Hereditary *SPOILERS ALLOWED*

Curious what other people thought of the movie?  I thought it was pretty good, but a little too slow and art housy for me.  I checked my watch several times during the movie. 

Also I will now be randomly clicking my tongue to see peoples reactions...

Comments

  • What the hell just happened? I’m creeped out, but have no idea what the fuck I just saw.

    can someone explain?
  • bizmarkiefaderbizmarkiefader San Francisco
    I liked it a lot, it had a powerful sense of dread through the whole movie. It could have been a little shorter though and I don't think it really needed that monster movie turn at the end. It was so much more powerful when it was vague with the demonology.
    Pavkey88
  • rhcooprhcoop Knoxville, Tn
    I thought it was terrible and very, very, very, very predictable after the car accident occurred.  To praise the movie a bit before I tear it apart, that one scene was shocking. They foreshadowed it with Chekov's walnuts, but that was very surprising. 

    Speaking of heavy handed foreshadowing, they might as well have someone waving a red flag behind Ann Dowd as soon as she showed up. 

    I'd say there was about 30 mins of fat that can be trimmed from the movie, it was pretty slow.

    I also know this is a horror movie trope, but all the characters (even the people that aren't crazy) are really dumb.  The husband should have left about 6 different times with their son.   

    I'm glad people are enjoying it, but it took everything I had to not get up and walk out of this movie and if it wasn't what my wife picked to watch for her birthday I would have. 
    Pavkey88
  • DoubleTDoubleT Melbourne, Australia
    Thought it was excellent. Will this be a first run Bald Movie?

    siobhan.alyse
  • Garthgou81Garthgou81 Placerville, CA
    Yeah, I know its divisive. But put me in the camp that absolutely loved it. I thought a TINY bit of fat could have been cut. I am usually the guy who is checking his watch in movies, but I thought it was expertly paced. Especially for a first time feature director. Loved it. Loved loved loved it. 
  • JoshTheBlackJoshTheBlack Atlanta, GA
    edited June 16
    I thought the slow pace really worked well for the movie to build the dread.  

    SPOILERS BELOW

    I loved how during the accident they don't show you the body, but instead you stay for a very terribly long pause with the son as he is in shock and follow him home and into bed and watch him through the entire night.  It really illustrates the shock he was in.  The sound of the Toni Collette's gutteral wailing was profoundly devastating while you have to imagine what she is seeing, then the smash cut to the head was just brutal.  This movie has a lot of patience that most horror films do not.

    There was also a lot of great attention to detail that is easy to miss.  The cult's symbol is present on the telephone pole. Toni Collette saws off her head with a piano wire that she gets off screen.  You hear the piano get knocked over after she leaves Peter's room, and as he ventures downstairs you can see it knocked over.

    Thankfully the theater I saw this in had decent projection, because if it had been just a bit darker a couple of the films tenser moments would have gone unnoticed. 

     seanray said:
    What the hell just happened? I’m creeped out, but have no idea what the fuck I just saw.

    can someone explain?
    Essentially Grandma Graham was the leader of a cult attempting to bring forth the demon king Paimon, who needed a male body to fully rise.  She attempted to put him into her husband, making him appear to be schizophrenic and eventually commit suicide.  When that failed she tried to put him into her son, Anna's brother, who eventually hung himself because his mother was trying to put people inside of him.  When Peter was born, Annie kept him far away from her mother, however when Charlie was born she allowed her mother in the picture.  In fact, Grandma Graham nursed Charlie.  She put King Paimon's spirit into Charlie, however he was not able to fully rise due to not being in a male body.  After grandma's death, the rest of the cult continued to try and get King Paimon into a male body that I think needed to be part of the Graham bloodline.  The cult arranges to kill Charlie using some sort of sacred knowledge bestowed upon them by King Paimon.  When Charlie died, Paimon's dormant spirit jumped into the weakest family member (Anna).  Then along comes Ann Dowd to trick Anna into performing a ritual that awakens Paimon, who then starts to wear down Peter through Anna and along with the help of the cult.  The weaker Anna gets, the more control he has over, culminating in her sawing her own head off.  Peter, frightened by the naked cult members jumps out of his attic window and is finally possessed by Paimon.  The movie ends with the cult explaining all this to the newly awakened Paimon.  At least, that's what I believe happened from my first viewing and discussing it.

    King Paimon is a real demonic figure that has the power of "knowledge of past and future events," clearing up doubts, making spirits appear, creating visions, flight, and general abilities to "make all kinds of things" for his followers.  This is not explicitly stated in the film, but does fit with the cult's abilities to pull of their stunts! 
    seanrayGarthgou81
  • @JoshTheBlack

    thank you! I’ve thought about it all week, and I had about half of that put together. I didn’t realize Charlie was possessed. Thanks!
  • Garthgou81Garthgou81 Placerville, CA
    edited June 16
    Yeah, @JoshTheBlack that tracks with how I understood things as well. Some of the smaller points I didn't really figure. But overall, that's what I thought happened. Your comment about attention to detail is what really makes this movie awesome to me. Hell, three minutes into the movie as Toni Collette is speaking at the funeral, she mentions that she is happy to see so many new and strange faces.

    In retrospect, you put it together that these are all cult members who swarm the family like locusts. The creepy smiling guy for example, who we see again later during the climax of the movie. It also makes you wonder in how many random people throughout the movie are cultists that are just keeping tabs on the family and doing things in the background to continue the plan. Ann Dowd is so pushy. It stood out to me at the time, but I took it as her just being passionate. She literally would not take no for an answer.

    They also chose the perfect actor for Peter. He did such an excellent job of playing catatonic, but then being able to go to absolutely horrified in a matter of moments. 

    If The Shining, Rosemary's Baby, and the Witch had a horror threesome and a demonic lovechild, this would be that. This movie had the unsettling music and visuals of The Shining, the themes of Rosemary's Baby, and the indie family strife and pacing of The Witch. 
  • amyja89amyja89 Oxford, England
    I’m shook. About three or four things happen in this movie that will fuck me up for life.

    One element I can’t quite jive with is how exactly Charlie’s death was orchestrated by the cult. Do they mean to imply that there was someone at the party specifically cutting nuts and specifically cutting chocolate cake to set her off? I can get my head around putting road kill on the road to make Peter swerve and have a car accident, so perhaps the decapitation was just an extra horrific bonus given that she wouldn’t have been hanging out the window if she could breathe properly?

    I get that films like this, especially when demons are involved, shouldn’t be required to lay everything out like an Oceans movie, but for such a crucial part of the plot it feels like a little too much hand waving for my liking.
    Pavkey88
  • Pavkey88Pavkey88 Florida, the home of beautiful beaches and meth addicted face-eaters
    edited June 16
    I liked the movie a lot until the last half hour, when they started wrapping things up. Went super supernatural and became silly, why did her husband burn and not her?? SHE through the book in the fire, not him. 

    The acting and direction was mostly great but Exorcist or the Witch this is not. Not even close
  • amyja89 said:
    I’m shook. About three or four things happen in this movie that will fuck me up for life.

    One element I can’t quite jive with is how exactly Charlie’s death was orchestrated by the cult. Do they mean to imply that there was someone at the party specifically cutting nuts and specifically cutting chocolate cake to set her off? I can get my head around putting road kill on the road to make Peter swerve and have a car accident, so perhaps the decapitation was just an extra horrific bonus given that she wouldn’t have been hanging out the window if she could breathe properly?

    I get that films like this, especially when demons are involved, shouldn’t be required to lay everything out like an Oceans movie, but for such a crucial part of the plot it feels like a little too much hand waving for my liking.
    So one of Paimon's defining traits is apparently his wisdom and foresight, and so the orchestration of Charlie's beheading was presumably planned with his help.  That works for me; its ridiculous to imagine normal humans predicting and planning around this very specific and unlikely series of events, but a Hell God of wisdom?  Sure.   I think the nut chopping was definitely being done for the purpose of setting Charlie off - notice how unnaturally the teenager is chopping those nuts, showing the same kind of energetic, violent motion Anna displays later in the film.  Seemed to suggest she was under some kind of demonic influence.

    Charlie was definitely meant to be decapitated, not just killed.  It seems to me that when Paimon possesses someone, he's stuck in there until that person is decapitated.  So to get out of Charlie and into Anna, Charlie had to be decapitated.  To get from Anna to Peter, same thing, which explains her cutting her own head off with the piano wire.      
  • amyja89amyja89 Oxford, England
    Stackpile said:
    amyja89 said:
    I’m shook. About three or four things happen in this movie that will fuck me up for life.

    One element I can’t quite jive with is how exactly Charlie’s death was orchestrated by the cult. Do they mean to imply that there was someone at the party specifically cutting nuts and specifically cutting chocolate cake to set her off? I can get my head around putting road kill on the road to make Peter swerve and have a car accident, so perhaps the decapitation was just an extra horrific bonus given that she wouldn’t have been hanging out the window if she could breathe properly?

    I get that films like this, especially when demons are involved, shouldn’t be required to lay everything out like an Oceans movie, but for such a crucial part of the plot it feels like a little too much hand waving for my liking.
    So one of Paimon's defining traits is apparently his wisdom and foresight, and so the orchestration of Charlie's beheading was presumably planned with his help.  That works for me; its ridiculous to imagine normal humans predicting and planning around this very specific and unlikely series of events, but a Hell God of wisdom?  Sure.   I think the nut chopping was definitely being done for the purpose of setting Charlie off - notice how unnaturally the teenager is chopping those nuts, showing the same kind of energetic, violent motion Anna displays later in the film.  Seemed to suggest she was under some kind of demonic influence.

    Charlie was definitely meant to be decapitated, not just killed.  It seems to me that when Paimon possesses someone, he's stuck in there until that person is decapitated.  So to get out of Charlie and into Anna, Charlie had to be decapitated.  To get from Anna to Peter, same thing, which explains her cutting her own head off with the piano wire.      
    I can get behind that guess!

    The only other thing that I can't seem to put in to place is why Steve set on fire the second time the book was thrown in to the fireplace rather than Anna.
  • JoshTheBlackJoshTheBlack Atlanta, GA
    Paimon’s dormant spirit was trying to protect the book. He was probably somehow linked to it. When it is placed in the fire the first time, there’s just a light blaze on Anna’s arm. I think by the second time it was thrown in, he had gained enough control to no longer need the book and immediately engulfed the husband as punishment, or to further weaken the family. I don’t think the book was ever actually linked to Anna, and I’m not sure it was necessary after the ritual was performed. It could have been done just to cause fear in the first place. 
  • Garthgou81Garthgou81 Placerville, CA
    I could see how some could be put off by how they hand-wave stuff away. But when you are dealing with the occult and curses and possession, you either jump on board for the ride or you don't. It also seemed to have enough consistency and internal rules that I was fine with it. 
Sign In or Register to comment.