Après avoir vécu un drame personnel, Harper décide de s'isoler dans la campagne anglaise, en espérant pouvoir s'y reconstruire. Mais une étrange présence dans les bois environnants semble la... Tout lireAprès avoir vécu un drame personnel, Harper décide de s'isoler dans la campagne anglaise, en espérant pouvoir s'y reconstruire. Mais une étrange présence dans les bois environnants semble la traquer.Après avoir vécu un drame personnel, Harper décide de s'isoler dans la campagne anglaise, en espérant pouvoir s'y reconstruire. Mais une étrange présence dans les bois environnants semble la traquer.
- Prix
- 2 victoires et 36 nominations au total
Avis en vedette
Maybe it's just me, but I really connected with this one. Don't get me wrong, I can totally see why it's gotten such a mixed reaction: it's definitely not for everyone. But I still think that, even if you end up hating it, you should give this one a shot.
First of all, the acting is brilliant from everyone involved. It's also Garland's best looking movie by a long shot - there are tons of really poetic, haunting shots, and the shallow depth of field is really suited to this kind of story.
What it comes down to is whether you're okay with a movie not being grounded. This is a very non-literal story, and no explanation is given for any of the events that take place.
I think there is some misinformation being perpetuated about the movie as well. I did not get the message of "Men are bad" from this movie. It's a lot more nuanced than that, at least for me.
If you're going to watch this, be prepared for some uncomfortable and disturbing imagery, and be ready to not fully understand every last thing that happens. If neither of these things bothers you, this might just be for you.
First of all, the acting is brilliant from everyone involved. It's also Garland's best looking movie by a long shot - there are tons of really poetic, haunting shots, and the shallow depth of field is really suited to this kind of story.
What it comes down to is whether you're okay with a movie not being grounded. This is a very non-literal story, and no explanation is given for any of the events that take place.
I think there is some misinformation being perpetuated about the movie as well. I did not get the message of "Men are bad" from this movie. It's a lot more nuanced than that, at least for me.
If you're going to watch this, be prepared for some uncomfortable and disturbing imagery, and be ready to not fully understand every last thing that happens. If neither of these things bothers you, this might just be for you.
First off, let me say, that was the strangest ending to a film I think I have ever seen. How this movie got an R rating is beyond me because it is graphic! Secondly, what the hell did I just watch??? The movie was going so well for the first hour or so, beautiful cinematography, a sweeping sound mix and some very brilliant acting and writing all around. But then things start to get... weird. It completely loses it's footing and the film turns into what I can only describe as the worst allegory for depravity and misogyny I think ever put to film. It just didn't make any sense and the more I think about it, the less sense it makes. There is no outright conclusion, only a bunch of nonsense thrown at you in hopes that you'll think it's cool, but it comes off as pretentious and pandering. I would've loved to know what happened afterwards, but alas the movie is unfinished. If you do go to see this one, be prepared for an ending that will either leave you gagging or wanting. It really leaves nothing to the imagination and everything to your imagination at the same time. I only recommend it for the strong acting and beautiful camera work, but other than that, the film falls flat on it's face in the last half hour. 2.5 birthings out of 5.
Immerse yourself in a not uncommon story of a woman fighting her demons after aggressive and confrontational encounters from her partner resulting in tragedy and guilt. An outstanding performance from Jessie Buckley through a piece of cinema that leaves you feeling constantly uncomfortable, and under no illusion of how abuse perpetuates through the ages, in many guises, and is ultimately so difficult to contain.
"Men" follows a young woman vacationing in a remote English village after suffering a personal loss. Immediately upon arrival, it appears she is being followed, and she finds herself increasingly unnerved by encounters with various men in the village.
This offering from Alex Garland is a strange, at times intoxicating melange of elements borrowed from supernatural thrillers, slasher films, and even body horror. Does it work? In part, yes. The first hour of "Men" is remarkable, and I found myself utterly lost in the visuals and atmosphere. The lush countryside and its green forests are captured in such a way that both the natural beauty and the stark ominousness of the landscape are on full display. There is a protracted scene in the first act in which Buckley's character takes a stroll through the woods, and it is truly one of the creepiest, most unnerving sequences I have seen in a film. To some extent, the film plays like an emerald green version of Lars von Trier's "Antichrist"; there are even shades of "Let Sleeping Corpses Lie" present, as well as an obvious (and memorable) visual nod to Carol Reed's "The Third Man".
Garland obviously has a taste for the surreal, and it is laid on thick here in a crescendo that builds to the shocking final act. Along the way, we are offered nightmarish sequences in churches, graveyards, and abandoned buildings; symbolism of the Green Man and the Sheela-na-gig are recurring motifs set against the green (and occasionally blood red) color palette, and Rory Kinnear's multiple roles (he portrays each of the male characters featured in the film) only compound the uncanniness. The entire thing truly feels like a very bad dream, and it does it better than any film I can recall seeing in recent memory.
Unfortunately, the film gets clunky in the final act, and the back-and-forth hi jinx start to wear thin. The finale features a repulsive sequence that could be pulled from a number of Brian Yuzna or David Cronenberg features, and, though shocking, I am not sure there is enough metaphoric subtext to support such an outrageous sequence. While there is an underlying theme in which Buckley's character observes pieces of her deceased husband in each of the men she encounters, I felt the over-the-top gross out nature of the ending was somewhat unwarranted. On the bright side, however, the consummate performances from Buckley and Kinnear help maintain some believability here.
Overall, "Men" largely succeeds on the basis of its stellar photography and atmosphere, which envelops the viewer in an emerald nightmare landscape that is both gorgeous and unnerving. The all-out body horror of the final act does feel unearned, but I can say this much: You'll never forget seeing it. 7/10.
This offering from Alex Garland is a strange, at times intoxicating melange of elements borrowed from supernatural thrillers, slasher films, and even body horror. Does it work? In part, yes. The first hour of "Men" is remarkable, and I found myself utterly lost in the visuals and atmosphere. The lush countryside and its green forests are captured in such a way that both the natural beauty and the stark ominousness of the landscape are on full display. There is a protracted scene in the first act in which Buckley's character takes a stroll through the woods, and it is truly one of the creepiest, most unnerving sequences I have seen in a film. To some extent, the film plays like an emerald green version of Lars von Trier's "Antichrist"; there are even shades of "Let Sleeping Corpses Lie" present, as well as an obvious (and memorable) visual nod to Carol Reed's "The Third Man".
Garland obviously has a taste for the surreal, and it is laid on thick here in a crescendo that builds to the shocking final act. Along the way, we are offered nightmarish sequences in churches, graveyards, and abandoned buildings; symbolism of the Green Man and the Sheela-na-gig are recurring motifs set against the green (and occasionally blood red) color palette, and Rory Kinnear's multiple roles (he portrays each of the male characters featured in the film) only compound the uncanniness. The entire thing truly feels like a very bad dream, and it does it better than any film I can recall seeing in recent memory.
Unfortunately, the film gets clunky in the final act, and the back-and-forth hi jinx start to wear thin. The finale features a repulsive sequence that could be pulled from a number of Brian Yuzna or David Cronenberg features, and, though shocking, I am not sure there is enough metaphoric subtext to support such an outrageous sequence. While there is an underlying theme in which Buckley's character observes pieces of her deceased husband in each of the men she encounters, I felt the over-the-top gross out nature of the ending was somewhat unwarranted. On the bright side, however, the consummate performances from Buckley and Kinnear help maintain some believability here.
Overall, "Men" largely succeeds on the basis of its stellar photography and atmosphere, which envelops the viewer in an emerald nightmare landscape that is both gorgeous and unnerving. The all-out body horror of the final act does feel unearned, but I can say this much: You'll never forget seeing it. 7/10.
Generally, I'm not a fan of cinema as metaphor (got halfway through the mess that was 'Mother!', spotted the metaphor and switched off), but this was so well done that I couldn't look away.
Which says a lot considering there's a couple of scenes in there that ain't for the squeamish. I'd recommend this not just for the deep sense of unease it stirs up (again and again) and the disturbing shots scattered throughout, but also the setting, the effective use of music, the performances and the metaphor itself. Visceral, affecting and deeply unsettling.
Anyone looking for run-of-the-mill horror might do better to avoid this one, but if you're in the mood for something with a little more substance beneath the surface give it a watch. At the least you'll be entertained.
Which says a lot considering there's a couple of scenes in there that ain't for the squeamish. I'd recommend this not just for the deep sense of unease it stirs up (again and again) and the disturbing shots scattered throughout, but also the setting, the effective use of music, the performances and the metaphor itself. Visceral, affecting and deeply unsettling.
Anyone looking for run-of-the-mill horror might do better to avoid this one, but if you're in the mood for something with a little more substance beneath the surface give it a watch. At the least you'll be entertained.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesEux (2022) was filmed in the United Kingdom, specifically St Katharine Docks, London, and parts of Gloucestershire, including Withington, standing in for Cotson; and a tunnel in The Forest of Dean.
- GaffesOn around 28 minutes in, the phone Harper uses to take the picture and the phone she uses to see it in the bath are different.
- Bandes originalesLove Song
Written by Lesley Duncan
Performed by Lesley Duncan
Courtesy of 1971 Sony Music Entertainment UK Limited
Licensed by Sony Music Entertainment UK Limited
Published by Concord Music Publishing LLC
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Men?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Sites officiels
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Men
- Lieux de tournage
- Withington, Gloucestershire, Angleterre, Royaume-Uni(village of Cotson)
- société de production
- Consultez plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Brut – États-Unis et Canada
- 7 587 853 $ US
- Fin de semaine d'ouverture – États-Unis et Canada
- 3 293 030 $ US
- 22 mai 2022
- Brut – à l'échelle mondiale
- 11 151 120 $ US
- Durée
- 1h 40m(100 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant