The concept is great. The footage scenes authentic. An Indie film but so what. Enjoy.
Add a Review
-
alexisblondebeacher17 April 2020
-
Blue-Grotto8 November 2015Men are obsolete. In the 1950s women start to get pregnant on their own, and give birth only to girls. The world doesn't need men anymore. This isn't the only bad news for males. An uptight, extreme and conservative female coalition is in power, and payback is harsh. The few remaining men are locked up in "sanctuaries" and darted with tranquilizers if they dare to leave. Their food is laced with estrogen to keep them docile. Menstral cycles are synchronized and the world becomes one big sorority house. At 37 years old Andrew is the youngest man in the world. He is a fluke and anomaly, born when women are giving birth solely to girls. He has a permit to leave the sanctuary and live as a domestic worker with the family of Terra and Iris. When Iris starts a relationship with Andrew, the two create a media firestorm. As with Alice in Wonderland, Gulliver's Travels and other satires, this alternative history and mockumentary helps us step outside of ourselves and see the world from a different perspective.
It is enlightening as well as hilarious, and slightly scary and unsettling, to imagine this role reversal. Who would have thought a professor of men's history would ever be needed?! While the film is limited in terms of depth, funding and acting, I thoroughly enjoyed the out-of-the-box thinking and puns about human nature. It is good that this is just a fantasy (and yet I know a few women who would like this world to happen, at least for men who don't instantly agree with them). Seen at the Toronto International Film Festival 2015. -
johnbyrne-1977327 February 2022Two gay men and we both thoroughly enjoyed this film. It puts aside any sense of subtlety and hits you over the head with ideas of sexual identity and politics.
Loved that the main spokes"man" for the liberation of men was an absolute plonker - men can be dicks.
The film didn't really show the full extent of the more or less total female society and how it had developed over the 40 years of female only births though to be fair that is still a short period of time.
How different this film might have been written and direct by a women one can only guess but it put neither man or woman in a great light.
However the film was thoroughly enjoyable and we laughed out loud several times - particularly at the male stereotypes. -
benjaminburt3 November 2017It is fascinating to me how such a simple film became so controversial. It took a pretty basic concept (some would say a rip-off of Children of Men) and blasted onto the scene as a simple yet intriguing mockumentary on gender relations.
If this had come out ten or fifteen years ago, there wouldn't have been anywhere near the controversy. But, maybe that's what the film was going for. It meant to stir up discussion. If that was it was going for, I imagine the film was trying to say that both men and women are important in society.
But, what's great in this film is that is has so many layers. Could it be a parable for homosexuals? Is it a cautionary tale? Is it meant to put men down? Or perhaps it's meant to proliferate gender stereotypes? Maybe it's just a simple comedy? If any one of these were true, this film might not be so special, but seeing as all these elements combine, this film is very profound. -
twelvetongue25 October 2016If you are looking for gut-busting comedy, or exciting cerebral sci-fi, look elsewhere. This is a low budget satire mockumentary, that ever so subtly pokes fun at the generation gap in feminism and the MGTOW movement. I found the alternate history route a little annoying as it wasn't developed enough. War had ceased, but technology had stagnated. Just one turncoat in a world full of women seemed a bit hard to believe and a little bit boring. It almost seems like it deserves to be a series. A global language other than English, or a register of English in which the feminine is the default and men were the other was definitely needed. It fell short of being either comedy or sci-fi. I enjoy the fact that it annoyed both feminists and MGTOWs giving reviews which proves that it was fair and balanced, which is why I hope that there are actually prequels and sequels that hopefully are more developed. It is a little bit like the very first Planet of the Apes or Trailer Park Boys in that it is so low budget and half baked that it leaves you hungry for more but only marginally entertained.
-
wayne-johannesen4 October 2016*Possible spoiler alert*
After reading through the reviews, I (like another reviewer) thought it's necessary to write an independent and balanced review.
To the reviewer who gave this 1-star on 26th April "lighten up; it's a mockumentary - a film which takes the form of a serious documentary in order to satirize its subject."
This movie is not a piece of feminist propaganda, it is in fact a well thought out and scripted movie.
Men are relegated to subservient roles in society around the world as sperm fails to conceive eggs and "virgin births" by way of parthenogenesis become commonplace in society.
There are some genuinely funny moments in this movie.
This is not a high budget feature film out of Hollywood. It's certainly not for everyone but it's definitely worth a look. -
bruce-888-6512619 May 2016Decided to write this review because of another review where the reviewer obviously did not understand the concept of a mockumentary. This is the Turkey, the dressing, gravy and mash potatoes! The complete saga of another reality where men become obsolete; that's the mcguffin. The real story is what the women of the world make of that, and the men too. Told in the manner of documentaries that go back and forth, present day and past, as the info is needed, the story does build and the ending isn't predictable. The acting is great - everyone - which means the writer/director did a great job. There are so many scenes so well done it was an absolute pleasure to watch and laugh along with everyone else in the audience when we recognized ourselves and the things we do. But we also recognize the foibles of our generation, the previous ones, and many of the decisions made for stupid reasons. How women were/are treated, aboriginals, bears wandering into cities and, of course, Australians.
-
pomdter31 October 2016After seeing the movie "A Boy and His Dog", I noticed a new genre of movies I call one liners. It is where the entire movie is just a setup for the last line said in it. This movie falls in that genre, and the line is very funny, so I give it an extra star over the one star it tries so hard to obtain.
This movie is simply a slam on men. It leaves you wondering how hard the women who made it were dumped to have this level of vitriol in their male stereotypes. That being said, I recommend men watch this movie with their significant others to see their reactions. First off, you will seem a great catch in comparison to the angry sexist characters in the story. But, more importantly, you can see if your potential mate really enjoys the movie and can take it as an indication to run away. Fast. -
First of all, let me say I get the feeling that a lot of people will be enamored by this movie, or more precisely, feel pressed into treating it with a sort of reverence for what it is, a fake documentary centered around a pseudo controversial, pseudo thought- provoking subject: the extinction of man, being presented in as kosher and superficial a way as possible. By the same token, this is precisely why it left such a dry taste in my mouth, because it just doesn't go beyond being a documentary about a fake subject, crafted to be as close of a simulacrum to real life as possible, with a little bit of comic irony thrown in, in the attempt to give the audience at least SOMETHING tangible to come away with.
The problem is, it's not enough to make the film stand out. For one, the jokes just aren't clever or funny enough for this film to be appreciated as a comedy, in my opinion. The humour is very much in the vein of "chuckle chuckle" university hall type humour, and the entire film basically has one running joke going for it: male stereotypes that have already been done to death, combined with the situational irony of straight white males being presented as an oppressed class.
In that regard, it's very clear to see that the filmmakers were quite stealthily trying to walk the line between coming across as either feminist leaning, or anti-feminist. Contrary to what some commenters are saying, I think they largely succeeded to that effect, and I'm saying that as someone who tends to have a very strong repulsion to anything that comes across as preachy gender bias. Some commenters were annoyed that the film focused so much on men's needs, desires, and feelings, whereas others were, I guess riled up by the male stereotyping. One way or another, if you have trouble appreciating a light-hearted film for what it is, your own biases may very easily show, because that's what this is, a film that puts forth incredibly superficial and innocuous ideas, which isn't meant to be taken too seriously, as a result.
Indeed, this is lukewarm stuff that's not going to land or resonate with people in ANY meaningful way, and instead will have people arguing back and forth over whether or not it was taking a light jab (very light) at either gender (realistically it does so to both). It's not a thought provoking film in the slightest. It doesn't deal with the idea of gender as a social construct whatsoever, and somewhat surprisingly, it barely even scrapes the surface of the most obvious thing, the gay/straight issue, not to mention barely scraping the surface on how gender roles in society play out. Women achieve world peace and environmental causes. That's as deep as it gets. Do women really make worse engineers, and would certain male dominated fields like that end up disintegrating? This film wasn't about to touch those kinds of topics with a 10 foot pole, with good reason, to some extent.
Ultimately, being thought-provoking is at the very end of the list of things that this film could have done to make itself resonate more. Worst of all, is it's a very ineffective character study. We really don't get to see the nitty-gritty of our male protagonist's daily life, because the film instead spends so much time building up the history behind this manless alternate universe that they've created, which I found impossible to get interested in. Simply put, the society is not strange enough or dire enough to be spellbinding the way stories like "1984" are. If the film was focused as more of a "day in the life of" style documentary, while leaving out the long boring history lesson, it would have been infinitely better. Come to think of it, I don't think I've ever seen an ACTUAL documentary that attempts to do both in one movie, the way this film does. The film lacks focus, and really, that's what kills it.
All the while watching this, I just kept thinking to myself "This is stupid." or "Who cares?" because I could not in any way connect with, or emotionally invest into the characters on screen. No offence to anyone who actually liked this, but to me it was a film almost completely without purpose. They successfully created a very realistic-seeming fake documentary about the near extinction of the male species... So what? -
felipepm1710 July 2019Considering it's a fake documentary-style movie, it's somewhat fun.
-
rsvail28 October 2016Spoiler's are included in this review.
No Men Beyond this Point is a light science fiction mockumentary that uses documentary style techniques to show an alternate history world in which females solely reproduce only females by spontaneous self-impregnation, making males both obsolete for reproduction and doomed for extinction. The premise is expertly revealed in documentary style, with short expositions, while weaving in a personal conflict that brings a satirical conclusion to the movie.
The movie can be viewed as a multi-layered satire that humorously exposes socialist views about government, economics, history, and gender and/or a multi-layered satire that humorously exposes government classicism, societal sexism, and perhaps even lampooning the male hubris of movements such as MGTOW. The movie is either perfectly executed or accidentally crafted, so as to create a situation where the viewer has many interpretation options.
For those that believe it's a dark humor version of the feminist screed "The Hunting Ground", I'd ask if the movie positively propagandizes third wave feminism in some way or did it in fact mock third wave feminism?
For those that believe the movie ruthlessly mocked males, did it really stereotype men or did it reveal the stereotyping of men?
Unless the creators provide their opinion, the brilliance of the movie is it satires all these beliefs and forces the viewer to consider the movie's caricatured versions of men and women, as well as asking simple questions about economics, government, and society. I'll provide a for instance for all of these:
Males: The movie caricatures men as mostly sexist, violent, unable to organize, solely responsible for every war, and motivated by the simplest of needs, making them all incapable of doing anything productive.
Females: The movie caricatures women as having almost no sexuality (except as it may have been a forced societal male construct), women cannot rise through competition with males - but only in the vacuum created by male extinction, females are ruthless manipulators of government with no recognition of individual rights, their massively superior intellects and demeanor effortlessly ends corruption, cures cancer and solves the age old issue of scarcity by hugs and sharing, while absolutely freezing all technological advancement (apparently that math'stuff is too hard and not wanted by all of female society). In a world without men, every woman is a ballerina. I recall that half-truth adage about women hating each other, because they know how each other thinks.
Economics: All scarcity disappears when: Women. Lots of fresh food, unlimited land for every possible use, and the world heals with tender loving care and runs on the energy created by girl- smiles and yoga classes. In a post scarcity world, everyone's daughter gets the best of everything all the time.
Government: As noted above, a one world government appears without pesky males in the way, women have no biases or bigotry (we all know women are not competitive with each other...at all), suddenly this one world government ends all religious conflicts, all territorial disputes, and ruthlessly violates individual rights with only harmony of the...ummm citizens. After all, government becomes based on hugs (and not the last arbitrator with the guns) when women are in control. Women are so much wiser and kinder than their predecessors and no women would use government for their own advancement and cronyism. They're all with Her!
Society: Apparently society was 100% male driven and with males out of the way women are free to be their asexual, non-competitive, and always loving selves. Women all like each other without men around. Just likes happens now, remove men from an office and all the women just can't get enough of each other. In women world, society and government are the exact same thing. There are no cultural influences, no historical norms, no biological imperatives, no self actualization, and everyone wants the greater good. The greater good is what the government says and the government is...benevolent and based on what society wants.
What's great about the movie is everyone can read as deeply or as shallowly as one desires. Personally, I see everything satirized. Beyond the mockumentary, the acting is superb. There is so much that passes without need for dialogue. Mostly, the movie is well organized and appropriately paced: editing is good. The movie is right sized, not too long and not too short. The dialogue mostly works, although I deduct a star for repetition with some of the male dialogue: they oversell and could have further textured the movie with some of the screen time allocated for repeating the same joke/same caricature. Overall, I had a hard time deciding between 7 or8 stars. Less fails to give the movie the credit it deserves, but 8 almost puts the movie out of its league. -
jzakany24 October 2016I watched this movie as it was recently added to the Netflix catalog. It was billed as a comedy, so I thought I would give it a shot. I am sorry I did.
Why was the movie so bad? It was bad because it did nothing for me. I didn't make me laugh even though Netflix tried to bill it as a comedy. It is a fake documentary about the men dying off due to evolution, but it didn't make me think about relationships between men and women, either sexual or social. It didn't make me think about the feminists' view of history history that all the wars were started because that's what men do. This was just a really, bland movie.
I would have given it two stars but the actors were good. It is just too bad they were given horrible material.
I am shocked to see IMDb give this an overall rating of 6.2 stars. This is a small, independent movie that not many have seen. I honestly believe the rating has been skewed by people who made the movie voting for it. One of the reviews I read had to have been from someone involved in making the movie. The last line of the 10 star review said "Our leading man..." Not "THE leading man...." Bad, boring, unfunny, un-thought provoking movie. -
chadz7517 June 2019Interestingly put together, obviously a mockumentary although some reviews seem to think this is a serious film. It is not. It is a mockery, and does an OK job at it. Too many silly continuity faults though, e.g. last man born 1950, first woman president elected 15-18 years later... BEFORE those girls born in the new gender imbalance were eligible to vote.
I did get annoyed by several plot quirks though - such as, why would women send men off to camps to waste away instead of using them to do dirty menial tasks, or as sex slaves (when not fertile, obviously).
Or why not have an army of oestrogen-fuelled men who just patrolled neighbourhoods killing spiders, as we all know once the last man died, and the spider population exploded, the women would know they'd made a huge mistake. -
rtbphotography25 October 2016...whether it was meant to be or not. That's what I got out of it.
It's a cautionary sci-fi tale done in documentary format of an alternate time line where in the 1950's women have evolved the ability to conceive without a male i.e. no sexual intercourse...virgin births. But it gets better; all the women in the world give birth to....GIRLS. As a result, men are becoming obsolete until there is only ONE man who is under 40 years of age.
If you're a hardened misogynist, this movie might give you night mares....LOL!! The film really shows what life might be like in a matriarchal society. Not all the ladies depicted are ....nice. You'll see how in this world everything is turned upside down including bigotry, intolerance, hate, and government overreach.
What I hope is, if you're a man, it might give you pause and cause you to actually THINK about your fellow human beings...and specifically the females in your life...just a little.
If you're a BIGOT, you'll get a glimpse of what being a minority can be like...especially one which is hated. -
info-9070119 January 2022"So what do we have to show for all these massive spending cuts in defense and program cancellations? World peace and electric cars! Big bloody deal! True progress only comes about through conflict!"
This line, spoken by the leader of the MLO, Male Liberation Organization, the men's resistance group says it all. It speaks to the utter absurdity that men have turned this world into and why they ultimately are losing control of it. Women must take control of it or we will all die. The man, Mark Sawers, who wrote and directed this satire of Idiocracy and Don't Look Up ilk, understands completely why men are making themselves obsolete and deeming themselves removable.
This film brings clarity to the many ways that men need to be slowed down and stopped from having the power to destroy us all, but it also highlights the weakness of women when they do have power, to save us all. Both of which are part of the human condition.
The last scene and line tell it all, and remind us that truly, men can't be trusted with the majority of power ever again, and when women are represented in the numbers commensurate with gender population, they best not forget this and NEVER allow men to rule again. They are clearly not qualified.
Good start, but it punked out in the end. -
trojanz16 July 2016I wanted to watch this movie just to see what their overall take on an all female world would be from a completely science fiction standpoint. Also because I wanted to see how outlandishly wrong they would be. I must say that it was humorous in some places and did take an interesting spin on things but ultimately I think the movie was designed, and flavored, to be funny to feminists, liberal/progressive types, or those men who believe everything feminists say about men.
It had some funny moments that I chuckled at but constant pushing of men being stubborn, stupid, lazy, and overall incapable of doing anything that a woman could do better got old. The only "digs" at women were that they weren't very concerned with technological innovation...as a trade off, women achieved world peace and electric cars(?). You can mix in a few other themes such as obvious references to gay marriage and such as well, but primarily, this movie was meant to entertain feminists. -
kathi-2223612 April 2022This was brilliant. At first, I was thinking "Well, clearly a man wrote this (which is true)", but the more I watched, the more I saw the satire and the hilarity of it all. And when I saw the heterosexual women being referred to as "crooked", I was on the floor. This is an excellent send up of all sorts of human prejudice. As a lifelong heterosexual feminist, this really spoke to me. This movie hasn't gotten the recognition it deserves.
Hilarious and a great satire about sexuality and our culture in general. -
RiotJaynie31 July 2016I admit I laughed a few times at the absurdity, and I liked thematically what was trying to be done - breaking down gender roles and societal inequality etc. Unfortunately it still very much feels like it was written by a dude. Even when most of the characters are women - we still mostly focus on the plight of men. We only hear about politics and economics and lifestyle shifts in this new world in relation to how it effects and alters male reality. And for some reason even the women somehow talk as if they are being puppeted by men (male writer no doubt), for example at one point the parthenogenesis is considered the reason for an increase in female aggression, before realizing nope - just pms. HAH GET IT, WOMEN ARE BITCHES WHEN THEY MENSTRUATE. FUNNY. I'd have to rewatch but it didn't even seem to pass bechdal, because the only thing the female characters ever spoke about was men - even as they're going extinct, men think they're all we can think and talk about >.>
No men beyond this point, more like the story of how sad it is to be to be the last man on earth. Women are drawn as pmsing vengeful feminist tropes who secretly desire for men to return but are too ashamed to admit it, until the end when the unlikely male hero breaks free of his shackles to impregnate a lovesick women who craves masculinity in her life. The film even ends with the potential 'resurgence' of men, even though the film makes a point of how pointless they are (but only satirically).
It's very light in it's gender politics so I wouldn't expect much if you actually find this topic interesting. For example, somehow the writers forgot to consider homosexuality and assumed that a world of women would somehow become non-sexual or anti-sex. Apart from a brief minute long collage of a few women kissing, the rest of the film runs as if women are non-sexual beings. Because women don't like sex and intimacy? Yeah okay. Also things like the banning / disapproval of masturbation because it'd be seen as a gateway drug of sorts to thinking about men - because female sexuality only exists in the context of men of course. We couldn't just enjoy sexuality without men existing. The film makes a lot of these strange conclusions, honestly, but it doesn't detract too much from the film, which is still decent well acted and somewhat funny. It plays a little like a 'what would the world be like if women took over' but from the point of view of one of those annoying fedoras that scream humanist when somebody discuses feminism.
One of the funniest elements is the absurd Aussie mens rights activist who does nothing the entire film except complain - somehow they got that part right. Overall the premise is great, and I'd love to see some more writers tackle this (cant help but be reminded of Y: The Last Man, which is infinitely better than this, but alas, only a graphic novel) but this film falls a little short on delivering due to a lack of intelligent feminist theory and understanding.
What's funnier than this film is all the men who hate it because of its premise, calling it propaganda. If they watched it and knew anything about gender politics they'd realize this movie is more in line with their thinking than current feminist understanding. -
rkhen24 February 2022You know you're in for a rollercoaster in the reviews when a third of them are feminist screeds and another third are MRA tantrums.
So, to avoid spending too much time here, let me just lay down some real.
1. This is a mockumentary. It's pushing exactly no agenda. It has nothing it wants you to do or enlist in. The point of this exercise is to make you think about some big topics while also making you laugh. (Although that apparently doesn't work on butt-hurt ax-grinders.)
2. Every line in this movie is a joke. EVERY LINE. If you took a single one of them as advocacy, you're a moron. If you thought the women came off looking "correct" while the men were all dopes, or the men were all "correct" while the women were sitcom stereotypes -- you're half wrong. (The "correct" half.)
3. The movie is genius. Watching it, I really wanted to use it as discussion fodder for a class on gender politics, or social problems, or cultural assumptions. It would drive the students crazy though because I'd be stopping it every 5 seconds to point out the jokes, and what the writers were harpooning with them. Since I'm a man, I mostly noticed the way they undermined us with vaudevillian call-backs to 50s-sitcom tropes. Example: the dazed brother who wanders out of his "sanctuary" hoping to meet girls, and after proving about as adept at that as most of us, winds up treed and darted exactly like a lost cougar, right down to the plummeting body. I laughed for 10 minutes. And yes, the unspoken reference to cougars is intended. They're talking about the mean little Main Street morality we weaponise to stick our pointy little noses uninvited up others' crotches, whether it's women who date younger, or awkward would-be pickup artists.
4. Most of the jokes here are that kind. You have to be well-informed, paying attention, and not trying to win some "case" in your head. A few of them stand on your chest -- the global sorority synching up, requiring a worldwide three-day retreat every month to prevent global PMS riots; the male hunger-strike that ends after 24 hours because "Hey, we got hungry!" ('Nother pause for another ten-minute laugh.) But there are also very subtle, straight-faced what-ifs, if you're watching closely. No digital cameras in this world; the new female regime isn't technologically helpless, but neither is it performing to bi-gender spec. And male creativity is greatly curtailed. Without women to write songs about, to dress for, to build homes for, to paint and sculpt, to keep us honest and on-task, to please and fence with, our "sanctuaries" become immense fraternities. Our heroics are gone. So is our discipline. So is our ambition. We look, and act, sleepy and slovenly.
I was bowled over by the sheer density of the commentary in No Men, the relentless torrent of brain-candy. You could discuss any twenty seconds of this movie for hours. It isn't all soft and cute -- like all human beings, many women, once placed in a dominant position, become arrogant jackasses. And in spite of the comeuppance they've received, many men still fail to get it. "Oh, so this is what it's like. Well, damn. What were we thinking?" Some brothers just can't chamber that insight, even when it's dumped in their laps.
So here: if you're fuming over this clever and thoroughly enjoyable little sociology experiment, why don't you just watch it again, and this time try not to be one of the two sad cases in the paragraph above? -
theresataylor-8516625 July 2021...but it's so dull! The trailer was funny so I thought I'd give it a chance. But zzzzzz. Don't waste your time on this.
-
likalaruku18 July 2016A lot of people are claiming that this movie is feminist propaganda that mocks MGTOW, but some of the biggest anti-SJW voices of Youtube have been promoting this as a mockbuster that makes fun of 3ed wave feminism. Some people are just so sensitive & easily triggered that they take it as a personal attack & fail to see that the satire pokes both sides, ultimately making a mockery of the gender war. & I have a hard time believing that the people who gave it a negative view watched it in its entirety.
The mocumentary is set in an alternate universe where the timeline diverges in the 1960s, & a strange phenomenon of immaculate births & no male babies. Women are encouraged to partner together to raise children, but still discouraged from partaking in lesbian sex, & men, like the native Americans hundreds of years ago, are rounded up & put on reservations. But one man & one woman won't take it anymore, & work to bring the sexes together, to encourage sex, & to try making traditional birth a thing again. -
benjaminweber14 April 2018This film examines what would happen if humanity suddenly began to procreate via parthenogenesis, otherwise known as virgin birth. While this idea seems interesting on paper, it is delivered as a fake documentary, without understanding what can make a documentary interesting. It tries to be funny, but only offers some set-ups that could be funny. In the end, it falls apart under its own weight and poor editing.
The film keeps cutting back and forth between interviews with fake experts and a case-study of the youngest man alive, which can work in non-fiction where the focus is on the facts, but not in fiction where there focus is generally on either the characters or plot. The result is the film feels unfocused in places, and the viewer does not develop any feelings towards the characters.
The plot is similarly unfocused, both for the historical background and the characters' story. In both cases, large events just happen with little or no explanation, even in cases that demand an explanation, to the point where it is impossible to suspend disbelief. However, this effect seems unintentional, since there is almost no attempt to use this for comedic gain.
Many of the 'jokes' are attempting to go for mockumentary-style humour, where a funny subject or event is presented entirely deadpan. This only occasionally works, as the event is rarely given enough time to build up and is quickly forgotten afterwards. Alternatively, the event is simply not outlandish enough for deadpan humour to work, and simply comes across as obnoxious or boring.
This wasn't so much a bad film as a mediocre one. It had potential, but was executed poorly, and not in an entertainingly bad way. It is just dull, and with a lack of creative vision behind it. -
movieliker125 July 2016I thought this movie was terrific. And I am a masculine heterosexual man. Anybody who didn't like this movie was either taking it too seriously or is very insecure. This movie is a comedy, a satire, and it is thick with irony. It is very smart and clever, and very entertaining.
It is about what if women took over the world and men were no longer needed. A term other reviewers have used is it is a "mockumentary". Which is a good term because it is filmed in a documentary style.
It is unrated. But I would give it a PG rating because there is no sex, nudity, violence or vulgarity. It wouldn't really interest children. There are some adult references but they will go over any child's head unnoticed. (They do say the word "penis" but it is used in a matter of fact way, not erotically.) -
trivedisorabh15 August 2018I mean full respect to women power - but what is it? They could have made it more good.
-
tkdrumright7563 October 2018Okay so some people are complaining about it being feminist overkill but if you bothered to check you'd find the movie was written and directed by a man. And a lot of the things that happen in the movie are just a reversal of things that men have done to women for ages. But all in all, it's just meant to be a joke. They're just taking the piss and if you're the type to get your panties in a wad because you can't handle a joke at your expense then you're defintley going to hate this movie. You don't have to be a feminists or a man hater to find humor in this movie. Just pull your head out of your *ss.