Men - Movie Review

Critics Score - 7 of 10

General Audience Score - 5 of 10

What does the phrase Deus Ex Machina mean? It comes from Latin origins and has the general meaning of “god out of a machine”. It’s a reference to a mechanism of storytelling, used to refer to an unexpected plot device that gets someone out of a tight spot. An example of this would be the Tyrannosaurus Rex appearing suddenly at the end of Jurassic Park to prevent the velociraptors from eating our main characters. Back in 2014 we got a little film from debut director Alex Garland called Ex Machina, a fantastic piece of filmmaking, which he followed up with Annihilation in 2018 and earlier this year with the new A24 film Men. If you’ve seen any of Garland’s films, you know the formulaic storytelling of the major studio films is not his thing, his visionary filmmaking is exciting and fresh. The Deus Ex Machina plot contrivances of a genie appearing in the cave of wonders to save Aladdin isn’t what you should expect. But his new film Men is a wildly original film with some absolutely stunning cinematography and gorgeous scenery, but as it begins to morph towards the abstract and comment on societal gender issues, many general audiences will be lost along the way. It’s a bit creepy, much in the way his previous films were, but not scary in the way most horror films try to be. The art house loving cinephiles and movie aficionados will find some aspects they’ll enjoy in this movie, as I did, despite it being a little uneven in it’s delivery. But unless you’ve seen and enjoyed Garland’s other efforts and know what wavelength to expect, you may want to take a pass on this date with Men.

SYNOPSIS - This deep dive into what can only be interpreted as a dissection of toxic masculinity in various forms begins with a shot of a balcony in the rain, drenched in a reddish orange hue. We then see our main protagonist Harper (Jessie Buckley) standing with her back against her kitchen counter when Love Song by Leslie Duncan begins playing, oddly the song seems to be just for the audience, except Harper visibly jerks from the sound of the music starting. She crosses the apartment to close the balcony door, the slow motion rain drops bathed in the orange sunset light, but we also notice she has a trail of blood coming from one of her nostrils. The camera switches to a shot from behind her, we look out her patio door and inexplicably we begin to see a man we later learn is James (Paapa Essiedu) come into view from the top of the screen as he slowly falls past the window, his arms and legs flailing. Leslie Duncan keeps crooning away as we get a close up of Harper’s face, but then the scene cuts and we get some cinematic shots of a dandelion field and an old rundown home. We keep watching as some undisclosed time later, Harper drives her blue Ford Focus through what I assume to be the rural English countryside to a small village. She pulls her small car into the driveway of a sprawling estate of old fashioned buildings, barns, cottages, hedges and gardens, where she gets out and walks over to an apple tree where she picks one and begins to eat it. 

The estate’s owner/groundskeeper Geoffrey (Rory Kinnear) peeks out a window at her and then after greeting her, he asks with his heavy English accent, “was it a hellish drive?” The performances are all of excellent quality, Buckley is superb as always but I especially wanted to mention Kinnear and without spoiling too much, point out how truly impressive his . . . multi-faceted performance was. He shifts easily from the devoted farmhouse caretaker to a more creepy and unsettling person in a moment, getting a read on what his character might have up his sleeve was difficult. But as we wind our way further into the story, Harper goes out for a walk deep into the beautiful countryside where she finally comes upon a long tunnel through which an ancient railway line must’ve passed. After going through the dark entryway, she begins shouting “ah” and listening to the echoes reverberate off the walls before trying different tones and at varying intervals to create a musical choir-like effect. As we watch down the long tunnel of darkness with the small opening of light at the far end, we eventually hear a screeching sound and see a dark figure slowly stand up and even from a great distance, we discern it hurriedly begin to move in Harper’s direction. This kicks the film’s tension up a few notches, which is the realm of unease it strives to sustain and reside in through the rest of it’s hour and a half runtime. I won’t tread any further down the plot lines with the assortment of characters that arise to avoid any spoliers, but suffice it to say, this movie, on the surface level, goes completely off the rails by the finale.

On a technical level the film excels, as has been the case with all of Garland’s films. I’ll say the direction of the film is tight, I believe Garland made exactly the film he set out to, but what’s missing is how ambiguous the story gets and how his vision translates to us the audience. The film is saturated in double meaning, as the name of the film alone implies, but what the individual audience member gets out of it will depend on them. At the basic level, there’s some serious critiques of the male sex in general and their use of control over women, especially in a romantic relationship, as we unwind the backstory between Harper and James. But there’s also elements of male control, manipulation and egotistical behavior present in various behaviors that are tantamount to bullying, harassment and downright physical and mental abuse. These behaviors are found in many aspects of the male side of society that include but aren’t limited to business, religious, governmental and even the police, the film touching on several of these. The screenplay, alongside the direction from Alex Garland, while complex, intricate and having just so much to unpack, is debatable in how accessible all these intricacies will be in their effectively coming together to engage mainstream audiences. This is not a film to cue up on a first date or to show your parents over a holiday vacation, unless all parties involved are given consent forms to sign. Of the other technicals, the cinematography is great, there are some shot compositions that are really delightful and the scenic countryside is really gorgeous. The original score is also very good, albeit strange, the operatic tones and voices soaring and sometimes even weaving into the realm of screams and moans, but it all blends seamlessly into the overall odd and melancholic tone the movie thrives in. Most movie lovers would do well to give Men a chance, but strap yourself in cause you’re going for a ride.

SUMMARY - While Men is exciting and fresh, albeit abstract, unless you’re in the right mindset of knowing what you’re getting into, this film will probably leave you shocked or even with a bitter taste in your mouth. But there’s plenty of cinephiles, art house, indie and A24 movie lovers that’ll find this wild ride with these Men to be some haunting and fascinating fun.