Topic: Hereditary

[thugler]

Well, fuck all you boring bastards, I thought this was rather tasty.

On paper, yes, it ticks several familiar boxes, but the execution (ho ho) was fresh. Charlie, for example, could so easily have been just another spooky child who makes creepy art - but instead struck me as an authentically strange, lonely, sad girl. I loved the lighting and art direction - it had an unusual amount of sunshine and colour for a horror film.

I always wanted to know what would happen next, I was engrossed in the mood and the world, it's a cool film for handsome people.

Yep, loved this. Don't know what everyone's moaning about. Some amazing shots, genuinely didn't know what was going to happen next and kept up the ambiguity of what was happening long enough.

Everyone in the cinema I was in were genuinely shocked and freaked out by a number of moments and not just usual jump scare rubbish.

Ending was a little silly but I read it as a bit of relief after a pretty unrelenting 2 hours.

Also 2 or 3 fantastic performances that raised the material up massively.

The vvitch had a great atmosphere but nothing fucking happened.

Soundtrack was great too, love the bassy pulses and use of horns.

[Shameless Custard]

Nothing happened in The Vvitch? Eh?

EH?!!!

[Johnny Yesno]

Charlie, for example, could so easily have been just another spooky child who makes creepy art - but instead struck me as an authentically strange, lonely, sad girl. I loved the lighting and art direction - it had an unusual amount of sunshine and colour for a horror film.

Soundtrack was great too, love the bassy pulses and use of horns.

I don't think anyone's disputing that. I specifically went to see the film because I knew Colin Stetson had done the soundtrack.

That's what makes it such a shame that all this talent was wasted on such a shitty script.

[Noodle Lizard]

The score was good in and of itself (to the point where I got hold of a copy), but also quite cheaply utilized I thought.  Especially in the first half, it was just an unbroken wall of tension over fairly mundane scenes.  Granted, I've probably defended similar uses of score in other (better) films, but that was one of the first things that jumped out as an "uh-oh" for me.

[Johnny Yesno]

The score was good in and of itself (to the point where I got hold of a copy), but also quite cheaply utilized I thought.  Especially in the first half, it was just an unbroken wall of tension over fairly mundane scenes.  Granted, I've probably defended similar uses of score in other (better) films, but that was one of the first things that jumped out as an "uh-oh" for me.

Now you mention it, I had the same issue. I wonder if Stetson composed it scene by scene or if he presented a bunch of pieces to the director so he could choose how he wanted to use them.

[popcorn]

That's what makes it such a shame that all this talent was wasted on such a shitty script.

I thought it was a rather good script. To the point.

Yes, the discovery of the books is expository and cheap, but that was my only real problem with the film. Whereas I really liked the speech that wraps it all up at the end - the way it's all explained to the kid, complete with fanfare, is what makes it work. It's funny.

[Noodle Lizard]

I thought it was a rather good script. To the point.

Yes, the discovery of the books is expository and cheap, but that was my only real problem with the film. Whereas I really liked the speech that wraps it all up at the end - the way it's all explained to the kid, complete with fanfare, is what makes it work. It's funny.

Unintentionally, though.  I mean, a lot of things in it made me laugh, but I don't think that works in its favor.  Ultimately it's a horror movie, that's what Aster and its earlier hyperbolic critics say.  No mention of lolz, no mention of surreal comedy, no mention of satire, nor is any of that evident in the film's presentation or screenplay (which you can find online).  So if people are laughing at it, and not actually finding it scary (I've still not met anyone who found it scary, even those who liked it), I'd say it was something of a failure as a horror film, whether or not you can glean some unintentional enjoyment out of its failures.

[popcorn]

Unintentionally, though.  I mean, a lot of things in it made me laugh, but I don't think that works in its favor.  Ultimately it's a horror movie, that's what Aster and its earlier hyperbolic critics say.  No mention of lolz, no mention of surreal comedy, no mention of satire, nor is any of that evident in the film's presentation or screenplay (which you can find online).  So if people are laughing at it, and not actually finding it scary (I've still not met anyone who found it scary, even those who liked it), I'd say it was something of a failure as a horror film, whether or not you can glean some unintentional enjoyment out of its failures.

I think this is a bit misguided on two counts.

First, don't get me wrong: this film spooked me proper. It absolutely is a horror film. But it also has small elements of humour, even elements that border on the camp, in the tradition of ghoulish fun - such as the welcome mat with the mother's stitching, or the husband's deadpanning after being told the corpse is in the attic. Horror and humour are old friends. The ending isn't so much a laugh-out-loud moment as cathartic. It has a celebratory, congratulatory tone, and that, coupled with the enormity of what has occurred and the horror of realisation, is ironic in the best sense. It's a gas!

Second, your entire premise that if we get something out of a film that the director didn't intend then the film has failed is bananas anyway. Even if the director didn't know exactly what he was doing - and he obviously did - who cares?

[popcorn]

I've still not met anyone who found it scary, even those who liked it

I have to come back to this. Is it honestly true? I saw it in a packed cinema and the level of tension was strangling. My girlfriend gripped my shirt from beginning to end (but she is a girl and therefore weak I suppose), there were several audible gasps, and one well-timed Charlie cluck made the woman next to me actually shriek out loud.

Fair enough if no one you personally know found it scary, but seriously, this film has put the spooks up a lot of people.

[Z]

Asides from the head being knocked off, nothing seemed to provoke much of a reaction at my screening other than the funny bits. This was a 4pm(!) screening though, reasonably full but I imagine very different to a post-9pm crowd.

the husband's deadpanning after being told the corpse is in the attic

That just came across as Gabriel Byrne being totally lost to me.

[Twit 2]

The more I think about the film, the worse it gets, and I was mightily unimpressed at the time. I really wish I hadn’t got sucked into the hype: perhaps if I’d watched it totally cold I could have enjoyed it more. Or if it was meant to be a comedy (not wry black humour, like I imagine the director thinks it is, but just silly, slapstick stuff).

[Goldentony]

Saw this just now. Wasn't scared at all, but I don't hold that against anything because I can't think of many films i've been properly scared of. Agreed that the hype oversold it a wee bit, but I was entertained throughout. Slow, miserable breakdown of a family that eventually just goes fucking bananas. Happy to not see any demon kids shouting and their mouths opening wide, any big crawling demons, the guy from Watchmen, a telly turning on by itself or any of that. Nearly had a full house but there was an evil grandma.

Some of the visuals did come off as funny, especially people's faces in it. Really appreciated a lot of the odd surreal touches toward the end like the mum slicing her own nut away and then floating up to the tree house

Anyway, a good laugh.

[holyzombiejesus]

Just saw this. What a silly film! Quite enjoyed it until the first seance (I LUV U GRANMA) but even before then there were just silly bits, like cutting the pigeon's head off (and if I never see another horror film where birds fly in to a window, I'll be delighted). As most have said, the second half was just a nonsensical mess, although thought the meal scene was OK. Loads of giggles at the end from the audience I watched with, especially that naked man waving at the son and him then jumping out of the window.

Oh yeah, what happened to the dog? Was there a brief shot of it's corpse just before the silly treehouse bit?

[holyzombiejesus]

Did anyone else think that after boy drove back to the house and went to bed after the accident, mum was going to go outside and find Charlie alive and well?

[fucking ponderous]

Actually that was genuinely one of the most tense bits of the film. That long ten minutes stretch where you just knew the kid was dead, there's no way she couldn't be, but the film hasn't actually confirmed it yet so there's a small bit of hope she might be alive. It was very well done.

[gout_pony]

The seems like one of the most divisive films we've talked about on here in yonks, for what it's worth.

[St_Eddie]

The seems like one of the most divisive films we've talked about on here in yonks, for what it's worth.

I don't know about that.  It seems that the majority are on the same page (it's alright but is really dragged down by a daft third act) and a few people really loved it.  It's certainly no The Last Jedi, in terms of its divisive reaction.

[Moribunderast]

I don't know about that.  It seems that the majority are on the same page (it's alright but is really dragged down by a daft third act) and a few people really loved it.  It's certainly no The Last Jedi, in terms of its divisive reaction.

Hah, I just saw it and thought that the daft third act was what saved it! I didn't buy into the hype because when outlets/marketing ask "IS THIS FILM TOO SCARY?" then the answer is invariably "No" but I was expecting a good little horror film. It was okay but that's about it. Didn't scare me at all, despite a few nice visuals littered throughout. I didn't have a great cinema experience as a couple behind me were loudly eating and rustling biscuit boxes/wrapping for the entire thing and an old fella to my side was offering up his predictions of what would happen next (only to be wrong, always) every couple of minutes, so it was very difficult to get immersed in any tension on-screen. Am I getting more pedantic or are cunts getting ruder in the cinema?

Anyway, the film had it's moments but felt 30 minutes too long, had annoying characters and a pretty dumb story overall, even though I enjoyed the ending. Surely Toni Colette and Gabriel Byrne are the worst film parents of the year, constantly sending their daughter out without her Epipen? They got what they deserved.

[DukeDeMondo]

He's heading properly north of his comfort zone with his next picture, if this synopsis is anything to go by:

"The story follows a young couple visiting an isolated Swedish village; over the course of their vacation, they discover that its residents participate in an eccentric set of seasonal traditions. The recent death of the main character’s parents casts a sense of dread over the proceedings."

Dunno how he's gon' handle that.

(I know, I know, it's not what it's about it's how it's about it, and also there's nothing wrong with a filmmaker worrying away and away at the same narrow set of preoccupations from now till doomsday if it makes for something worthwhile every time, I know, I know)

[Hank Venture]

Just wanted to say I really liked it, so that’s that settled.

[Hecate]

Man, that was brilliant! Really tense. Not quite as good, but very similar to The Witch in some of it's themes.

[Junglist]

That opening hour is full of so much dread and unease that I was captivated, and then it shits it away rapidly.

[chocolate teapot]

I liked this a lot.

The photo of Grandma at the funeral looked so real as though it was a portal, like you could step right into that room there and then. One shot near the end when it went from night to day, it looked and sounded like someone just pulled a lightswitch. All of the characters moving through the house like they were also miniatures.

The tense and dreadful family atmosphere, no one really communicating effectively. All the shots of a person in the distance. I really liked how the son was reacting to everything, realistic human emotions of course being extra disturbing for him because he caused the death. Him pleading with her, calling her mommy instead of mom at the end. God I can really feel his guilt and queasiness of what he had done to his sister, I felt exhausted for him when he goes from bed to class, I would think his dad would have made sure he took time off school or something.

The ending was oh my fucking god! And not unlike The VVitch in tone.

9 thumbs up!

[dallasman]

Man, that was brilliant! Really tense. Not quite as good, but very similar to The Witch in some of it's themes.

I thought so too, but I liked this better. I loved that they did the same kind of thing at the end - just "yeah, this is what was behind it all, because it's a movie and magic works". I thought Hereditary took it to a delicious new level, though, letting the warped comedy really spill through in the final minutes. It reminded me of the movie "Mum & Dad", and the Christmas party scene. I saw it this weekend, and thought it started out really good. Charlie was brilliantly handled, for the reasons articulated above. It scored an immediate extra star to have that old trope decapitated. And as people have also already said, the execution and deployment of scares was excellent. Toni Collette brilliant as ever. The kids were alright, Gabriel Byrne good but maybe a bit too quiet?

The problem was Ann Dowd, of course. The second I saw her face in the crowd, I knew what kind of twist would likely be coming (no, I didn't know she was in it until she appeared). Not only is she typecast (The Remnant? Gilead? Hello?), her character is predictable enough as it is. That said, the movie could have gone for another twist with her (which I might even have been subconsciously expecting) so the photo album reveal still worked pretty well. It did get a little resolution-by-numbers for a few scenes, but as I said, I enjoyed the bizarre, over-the-top finale. 

The old-school scary renaissance has been going on for a few years now, and I feel as if this combined the best lessons from that genre with a few splashes of extreme gore for the more carnivorous viewers. You can do a lot with just a figure appearing in a dark room, or a shadow flying overhead, but there's something to be said for the severed head too. It's not a perfect horror film, but it's better than any of the Insidious sequels and imitators I've seen (which is not that many, to be fair). Two thumbs up Charlie's trachea, to make her tell rude jokes over the credits.

[popcorn]

I thought so too, but I liked this better. I loved that they did the same kind of thing at the end - just "yeah, this is what was behind it all, because it's a movie and magic works". I thought Hereditary took it to a delicious new level, though, letting the warped comedy really spill through in the final minutes.

Yes, this is a good way of saying what I was trying to get at earlier in the thread.

[Bhazor]

Just got round to seeing this. Went in with zero expectations and thoroughly enjoyed it. Though I'm a sucker for ritual movies like VVitch and Neon Demon where it seems like a string of random horrible events that coalesce into some grand scheme by some cultists. Unfortunately, though ritual movies are very popular the vast majority are absolute irredeemable jump scare filled shit like Conjuring. Or Insidious. Or Ouija. Or Babadook. Or The Last Exorcist. Or Truth or Dare. Or Unfriended. Or Oculus. Or Sinister. Or Annabelle. Or Deliver Us From Evil. Or Bye Bye Man. Or Ghost Dog. Where the monster is just some cunt from Slipknot who jumps up at the end like a jack in a box.

But Hereditary keeps its jumpscares minimal with the scariest part being a long shot of a naked guy standing in a doorway that goes on for about 20 seconds. Then its a jump scare because fuck you I guess. But by that point it felt earned and its the lead in to the bonkers final 10 minutes which I thought were great. Dreamlike and grotesque and ethereal and theres a guy's balls right there where anyone can see. What more could you want?

The dad going on fire was fucking hilarious though. That looked like shit.

[SteveDave]

Do you reckon the son used his own gob or it was some kind of thick viscous liquid in his mouth? He was almost constantly with a long string of it towards the end of the film.

I loved that it was so quiet and there were no "DUNNNNNN" noises (that I can remember).

[Bhazor]

There were definitely scare chords there. Not as many as any other modern horror film would have. But they were still there. The clicking just felt like such a crutch. It exists only to tell you that its the creepy dude ooh he's possessed oooooooh get fucked.

[SteveDave]

There weren't any when someone would appear behind a character though. Near the end when Toni Collette is on the ceiling above where the son wakes up. I didn't notice her for about 10 seconds. Or I can't remember them. I was a bit drunk watching it.

It would've been better if he'd clucked right at the end though rather than from when he got up after jumping out of the attic.

[Bhazor]

There bloody was. After mum's hiding on the ceiling when he looks over at the grinning naked guy, she teleports behind the older ugly kid and then silence.... JUMP OUT DWORRRRRGHHHHHHH BLARGH DUNNN DUNNB BLARGH BLARGH.