It’s startling to see a movie where you know, just know, that zero compromises have been made. That the director has done exactly what he set out to do. It’s startling to see (especially) a film that does not 1. reach for a brass ring in terms of emotion/effects/make-a-big-splash or 2. try to be comprehensible/acceptable/swallow-able to the widest possible audience. Director Robert Eggers, in his first feature The Witch (which he also wrote, based on his research/obsession into Puritan New England the Salem witch trials/hysteria), has made a film that is difficult, a film that requires patience, a film that requires a LOT of the viewer. It’s being billed as a horror film. That’s incorrect. It’s a drama. There are moments of pure terror. There’s maybe two “Gotcha” scares. There’s a lot of blood. But the fear is emotional. And that makes it worse.
Eggers has followed his own artistic vision, no matter how difficult, unyielding, humor-less, genre-less. He has been uncompromising in his goals, and has created an uncompromising film. (My pal and Ebert editor Brian Tallerico interviewed Eggers about the film.) 1630s New England was a bleak and rigid world. Much of the dialogue comes from transcripts and extant documents from the 17th century. It sounds right. The original score by Mark Korven is so effective, and sometimes it’s barely there, you can feel it, but you almost can’t hear it. So primeval, really, where very real fears from very real beliefs (Satan, witches, demonic influence) dominate. The fear of sin and Satan is constant. The goal is to live in a state of almost constant prayer. And you don’t know until you die … whether or not you’re going to Heaven. So worry and fear about your eternal life comes with every breath. Good times.
The family in The Witch was banned from the plantation because they were too fanatical even for those bunch of fanatics. (Kind of like Roger Williams, the founder of my own home state.)
While I am sure there were compromises made along the way (always the case with low-budget films), The Witch is so serious in its intentions, so ruthless in sticking to its mood and tone, that the compromises are not on the screen. I couldn’t clock any, anyway. I thought at one point, “This is exactly the movie that Eggers wanted to make.”
Exciting.
I want challenging films like this. I want individual outlooks and perspectives, told personally. I love difficult, especially when I get the sense that the vision of the director is being realized. It’s like a high-wire act. We all see so much crap, condescending warmed-over cliched stuff, especially in the supernatural genre, that when something comes out that looks different, feels different, has a different structure and intention … it’s exciting. I felt that way about It Follows too, although that was more of a classic horror film than The Witch is.
The dread The Witch creates is the dread borne out of fanaticism and religious hysteria, claustrophobic family life, total isolation, poverty, literalism. Terror comes from the inside. Terror is disorienting. The film has no tricks up its sleeve. It doesn’t withhold crucial information to be theatrical, or “effective,” or to “keep the audience on the edge of their seats.” It withholds because in a mood of hysteria, nobody knows which end is up. It withholds because the fear of the devil and of witchcraft is so palpable that people’s faces visibly change when the mere word “witch” is spoken. Hysteria is catching, you know. If you’ve read the transcripts of witch trials, or first-hand accounts from that era (I’m from New England, and every year our class would go to Salem for a field trip), then the paranoia, terror and superstition come rippling off the pages. Trial shmial, being accused of being a witch was all it took.
Eggers knows his stuff. The film has very few frills. The actors don’t wear makeup. The light is grey, the colors dim. Everyone’s hands are dirty. (Apparently, the family’s house and barn were built by the production team only with the tools that the family would have had. 1630s tools. The clothes were hand-woven. These details show an obsession with authenticity that is part of Eggers’ vision and passion. Sometimes, when you watch a period piece, you know that that corseted 19th-century woman pulls out her iPhone in between takes. The period is so thin in such pictures. The Witch, on the other hand, looks like it lives and breathes from that era.) Whatever effects Eggers used to get that realism, they are invisible. He cast phenomenal actors (adults and children) who seem like they have strolled right out of that long-ago period. Saying “thee” and “thou” come naturally to all of them, including the very small children. It does not feel like a “period piece.” It feels like a historical document, or a diary entry passed on down through the centuries, warped through the re-telling. (Two notes: the father is played by Ralph Ineson, who was so sleazy and Cockney-dude-bro in the British Office. He is so unrecognizable here and so different it took me a while to clock what else he had done. It’s an extraordinary performance. And Supernatural fans, Julian Richings (aka “Death”) is in the first scene as the Governor who banishes the family from the plantation. Because he looks like a medieval woodcut, he fits right into the grim 1630s environment).
There was not one moment in the film when I relaxed. The film never lulled me into a sense of complacency, to then jolt me, artificially, with some horrible thing. There was not one moment when I let my guard down. Everything is eerie. And bleak. Suspicions growing, everyone starting to lose it. So that when characters laugh, it rings false. Laughter seems dangerous. Perhaps even sinister. There were moments when I re-coiled from what I was seeing (one scene that comes mid-way through in particular), and there were moments when I felt so disoriented that I didn’t know what was happening. This is not a criticism. This is the mood of a witch-hunt. If you believe, like the Louvin Brothers, that Satan is real, then human beings can be infected, entered into, compromised. The soul is a fragile thing. No amount of prayer can ward off insinuations from the Devil. All of life must be spent building up walls to stave off Evil.
That’s the world the family lives in and believes in. Eggers never lets us out of it.
The ending is radical. Radical in a way that almost explodes all that came before. It creates more questions than answers, and that is deeply right. That’s also what I want more of in film. It is hard to watch that final scene and have a totally unambiguous reaction. (Or, I imagine it would be hard.) The ending, though, is where it was always going. That becomes clear the more you think about it. The script, taken from transcripts of sermons and other materials from the era, is wordy. Until … it’s not. And when the language drops out of the film near the end, something else arises, something powerful enough to suck all the oxygen out of the atmosphere. And that powerful thing, that powerful feeling is what language is used to hold back, or control. People need their words if all of THAT is going on underneath.
The Witch is a work of great integrity. Not easily-classifiable, not easy to watch, not easy to endure. The feeling is one of dread, from beginning to end. The film does not have the unbearable un-relenting terror of The Babadook, where I honestly thought I might pass out a couple of times. The Witch is different than that, although the terror is in every frame.
The film is exactly what it wants to be. It’s something to see.
Here’s a really good piece by my friend Bill about it (spoilers abound).
So far, it’s the most thoughtful review I’ve seen.
The only thing I knew about this film before your review was that the poster (this one) was really really effective.
Now I want to go see it, but it isn’t out over here til Oct., I guess they are keeping it for the Hallowe’en market
Fence – wow, yes, that poster is stunning!
From what I gather, critics are loving it and audiences not so much. I think the marketing of it is a huge problem – it’s not a horror movie, although I found it TERRIFYING. But it’s not a horror movie in the normal understanding of it – there are no jump-scares … there are long religious monologues … I don’t understand those who are saying, “Yes, it’s not scary, but it’s still a good movie …” In what world is this not scary? Are there not different kinds of terror?
The marketing – AND the reactions – have been too simplistic for my taste.
It’s also (spoiler? don’t read further if you don’t want to) extremely “gory.” There’s a LOT of blood. But it’s used in a more realistic way – instead of highly stylized – which, maybe, dumb audiences are more used to. The Witch strikes me as truly shocking, as well as deeply immersed in the world of Puritan fanaticism, sexual repression so fierce it is the same thing as terror, and also – weirdly – a home-spun tale of a hearty pioneer family trying to survive.
So it doesn’t really line up with any one genre – and it is scary in its own way. It does not seem to follow any rules other than the ones it has set up for itself.
I find that so refreshing and I haven’t been able to get the movie (especially the final sequence) out of my mind.
In other words – the marketing of the film has not done it any favors.
I obviously got the release date wrong, but it never came to my local cinema so that didn’t matter either way :) but it is out on DVD now so I’ve just watched it.
It was so great. Just fantastic.
Slow and gradual, but never boring. It was just a fantastic film. All the thumbs up.
Do NOT read the “plot” section of the Wikipedia page for this unless you want to know what happens beat-by-beat, up to and including the final scene.
I have a FB friend who recently mentioned that he hates suspense (which he defines as ‘not knowing what’s going to happen next’) and finds it unpleasant in “the same way I find urinary discomfort unpleasant.” He seeks out spoilers for movies he wants to see. Me, not so much. I kept reading because I can’t stop.
Jeff – have you seen The Witch?
It’s funny in re: spoilers. When I wrote about The Room here a while back, I tried to avoid saying anything about what happened – particularly in the second half of the movie. A friend of mine read the piece and emailed me begging to tell her if they “got out.” She wouldn’t be able to sleep. She also did not want to see the movie because it was traumatic for her just reading the bare bones of the situation. She sounded so truly anxious that I told her everything that happened.
It was kind of a charming example of how wrapped up in stories we can get – even if we haven’t seen or experienced the actual story.
I avoided reviews of The Witch. I just knew that certain people I admired – in particular one of the biggest horror fans I know (Stacie Ponder, of “Final Girl”) was in love with it – and that was enough recommendation for me.
No, it isn’t playing within 25 miles of me. But your review was so intense I had to pause after every paragraph to look at pictures of Edna St. Vincent Millay and calm down, so I may have to gas up the car this weekend.
// I had to pause after every paragraph to look at pictures of Edna St. Vincent Millay and calm down //
hahahahaha!!
Let me know what you think when you see it. I haven’t read too many reviews, but I know there’s a lot of analysis about there that it’s somehow a critique of patriarchy – which I don’t think holds up. It’s more radical than that.
Well, thanks to Wikipedia and my utter lack of self control the spoiler ship has sailed, so that won’t be an issue. Could be a while. I haven’t seen Hail Caesar! yet, either. The closest multiplex still has Rush Hour 2 on three screens. But I will persevere.
I watched it last night. My expectations were high and it lived up to them and then some. I love how it gives you NO escape hatch– right from the get-go, we know it’s a real witch and it’s not happening in somebody’s head. So many amazing things. That crow! Ana Taylor-Joy was wonderful, but that little girl playing her sister– I can’t imagine how you direct somebody barely out of toddler-hood into a performance like that.
The ending– even tho I knew it was coming– was so satisfying. Totally nuts, but so satisfying.
Jeff – so excited you saw it! Not sure if you saw one of my recent posts – but I was on the Gotham Awards nominating committee for Breakthrough Performance – and out of a huge field of contenders, she made it to the Top 5. Very very happy for her – it’s a tremendous performance.
So agree about the little sister.
I felt that all the actors were so a part of that world – just flat out NOT “modern” people at ALL – You know how sometimes period pieces you can just tell the actors are acting “Look at me, I’m in another time without electricity”? These actors seemed pre-modern, totally.
I have no idea how you achieve that – but I do know the director went to great lengths to immerse everyone in the period – their costumes, the sets – etc.
// The ending– even tho I knew it was coming– was so satisfying. Totally nuts, but so satisfying. //
I know, right? I get this skin-crawl-y feeling just remembering it.
I’m really happy to hear about the Ana Taylor-Joy nomination. I’m utterly BAFFLED at the plethora of one and two star reviews on Netflix & the IMDB. People complaining about “no plot,” “not scary” (!!) , and my favorite, “We never find out why any of this is happening.” Like they feel cheated because we don’t find out the farm is located on an old Indian burial ground, or Ralph Ineson was mean to the witch at the prom or something. Oh well.
I convinced a friend of mine to rent it and she said, “Okay, witches can fly, and that’s great, but obviously the dental plan is for shit.”
How can anyone say that that movie is not scary?
These are people who have been so coddled by what they expect that … their nerve endings have been dulled!!
Sheila, I saw it yesterday after reading your post, and I’m right there with you all the way. I must report that after the movie ended with that final blackout, I did say to myself, ‘And she lived happily ever after.’
So psyched you saw it!
// I did say to myself, ‘And she lived happily ever after.’ //
Ha!! Oh man.
and yeah … that final moment … I still kind of can’t believe it, it was so bold and crazy and scary. I haven’t stopped thinking about it.
Wait–Roger Williams was fanatical?
Well, by that I mean, he was too fanatical in his own beliefs for the fanatics in Massachusetts!
His religious convictions of his own were so strong that he helped create this whole separatist group who followed him, as opposed to the Puritans.
But still: he was waiting for a new apostle to appear – since every other religion appeared to him to be corrupt – he felt he was appointed by God to be the proper receiver of said new apostle.
His main beef with the Plymouth people was that there was no separation between church and state – he was Mr. “Wall of Separation” – and for that, I’m very proud to hail from Rhode Island!!
He’s always been a hero of mine–the voice of tolerance. Church/state separation–what a concept! And he believed that the Indians could lose the rights to their own lands only if they sold them. Learned the Algonquin language. I look at men like this, and John Adams, and Franklin, and the rest, and wonder at our once great fortune. They must all be spinning in their graves like lathes.
You know those thought experiments (often turned into crap novels) like What if Hitler had Won? and What if Grant had Lost? and What if MLK and Malcolm X hadn’t been assassinated? Lately I’ve been wondering what would have happened if Adams and the others hadn’t compromised with the slaveholding colonies in order to declare independence. Would we have stayed a colony forever? That’s hard to imagine. Still, assuming we’d have eventually become a sovereign nation, we’d have done it without Walker Percy’s “original sin.” I bring it up because you’re much more well- and widely-read than I. Have you come upon any writings on this issue?
Roger Williams was definitely a bad-ass and way ahead of his time! We had to design our own Rhode Island flag when I was in 3rd grade, and mine was a drawing of Roger Williams (who looked like a pilgrim) holding a “Rhode Island red” – our state bird – and I won 3rd prize. Why do I remember these things.
and in re: the slavery compromise – I haven’t, or – not specifically – but Joseph Ellis’ book on Jefferson is really really good on the writing of the Declaration, and his first draft and then how the slavery condemnation passages were struck, etc. And all the arguments they had about it in their various conventions. We needed the South for the solidarity in that Declaration … so it’s hard to picture what would have happened otherwise. Unfortunately, putting it off – as we all know – was a dreadful decision – and haunted everything thereafter.
It would make a good alternate fiction book – although – like you say – those are rarely any good.
// and wonder at our once great fortune. They must all be spinning in their graves like lathes.//
I feel the same way in both respects.
Jincy, your comment got me to read more about Roger Williams. I didn’t know he tutored John Milton in Dutch – in exchange for Milton tutoring him in Hebrew. Wouldn’t it have been something to be in that room, when they were speaking English!
Sheila, I saw The Witch this weekend. “Would thou live deliciously?” Now that’s The Tempter.
I know, right?
Rhode Islanders grow up so steeped in Roger Williams Lore that it’s almost like we’re all related to him. And then of course our zoo is named after him. I love New England.
and yeah – deliciously – that word sounded CRAZY after all the rest. Glad you saw it!
Sheila This sounds fantastic. And yes, another one with a great poster. I didn’t read past the spoiler alerts in comments. I’m going out to see my daughter in LA and she just wrote to me – I want to see two movies, The Witch and Cemetery of Splendor. Yes! We like scaring ourselves to death, but as you say here, it’s more then that. I will report back!
Can’t wait to hear your thoughts – save travels – have fun!
Sheila
Well, I’m never going into the woods again.
I saw it with my daughter who loved it too but as it ended she got hysterical laughing as I turned to her with a WTF?! terrified look on my face!
And like you I couldn’t get it out of my mind. I think because too there was other levels going on that I didn’t think of till after I saw it. Such as, humans are social creatures and it’s near impossible to go it alone in this world without help from friends or family. And how it was for children, young adults who had no rights at all.
I was glad too when the movie didn’t go to places that I thought for a minute it might. Like the father wasn’t abusive and no incest went on. And the same for the brother and the sister. The brother’s looks were normal adolescent sexual curiosity. And the parents actually loved each other.
When the boy comes upon the witches house in the woods in such a feeling of those clear waking nightmares that I couldn’t breathe. Also then, this witch knew about his sexual curiosity, so, she was in his head and knew his thoughts, terrifying!
I thought all the actors were terrific. I loved the twins, especially the girl. Where I felt at first it’s just child play with Black Phillip.
It’s funny how people see things differently. At the end my daughter thought the two dead goats laying on the ground were the twins. And I didn’t think that at all, because there were other goats in the film. I assumed the witches just took them and ate them, agh!
As a painter I felt the director used Goya for inspiration and I thought that was brilliant.
And thank you for the clip of The Louvin brothers! I loved Bob Dylan’s intro too!
The ending. I have no words.
Yesterday walking through the LES and passing a church I stumbled upon a procession for Good Friday. I love those things even though I’m not Catholic, there’s such beauty and longing in it and the people’s faces. And I got to thinking about stuff I thought of as a child. My Ma actually converted from being Catholic to Lutheran and I got in trouble for saying, “Why did we transfer into such a boring religion?!” Also, I got into trouble in Lutheran bible class for asking, “Why did Christ go to hell?” They said, “Well it was actually Hades.” “So why do we say Hell?!” Today, appropriately enough, I’m still wondering why and if Christ went to Hell!
Like I said, this movie stayed with me!
Regina – thrilled you saw it. WTF indeed!!
// Like the father wasn’t abusive and no incest went on. And the same for the brother and the sister. The brother’s looks were normal adolescent sexual curiosity. And the parents actually loved each other. //
I so agree. There’s enough “people were so AWFUL in the past” bull-shit out there as it is. Uhm, no, not everyone was awful in the past, you snobby know-nothing!
Some of it reminded me of that old “Wilderness Family” TV series – although that was obviously a much sunnier view of things. But a family “opting out” of society together and the struggles of that kind of closeness … I sure as hell wouldn’t want to do it!!
// Where I felt at first it’s just child play with Black Phillip. //
I know, I felt that too – it made me want to watch it again, but I just don’t know if I CAN watch this thing again.
// My Ma actually converted from being Catholic to Lutheran and I got in trouble for saying, “Why did we transfer into such a boring religion?!” //
hahahaha Oh, Regina, that’s so funny!!!