Midsommar Review

A film that shocked many casual viewers and surprised even the most hardcore of horror fans last summer was “Midsommar,” another look inside the mind of Sophomore film director Ari Aster. This film takes the audience through the disturbing traditions of a fictitious Swedish village when a group of college students are invited to witness an event that occurs once every ninety years. Aster’s previous effort, “Hereditary,” showed that he has an understanding of exactly how to get under the skin of those that venture into his twisted sandboxes and “Midsommar” escalates what the writer/director can do.

Produced by the more than “artsy” film company A24 this is the second film in their collaboration with director Aster, proving that this partnership might help redefine the horror genre. Comparing “Midsommar” to 2018’s “Hereditary” we can see Aster moving away from closed environments and while his previous film was much more contained, therefore more claustrophobic, the focus was on the happenings of the main characters. “Midsommar” values the open environment over the characters. Because of this, the film fixates on showing the wide and picturesque village that exudes vibrant greeneries and flowery backdrops that may muddle the proximity of exactly where some of the scenes are taking place, fitting in well with the overall helplessness of our displaced main protagonist.

Aster has once again taken a page from many films of the 1970’s during the period where cult B-movies were being made en mass and, like its older sibling, “Midsommar” utilizes the fear created during the “satanic panic” to revisit the fear of cults that many of those films focused on. The film’s narrative is standard fair at this point when dealing with the depiction of ritualistic village practices, but what is different in Aster’s approach is that these village members are depicted as wholesome, genuine and free of malice unlike films like the original “The Wicker Man” where the villagers come off as disconnected from reality. There is a strong sense of community with their "Lived-in" traditions, adding to the believability of this Pagan sect. Aster’s masterful timing with certain shots, that may go on a bit too long but are done so for cinematic effect, are present in the film in full force to drive home why those scenes should be significant to the audience.

Where the film succeeds with its effort to scare and downright disturb the audience it fails at providing effective characters; not because of the lack of acting efforted by the actors but because not much could have been done due to the conventions of the genre being something not even Aster could overcome. The characters come off as one dimensional and are archetypes that have come before with the exotic fetishist, nosy intellectual, the directionless boyfriend and grief-stricken female lead. If a bit more time was spent on establishing the cast the fates of said characters might have actually garnered an emotional response, but it’s made clear that they are not the focal point of the film and, because of this, it might be the only fault in this otherwise flawless piece of horror.

Taking a deeper anthropological look at “Midsommar” and those that share its filmic DNA, many films in the subgenre are a look into the fear of the “Other,” people that are outside of normality and have been sheltered from the outside world. On one hand the cult members exude a strong sense of community built on the trust of each family brought on by hundreds of years of tradition. On the other hand, their practices come off as depraved and sickening to the modern sensibilities and values we hold onto now, because of this they are seen as barbaric. Recently there has been a steady stream of films that share their subgenre with “Midsommar” and the notable examples from 2018 are “Apostle,” Gareth Edward’s gritty and realistic take on the subject matter, and the other being Panos Cosmatos’s “Mandy” a more psychedelic and ethereal spin on the genre. These three films show that the subgenre is ripe with elements that can help elevate the horrors.

While the film may have predictable bits here and there it’s the execution that will disturb and satisfy those that have grown accustomed to the director’s signature style of keeping a take long and having razor sharp editing to piece together a film unlike any other. Like "Hereditary" before it this film's ending is sure to divide those that watch, is it a happy ending or is it an ending that hides something more sinister underneath?