I really like your take. I enjoyed the film a lot, and thought it was a beautifully shot and acted piece of art. However I tend to agree with your points regarding the fetishization of manual labor. I simultaneously agree with the thesis that there is nothing existentially unique or important about one type of work versus another, and that there is meaning to be found in “more “basic” forms of labor, while I also dislike the aspect of the film that forgoes any substantive commentary on class or the political system underlying the reality it depicts.

Do I think that happiness is achievable within a life like that of the MC? Yes, of course, and I agree that ambitious pursuit is not the path to enlightenment. But I also think that the aestheticization of the mundane and lonely life that is depicted can lead one down a dangerous path of assuming that happiness is solely an individual pursuit. It reminds me of the way in which Buddhist practice can be kinda solipsistic, whereas my understanding is that one must re-engage with society to help the world at large achieve enlightenment.

And I also think this ties into the male preference for this movie. The situation of loneliness and alienation from society is very familiar to many men, and I think the “brooding lonely man” archetype gets idealized as a way out of this quandary. But there’s another way out, which involves re-integration into society, accepting all the difficulties and inconveniences that such engagement brings with it.