THE MAN IN THE ORANGE JACKET is a Latvian/Estonian co-production, a horror film about the eponymous man invading the mansion of a rich magnate and then deciding to squat there.
The film is well-shot and the first 15 minutes, apparently constructed as a sort of prologue before the credit sequence appears, are very promising. Unfortunately, the film fails to deliver on that promise, largely because for some reason it could not decide what it would be about.
During the first few scenes, we hear that a couple hundred of workers in a harbor facility were fired, and then we come to find out that the owner of the mansion is also the employer of these people, and all too aware that he just destroyed the livelihood of hundreds of families.
It is easy to surmise that the home invader is one of his former disgruntled employees, and that sets the movie up for exploring issues of wealth inequality and class warfare. Indeed, as the home invader decides to squat in the mansion and indulge in luxuries that were previously completely out of his reach, the movie effectively conveys how he begins to see the world through the eyes of the elite, along with its dark corollary of a constant fear that the have-nots-among them people exactly like him-will try to take what he has.
However, then the plot inexplicably falters in that it never explores how his newfound views affect his relationship with other people in his class. The squatter becoming like his victim could have been a rich source of irony, but instead the story merely hints at it as it suddenly veers off into hallucinatory episodes, after which we are for several stretches no longer sure what is real and what isn't.
I actually don't mind a left turn like that in movies, but if they are going to do it, there should be a good reason for it. For example, a person who does what the intruder had done might fall into a psychotic state due to anguish and guilt, but, to the extent that the scenes depicting his imagination provide a window into his mind, all we see is a sick, demented individual.
The absence of remorse or empathy in him then destroys the credibility of the later scenes in which he sees himself in the position of the hunted. After being shown extended sequences of his inability to emphasize with his victims, it is a hard sell to portray him as if he can relate to their experiences. His utter lack of humanity also makes the entire subject of this individual's mental state uninteresting.
Perhaps the intention was to explore both: combine the class warfare theme with the mental psychosis one, but the film is too uncommitted to either for it to be impactful, and as a result the disturbing scenes of violence come across gratuitous.
The episodic nature of the movie is formalized in four acts, but it is not clear to me what the point of doing that was. I found the conclusion of the movie especially a let-down because it reeks too much of deus ex-machina.
Overall, I think this is a movie which could have been much better if it had committed itself more to the topics it merely touched upon.
3 out of 3 found this helpful