• This is a terrible movie! A) Neil Labute is under the mistaken impression that depicting humankind as self-absorbed, cruel, shallow, misogynist, misanthropes somehow means he's really deep or hip or artistic. NOT. I argued against those who called In the Company of Men misogynist, because I thought the man was trying to make a point about misogyny and how unattractive/self-loathing it is, etc. But after seeing 5 films by this man, I realize he's not commenting on these things, he simply IS these things. He probably thinks he's very Mamet-esque, but he shares more in common with Todd Solodnz who doesn't seem to think much of humankind, either. The "f*** you" that Rachel Weisz delivers straight to the camera at the end, as she flips the bird with both hands -- because one bird and the words just don't quite get the point across -- is Labute's message to the world, including the audience that pays their hard-earned money to see his movies. B) This is a 4 character play put on film. It reads like a play, it's staged like a play. I didn't see the play, but I feel as though I have. I could see the scene changes, accompanied by the same scene change music, as opposed to a real film score. The dialogue had that stilted, actor-y stage quality complete with those pauses which are supposed to be filled with subtext but really just play as if the director said, count to 5 before your next line. And there are some talented actors in here, who deserve better. In short, it's contrived, it's ugly, it's poorly directed, it's not worth your $9.25 and I hate to say that about any indie film, cause I want to support indies. But I want to oppose misanthropy more. There's so much to be writing about in this world at this time that is truly important, and this is filmic equivilent of performance art which, like a self-important art student,