TL:DR: Skip this and watch Estonian folk-tale "November" if you want something similar to "The VVitch." The high scores are from try-hards and liars.
This film is beautifully shot. But that is where the positives stop.
There is absolutely NOTHING about this that is unnerving, uncomfortable, or anything that elicits an emotional response of any kind. The atmosphere is not ominous or foreboding. If the soundtrack were removed, you wouldn't even know what tone this film was going for. (and the soundtrack is literally just 4 notes sliding back and forth) Beautiful cinematography means nothing in a film if it doesn't communicate anything other than impressive composition.
It is NOT a picture of an isolated woman's descent into madness. Its just slow moving shot after shot of a depressed woman continuing to be depressed. The only inkling we get that she may be experiencing some sort of "madness" isn't until the 1:30 mark and the credits roll at 1:37. "Oh but that's the point. Its a snapshot of depression and isolation," you say. Then ask yourself if it was a point that even needed making.
Even the minimal description of the film ("Paranoia & superstition in 15th century Europe") is misleading. There is no paranoia at all. And during the 1:42 runtime, only 4 minutes are less have anything to do with superstition.
I am so tired of people pretending like films like this have any sort of depth. Even calling it pretentious just validates the people who claim they see something in it. I understand that art is subjective, and if truly did enjoy this film, more power to you.
However, I think a lot of you are lying to yourselves and others. Defending art just because it is art does nothing. Don't forget that just because something IS art, doesn't automatically make it GOOD art.
In my opinion, all this was is a cheap attempt to capitalize on some of the more successful slow moving folk horror. A director who knows how to work a camera isn't that unique, especially not when that's literally all they have to offer.
Go watch "The VVitch" or the Estonian folk-tale "November" instead.
This film is beautifully shot. But that is where the positives stop.
There is absolutely NOTHING about this that is unnerving, uncomfortable, or anything that elicits an emotional response of any kind. The atmosphere is not ominous or foreboding. If the soundtrack were removed, you wouldn't even know what tone this film was going for. (and the soundtrack is literally just 4 notes sliding back and forth) Beautiful cinematography means nothing in a film if it doesn't communicate anything other than impressive composition.
It is NOT a picture of an isolated woman's descent into madness. Its just slow moving shot after shot of a depressed woman continuing to be depressed. The only inkling we get that she may be experiencing some sort of "madness" isn't until the 1:30 mark and the credits roll at 1:37. "Oh but that's the point. Its a snapshot of depression and isolation," you say. Then ask yourself if it was a point that even needed making.
Even the minimal description of the film ("Paranoia & superstition in 15th century Europe") is misleading. There is no paranoia at all. And during the 1:42 runtime, only 4 minutes are less have anything to do with superstition.
I am so tired of people pretending like films like this have any sort of depth. Even calling it pretentious just validates the people who claim they see something in it. I understand that art is subjective, and if truly did enjoy this film, more power to you.
However, I think a lot of you are lying to yourselves and others. Defending art just because it is art does nothing. Don't forget that just because something IS art, doesn't automatically make it GOOD art.
In my opinion, all this was is a cheap attempt to capitalize on some of the more successful slow moving folk horror. A director who knows how to work a camera isn't that unique, especially not when that's literally all they have to offer.
Go watch "The VVitch" or the Estonian folk-tale "November" instead.