Skip to main content

What happens at 72?

Midsommar
(2019)

(SPOILERS) Ari Aster, by rights, ought already to be buckling under the weight of all those accolades amassing around him, pronouncing him a horror wunderkind a mere two films in. But while both Midsommar and Hereditary have both received broadly similar critical acclaim, his second feature will lag behind the first by some distance in box office, unless something significant happens in a hitherto neglected territory. That isn’t such a surprise on seeing it. While Hereditary keeps its hand firmly on the tiller of shock value and incident, so as to sustain it’s already more than adequate running time, Midsommar runs a full twenty minutes longer, which is positively – or rather, negatively – over-indulgent for what we have here, content-wise, and suggests a director whose crowned auteurishness has instantly gone to his head.

That’s by no means the cardinal sin of this Sweden-set Wicker Man-esque folk horror, however; after all, the recent Suspira was even longer, and while it also had no business being that long, it did at least sustain its duration. Here, while Aster consistently captures transfixing images in collaboration with cinematographer Pawel Pogorzelski, and conjures a pervadingly claustrophobic mood amid the bright sunshine and wide-open spaces of its setting – only added to by the immersive, unsettling score from The Haxan Cloak – I was finding myself just plain tired with the whole conceit (and it is a conceit) with what must have been about an hour left of running time (inconceivably, Aster has mooted an even longer cut). The fault therein being not that Aster the director hasn’t put something on screen that doesn’t consistently command the attention and divert the gaze, but that Aster the writer simply isn’t able to maintain that conviction.

This is somewhat different to the problem faced by Hereditary, which rather fell apart during the last third as a consequence of the underwhelming big reveal; laying bare the implied or left to the imagination undid much of the impact of the preceding. Here, the issue is more that there’s nothing to unveil. As soon as a couple of septuagenarians hurl themselves to their very messy doom from a clifftop, any random visitor with their wits about them would make a bolt for it.

This is a movie about a freaky, white-robed nature cult featuring protagonists who have never seen, read or heard anything about the behaviour of freaky, white-robed nature cults (even those calling themselves The Polyphonic Spree). And, just for giggles, have zero common sense. So no different, in essence, to all those slasher movies with oblivious teenagers doing exactly what you shouldn’t do in such circumstances. At least the English couple want to get out when the aforementioned pensioners start dropping on the rocks, but they’re ultimately as mystifyingly self-deluding as everyone else in their way, failing to consider a worst-case scenario given the obvious signs that something is very, very wrong in their midst.

You might argue for the self-delusion of the anthropology student(s), but surely they should be exactly the ones to have a degree of insight into the various extremes of practice that might occur in such cultish enclaves? The only one of whom I could really see this fateful scenario playing is Dani (Florence Pugh), already characterised by a surrounding aura of death and eventually seeing her fate as a self-fulfilling prophecy and salvation of sorts (but only eventually, as she’s right there with a desire to leave when things start getting seriously weird). Except that she’s the one who survives and is inducted into a new family (because she is sufficiently emotionally dislocated to be able to attune to the warped morality – or the differently warped morality, if you like – of this replacement peer group). Some readings, on a gender basis, have taken this as an empowerment fantasy, which if you want to buy into, you have to ignore a lot of brutal killing and brainwashing. But sure, if it floats your boat.

Compounding the concern of unbelievable motivation is that Aster does such a skilful job during the first forty minutes or so exploring entirely stark and shocking, all-consuming grief and hopelessness on the part of Dani (Pugh’s really very good here; I wasn’t persuaded by her turns in either Outlaw King or Little Drummer Girl, having been as impressed as many by Lady Macbeth, but this is probably as dedicated and commanding a lead performance as we’ll see this year). Aster’s incredibly adept at immersing the viewer in the subjective experience of his characters, be that the loosening grip on emotional security of a psychology student or (to more humorous ends) a party of trippers attempting to make hallucinogenic sense of their experiences (and the lurch into unremitting nightmare that can be triggered at the flick of a verbal switch).

He elicits strong performances from his cast too, the more actorly American visitors contrasted with the more naturalistic, faux-documentary performances of the cult members, of whom at least some are being outright studied/ interviewed. Jack Reynor’s boyfriend Christian, only remaining an item with Pugh through reluctant obligation, is utterly unsympathetic (which, as if it needs saying, does not mean he deserves to be burnt to death, any more than Edward Woodward would). And it’s no surprise that Will Poulter should be cast as the antagonistic, insensitive provocateur (complete with pissing on sacred trees). William Jackson Harper, meanwhile, is the student so focussed on investigating rites and mores that we’re asked to believe he can’t see the wood for the trees; individually, wanting to ignore the unsettling circumstances might be seen as just about feasible, but collectively and cumulatively, it elicits derision. The equivalence Aster invites in the exchange regarding how the Hårga would see broader western values is all very well as a cool intellectual response, but doesn’t work in the face of the gut-punch shock tactics the director is simultaneously pulling.

As per Hereditary, Aster likes his shocking, sudden-impact grue, and his manner at times also leads to similar “Did he mean that to be funny?” moments (outside of those he clearly did). I’d be more inclined to crediting such dexterity if he was nimble and attentive to concise storytelling. It’s clear that, as with most of the more “art-house” inclined horror directors of recent years, he values mood and atmosphere over cheap shocks (for the most part anyway). Which is admirable, but the accompanying danger is that one may find oneself inclined towards becoming a bore, particularly if one’s style outreaches one’s substance. There isn’t really much in Midsommar that would set it on a par with the thematic impact of its progenitor The Wicker Man; Edward Woodward’s ingrained belief system is palpably intertwined with his fate and that of the heathens who entrap him. For Dani, it’s the rather arbitrary acceptance of a half-baked nouveau nature cult with all the concomitant trappings – sex, incest, sacrifice, runes, suspicious snacks and disembowelled bears, oh and inbred savants with a penchant for face-wearing – the kind of thing, with less pompous self-importance, that could be the stuff of any wrong-turn slasher.


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Popular posts from this blog

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983) (SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk , and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm ’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. T

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013) (SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight ; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.

Do you know that the leading cause of death for beavers is falling trees?

The Interpreter (2005) Sydney Pollack’s final film returns to the conspiracy genre that served him well in both the 1970s ( Three Days of the Condor ) and the 1990s ( The Firm ). It also marks a return to Africa, but in a decidedly less romantic fashion than his 1985 Oscar winner. Unfortunately the result is a tepid, clichéd affair in which only the technical flourishes of its director have any merit. The film’s main claim to fame is that Universal received permission to film inside the United Nations headquarters. Accordingly, Pollack is predictably unquestioning in its admiration and respect for the organisation. It is no doubt also the reason that liberal crusader Sean Penn attached himself to what is otherwise a highly generic and non-Penn type of role. When it comes down to it, the argument rehearsed here of diplomacy over violent resolution is as banal as they come. That the UN is infallible moral arbiter of this process is never in any doubt. The cynicism