A couple travels to Sweden to visit a rural hometown's fabled mid-summer festival. What begins as an idyllic retreat quickly devolves into an increasingly violent and bizarre competition at the hands of a pagan cult.
Three 6th grade boys ditch school and embark on an epic journey while carrying accidentally stolen drugs, being hunted by teenage girls, and trying to make their way home in time for a long-awaited party.
Keith L. Williams,
Hal, wayward prince and heir to the English throne, is crowned King Henry V after his tyrannical father dies. Now the young king must navigate palace politics, the war his father left behind, and the emotional strings of his past life.
Dani (Florence Pugh) and Christian (Jack Reynor) are a young American couple with a relationship on the brink of falling apart. But after a family tragedy keeps them together, a grieving Dani invites herself to join Christian and his friends on a trip to a once-in-a-lifetime midsummer festival in a remote Swedish village. What begins as a carefree summer holiday in a land of eternal sunlight takes a sinister turn when the insular villagers invite their guests to partake in festivities that render the pastoral paradise increasingly unnerving and viscerally disturbing.Written by
This film was greenlit on May 18, 2018, and premiered on June 18, 2019, marking an unusually short production period for a wide released theatrical film. See more »
Dani misspells the word "something" as "somehting" in her last direct message to her sister. See more »
No. No, no. Uh Ruben was - a product of inbreeding. All of our oracles are deliberate products of inbreeding.
See more »
The 171-minute Director's Cut restores 24 minutes of additional scenes that were not included in the original cut. The biggest chunk of new footage added, as director Ari Aster acknowledges, is the subplot of Christian researching for his anthropology thesis. The newly added footage is as follows:
1) In the party scene, Dani learns of the scheduled trip to Sweden and questions Christian's intentions. Christian gaslights (suggesting that she was not in her right state of mind) her after she had indirectly ruined the surprise of a romantic invite. The gaslight moment is repeated again in the final additional scene later after the special ceremony. This new scene also shows that he is ill-prepared, which sets up his confrontation with Mark later.
2) In the extended the car ride to Halsingland, Dani asks Josh about the book he's reading and she's told to ask Pelle. Pelle tells her that Christian was brainwashed when he found him. This hints the characteristics of the characters throughout the film: Mark (going along for the ride) ; Dani (tired and depressed); Pelle (manipulative and the mastermind of the secret plan); Josh (passive); Christian (naive)
3) The subplot of Christian's anthropological research is put back and is evident in several scenes of him interacting with Pelle's commune. The subplot reveals two things: Pelle and his commune are well aware from the beginning that he can be easily be manipulated, proven by Maja's attempt to seduce him and his grisly fate at the end; it also reveals that his research is merely a self-serving and misguided attempt to make himself better.
4) After the ritual suicide of the two 72 year-old natives (as to mark the end of the circle of life), Dani is invited to see a special ceremony of a young boy, dressed as tree, volunteered for another ritual. Declaring himself "what's brave is going home" the boy is about to be thrown into a body of water, which horrifies her again. At the last minute, he is let go, having proved his bravery.
5) Immediately after the "special scene", Dani converses with Christian about what she saw. Christian, too focused on his anthropological research, gaslights her again. Soon thereafter, she asks for a sleeping pill before he is targeted by the natives.
'Midsommar (2019)' takes a very long time to get to a very predictable and, frankly, uninteresting point. It's just so slow and, honestly, boring. There's nothing all that engaging about the story, and perhaps its most - or, maybe, only - intriguing thematic aspect is reserved until the very end - the final shot, even. This seems to be as spur-of-the-moment for the film as the decision that leads to it does for the central character. The general theming of the feature isn't all that strong or cohesive and its events don't act as an 'allegory' for the theme, either. This leads to an aimless vibe, a sense of almost making things up as they go along. This creates some issues when everything starts tying together, especially in terms of overall motivation. I mean, some things in here just aren't believable. Plus there's no actual mystery driving the plot, so there's never any tension or suspense. I will say that one sequence is properly horrifying, punctuated by gruesome imagery not for the feint of heart, but it stands as the sole example of something that comes close to getting under your skin and, as such, feels sort of out of place, in a way. It's also brushed off quite quickly, despite being revisited a few times. Still, the film isn't scary. It's not disturbing, either. Most of the 'horror' just comes from the unfamiliarity of the situation - that being a foreign festival presented as a long-held, normalised tradition - from an outside perspective. On top of that, you don't care about the characters - who often make odd, audience-distancing decisions - enough to be affected when things inevitably take a darker turn. That's a bit of an issue. Obviously, the piece is well made, no-one's debating that. It has an effective, if slightly obnoxious, score and makes some distinct visual choices. However, technical competence cannot make up for narrative failure. The opposite of this seems to be the erroneous basis for most of the movie's somehow glowing reviews. Of course, if you really like it, then you like it and that's good for you. I'm just saying that there comes a point where you have to stop awarding, essentially, participation points to well-made but empty fare; most pictures are at least competently constructed and even those that aren't can be enjoyable - or more enjoyable than something like this, at least. The film isn't engaging, entertaining or even close to terrifying, despite its undeniable technical competence. Also, the influences of 'The Wicker Man (1973)' are unmistakable - it actually has quite a bit in common with 'The Wicker Man (2006)', as well. Look, horror doesn't have to scare, as such, but it should do something. This doesn't really do anything and it takes a very long time to do it, too. 4/10
175 of 290 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this