Topic: Hereditary

[fucking ponderous]

I thought it was fun. The hype definitely spoiled it for me as I was expecting something much more brutal. But definitely a Good Film. 
I am a fan of the director's prior shorts as well. I agree the one about bad incest isn't incredible, but I really like two of his more recent shorts, Basically and C'est Le Vie.

[Twit 2]

A well-made drama about family dysfunction would be fine with me: I’m not actually that bothered if it isn’t that scary. Like I said, The Badabook’s horror elements were more silly than scary, the metaphor a bit overcooked, but the scenes of mother terrorising son were very affecting and the most interesting part of the film. I am expecting to like Hereditary despite the hype, will find out when I see it on Saturday.

[Mini]

The Babadook worked for me by creating this dark little world, whereas Hereditary kept taking me out of that world with its allusions to better films and general failure to hang together all that well. It was decent enough I suppose. I find that horror films that critics say are good (e.g. The Conjuring) are bad, and the ones they say are great (e.g. Hereditary) are good. Which is what I say in my review if you want to read that again.

[Noodle Lizard]

The Babadook worked for me by creating this dark little world, whereas Hereditary kept taking me out of that world with its allusions to better films and general failure to hang together all that well. It was decent enough I suppose. I find that horror films that critics say are good (e.g. The Conjuring) are bad, and the ones they say are great (e.g. Hereditary) are good. Which is what I say in my review if you want to read that again.

Good review, I agree with most of that. 

I'm surprised reviews aren't making more of the enormous plot holes or senselessness of it, as well.  Horror's not known for always being completely logically consistent, and generally I do like horror movies which favor ambiguity rather than try too hard to clarify everything (provided the filmmaker has a good grasp of the meaning, not It Follows).  But Hereditary tries to explain exactly what's happening and why - complete with the ever-tedious "room full of exposition" trope, and a literal minute of expository monologue to close it out (^{apparently this primordial demon needs to have its existence explained to it}).  But the problem is that so much of what happened doesn't make sense with the explanations given, or you'd at least have to do some pretty serious mental gymnastics to make them fit, and that's when "ambiguity=art" might be fallen back on among its defenders - which is a total cop-out in this instance.  Even given the highest benefit of the doubt, it's convoluted as fuck.  The very premise of it doesn't make sense, and that's a pretty big problem when it's what you ultimately decide to make the entire movie about.

I've got hold of the script, and am interested to see how it looks written down.  My guess is that it was written chronologically over a period of months, or years, and Aster watched a fair few different movies in that time.  Or at least changed his mind about the kind of movie he wanted to make several times over.  That's to be expected, but the problem lies in that I don't think he did any significant rewrites with a more concrete idea of what he wanted it to be, so you're left with a bit of a mess.  I think he's getting away with that because some people seem to think that wild tonal shifts are inherently "art", regardless of the purpose and quality.

[Mini]

^ Very well put. I was thinking about how much I liked The Killing of a Sacred Deer, and how freaky I found it, because it had a very clear point of view. Hereditary is all over the place by comparison.

[Twit 2]

Kermy no likey. Prolly cos it got compared to his precious Exorcist. He used ‘More like the Witch’ as a bit of a criticism, but he gave that film a good review.

[Noodle Lizard]

Kermy no likey. Prolly cos it got compared to his precious Exorcist. He used ‘More like the Witch’ as a bit of a criticism, but he gave that film a good review.

That may have been in response to Aster's continued assertion that he's somehow changing the face of modern horror and only citing older "classics" as influences.  It certainly owes more to modern horror than anything else, I think, in terms of presentation if not content.  The Witch and especially The Babadook are more fitting comparisons than The Exorcist or Rosemary's Baby (despite one plot similarity with the latter).

I'm glad there's at least one prominent critic who's not calling it the greatest thing ever, though.  Kermode's very hit-and-miss and seems to let his opinions on people or genres dictate his opinion of the quality of the work itself, but I think he's right here.  However, the bit he (and everyone else) describes as being "brilliantly shocking" or whatever made me burst out laughing.  One for the Final Destination thread.

[Z]

Basically what I expect from an A24 horror, enough going right to make me extra disappointed about the dumb bits and stuff that doesn't work. There was too much going on in the film in general, I think a rewrite aiming for 100 minutes would've ironed out a lot of it.

Was the age gap between the two kids meant to be only like 2-3 years?

[Paaaaul]

Basically what I expect from an A24 horror, enough going right to make me extra disappointed about the dumb bits and stuff that doesn't work. There was too much going on in the film in general, I think a rewrite aiming for 100 minutes would've ironed out a lot of it.

Was the age gap between the two kids meant to be only like 2-3 years?

Apparently it was a 3 hour film cut down to 2 hours. I reckon a lot of what got chopped was in the last act where it starts feeling really messy.

I think the kids were 13 and 16.

[Z]

Apparently it was a 3 hour film cut down to 2 hours. I reckon a lot of what got chopped was in the last act where it starts feeling really messy.

3 hours after shooting?

[Paaaaul]

The original cut was 3 hours.
http://collider.com/hereditary-interview-ari-aster/

[Z]

The last thing this film needed was the final third to be 30 minutes longer.

Gabriel Byrne must be like 70 years of age and he's still playing characters who could easily be in their 40s, I'd say at the start of his hollywood career he was playing characters edging towards that age range too.

[Jumblegraws]

Had this film ruined for me last night by an audience of snickering, whispering fucks. Fuck knows how it would have been if the screen had been anywhere near full-capacity. Life for me these days doesn’t really accomodate post-10pm screenings, which is how I would have avoided this problem way back when. Also, the person behind stank of cigarettes and shitty fragrance. Never setting foot in a multiplex again.

As for the film, given the noise being made about it by critics, (I avoided reading actual reviews entirely) I was surprised at how much it channeled earlier films that ran along similar themes (Rosemary’s Baby and Mephisto Waltz have been mentioned, I also thought there was definite shades of The Entity there, to the extent where a compare-and-contrast of the mother-son relationship in either film could be quite interesting) and I actually checked to see if it was any sort of official thematic sequel to The Witch afterwards. All-in-all, I think I liked it, it’s definitely a film I need to watch with fresh eyes distanced from the hype and the aforementioned experience with the peanut gallery.

 

[Wet Blanket]

WARNING: SLIGHT SPOILERS



Didn't work for me. It had its moments but there was too much in the pot. The obvious forebears like The Exorcist, Rosemary's Baby or The Shining take one sinister idea and run with it, whereas this felt like someone had made a list of 'scary stuff' and thrown it at the wall to see what sticks, a bit like the horror equivalent of an Airplane movie, and it didn't really hang together.

Also it was all a bit literal for my taste, would have liked a bit more enigma over whether supernatural forces were at play or if Toni Collette was just going mad with grief.  It wasn't the car crash of plot holes that A Quiet Place was, give or take the family's strangely blase attitude to epipens, but again it felt like each new development was too obviously signposted.

Still it was very nicely made, with some startling imagery, but ultimately a bit disappointing. Overhyped maybe. A typically baggy first feature from what looks like a promising director.

I saw it at a late showing and found myself a similarly restless audience. They were shocked into silence by the first act but tutting and sniggering towards the end. I have to admit there were a couple of times where it got a became so overwrought as to be ludicrous. Naked people aren't scary. "That did look like your mother!" delivered in deadpan fashion from Gabriel Byrne (who seemed to be floundering, I thought) also made me laugh.

[Z]

I've got hold of the script, and am interested to see how it looks written down.  My guess is that it was written chronologically over a period of months, or years, and Aster watched a fair few different movies in that time.  Or at least changed his mind about the kind of movie he wanted to make several times over.  That's to be expected, but the problem lies in that I don't think he did any significant rewrites with a more concrete idea of what he wanted it to be, so you're left with a bit of a mess.  I think he's getting away with that because some people seem to think that wild tonal shifts are inherently "art", regardless of the purpose and quality.

That's a very good theory!

with some startling imagery

I really can't think of any image in the film that blew me away. The location was pretty well chosen, good horror house, but that was really it. Frankly I'd be astounded if he winds up making something more cohesive.

The shot of the _{daughters head} stood out a good bit, but it was more surprising that they done it as opposed to being especially impressive. I guess the opening one kind of was too, but I found it a bit cringeworthy, as if he gave her that career purely to do that shot.
I always wind up using this example with horror films, but a lot of what works with Rosemary's Baby is (imo) very visceral and hard to pin down just why it works so well. It's that Polanski has a very strong intuitive sense for what will be unsettling. This guy it all just seemed more like _{"and we'll have her head and there'll be maggots and stuff and it'll be gross!"}. The real work of it all, if it worked, is down to the prop designer.

[The Roofdog]

The final act of this seemed pasted in from a different film. The first 90 minutes goes to such lengths to carefully build atmosphere and then it all goes out the window from about when she goes into the attic.

[wasp_f15ting]

The final act of this seemed pasted in from a different film. The first 90 minutes goes to such lengths to carefully build atmosphere and then it all goes out the window from about when she goes into the attic.

Completely agree.. ruined for me as a result. I don't know where else or what else it could have been done, but it almost felt like they made it less ambiguous so American viewers won't go WTF.

[Twit 2]

This was a massive let down. Not only was it a total mess but it was frequently just silly. Good score, good acting, good cinematography, some nice camerawork but story was all over the place. It worked neither as a genuine supernatural tale nor as an ‘it’s all in their heads’ bit of cleverness (I think the latter was what was clearly intended by the director) and certainly not as a mix of the two. I think I’d have been more angry if I wasn’t so bemused. Don’t believe the hype! I think I like it even less than Noodle, which is something I rarely say.

[zomgmouse]

I liked this but thought it could have been way tighter - having said that most times events transpired that had been foreshadowed it felt too easy a link. Not really sure what the solution is.

[Fry]

Thought the first 3/4ths were pretty good, it did get a big shonky near the end. The final scene had a lot of people laughing at the end.

[Sin Agog]

I did notice and appreciate the total lack of jump scares until the seance.  Toni Collette's a really great actress.  Loved her performance/s in The United States of Tara.  Ending felt crowbarred in from another film, though, so a nice family microscope movie (like we're looking in at them through a dollhouse geddit) ended up feeling just a bit silly.  Actually, I'd have preferred it if the camera had panned out and it turned into a Svankmajery stop-motion movie set in the model suburbs she'd been building.  Beats that incongruous, unearned Devil Rides Out shit.

[Shameless Custard]

Enjoyed the first half, but I was groaning by the end. The closing bit of dialogue from Aunt Lydia had me hooting

And the son's ridonkulous crying. Fuck me

What a let down

[St_Eddie]

I went to the cinema to see this the other day.  The first half was very good.  There was a nice slow pace to it; understated, subtle and intriguing.  The cinematography and design of the family home was beautiful, giving the film the look of being set in a doll's house, appropriately enough (it really reminded me of the computer game, What Remains of Edith Finch).  The slow tracking opening shot is incredible and that shot of Charlie's head covered in ants will stay with me for a fair old while.  The moment near the start, where Annie is in the attic and sees her Mother in the dark was genuinely scary and I thought that I was in for a terrifying film.  It wasn't to be though, sadly.

From the family seance scene onwards, it become increasingly stupid (I found the bit with Annie, talking like her daughter, Charlie, to be unintentionally funny).  I was fully ready for the credits to role the very moment that the crown was placed on Peter's head at the end but no, they just had to have a character step in to explain the plot for the dummies in the audience.  Fuck's sake.  I understood the story, film.  You don't need to explain what the previous 2 hours were about.  One can only assume that exposition dump was a result of test screenings.  Fuck test screenings and fuck idiots who can't follow a story.  If they don't understand it, then so be it.  Don't fucking pander to them because it only serves to undermine the film itself.

Also, it was at least 20 minutes too long (knowing that there's a 3 hour cut out there somewhere is boring me to tears, just thinking about it).  In summary; darn good first half, silly and bloated second half.

6/10

[Shameless Custard]

Pretty much my exact same feelings too, Eddie

I liked the feel and look of it. It was clearly going for the uneasy tone and feeling of dread and impending doom of the likes of Rosemary's Baby, The Omen, Don't Look Now, but those were far, faaaaaar better films

It's a three bags, 6/10 fairly decent modern horror, that riffs on a lot of superior films. Entertaining enough, but I can't help feeling it's being way overhyped and overrated

[St_Eddie]

...I can't help feeling it's being way overhyped and overrated

That's pretty much true of all modern horror, in my opinion.

[saltysnacks]

This film must have been interfered with by the studio, if you think of the scene leading to Charlie's decapitation, something which had my heart pounding, (the shot with her head and the mother's primal screaming genuinely horrified me) and then compare it to the abysmal ending, there is a huge dissonance. I was very disappointed with this film, it had a lot of potential.

Thinking about this film has made me decide to watch The Exorcist tonight, maybe we'll actually get a film that reaches the heights of 70's horror one day.

[Shameless Custard]

The 70's is easily the best decade for horror, I think. So many classics. The whole feel and aesthetic of those films just work for me in a way that other time periods don't

[Noodle Lizard]

This film must have been interfered with by the studio, if you think of the scene leading to Charlie's decapitation, something which had my heart pounding, (the shot with her head and the mother's primal screaming genuinely horrified me) and then compare it to the abysmal ending, there is a huge dissonance. I was very disappointed with this film, it had a lot of potential.

Thinking about this film has made me decide to watch The Exorcist tonight, maybe we'll actually get a film that reaches the heights of 70's horror one day.

I think A24 are quite notoriously hands-off.  Which, as I've discussed elsewhere, isn't always as good as it sounds.  The best films are often made in comparatively restrictive conditions.

[zomgmouse]

Ok but do you get it there's a pigeon and its head comes off and she puts it on a new body and she draws it with a crown and then her head comes off and gets put on a new body and also gets a crown do you get it

Do you

[Johnny Yesno]

I just saw this last night and I agree it was a bit silly and too long. At least Colin Stetson's soundtrack didn't disappoint. It was mostly that I went for anyway.

https://soundcloud.com/editions-milan-music/sets/hereditary

Here he is doing some of his non-soundtrack music:

Colin Stetson - Spindrift (Official Video): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJHr2DlRog8

Colin Stetson - In The Clinches (Official Video): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T690rDJ7c80