Alex Garland is finally back with a new, mind-bending movie.
I’m a big fan of Alex Garland, he’s written and directed some amazing, thought-provoking sci-fi,
so “Men” was a highly-anticipated film for me… but here’s a plot twist:
this time he steps away from sci-fi in favor of some surreal, folk-flavored horror.
“Men” centers around Harper, played by the always excellent Jessie Buckley.
This is a woman who is dealing with a personal tragedy and
a complicated time in her life, so as she’s trying to move past everything
that’s happened she goes to stay at a secluded house in the English countryside.
Of course, this being a horror movie, it’s not long until she is stalked by a stranger,
and things only get weirder from here as Harper’s vacation descends into a surreal nightmare.
Where do I even start with this?
First of all, I can easily see this being Alex Garland’s most divisive film to date.
If I were to guess the Audience Score on Rotten
Tomatoes for this - I’d probably go with something in the 40’s, maybe 50s.
But I’m willing to bet it’s not going to be fresh.
If you’re a fan of the writer-director, you probably fully expect this movie to be weird,
artistic and allegorical, and it certainly is all of those things.
However, the film lacks the subtlety and depth of his previous work.
In a way, if you’ve seen the trailer, you’ve already seen everything this movie has to say.
Sure, there is more to see here, and I guarantee there will be some visuals and dialogue choices
that will make you highly uncomfortable,
but on the thematic level what you see in the trailer is really what you get.
Now, of course, I can’t fault the trailer for properly representing the movie, but for Alex
Garland this is a film that’s surprisingly straightforward and blunt in its metaphors,
and a film that isn’t really interested in digging much deeper with what it's trying to say.
Exploring humanity is a major part of what Garland does in his work.
Whether it’s the nature of humanity itself, individualism, freedom of choice,
or self-destruction and trauma - the complexity and nuance of human nature and human experience
have always been at the core of his films and series.
But while “Men” tries to revisit the ideas of trauma, anxiety, and the female experience,
it mostly just presents them rather than explores them.
Garland also touches on cultural expectations, guilt, victim blaming, gaslighting, and more…
but once again, those are things that simply are mentioned rather than explored.
You could say that the idea is to start a conversation rather than express a point of view,
and Garland himself has mentioned that he wanted to make a film people can project
onto as much as possible, to have the viewers participate in the narrative.
However, if that’s the case, the movie just isn’t vague enough,
as its symbolism and metaphors are pretty obvious.
This isn’t to say that there is nothing to appreciate about this movie though.
First of all, let’s talk about the fantastic performances.
With every film I see her in, I am more and more convinced
that Jessie Buckley is one of the best actresses working today.
Considering Harper as a character doesn’t have a lot of development, and
is mostly experiencing and reacting to what’s going on, Buckley really brings her to life.
You can tell she has a deep understanding of this character,
and she feels like a real person with a nuanced personality.
She’s a fascinating actress to watch because the smallest changes in her facial expressions convey
so much, and this is exactly what a role like this
needs - just by observing her you know there is a rich inner world inside her.
Rory Kinnear, on the other hand, delivers a very
different kind of performance here, as he plays a plethora of doppelgangers.
They’re different ages, different personalities, different temperaments,
but in some way all threatening to Harper, some more than others.
They’re not meant to actually represent real people, but rather they are various archetypes
of men, often exaggerated, each representative of things Harper has to deal with on a daily basis.
Some of them want something from her, some of them are dismissive of her needs,
and some are simply there, but in her eyes all of them are the same - they’re
literally played by the same actor, which is not something Harper ever addresses.
Kinnear is straight up scary in this movie - whether he’s being aggressive,
or seemingly well-meaning, there’s always something unsettling and creepy in his presence.
Something I did not expect from this movie, but really enjoyed, is the sense of humor it has.
Particularly in the first half, there were quite a few moments that actually made me laugh.
It may have been an awkward, uncomfortable laugh,
but it was still surprisingly entertaining and funny, considering how serious the premise is.
Finally, I of course have to mention the cinematography.
There are plenty of fascinating, striking visuals in “Men”,
and Rob Hardy who worked with Garland on his two previous films as well as his miniseries
“Devs” certainly uses the setting to its full potential.
Among other things, there is this constant visual opposition of red
and green, which immediately catches your eye.
Considering the themes and symbolic nature of the movie, the green likely represents
healing and growth, which is what Harper is looking for at this stage of her life.
She literally is searching for new beginnings and a new life.
Red on the other hand is often associated with aggression, violence,
and in this case can be connected to trauma and once again quite literally blood.
It can also represent love and desire, which in Harper’s case
are intertwined with aggression and trauma, so this battle of green and
red is an aesthetic representation of the things Harper is stuck in the middle of.
So here’s where I am with this movie: the concept itself is undeniably interesting and there
are things to admire about the execution, such as the performances and the visuals.
Where the movie loses me though is the writing.
There’s lots of symbolism, including folk and religious symbolism, but
not much depth beyond that. There are ideas that are represented but not really explored.
The main character gets somewhat of an answer to her question at the end,
but it’s not anything that isn’t already clear from the beginning.
And yes, there are some issues with pacing as well.
I do think it mostly succeeds as a horror movie,
as long as your preference in horror is weird and artistic rather than mainstream.
And it’s also a movie that keeps you engaged,
despite the pacing and the repetitive nature of what’s happening.
It works because even though it’s repetitive it keeps escalating,
and as a viewer you keep wondering where and how far is this going to go.
And let me tell you, it goes pretty far.
That third act and that ending…
If you thought “Annihilation” got weird by the end - just you wait. “Men” is pretty out there.
Personally, I do think the third act went
overboard and a certain scene overstayed its welcome by a lot.
You know the one, if you’ve seen it. Just... traumatized forever.
In the end, I equally understand why some people will love it and some people will hate it.
My immediate reaction right out of the theatre was actually pretty negative, and while as I’ve
thought about it I’m a bit less negative on the whole experience, it’s still not a movie I loved.
It just wasn’t for me, and because of that it’s actually a little bit hard for me to rate it.
Taking my personal feelings out of it, which is not something I believe in when
it comes to discussing art, this is probably around a 6 out of 10.
It has some interesting things going for it and it’s effective as a horror film,
but the writing leaves a lot to be desired.
If we’re talking about just my personal feelings - this is probably closer to a
4 out of 10 because, as I mentioned, despite my love for Alex Garland, this just wasn’t for me.
So I guess the middle road between those two is a 5 out of 10,
and I just cannot push it over to a 6, to a “liked it” territory because, well, I
didn’t like it and it lacked the depth that it seemed to promise.
But I cannot stress enough the importance of
forming your own opinion here. Always, but especially here.
Truly divisive movies, which is what I believe "Men" is going to end up being, are always a
very interesting experience, no matter which end of the spectrum you're going to end up on.
You may love it, even though I was left pretty disappointed.
While I am a horror fan, and Alex Garland clearly has some
fascinating and twisted horror ideas in him, I just really hope he gets back to sci-fi.