Men & Chicken movie review & film summary (2016)

Gabriel, determined to find answers about their shared background, tries to wrestle the wild brothers under control. Elias, however, takes to the chaos like a duck to water. Within 24 hours, he's dressed up in tennis whites playing badminton as though he had lived there all his life. He never wants to leave. 

Mads Mikkelsen, an exquisite actor, so elegant, controlled and frightening as Hannibal on NBC's "Hannibal," is barely recognizable as the constant-masturbator Elias. He's got a haircut and a mustache reminiscent of Christopher Walken's sleazy look in "At Close Range." But it's not just the externals that make him unrecognizable. Elias is chatty, impulsive, rude, irritated by his frustrated sex drive. Mikkelsen, as Elias, is always thinking, processing, eyes shifting around as he takes in new information. He thinks so much more than he says, and that's one of the reasons that the performance is so funny. It's not strange just for the sake of being "wacky" or "quirky." Mikkelsen has made sense of Elias, and has connected all of those disparate pieces to create a very real character. Humphrey Bogart once said that good acting was six feet back in the eyes. Mikkelsen goes that deep, and that's why he is so transformed. Elias is so strange that one might struggle to place him, or compare him to someone else. But he is his own thing, and you can't take your eyes off of him. 

Strange motifs and themes emerge and recur: copious ejaculation, dead birds, evolutionary mutations, hybrid breeds, survival of the fittest, inherited characteristics. Nature creates "monsters," and man can create monsters of his own. Jensen uses horror movie tropes: strange things glimpsed at night, closed doors, phonographs playing in empty rooms. But there are farcical elements too: the brothers running around the sanitarium wielding badminton rackets, the repeated beatings with a stiff dead bird and the casual discussions afterwards ("I'm not mad at you for beating Gabriel with the mute swan. It happens to the best of us.") There's also a grotesque element, in the traditional sense of the word: "freaks," cages, mutations limping through their lives. What was their father up to? What's with the cleft palates? What is in that basement? At some point, is someone going to sexually assault a chicken? It is discussed as a valid option. 

Audience members looking for a character to "relate to" or "like" may have a rough time. But nobody is likable in farce or absurdist black comedy: it's not that kind of genre, nor should it be. What does all of this add up to? Damned if I know. But it's fun to see a film that plays by its own rules to such a degree that any comparison to anything else falls apart.

ncG1vNJzZmivp6x7s7vGnqmempWnwW%2BvzqZmq52mnrK4v46mnKdlkaOxbq%2FHopqknZ5if3F9lQ%3D%3D