The conservative New York Observer, however, hails the controversial movie as "one of the best and most disciplined films of the year."

Whether this is so or not, In the Company of Men, has no happy ending, though its characters are presented in their values-mazes without apparent demonization. The anti-hero is Chad (played by Aaron Eckert) who betrays--as he climbs the corporate ladder-- his best friend as well as the deaf corporation typist (Stacy Edwards) he coldly seduces.

Speaking of the discomfited corporation machoman misogynist's perspective he embodies, Chad explains that "women, nice ones, the most frigid of the race...Doesn't matter in the end. Inside they're all the same, meat and gristle and hatred."

What's so unsettling about this film? It once again traipses through male and female relationships, showing hits and misses. But in this case, it seems, its the institutions blamed for such hard-handed cold-hearted betrayals, the corporate structures that inhibit human relationships in extremely greedy and competitive business environs.

In the Company of Men shows Chad planning with male friend Howard his revenge against all women, settling on the deaf office worker as his victim. The film has been compared to Carnal Knowledge, and to Putney Swope, an anti-capitalist satire.

The movie, according to reports, cost only $250,000 to produce. Already its 34-year old director and screenwriter, Neil LaBute, is enjoying considerable media attention.

On the other hand, LaBute's film has also been accused of insensitivity toward women. He denies this charge, stating that it is "an intensely moral film," and that its lack of a happy ending is hardly a matter of concern in the context of the film. The filmmaker allows that if his audience is disturbed enough by what they see portrayed, hopefully they will go forth and do battle to help change conditions.

LaBute's approach to his film gives no indication of anger. It is said that he films evil and that no one is sure what kind of motives are propelling him.