Anya Taylor-Joy speaking at the 2018 San Diego Comic Con International, for "Glass", at the San Diego Convention Center in San Diego, California. (Photo by Gage Skidmore.)
By Eliška Jacob ’24
A&E Editor
The epithet “if looks could kill, I’d be dead right now” may well apply to an analysis of “The Menu” — just replace “looks” with “a six-course meal.” Released in theaters on Nov. 18, 2022, and streaming platforms on Jan. 3, 2023, “The Menu” is a dark, satirical horror-comedy that reveals the exploitative nature of the wealthy through various scenes that demonstrate the pretentiousness with which the rich characters carry themselves, especially when interacting with service workers. Margot (Anya Taylor-Joy) agrees to attend a prestigious dinner headed by the renowned Chef Slowik (Ralph Fiennes) on a remote island with her partner Tyler (Nicholas Hoult). The exclusive full-course meal caters to a small group of affluent individuals, a demographic Margot does not fit into. As the night progresses, the diners realize that this meal is not what they expected, as the image of what Chef Slowik created for his customers begins to manifest into a dark, queasy reality.
The film has drummed up opinions about its brilliance, or lack thereof, with The New York Times’ Jeannette Catsoulis defining it as a “brutal satire of class division — viewed through the lens of high-end gorging — [that] is ruthlessly focused and gleamingly efficient.” Bon Appétit’s Serena Dai noted, “While most of the movie feels tailor-made for people who closely watch the fine dining world, the ending did make me roll my eyes. … It reminded me how many horror films struggle to stick their landings.” To gain an understanding of other perspectives on this film, Mount Holyoke News reached out to the College community to hear their thoughts.
“I fucking loved this movie,” began Gabby Rondinelli ’24. “My mom and sister went to go see it in theaters without me, but we watched it together when they put it on HBO Max.” Jean Klurfield ’24 also had a similar viewing experience: “My mom sat me down and said it was hilarious, so I watched it with her. … I really liked it.”
Focusing on the movie’s overall theme, Klurfield explains, “I think sometimes we get this anti-wealthy rhetoric without the real follow-through, without real punishment to the extent I would like. I was actually finding myself rooting for the so-called villain, the chef. He is, of course, terrible, but if he didn’t end up killing those rich assholes, I’d have been very upset.”
As the audience learned more about Chef Slowik’s backstory, sympathy began to manifest. His tumultuous childhood carried by his abusive father may explain his desire to enact vengeance unto those that have perpetuated wrongdoings. The wealthy diners are characterized by these wrongdoings: a married man who solicits sex work, a pair of pompous tech bros who had been falsifying bills to their customers to make more money and a Slowik fanboy who treats his partner as if she were a child. These characters, while perhaps not deserving death as a consequence of their actions, embody the sort of elitism and self-righteousness that Chef Slowick despises and sees as a fatal vice.
Rondinelli also echoed support for Chef Slowik. “So sad and tragic and captivating how an artist [Chef Slowik] was drawn to something so insane to get back at the type of people who literally killed his will to create for pleasure,” she began. “I read somewhere that there was originally a scene that explained how the journalist [one of the diners] exposed [Chef Slowik’s] name while he was operating under anonymity, and that was his breaking point. Literally just such a clever movie.”
Following praise for Chef Slowik’s controversial executions — literally and figuratively — Klurfield also criticizes the Chef. “There is too much satire when it comes to [Chef Slowik’s] choices,” explained Klurfield. “Because he is portrayed as so terrible, there’s this ‘Oh, he’s insane and clearly the villain’ truth which prevents us from being able to fully endorse Chef Slowik — I wish we could.”
Klurfield explained that while she couldn’t fully get behind Slowik, she could get closer to supporting the kitchen staff: “The way they as a team of diverse people in the service industry ‘get back’ at the snobby food critic by handing her broken emulsion after broken emulsion, or stabbing Slowik in the nether region, or chopping a cheating millionaire’s finger off.”
Focusing on the staff, Klurfield declares, “If I could emphasize anything, it would be the role of the staff here. Are they being used? Is this what they want? Of course, the movie cleverly gets to sidestep these questions when it reaches their rich asshole viewers by claiming the genre of satire sneak in simultaneously; a good way out.”
One comedic aspect of the film, depending on the audience, was the almost laughable portions of the food presented. Rondinelli agreed with the ludicrousness of the food: “All the dishes made me angry. Like the whole time I was asking where the food was.” The various courses presented during the meal seemed to be a satirical take on the pretentiousness of both Chef Slowik and the diners. One notable dish was the bread platter that did not contain bread. Instead, the plate contained dollops of dipping sauces for the diners to eat without any sort of accompaniment, illustrating a scene frustrating for the wealthy patrons and comedic for viewers.
Rondinelli mentioned multiple scenes and scenarios that stuck out to them in particular. “The. Cheeseburger. Scene! Also, the fact that NONE of the rich people tried to run away better! What the fuck! Hilarious and such a reflection of [the rich] today. But yes, the whole interaction about [Margot’s] cheeseburger and her bill — slayed.”
Concluding their thoughts, Rondinelli and Klurfield both offered praise for the movie. “We need more horror movies that take FOREVER to chill you to your tailbone, y’know? … I thought this movie was a whole new kind of inside-diss to Hollywood,” began Rondinelli, “But obviously, they all have thick skulls and probably won’t ever understand what this movie was about until they work a minimum wage job again.” Klurfield provided a synopsis of her final thoughts: “It’s an impressive film, if predictable or pompous at times. The right amount of gore, the right amount of food shots, the right amount of bro humor. I thoroughly enjoyed [it].”
“The Menu” proves itself to be an enjoyable watch for foodies and the everyday watcher. Characterized by sustained intensity throughout the film that keeps viewers on the edge of their seat, “The Menu” is a gory riot whose message of social critique will remain prevalent for the next generation of film watchers.