Shocking scene: why the end of Men justifies its ban on children under 12 with warning – Actus Ciné

No one expected the final series of Men, the shocking and visionary new film from Alex Garland (Ex Machina, Annihilation). Back to the last scene of the horror feature film and what it means. Warning, spoilers.

Warning, spoilers. The following paragraphs reveal the plot elements from the end of the movie Men. If you don’t want to know anything, don’t read.

completion Ex Machina and BREAKINGDIRECTORS Alex Garland came back with a shocking new film to wear by Jessie Buckley and Rory Kinnear. Now in theaters Men following the traumatic experience of Harper, a woman who left to isolate herself in the English countryside to rebuild herself after a personal tragedy.

But a strange presence flows through him in this peaceful little village and the violent memories of Harper (Jessie Buckley) come out and change what should have been a time of peace and stability. into a dream come true.

With Men, Alex Garland offers a shocking and visually new cinematic experience, amidst physical horror and psychological drama, by calling out symbols, metaphors and myths mixed with horror and fantasy to break the relationship of violence between men and women. .

Instead, the film ranges from fantasy to humor and drama to a crazy final act that no one would expect and that explains the ban on under 12s with a cinematic warning. In fact, after being harassed and attacked by several men or archetypes of men of the same face (Rory Kinnear), Harper witnessed a confusing and frightening scene.

Metropolitan FilmExport

The man breeds evil

He sees the Green Man, the first Man from the forest to harass him, trying to enter the house, while wearing his various forms of threat (the policeman, the child or the priest). But Harper was able to defend himself and attack and injure his attacker.

Then the weak Man fell to the ground and gave birth to another Man like him. Which also gave birth to another Man of the same appearance. And so on, sometimes through impossible vaginal openings. Every new Man born is weaker, more meaningful, strange.

Until recently it was actually James (Paapa Essiedu), Harper’s ex-husband who was an abusive husband to her and killed himself after a violent domestic argument. When Harper asked her what she really wanted from him, she simply replied “Your love”.

Metropolitan FilmExport

A childish and pitiful request that can only meet her needs, ignoring the consent or the needs and desires of her spouse whom she intends as a mother and caregiver, to bring her unconditional love , who was also looking for the Men who chased him.

And this representation of misogyny, which comes to these different types of Person through symbolism and other biblical figures, seems to be a way for Alex Garland to reverse established codes and presuppositions according to where the original sin will come from the Woman. . The idea that all women carry within themselves Eve’s sins (along with the image of the apple we see in the film) is thus criticized in a completely different reading.

Men will immediately bear their own sins of violence and non -femininity, relics of a patriarchal society. And that these traits can be inherent in their identity because they are always reproduced in the film’s birth. The male will breed evil. An evil as horrible as the pathetic one Harper faced.

Although it’s unclear what the outcome of this latest exchange between Harper and James will be, we find him next to the post-credits scene alone, at peace with himself and released from the weight of old toxic relationships.

Metropolitan FilmExport

After the “MEN” title card, Harper is accompanied by his friend Riley (Gayle Rankin), with whom he used to talk on the phone. When Riley arrives, he can only see the damage and the liter of blood on the ground. This proves that all the traumatic events that Harper experienced are real and that he is a survivor.

According to Alex Garland, this post-credits scene was originally supposed to have a dialogue but in the end he cut it out. This was revealed by the director during a Q&A in New York (via polygon): “The dialogue seems like too much next to the smile.”

In any case, Alex Garland declined to comment much on his film so as not to spoil the public experience: “It can all be a little psychoanalytical if I talk about it too closely. I think it can be distracting. [la lecture du spectateur]. In this film especially, I want to step back because the idea of ​​the film is to open up different interpretations.

The trailer for Men, in theaters June 8:

Leave a Comment