Tonight’s movie is technically this is classed as a horror comedy, but it’s really a nihilistic dark comedy with an emphasis on the nihilism. Directed by Mark Mylod (Whose only previous feature was 2011’s Romcom “What’s Your Number?”) and is written by first time feature writers Seth Reiss and Will Tracy. The movie stars Ralph Fiennes and Anya Taylor-Joy with notable support from Nicholas Hoult and John Leguizamo. This movie has had a pretty positive reception but audiences are torn between people saying it’s the best movie of last year (It’s not) and those were more sort of “Meh” about it. So where did it land for me? Let’s have a look.
Starters
The setting for the film is a trip to a special exclusive restaurant based on a remote private island. Naturally such a remote location never bodes well in a movie for those foolish enough to go there and this is no exception and naturally as the extravagant multi-course meal goes on it becomes increasingly clear there is another agenda to this meal. It is hard to get further into the story and to a lot of my criticisms without hitting spoilers, so I am going to save that until the end. For now all you need to know is that the guests have all been invited specifically, with the exception of Anya Taylor-Joy’s character “Margot”, who is a last minute replacement.
Since Margot was never intended to be there not only does this provide an element of the plot (As the spanner in the works) but also provides an outsiders view into the events and the crazy world the rest of the characters seem to inhabit. Anya Taylor-Joy provides as solid a performance as I’ve come to expect from her, but it is Ralph Fiennes as the broken, vengeful “Chef Slowik” that steals the show here. Hoult gives a pretty solid performance as the obsessive fanboy “Tyler” but doesn’t have much asked of him and Leguizamo is just sort of there and I can’t help but feel wasted.
Main Course
The movie certainly has it’s charms both in concept and in the performance of Fiennes, but it is also very slow, plodding and predictable. The most notable aspect is an overwhelming sense of inevitability and going through the motions. Slowik is motivated by the fact that he feels the focus on pretentious highbrow cooking has robbed him of all the enjoyment he used to have for his art and he blames his high class clientele for leading him to this point, so he he plans a pretentious and ironic recipe for revenge on those he feels are most to blame.
The revenge plays out through a series of twisted courses with his victims ranging from rich investors, to restaurant critics, to an obsessive fanboy (Hoult), to an actor that just happened to be in a movie he didn’t like when he needed cheering up (Leguizamo). None of the courses though, outside the final one are actually directly about inflicting violence on the customers, because as I said, this isn’t actually a horror. Most of these events play out completely without surprise and in at least one instance the obviousness of the event is frustrating to watch, though I can’t help but wonder if that is somewhat of the point since the Nihilism and Fatalism seem to be strong themes here.
– – – SPOILER TERRITORY – – –
Obviously a key part of the plot revolves around Margot. As soon as she arrives on the island it causes a disturbance in Chef Slowik’s plans and eventually he confronts her so he can determine if she belongs with the dinners or the staff. The decision though isn’t about if she will live or die as Slowik’s plan includes all their deaths regardless of which side of the counter the are on. So to save herself she needs to find some way of convince him she shouldn’t be on either side. This is eventually done when she is randomly given the freedom to travel about the island and decides to have a look at his private residence. There she notices early photos of the Chef working as a short order cook, flipping burgers and apparently very happy doing it.
It’s worth noting that at this point she is still trying to save everyone so doesn’t just take the opportunity to escape, instead calls for help from a coast guard who all too predictably turns out to be working for Slowik (That was a real low point for the movie for me). However, after that plays out she makes one final gamble complaining about the quality of the food and demanding a cheeseburger, which Slowik provides and then allows her to take the rest of it she couldn’t finish “To go”, basically letting her escape. Partially because this probably reminded him of a time he was happy but also because of her compelling rant which showed she really understood. The rant is interesting here, because it is a rant that could equally well be applied to the film itself.
– – Deserts (Still Spoilers) – –
The cheeseburger rant is about how the focus on being clever with the cooking and appealing to an elite few that are more interested in being pandered to then actually enjoying the food has drained all the joy out of the experience for both the clientele and the cooks. This can be seen in the film itself with how easily everyone but Margot become resigned to their fate. When the final moment comes they all seem largely dispassionate about the whole thing, like it is almost ceremonial. On one hand this shows the movie is dedicated to it’s own themes, but on the other hand I couldn’t help but wonder if they had considered the same argument could be put towards movies too and that the main issue with this movie is it is totally lacking in the “Cheeseburger factor” itself.
That’s the thing, because the movie is designed to seem clever, but it plods through the story joylessly throughout. Despite being labelled as a horror comedy there are no real moments that indulge for horror fans or really that are likely to make anyone laugh, except perhaps that kind of fake laugh people make when they want to show approval of something clever but that they don’t actually find funny. There also aren’t really any individual scenes that actually stand out. It only really works as a package deal, all together, much like the menu chef Slowik has prepared in the film itself.
Conclusion and Coffee
The key here is the film is the movie version of just those kind of “work of art” menus. It’s not an emotional experience, instead It is one that needs you to stand back and appreciate the whole thing as one piece. It’s hard to get past the fact the moral of the story is apparently that art like that is not really a good thing without a bit of joy thrown in too. So the question is, do the film makers really believe in their own conclusion or do they only consider that an issue for cooking only and not entertainment? As a result this movie leaves me somewhat torn. What I do know is that I am not likely to come back to it.
The movie did keep me interested and was definitely well made, but that’s about it. Had I seen it last year it may have made my top ten, but it wouldn’t have been near the top 5. Conceptually interesting and helped significantly by a great performance from Ralph Fiennes, but at the same time it is a melancholy experience with no real fun to it whose end is more like a toilet flush after a satisfactory bowel movement than a crescendo in an emotional orchestral score. A joyless, yet strangely compelling cerebral offering distinctly lacking “Cheeseburger” this movie is a 6/10.
You must be logged in to post a comment.