A Different Man

I was not sure when to laugh or look pensive while watching A Different Man but I went with the audience and laughed when they did and thought when they did. Although I'm not sure I agree we should have laughed when we did because the story is of identity crisis above anything else. In this film, a man with facial deformities assumes another life after a successful surgery but is overwhelmed by what his new life is failing to give him and what the old life in hindsight gave him. It's a surreal experience where you will end up thinking about your own life should given a chance to change it and reborn as a new man. A Different Man shows that changing to another person looks good but it's the case of grass is greener on the other side. Sebastian Stan is adorable here.

(Watched at the 2024 MAMI Mumbai Film Festival.)

"Edward" (Sebastian Stan) is a facially disfigured man, stuck in a rundown apartment, whose life isn't really going anywhere fast. Then he gets a new neighbour. "Ingrid" (Renato Reinsve) is a writer who befriends him and promises him a part in her play. Meantime, his doctors manage to get him on a radical course of treatment that gradually returns his face to a more normal visage. Returning to his flat, and with some fairly grotesque things emerging from his leaky ceiling, he realises that nobody recognises him anymore so he has to assume a different identity. That's when he discovers that "Ingrid" is, indeed, putting on a play - and that the old "Edward" is the title and the topic. He wants the part. It's his part. How to get it though without giving the game away? Add to his frustrations the arrival of "Oswald" (Adam Pearson) who is an ostensibly decent character but who also wants the role, and he has the aesthetics as opposed to the prosthetics. "Ingrid" has tough choices to make but where might this leave "Edward"? There's something quite circular about the way this story pans out. A sort of be careful what you wish for type scenario that gives and removes hope from "Edward" and almost creates a villain of the piece too! Is that merited or is that justified? The drama shines a light on the more shallow attitudes amidst society, on our intolerances and assumptions but it also swipes at the fickleness of friendships, fame and success - all rather engagingly delivered by both Stan and Pearson. It's the former man who positively exudes exasperation as the denouement (only vaguely) skirts the Chaplinesque. It's on that note that it's worth saying this is quite funny at times, too - the writing doesn't try to impose any morals on us, rather it presents us with some scenarios and lets us enjoy and evaluate as we go. It doesn't hang about, and right from the start we hit the ground running as the characters develop, the personalities emerge - for good or bad, and it's well worth a couple of hours in a cinema. I got more from it second time round as I was able to focus a little more on the nuance than the imagery.

From what I'm reading online, everyone except me seems to find this film a comedy, but for me, this felt like horror. This gave me a similar feeling to what I felt after watching Synecdoche New York even though they're very different. Both had the making of a play as a central plot point and both made me feel like I'm watching a psychological horror film.

The protagonist Edward may be very different from me but his insecurities about life, the way he hides from the past and acts through the present, only to be shown to him he can't really make it because of who he is, just hits close to home.

The way this movie nonchalantly shows how people are perceived due to how each person believes what they are is striking. Be it the person who you expect not to be popular being popular or the person you expect to be kind being not that, maybe even unbeknownst to themselves. It breaks the bubble of how such movies usually show these kinds of situations by making it very unsettling which can be perceived as darkly comical as well I guess.

Sebastian Stan is brilliant with his body language conveying all the insecurities. Adam Pearson being the charming positive force of the movie was such a surprise but it's great to see especially when it's Sebastian Stan on the other side.

One of the best movies of the year and something I won't revisit anytime soon.

I enjoyed A Different Man, but it fell a little bit short of my expectations because there was so much hype surrounding it. It was good, a very A24 type movie, but not the kind of movie I'll be revisiting very often.

Sebastian Stan is great, but I never admire an actor who has the task of playing a bad actor. He manages to pull it off well, while also doing some solid acting aside from that. Renate Reinsve also had the unfortunate task of playing an unlikeable character, which just seems to be her resume, but again she did well. It's hard to actually rate Adam Pearson as he is such a unique actor and the role was a little bit overbearing, but I certainly enjoyed his performance.

The story felt a little like Adaptation. (2002) at times and even a bit like The Shout (1978). I'm not quite sure how I feel about it on the whole yet, as the ending was somewhat interoperative. It's a movie that will take some digestion so my rating may change later.

Much like Sebastian Stan's character Edward, for many years I was always the person that looked like another person. There was always a caveat of course, where it seemed like the person I supposedly looked like seemed more interesting, outgoing and well known amongst these groups. This parallel with my life and the film instantly drew me in.

It's intriguing this film came out so close to another film centering around identity, that being The Substance. Where the satire and in your face boldness of that film will define its legacy, A Different Man's approach is much more pensive and sad. It reflects the unique challenges of men and women, where women are judged for their outward appearance and sex appeal, while men are judged more for their success and charisma (though sex appeal does play a part in this film). Edward feels held back and embarrassed by his appearance, and fails to see his worth in a society bent on looks and stature. What he doesn't realize is that his inner self is interesting and complex, but he can't harness that power in him. Even when he is conventionally attractive, he is still the same nervous, awkward person. He acts how he thinks he should act in this role, rather than be himself. This is what makes the introduction of Oswald so interesting.

Oswald is aggressive, pushy, and dare I say diabolical. While his outward features should be a setback in his life, his confident and charismatic personality makes him the perfect foil for Edward. He is powerful in ways that Edward can only pretend to be, pushing him out of a play about his own life, stealing his love interest and earning the love and admiration that Edward felt deprived of. Edward is so weak and overwhelmed that he once again tries to pretend to be something he is not on top of his false persona. Edward never truly accepted his true self, and it eventually leads to some troublesome outcomes for him.

I definitely think this film is going to hit a lot of men quite hard, the reviewer included. With all of the discussions about what is masculinity or what even defines a man, it's difficult being our true selves due to the fear of being judged by mythical standards. Is the fact I never went to war not make me a man? Is the fact I am overweight and broken make me less than a man? People forget the pressures men feel in modern society, and we just turn off and sometimes disappear into the woodwork. Suicide and death are approached subjects in this film, and much like in reality, they are brushed aside.

I was definitely intrigued by this film, for we rarely see true deconstructions of the male psyche where the character doesn't do a complete 180 on their life and become a confident Casanova or something, or saves the day like every man wishes they can do. The reality is, most of us just exist and hope things turn out for the best. I did wish the movie had addressed the elephant in the room, which was trying to portray a story about a physically handicapped person without making them a victim. I think they expertly dealt with that subject with some meta commentary at the end. I don't think they wanted that subject to overrun the story, but they at least addressed the issue. In retrospect, they handled it as best as they could.