The Official Movie Thread

NP:
7493706
 
  • Like
Reactions: RadicalThrasher
Always wanted to watch this. Let me know what you think

I would say it's definitely worth checking out. The special fx for the time almost have a surreal, dream like quality to them and the story is decent, though very simple. It's not some hardcore horror flick, more like a dark fairytale for children. Actually by today's standards I'm not even sure I'd call it horror movie, it's more comparable to something like The Wizard of Oz. Pretty sure there's some hidden message/undertones in there about religion and promiscuity, being it's soviet and the 1960's. But yeah, under an hour and 20 minutes, it moves by at a quick pace, and the last act of the film is pretty nuts.



Brief synopsis:
In 19th century Russia, a seminary student is forced to spend three nights with the corpse of a beautiful young witch. But when she rises from the dead to seduce him, it will summon a nightmare of fear, desire and the ultimate demonic mayhem. Based on the classic novella by Nikolai Gogol.
 
Last edited:
I've been bothered by this movie all day and gave a shot at writing a longer review of it. Not something I usually do but I wanted to figure out why it bothered me so much.

Minor spoilers.

In an interview, Ari Aster described his film Midsommar as “a breakup movie dressed in the clothes of a folk horror film.” I have a reflexive reaction of disgust to statements like these that suggest that the subtext of a horror film is the crucial component and the text mere window dressing, and it's especially disingenuous when something like 2 hours is spent establishing the strange customs of this invented pagan cult and substantially less time than that on the relationship struggles of the main couple. I'd furthermore be surprised if anyone could make a case for how the breakup theme forms a consistent narrative throughline throughout the film; although one or two of the main character's decisions are motivated by it, for the most part the main characters exhibit no agency at all as they are being dragged one way and another by the members of the pagan cult.

The primary narrative throughline I identified in Midsommar was the invisible hand of the director moving pieces into place for the denouement. For the grand finale, Aster has a gorgeous, macabre tableau prepared and he will sacrifice any amount of organic storytelling to get to this conclusion. Midsommar moves towards its ending as inexorably as Hereditary did, but that film explicitly involved demonic entities to which any narrative meddling from on high could be attributed. I would also argue that Hereditary's narrative fatalism was also strongly integrated into the film on a thematic level, and made up an essential part of that film's horror. In Midsommar, it comes off less like a strength and more like an unnecessary holdover.

The inorganic storytelling of Midsommar is expressed not only in the passivity of the main characters, but also in the gradual reduction of the cultists themselves into caricatures. Initially, their portrayal is humanized; they present rational motivations for being part of the cult; they appreciate the community it provides, and they find solace in the ancient traditions. When a ritual suicide is carried out early in the film, they are given the chance to explain this extreme practice, and their rationalization gives them depth. But as the plot escalates and the rituals become less suicidal and more homicidal, they are given no opportunities to account for their actions. What is the justification for blood-eagling your victims before placing them on the sacrificial bonfire? Will the sacrifice offend Ymir if the lungs are still inside the body? It is also mentioned that between the ages of 16 and 32, cultists go on a “pilgrimage”, leaving the supervision of the cult for long stretches of time. In other words, this is a cult that routinely offers its members the opportunity to deradicalize, then expects them to participate in murderous rituals upon return. To be clear, I extend horror directors the license to invent however sensational and implausible cults they want. But when cult mentality is the main driver of your plot, maybe it behooves you to put some thought into the mechanics of cult mentality. This is an area where comparisons to The Wicker Man are especially unfavorable; in contrast to the stodgy Christian policeman protagonist, the pagan cultists of The Wicker Man came off as uninhibited and liberated, passionate and life-loving. The Wicker Man gave cult life a seductive appeal; it explained why anyone would want to be part of this community even if it involved the occasional participation in ritual sacrifice, without needing psychedelics or psychosis to explain their actions.

These criticisms aside, there is much to appreciate about Midsommar. As a Swede I got a kick out of being on the receiving end of Hollywood xenophobia for once, as I feel we're mostly just overlooked. (When Swedish actors are cast as villains in American productions, they are usually given more threatening nationalities, like German or Russian.) I continue to be impressed by Aster's direction and use of sound. But while I loved Hereditary on a sensory level when first I saw it in the theater, and afterward on a cerebral level; I loved Midsommar on a sensory level, but came out of the theater thinking that all the pieces did not fit together.

Haven’t had time to respond to this, I’ll try to soon. Really nice write-up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vegard Pompey