Beta

Like gravedigging, you have to dig deep if you want to get the payoff.

Alex Garland's film about the abuse of women succeeds thanks to its rich tapestry of jarring images. While fans of traditional horror may feel disappointed by its lack of jump scares, those who appreciate the more cerebral psychology of neo-horror (à la Hereditary) will find what they are looking for here.

The film is largely a success thanks to its strong cast and rampant symbolism, though Garland's choice to focus more on the women as victims rather than the titular men as aggressors means the movie misses its mark when it comes to demanding receipts.

My interpretation of the symbolism:

:rotating_light::construction::octagonal_sign::warning:MAJOR SPOILERS FROM HERE ON OUT:warning::octagonal_sign::construction::rotating_light:
The film, obviously, is on a mission to portray women (or at least one woman) as a victim to the male gender. That the director wants to paint all men with this broad stroke is evident in the choice to have the same actor (Rory Kinnear) play all of the aggressors, saying, in essence, that deep down all men are the same man: a being that's driven to hurt women.

Of course, her abusive husband, James, isn’t played by Rory Kinnear. Does this mean he’s somehow different than the other men who appear later in the film? Absolutely not, and proof of that is Jame’s injuries. After he falls / jumps from the building, we see that a gate post splits his right arm from his elbow to his hand, and that his left ankle is broken. Later on in the film, all of the men in the town who besiege Harper are shown to share these exact same injuries, illustrating that they are the same man as the abusive estranged husband.

This point is also reinforced by the presence of 'the naked man'. 'The naked man' is the personification of "The Green Man" (who is also symbolized in the stone carving on the church altar). According to Wikipedia, “The Green Man is a legendary being primarily interpreted as a symbol of rebirth, representing the cycle of new growth that occurs every spring,” which indicates that, as violence breeds violence, the cycle of violent men will continue with no end in sight. This is also what’s meant by the endless cycle of men birthing men that we witness in the film’s climax.

A quick glance at the film’s characters shows us several types of abusers that exist in society.

First, her husband, who starts off emotionally abusing his wife -- “If you leave me, I’ll kill myself” -- before graduating to physical abuse.

Then there’s Geoffrey, the man who rents her the mansion. He represents the “nice guy” who imposes his generosity on women and, when he’s later rebuffed, hurls insults at the women who aren’t interested in him.

The priest represents the patriarchy of religion and the structure put in place to perpetuate male domination and abuse.

Samuel is the young man 'frat bro' who feels he’s entitled to his ‘bit of fun’ and rebukes women who dare refuse him what he considers to be his due.

The police officer represents authority because, when he arrives at Harper’s rental property the night of the home invasion, he stands in her front yard yet neither says nor does anything. He’s as useless and impotent as the police and other authorities women might turn to when they seek assistance.

All of this is not to say that Jessie doesn’t have her allies. There is her best friend Riley (Gayle Rankin) who provides moral support throughout the film, and the kind policewoman who speaks with Harper when the police initially arrest the naked man. Garland’s point here is that the best place for a woman to get the support and assistance she needs is with other women.

This concept is driven home by the second figure etched into the altar (on the opposite face of The Green Man), that of the sheela na gig. The sheela na gig is a carving of a woman with an exaggerated vulva and is used to symbolize fertility and protection against evil.

That’s a brief rundown of the symbolism in Men, and also serves to illustrate what I appreciate about the film: it’s not because it’s horror that I have to turn off my brain. [/spoiler]

“Look at what the cancer has become!”

‘Malignant’, a movie that after some time reflecting on it, I’m still not sure what to think of it. The movie is so messy and becomes all sorts of things, but in some weird way it’s still incredibly well made. This reminds me of when another horror director named Sam Raimi, who after directing three superhero movies like ‘Spider-Man’ then went on to make something like ‘Drag Me to Hell’, a campy horror comedy that nobody was ready for. While ‘Malignant’ is nowhere near as good as ‘Drag Me to Hell’, but I’m glad campy horror movies are not dead yet and I find it amusing how modern audiences, who are more exposed to jump scared horror flicks, are reacting to this.

This movie is so freaking bonkers in every sense of the word. It’s so out there that I found myself laughing at some scenes. The structure is so bizarre and there’s multiple scenes that when given some thought it doesn’t make too much sense. I can’t tell if it’s self-aware or not. It starts off like a creature feature with scientists running down a corridor talking quickly about the “thing” and how out of control it has gotten, while everyone is trying to sedate “it”. Then it turns into a James Wan Insidious/Conjuring movie with the usual build scares scares. But then it becomes a slasher movie with a killer named Gabriel on the loose. And finally, it turns into a campy experimental action movie that goes off the walls.

Either way, I enjoyed it so much that it felt like a breath of fresh air, even if before what I said sounded harsh. I haven't had this much fun with a horror movie in what feels like awhile. I miss these types of movies that we rarely get nowadays.

With this being a James Wan movie, it’s well filmed and he does some amazing things with the camera work, especially with the police station scene, an unbroken long take massacre action sequence, which was beautiful to watch. This is also James Wans most violent movie he’s made, and I freaking loved it. And yes, even more gory than ‘Saw’. A lot of blood and bone breaking.

The trailers and marketing didn't do justice for this movie. I didn't hear anything about this movie leading up to its release. The trailer itself made it look like a generic mid 2000's supernatural horror. But then again, how the hell are you supposed to market something like this.

The twist may or may not be predictable for some, but in terms of how it was executed, not predictable at all.

Overall rating: What more can I say, see it if you’re curious. It grows on you after seeing it.