Breast Men

I watched this film with the view of learning more about the story than the quality of the film itself, but was pleasantly surprised. The black humour is subtle, but enjoyable. David Schwimmer starts out in his usual "little lost boy"-type routine but develops nicely into the role. Plus, it's always nice to see the gorgeous Lisa Marie on screen.

David Schwimmer puts aside his likability for this movie about breast implant pioneers. He does a great job as a money-hungry, publicity seeking plastic surgeon with no ethics, no morals, and ultimately, no soul. Chris Cooper, as the member of the partnership team with some little conscience, is equally despicable and equally funny. The 70s references are painfully accurate and anyone who lived then will wince in recognition. A good, if not great, dark comedy, worth seeing just to see David Schwimmer playing a self-centered jerk. By the time his final scene rolls around, you'll cheer for his exit. Overall, not bad ; some sharp commentary, and funny more often than not.

An okay treatise on an interesting subject (wink, nod). The Seventies milieu was well-presented, as were the scenes shot in Houston. David Schwimmer, however, just can't pull off his role as a surgeon. He doesn't seem to be a bad actor, but is just not believable in this part.

This is a fairly good movie (especially for a TV film). Ok it was dramatized a lot and you noticed it, but it was pretty enjoyable (better than Hollywood crap like The Avengers or Godzilla).

7 out of 10.

Breast men provides a decades long history of silicone breast implants in the United States, from development by a Texas team of reconstructive surgeons to their downfall at the hands of aggressive litigation. Now that science has established no link between silicone implants and connective tissue or other diseases, the film stands as a commentary on both women's social drive for larger breasts (Is it that men want larger breasts on their partners, or that women think men want them to have larger breasts?) and the devastating effect the legal system can have when driven by sympathy.

Mixed in with the storyline are comments from women, shown only in naked torso. They state why they want larger breasts, or how they feel about themselves with natural or enhanced physiques. Whether true or not, their comments have the ring of truth and give the film the air of authenticity; women dissatisfied with their appearance who long for "better" breasts. To their aid comes David Schwimmer, as a young doctor/inventor who devises an implant after seeing a neighbor trying out "bigger breast" creams and exercises. In partnership with Chris Cooper and Dow Corning, they develop the silicone breast implant and the procedure for installing it.

Their partnership appears foundering, until Schwimmer advertises (itself a medical no-no), which brings women in droves seeking a better look. Then the partnership angrily dissolves over money; Schwimmer ends up on the seamier side of breast enlargement, strippers and such. Cooper still works the richer clientele, until he is confronted at a medical convention by a woman with significant subcutaneous scarring and deformation. With lawyers blaming the doctors, and the Clinton-era FDA forcing withdrawal of the product, both doctors go down hard.

Emily Proctor provides a look from the female side. As a nurse her character is drawn to Schwimmer's dream of a "perfect body" for every woman, and at the same time slightly repulsed by talking openly about the subject.

What drives someone to plastic surgeons? More particularly, what drives a woman to want larger breasts? The film doesn't answer the questions, nor does it directly ask them, but when it's over the tragic consequences of wanting to look "perfect" lingers. The impact of lawyers on society, and in particular the medical malpractice profession, lingers as well. With a sympathetic clientele, and little good science on their side, a small group of lawyers literally brought down an industrial giant (Dow), and created panic among tens of thousands of women. Ten years later, science has clearly established they were wrong, but society has no mechanism for punishing the lawyers.