If you’re a regular moviegoer, fan of Zendaya, or have access to basically any social media platform, chances are you’ve heard of Luca Guadagnino’s Challengers (2024). The sports drama film claimed the top spot at the box office during its opening weekend and has remained relevant since - both numbers-wise and in conversation. People worldwide have taken to discussing the ins and outs of this story and its three central characters. Mike Faist’s character, however, seems to have sparked the most debate. Being labelled both the extremes of an innocent victim and master manipulator, Art Donaldson is a complex character to unpack.
If you somehow haven’t seen the film yet, consider this a polite spoiler warning because we’re about to dig right in.
Now, you would think that the commotion would mostly revolve around the other two characters. Both Tashi Duncan (Zendaya) and Patrick Zweig (Josh O’Connor) explicitly communicate their desires and goals through their actions - even when this emphasises their flaws and immorality. And, don’t get me wrong, both of these characters have sparked quite the reaction for such behaviour - it’s especially hard to leave the cinema not full of some hatred for Tashi Duncan. But it’s exactly because of the authenticity of these characters that Art is such an interesting figure to discuss. There is a general consensus on the motivations and morality of Tashi and Patrick’s characters. Art, however, has intentions that are more difficult to decipher. His character is much more timid and subtle than the other two, but does this necessarily make him any more just, or moral?
It’s difficult to pinpoint one correct answer to this - multiple interpretations are the beauty of ambiguous cinema. What we can say, however, is that Art Donaldson has a cunningness that, at first, might be difficult to realise.
Particularly in his youth, Art is subtle yet persistent in his desire for Tashi - approaching this in ways that can rightly be called manipulation. Even in the initial stages of the trio dynamic, Art is in a position of slight disadvantage. Patrick, despite being his close friend and tennis peer, is an objectively better player than he is. In one of the very first conversations shown between the two teenagers, Art asks Patrick to “not demolish me tomorrow”, humorously bringing up how his grandmother will be watching the game. Patrick responds “don’t guilt me with your dying grandmother”. This discrepancy in skill also creates tension in the early dynamic between Tashi and the two boys, where she states that whoever wins the match can have her number.
With the whole dying grandmother conversation and the acknowledgement that Art is going to lose the match - and his chance with Tashi - before it even begins, there is some sympathy established for his character. This carefully curated compassion the audience feels for Art makes it easy to simply categorise him as a victim, but it’s through the ‘unassuming good guy’ position that Art is able to pursue exactly what he wants.
Regardless of the fact that Art didn’t win Tashi’s number and that she is now dating his best friend, Art makes sure to keep himself involved. He uses the fact that he and Tashi are studying at the same university to stay relevant in her life and attend her college tennis matches. With Patrick on tour and the couple separated by distance, Art goes so far as to ‘innocently’ sow seeds of doubt into both of their minds about the seriousness of their relationship.
The cafeteria scenes in which he does this are a perfect testament to why some are eager to label Art as manipulative. Both Tashi and Patrick call him out on this behaviour too, with Tashi naming him “the worst friend in the world” and Patrick saying “it’s nice to see you lit up about something, even if that something is my girlfriend”. Art seems to be intentionally establishing himself as a barrier between the couple, which ultimately assists in breaking the couple - and entire trio - apart when Tashi injures herself and Art tells Patrick to “get the fuck out”. This creates a shift from Art being the outsider of their dynamic to Patrick now being the outcasted one.
While Art seems to have used manipulative methods to act on his romantic intentions, I would argue that he is a victim in his adult relationship with Tashi. In pursuing and obtaining Tashi, he had a sort of control and ambition that ventured into the immoral, but once achieving his goal of a relationship with her, this ‘nice guy’ quality becomes more honest. His love for Tashi is unconditional to a fault. He remains with her despite her conspicuous lack of proper romantic reciprocation and despite her prioritising tennis over him. He even seems to ignore the fact that Tashi slept with Patrick in Atlanta, while they were already together and engaged. With Tashi’s resentment and disregard for Art’s emotional state throughout their relationship, it’s impossible not to pity Art as the ‘lapdog’ devotee. Especially when Art painstakingly continues to pursue his tennis career for her sake, even stating “I know I’m playing for the both of us”.
Tashi’s number one priority was always tennis, whereas Art’s priority was her - in this, he is undeniably the victim.
So, is he an innocent victim and sly manipulator, or neither? I think it does a great disservice to the complexity of his character to label him as either extreme. The debate in and of itself, without an answer, is valuable. What can be said is that the ambiguity of Art Donaldson’s character - and Challengers as a whole - is captivating and undeniably reflective of the intricacy of human relationships.
Ilaria is a 3rd year Arts and Media student who is interested in analysing and reviewing literature and film. She joined Blitz to discuss and share these ideas with fellow students.
