “It’s unfair of me 
to keep you tethered to something that isn’t yours to control. I’ve done you a great 
disservice. All these years, I’ve kept you from building something of your own, that 
was yours” (Johnson 00:16:00). Harlan regretfully recognizes that he has raised his 
family within society’s classist system from which they benefit—a decision Harlan 
comes to regret as it has turned his family into money-driven, egotistical perpetrators 
of this privilege. Although Harlan’s efforts leave a fearful impression on the family, 
it is clear that the Thrombeys still feel secure in their positions. This leads to Harlan’s 

Davis

98



final move—his will reading. It is not until the Thrombeys learn that everything is 
left to Marta that their perceptions change, and they begin to grow fearful (Johnson 
1:07:18). In the article “Knives Out Is a Surprisingly Subversive Mystery,” editor and 
writer Olivia Rutigliano elaborates on the significant meaning of Harlan’s death in 
terms of the Thrombeys: 

Harlan Thrombey...comes to represent a longstanding system of influence and 
control that rejects the privileged descendants it has begotten, needing to die for 
this rejection to be fully meaningful and for a new, more productive world order to 
be born. His death is a sacrifice, it can prevent the ascension of his terrible family—
from a ‘body-politic’ angle, it might help save America. (Rutigliano)   

Using Harlan’s death, Johnson implies that to prevent the perpetuation of unfair 
systems that reward those who are privileged, those who benefit from America’s 
classist system society must recognize the unjustness in society’s current ways 
and be willing to make changes or sacrifices for the sake of a more equal system. 
This is seemingly the interpretation Johnson wants the audience to take away 
from the commentary within the film—an interpretation that, if taken into serious 
consideration, could “save America” from continuing to perpetuate the biased system 
that Harlan strives to and eventually does end.   
 When continuing to analyze the deeper meaning of victims within crime 
fiction stories, Bodies Bodies Bodies follows the death of a social media influencer 
to serve as a warning to younger generations about enabling the harmful behaviors 
they see these influencers exhibiting online. Similar to Knives Out, Bodies Bodies 
Bodies focuses on a group of upper-class individuals; however, in this case, it 
is a group of young-adult influencers who, during the night of a party, begin to 
suspect each other of murder after their friend—central victim David—is found dead. 
The mystery that plagues the majority of the film is solved when it is discovered 
that there was no murder at all. The cause of David’s death is that he accidentally 
slits his throat when attempting to post a TikTok (Reijn 1:26:53). In the “Digital 
Technology” chapter of the novel The Routledge Companion to Crime Fiction, 
Nicole Kenley, twenty-first-century detective fiction and global crime researcher, 
elaborates on the critical role that technology plays within fictional crime pieces: 
“The formulation that technology simply equals novelty is problematic because it 
obscures the true role of digital technologies, which is not as a marker of newness 
but rather as a signifier of the choices such innovations force upon society” (261). 
In modern society, being in a position to become an influencer—a position that will 
be discussed in more detail later on—comes with certain attributes that have become 

Davis

99



favorable to younger generations. As exemplified by David, these attributes include 
attention, popularity, and perhaps monetary gain; however, though technology has 
generated access to these attributes, it also has “innovated” a harmful mentality 
“upon society.” Specifically, David’s need for recognition on social media establishes 
a lack of recognition, one so severe that he blatantly ignores how dangerous it is 
for him to wield a weapon that he is clearly inexperienced with. David’s mentality 
is reminiscent of the behaviors seen in real-life with trends such as the Tide Pod 
challenge—a social media challenge that, despite being obviously dangerous, was 
popularized during its time of relevancy by many influencers and their followers. By 
purposefully setting up David’s death in this way, Reijn reflects on these behaviors, 
wanting to make it clear to the younger audiences that, despite the powerful 
influence influencers may wield, they should be mindful and careful about the 
harmful behaviors that are being perpetuated within social media spaces. 
 Though exemplified differently, it is worth recognizing here the use of 
technology in Knives Out as it exhibits similar ideas presented in Bodies Bodies 
Bodies. Despite being in the same time period as Bodies Bodies Bodies where the use 
of technology is popularized, Knives Out does not make technology a core subject 
throughout the film. Therefore, when technology is shown, its use seems meaningful. 
There are scenes in which technology is presented purposefully, such as when the 
Thrombeys instantly resort to their cell phones to search for ways to obtain Harlan’s 
will and when Marta’s blackmailer communicates with her through email (Johnson). 
These scenes seem to depict moments of the upper-class utilizing their access to 
technology as a weapon against Marta in attempts to selfishly gain something for 
themselves. As discussed previously with Bodies Bodies Bodies, Johnson’s decision to 
portray technology in this way highlights the typical socioeconomic status of those 
who can gain access to technology. However, this decision also presents a similar 
theme as Reijn—the theme that technology has the potential to inflict dangerous 
innovations upon society, especially when in the hands of those who are in positions 
of privilege.  
 Within fictional crime pieces, suspects are another key element to analyze as 
they are who the audience primarily focuses on and ultimately follows to solve the 
mystery that is presented; therefore, their behaviors during the time they are present 
are often significant and purposeful. As mentioned, Knives Out focuses on Harlan’s 
family, the Thrombeys, being questioned about his death. Johnson characterizes 
the Thrombeys as greedy and narcissistic people, making their behavior reflective 
of the types of figures in real life that benefit from the prejudiced system society 
has established. For example, during their questioning by the police, the Thrombeys 
praise Marta as Harlan’s caregiver, insisting that she is “part of the family” (Johnson 

Davis

100



00:13:05).  Flashback sequences during this scene exemplify the Thrombeys’ claims—
one showing a push-in shot of Richard, Harlan’s son-in-law, smiling at Marta as he 
seemingly invites her to join the family in conversation (00:13:05). However, the 
audience is later shown that, as a Latina immigrant, Marta was only invited into 
the family’s conversation because Richard started a debate regarding immigration 
policies—one in which some of the Thrombeys think immigrant detention facilities 
are rightful punishments for “breaking the law” while others compare them to 
concentration camps (Johnson 00:45:52). Johnson is purposeful in making the scene 
representative of the societal topics that were relevant for the time the film is set in, 
allowing the audience to recognize the types of people that the Thrombeys represent. 
Rutigliano analyzes the characterization of the Thrombeys:  

As invested as Knives Out is in exposing the culprit masterminding the mystery at 
hand, it’s more invested in exposing more realistic villains...That the Thrombeys 
variously believe themselves to be allies to the less-privileged or marginalized only 
makes their selfishness and wickedness feel more true-to-life...Knives Out is very 
clear that these kind of dynastic families should lose their power, but it’s loudest 
about the kinds of shady characters that hide in plain sight, professing to be allies...
to an inclusive system that plans to share power, resources, and rights up and 
down the ladder and across demographics, as long as it is convenient for them. 
(Rutigliano) 

Though the family may claim to be in alliance with Marta, Johnson makes a point 
to show that between criticizing immigrants right in front of her and fighting her 
over Harlan’s will later on, they clearly are not. Representing figures in real life 
who falsely claim to stand with those who are oppressed in society, yet continue to 
benefit from privilege, the Thrombeys are used to expose and warn audiences about 
society’s “realistic villains”—the ones who endanger the hopes of the more equal 
system that Harlan strives to create.  
 In Bodies Bodies Bodies, similar to Johnson’s utilization of the Thrombeys, 
Reijn uses the characterization of the suspects to expose “realistic villains,” 
creating audience interpretations regarding problematic behaviors within modern 
influencer culture. As already established, the film’s suspects are mostly young-adult 
influencers—social media figures, actors, and podcasters—who come from upper-
class families. This representation is fitting considering that, often, those who can 
be influencers are able to do so because they are in a position of privilege, having 
access to the necessary technology as well-off individuals. Reijn clearly depicts 
these positions of privilege and nepotism; the group resides at an exceedingly lavish 
mansion owned by David’s parents, utilizing its many rooms to partake in expensive 

Davis

101



alcohol and drugs while they party, record themselves, and merely talk about their 
jobs that require “a lot of work” (Reijn 1:12:59). By characterizing and portraying the 
characters in this manner, Reijn not only creates representational figures based on 
modern privileged peoples, but she also expands on this representation to recognize 
and curate audience thoughts based on the problematic behaviors within the 
influencer realm.  
 As exemplified earlier with the character of David, in an age where recognition 
on social media has become more enticing to younger generations, it is much more 
common to see influencers who neglect their privilege, often playing the victim and 
saying whatever will gain them the most sympathy or positive attention from an 
audience. Reijn uses the suspect characters to exemplify this behavior as their quick 
willingness to blame each other or label themselves as the victim in the situation 
prohibits them from sensibly handling the events of the night. A scene that best 
depicts this behavior is shown toward the end of the film. After the deaths of more 
characters, one of the deaths being the group’s fault after a false accusation about 
who the murderer is, tensions rise, and an argument begins amongst those who are 
left. However, the disagreement has little to do with the murderous events of the 
night and consists of the group attacking each other over their flimsy friendships. 
The group uses generational terms such as “red flags” and “triggering” to critique 
each other, debates over who is more “rich,” and defends themselves so as to 
appear as the victim within the situation—podcaster Alice attempting to excuse any 
wrongful behavior by claiming, “I’m an ally” (Reijn 1:08:46-1:10:04). Even though 
the group is no longer in front of a camera, they still exhibit these harmful behaviors 
that are becoming so prominent amongst modern online platforms. Author and film 
critic Justin Chang recognizes Reijn’s critique of these behaviors in the article “It Has 
Its Sharp Moments, but Bodies Bodies Bodies Could Use a Few Corpse Corrections”:  

In an age when everyone makes a fetish of authenticity, friendships are shown to be 
the flimsiest and least authentic of constructs, mediated by TikTok...there’s promise 
in [Reijn’s] understanding of how, even in a politically progressive, racially and 
sexually inclusive crowd, people can and do wield the language of social justice to 
hide their own glaring privilege. (Chang)  

Reijn focuses on these characters in hopes of showing audiences that they are 
representational of those who perpetually misuse their positions on social media to 
gain popularity—a behavior that the film critiques as an unhealthy and dangerous 
cycle that only works to protect those who are in privileged positions and should be 
abolished.  

Davis

102



 Using suspects as a symbol, both Johnson and Reijn further the discussions 
about class divisions throughout their films by establishing particular circumstances 
for their unique suspects, Marta and Bee. Similar to Marta, Bee is also a working-
class immigrant; therefore, both women not only stand out amongst the respective 
suspects but also are put into different positions based on their ethnicity and class 
throughout their situations. In Knives Out, as a minority and member of the working 
class, Marta already has less privilege in the situation than the other suspects. 
Academic writer Katarina Dulude recognizes Marta’s position in the article “The Roles 
of Class and Gender in Popular Films of 2019: Hustlers, Knives Out, and Avengers: 
Endgame”: “[Marta] would have never obtained so much money had Harlan not 
deviated from the norm and given it to her, not because she wasn’t deserving of it, 
but because the system rarely rewards those who work hard, but do not start their 
lives with the resources to propel them towards substantial affluence” (6). Johnson 
uses Marta’s vulnerability as a working-class citizen within the situation to highlight 
the unfairness in the justice system—a vulnerability that is compounded due to the 
fact that Marta’s mother is undocumented. This theme recurs in scenes throughout 
the film. Specifically, Marta insists that they call for help when she believes she has 
switched Harlan’s medications; however, knowing there would not be enough time, 
Harlan hatches the plan discussed earlier, telling Marta in a close-up shot that “[y]our 
mom is still undocumented, and if this is your fault, she’ll be found out, and, at best, 
deported, and your family will be broken” (Johnson 00:39:56). Despite desperately 
wanting to tell the truth, Marta is made well aware of the consequences if she does. 
A later scene where Harlan’s son, Walt, threatens to expose Marta’s mom if she does 
not renounce Harlan’s will only raises the stakes (Johnson 1:25:50). Johnson writes 
Marta’s character in this way to present and reflect the unjust irony of the justice 
system—a system that, despite being dedicated to preserving equal treatment, forces 
an innocent person like Marta to play the part of a murderer covering up their crime 
out of fear that she will lose her family if she trusts law enforcement. 
 Although Bee from Bodies Bodies Bodies is not a person of color, she is still 
vulnerable within her situation because, based on her socioeconomic status, the 
respective suspects treat her with prejudice and essentially view her as an outsider, 
similar to Marta. Their lack of hospitality toward Bee is present from the beginning 
of the film. An early scene of David interrupting Bee and her girlfriend Sophie’s time 
together to talk to Sophie “in private” about bringing Bee “without telling anyone” 
whilst the rest of the group probes Bee about her romantic past and nationality, 
serves as a clear example (Reijn 00:10:40-00:17:00). Though Bee and the group 
seemingly begin to feel more comfortable around each other, the group’s disdain 
resurfaces after murders begin to take place and they openly suspect and accuse Bee 

Davis

103



without solid evidence and lock her out of the house—a harsh and dangerous choice 
considering, at this point in the film, the audience is aware of Bee’s innocence and 
still believes a murderer is killing off the group one by one (Reijn 1:01:10). Similar to 
Johnson’s choices regarding Marta, Reijn makes a clear point to viewers by having 
well-off individuals quickly suspect and endanger someone who does not share the 
same economic status as them—a point that society’s unfair beliefs have embedded 
a distinct division between people that has reached an unfathomable and dangerous 
level.  
 Perhaps the most essential of the fictional crime elements, the resolution of a 
crime story best emphasizes the story’s central purpose, solidifying the conversations 
presented and the interpretations that have been established. Rafter expands on 
what the conclusions of crime films offer, explaining that crime films’ resolutions 
give “us contradictory sorts of satisfaction: the reality of what we fear to be true 
and the fantasy of overcoming that reality; the pleasure of entering the realm of 
the forbidden and illicit and the security of rejecting or escaping that realm in the 
end” (3). In different ways, both films achieve this type of “satisfaction;” Johnson 
achieves it by the end of Knives Out by ending the film with Marta overcoming 
the Thrombey’s attempts to reclaim Harlan’s will from her—a final closeup shot of 
her watching the Thrombeys from the balcony and sipping a mug that reads “My 
house, my rules, my coffee,” solidifying her victory (Johnson 2:05:08). Visually, the 
whole setup is symbolic; Marta’s placement above the Thrombeys represents the 
power she now holds over them as she has acquired the inheritance the family was 
convinced that they had earned. Rutigliano concurs with Marta’s success by the 
film’s ending, remarking that “[t]he film’s defensive-sounding title is the first and 
last sharp point it makes—that taking on a thorny, rotting system like the Thrombey 
family sovereignty isn’t easy, and won’t happen without a big fight, or at the very 
least, screaming bloody murder.” In the film’s finale, the previous conversations 
Johnson included come together to represent the metaphorical overthrowing of the 
modern biased system that the Thrombeys embody. By having this system lose to 
Marta, Johnson creates a new reality—one he seemingly suggests that society and the 
audience should stray toward. Less optimistically, by its conclusion, Bodies Bodies 
Bodies achieves the same “satisfaction” Knives Out does. After discovering the true 
cause of David’s death, the film concludes with a final scene in which Max, the only 
one in the group who was not present for the night’s events, returns and promptly 
asks Bee and Sophie, the sole survivors, what happened. In a final close-up, the 
girls, who are clearly in shock, are both silent as they are brought back to reality 
(Reijn 1:27:41). While this is can be seen as an unfortunate fate for the characters, 
the film’s conclusion does supply a sense of contentment by having the influencer’s 

Davis

104



egotistical attempts to save themselves backfire, leaving them either dead due to their 
unprincipled decisions or in a reality in which pretending to be the perfect influential 
figure will not be enough to dismiss a murder charge. The film’s final moments 
not only further execute Reijn’s themes regarding younger generations recognizing 
harmful attributes of online and influencer culture, but they also, similarly to Knives 
Out, make a proposition—a reality in which those in privileged positions are unable 
to fake their way out of the critical or, in the film’s case, fatal mistakes they made.  
 Using the films Knives Out and Bodies Bodies Bodies, this essay exemplifies 
specific and individual aspects of crime narratives that are capable of including 
social commentary. Both films, utilizing their victims, suspects, and resolutions, 
discuss and critique the relevant societal topic of class division. Focused on the 
upper-class Thrombey family who benefits from privilege, Knives Out criticizes the 
current bias system that society perpetuates, creating a new, more hopeful reality 
by its ending that Johnson believes modern American society should strive toward. 
Similar yet different, Bodies Bodies Bodies follows a group of wealthy social media 
influencers who, due to their economic statuses, are in privileged positions. The film 
uses the characters to critique social figures’ harmful behavior with technology and 
behavior within modern influencer culture, working as a cautionary tale for younger 
generations if they do not recognize the harm in this behavior and choose not to 
perpetuate it.

Davis

105



Works Cited 
Chang, Justin. “It Has Its Sharp Moments, but Bodies Bodies Bodies Could Use a Few 

Corpse Corrections.” Los Angeles Times, www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/
movies/story/2022-08-04/bodies-bodies-bodies-review-a24-pete-davidson. 

Dulude, Katarina. “The Roles of Class and Gender in Popular Films of 2019: Hustlers, 
Knives Out, and Avengers: Endgame.” The Macksey Journal, 2022.  

Johnson, Rian. Knives Out. Lionsgate, 2019. 

Pepper, Andrew, et al. The Routledge Companion to Crime Fiction. Routledge, 2021. 

Rafter, Nicole. “Shots in the Mirror: Crime Films and Society.” Oxford University 

Press, 2006. 

Reijn, Halina. Bodies Bodies Bodies. A24, 2022. 

Rutigliano, Olivia. “Knives Out Is a Surprisingly Subversive Mystery.” CrimeReads, 

7 Nov. 2022, www.crimereads.com/knives-out-is-a-surprisingly-subversive-
mystery/.  

Spina, Ferdinando. “Crime Films.” Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Criminology, pp. 
1-29. 

Davis

106

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/movies/story/2022-08-04/bodies-bodies-bodies-review-a24-pete-davidson
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/movies/story/2022-08-04/bodies-bodies-bodies-review-a24-pete-davidson
http://www.crimereads.com/knives-out-is-a-surprisingly-subversive-mystery/
http://www.crimereads.com/knives-out-is-a-surprisingly-subversive-mystery/

