I haven’t written anything here in over a year, so this post essentially recalls this defunct ol’ blog to life. I like to talk about film, and the last one I saw is “The Menu”, starring Ralph Fiennes and directed by Mark Mylod. I deliberately avoided reading anything about the film before writing this, but I saw it described as a “black comedy horror film.” That seems about right, ‘cept to me, it’s a little light in the comedy department and a bit heavy on the horror (and the nihilism, which I’ll get to later.)
The film begins with a group of gourmands boarding a boat to the fictional Hawthorne Island. (Perhaps a reference to Nathaniel Hawthorne, whose “House of the Seven Gables” deals with a curse on a family? Tune in tomorrow to Reading-Too-Much-Into-It Theater to find out.) where Chef Slowik (Fiennes) has his restaurant. (Is Slowik a play on “slow wick?” Tune in tomorrow …) We get our first glimpse of the characters, including Tyler (Nicholas Hoult), a foodie wannabe and his date, Margot (played by Anya Taylor-Joy, whose wide eyes look like they were drawn by a Disney animator.)
Once on the island, the diners are given a tour by Elsa (Hong Chou), Slowik’s right-hand woman. The chef’s assistants live in a cramped Quonset hut and endure a grueling daily schedule (think Julia Child Meets Jim Jones.) This gives us our first inkling that things on the island are just a mite odd. Once the meal begins, things go from quirky, to weird, to downright unhinged as each course is served.
I’ll get to the point; with any film, the question comes down to, “Did you like it?” I am forced to say no, I really didn’t like “The Menu”, despite having liked it in part – Fiennes always turns in a good performance, Taylor-Joy steals the movie, and there’s some great interplay between their characters; Margot is not cowed by Slowik and lets him know it. Truth to tell, though, I found the film, well, nihilistic. I’m not a fan of movies that paste on an upbeat ending, but “The Menu” is an overcorrection. Yes, I know, there are elements of satire in the film, which could be viewed as a commentary on those who bust their asses for a living and those who (in this case literally) consume the results of their labor. Nonetheless, in the end, nihilism is nihilism.
Maybe the real issue is that I’m just not in the target audience of this film, which I imagine to be a younger, hipper, horror-loving crowd. Perhaps it’s that the film has a gaping ”so-what?” factor. If you watch the film in its entirety, notice your reaction at its end. Mine was something like, “So what? I’ve watched this picture to its conclusion, endured a cinema of cruelty, and this is where we end? There are ultimately no surprises here. I figured it’d end on a note like this halfway through the movie. You’ve pursued a nasty premise to its nasty conclusion and the result is lighthearted and fun. (Just kidding – it’s actually nasty.)
As always, don’t take my word for it – your reaction may be completely different.
de jungle 