I don't know about you, but if I am at some weird cult compound for a ceremony and I witness... SPOILERS - Midsommar (2019) Discussion

[–] FootOfDavros (7232) a month ago

It is ridiculous.

I found this film to be a complete disaster. The only sense I could make of this particular part was believing they were already totally screwed at the moment they drunk the drugged up welcoming drinks. Their actions were probably compromised from that point onwards.

Although, I'm not sure that was the intention of the filmmakers, given that we're also led to believe they choose to stay out of greed / hopes of personal gain.

reply

[–] DancingintheDark (1333) a month ago

A woman just plummeted some 200 ft, into an active volcano while taking a selfie…., people are people and have been making poor decisions since we sprouted from our genesis, try not to read too much into the why of things, there is rarely a logical explanation as it relates to people that is.

reply

[–] Ace_Spade (9445) a month ago

This is very true. I'm glad you said it. Sometimes people do inexplicable things. In the case of Midsommar, we're also looking at herd mentality. Nobody else is freaking out, so even the people for whom this is unfamiliar are being messed up, psychologically speaking, purely by the "It's okay; we're all doing it," groupthink going on.

I do think about this, though, in terms of real life vs. movies. Movies are sometimes unrealistic in ways that are obvious - like giant robots attacking the earth, martial arts masters running up walls, or walking away from massive explosions without said explosion collapsing chest cavities - and sometimes they are unrealistic in ways that make people believe the movie at all.

For example, some of Desmond Doss' exploits in Hacksaw Ridge were actually toned *down* because the filmmakers didn't think we'd believe the real thing (I know some other elements were heightened for drama - it's not a very accurate movie). In the case of Midsommar, even though this could happen - as you've pointed out and I've agreed - for some people, it just looks like stupid characters. Sometimes filmmakers do or should make things less realistic to make a movie believable. I still enjoyed Midsommar, but I acknowledge that there are circumstances where I might get taken out of a movie because of an "unrealistic" element that is actually true.

reply

[–] DancingintheDark (1333) a month ago

Agreed and well put.

reply

[–] jriley555 (7192) 23 days ago

Leaving wasn't that easy. There was an element of surreality, abstraction in this story - I got into it. It was mainly a metaphor for ideas like alienation, loss, conformity, community, self-absorption. It was, in a way, a quirky morality tale.

reply

[–] whynotwriteme (7362) 23 days ago

Perhaps not, but wouldn't you at least try?

reply

[–] DancingintheDark (1333) 23 days ago

Why do some people stay in verbally abusive and/or physically abusive and/or sexually abusive relationships?

The film isn’t saying that you would stay, it’s implying that there are some people who would, and it’s correct in that assumption.

reply

[–] whynotwriteme (7362) 23 days ago

Somehow, the equivalency between staying in a longterm abusive relationship and staying with a cult you just met after witnessing gory suicide and murder escapes me.

reply

[–] DancingintheDark (1333) 23 days ago

Have you ever been in a relationship where someone beats you to unconsciousness or to near death or been sexually assaulted by a lover, or worse…..?

Please, enlighten me, what’s the difference between watching a ritualistic cult suicide and remaining to see what plays out next and staying in a short term, even if it’s a second date AFTER being raped, i.e. a few of the individuals victimized by Weinstein and Cosby, or say Tina Turner or Nicole Simpson who remained in long term relationships where hyper violence was common place.

reply

[–] whynotwriteme (7362) 23 days ago

It seems like you are turning a discussion of a plot point in a horror film into an intensely personal, impassioned crusade on something else entirely. Sorry, but I don't feel like continuing this debate with you.

reply

[–] DancingintheDark (1333) 22 days ago

Passive aggressive, gas light much?

I’m not saying that an abusive relationship is the same as a death cult, I’m saying that the behavioral mechanism/reasoning that drives someone to go on a second date with someone after being physically assaulted or sexually assaulted by them is very much similar to the behavioral mechanism/reasoning, that may drive someone to stay in a more than suspect foreign community.

Again, if you think about it, what’s the difference? You’re knowingly putting yourself in harms way in either scenario but due to naivety or stupidity or denial you stay.
Not you of course, but to those who consensually walk into the lion’s den, only to then be devoured.

My asking you about assault experiences was rhetorical and to emphatically assert that the trauma caused by such is no less than the trauma caused by viewing someone jump off a cliff, which you appear to be implying is somehow more of a red flag (nope, I’m out) than the former.

reply

[–] jriley555 (7192) 23 days ago

You are trying to rationalize a study in surreality. But to the point, who escaped of the party ? Who was going to pick them up ? Its not an important point, anyway. The main theme is that that these people were already trapped before they made the journey, and then found themselves in a different sort of one.

If you couldn't suspend disbelief, you missed the show.

reply

[–] FootOfDavros (7232) 23 days ago

Somehow, the equivalency between staying in a longterm abusive relationship and staying with a cult you just met after witnessing gory suicide and murder escapes me.

I think this was a fair point to make. Not the same thing at all.

reply

[–] DancingintheDark (1333) 22 days ago

I’m not saying that an abusive relationship is the same as a death cult, I’m saying that the behavioral mechanism/reasoning that drives someone to go on a second date with someone after being physically assaulted or sexually assaulted by them is very much similar to the behavioral mechanism/reasoning, that may drive someone to stay in a more than suspect foreign community.

Again, if you think about it, what’s the difference? You’re knowingly putting yourself in harms way in either scenario but due to naivety or stupidity or denial you stay.
Not you of course, but to those who consensually walk into the lion’s den, only to then be devoured.

reply

[–] FootOfDavros (7232) 22 days ago

I don't think the other chap was saying they were the same thing either.

I was just chiming in that I thought it was a fair point that they'd just met the cult people, so it doesn't seem a realistic comparison.

But that's the extent of my involvement. If you want to keep arguing to the contrary, you'll need to take it up with them...

reply

[–] DancingintheDark (1333) 22 days ago

They weren’t saying that, I was simply pointing out the similarities between the two, regarding those who willingly stay/remain in overtly precarious situations.
That’s all, cheers.

reply

[–] Tina (427) 23 days ago

Their food was being drugged and the cult was always one step ahead of them.

reply

[–] spurtle467 (1520) 23 days ago

While they had just witnessed the attempted suicides of 2 elderly members of the cult and would be right to feel shocked and alarmed by that, they had no immediate reason to feel their lives were under threat. The cult up to that point had shown no signs of hostility towards them. Some strange behaviour maybe but stuff that they could simply put down to cultural differences and traditions. They were otherwise welcoming and friendly towards the guests.

Once the suicides happened, I thought the mixed reactions that we saw from the guests seemed about fair enough. It garnered extreme reactions from some and less from others but I doubt any of them enjoyed what they saw or agreed with it. The extreme reaction came from the English couple, who were very vocal and wanted to leave like you are suggesting you would do. They were obviously then tricked into believing they would be taken away safely, although I have to admit my suspicions would be raised to the max if I was the girl, that my boyfriend had left without telling me.

That said, all this is in hindsight knowing they were all, barring one, killed by the cult by the end of the film. So it's easy to say what you would have done while already knowing the fates of these people, or going into this film knowing it's a horror and that it will more than likely turn out badly for everyone. Without this prior knowledge and being in their same shoes having witnessed that, I don't know if you'd automatically assume you'd be killed if you stuck around for much longer.

reply

[–] whynotwriteme (7362) 23 days ago

The old woman was a suicide, but the old man was a definite murder. If you recall, the cultists came up and crushed his skull with a big mallet because he survived the jump. That means the guests were witnesses to murder, and realistically, they all should have wanted to get away before the cultists decided to make sure they wouldn't tell anyone.

My strategy would have been to keep quiet about my misgivings, unlike the British couple, but make a break for it as soon as I got the slightest chance.

reply

[–] FilmBuff (6827) 23 days ago

You might do that, or you might not. You have no way of knowing how you'd react under such circumstances. To me, the film felt very believable, and the behavior of the characters was totally in line with how I'd expect most people to behave in that extreme scenario.

It's very easy to watch a film, and as you observe a made up story from the safety of a theater seat or your couch at home, determine the best course of action for the characters, but life isn't like that. We aren't in a movie, we don't know what's coming next, there's no storyline or plot thread to follow. People all the time ignore dangerous things out of fear of speaking up and being ridiculed. It's a lot like all the videos you see online of people being attacked on buses, trains, or out in the street, who simply freeze or cower and allow themselves to be pummeled without resistance. Of course, YOU would stand your ground and fight back and overpower your assailant, but the sad truth of life is that nearly no one else does. People quietly accept what happens to them, and try not to draw attention to themselves.

reply

[–] whynotwriteme (7362) 23 days ago

I can imagine people not being able to fight back, but I cannot imagine people witnessing a murder and making no effort to get away despite being allowed to be alone. A person would literally have to be an utter idiot not to even attempt to escape under those circumstances. The people in the movie except the British people, barely even reacted.

reply

[–] spurtle467 (1520) 22 days ago

Yes I'm aware of the mallet part but I wouldn't consider that murder. It's more assisted suicide. If they were killed against their will then I'd agree with you. It's what the two elderly members wanted and if anything it was merciful to that man's situation after the fall.

Our differences of opinion on the morality of what they did more or less reflects the reaction of the guests in the film to what they saw. So it goes to show that scene and what happened after wasn't wholly unrealistic.

reply

[–] whynotwriteme (7362) 22 days ago

I wasn't really thinking in terms of morality. I am pretty sure that in the eyes of the law, even in a Scandinavian country, it would be considered murder to take someone else's life under any circumstances. If the old man had not been done away with, he could have been treated and likely survived so mercy wouldn't be a factor in a court's decision.

reply