**Spoilers for both films. I recommend watching both if you haven't already.**
Last year, there was a lot of hype about Midsommar. While watching the trailer, I was reminded of the original Wicker Man from 1973. After watching Midsommar, I went and re-watched The Wicker Man to see if it still held up after all those years. And yeah, I found that Midsommar was very weak in some of the elements that made The Wicker Man so good. Let me explain:
1. Cultural clash.
There is no interesting cultural dynamic between the visitors and the cult in Midsommar. The visitors are weirded out because it's "different". Because the visitors hold no rigid moral code of their own, they try to go with the flow and accept that people just "do things differently". It's almost like they're at a zoo. The morality of both sides is not well-defined, partially due to the rather vague characterization we see in a lot of the main characters in Midsommar.
In the Wicker Man, we see a strong clash between the devoutly religious police officer and the paganism on the island. He is constantly shocked and bewildered by what is going on- not because the actions themselves are inherently immoral but because they are "not Christian". The character dynamic between an authority figure and submissive villagers is also much more interesting than the dynamic between tourists and weirdos. There is more conflict created because each character interaction takes place between moral opposites.
As society becomes more secular, this is one aspect of the film that changes. Back in 1973, perhaps the audience would agree whole-heartedly with the copper and see it as a black and white matter, a fight between good and evil.
But today, the rigid standards of puritanical Christianity do not have as much of a hold and the film's moral message becomes much more ambiguous to the audience. The villagers, after all, are just trying to have fun and survive. They believe they will starve if the harvest does not come back, but even so they put on a cheerful face and do the best they can.
Due to the way that the villagers are portrayed, the film invites you to ask yourself, "Are the villagers really that bad?" "Can you be considered evil even if you truly believe what you are doing is for the greater good?" I believe the director intended this all along.
None of these questions can be asked about Midsommar because the cult is just so strange and unrelatable that they don't even feel like human beings.
2. Temptation.
There is nothing in Midsommar's cult that is really all that tempting to the modern audience. They drink pubic hairs. They live in the middle of nowhere. They do strange dances. They dress in mostly white. They have sex with zero privacy. It's just strange, not really all that beguiling for a developed society. Midsommar really goes overboard with the weird **** and that's where I lose the film.
In The Wicker Man, there is genuine temptation. The island is beautiful and the town is just a normal town, so many people could actually imagine living there without changing too much of their lifestyle. The people look normal and dress normal (at least for the 70s). People don't just kill themselves when they reach a certain age- in fact it is clear that the citizens are enjoying life (and sex) well into their seventies and eighties. The temptation is real; The "Willow's Song" scene is still one of the sexiest scenes put on film. On Summerisle, they are living in a much less sexually-restricted society, which is attractive for many people. In Midsommar, sex is still very formalized and ceremonial, which is a huge turn-off.
3. Motivation.
Character motivations in Midsommar are vague. We know that the arc follows the failing relationship between Dani and Christian, and we sort of know why they make certain choices. But as to the cult themselves, it's as if they're an alien race. Why do they commit suicide? Because that's what they believe. Why do they drink pubic hairs before sex? Because that's what they believe. Why do they burn human sacrifices? In order to purge evil. But we are so distanced from the culture of this group of people that we don't even know what evil means to them.
In The Wicker Man, the motivations of the cult are quite apparent. They had a failing harvest, and they genuinely believe that a human sacrifice will bring back the bountiful vegetation. Lord Summerisle mentions "crop strains" but he is so committed to the paganism that by the end of the film, it's ambiguous as to whether he truly believes in a scientific reason for failure. You are certain that he 's a pretty "normal" guy but his actions at the end of the film muddy the waters.
Also, The people on the island love sex because...well, who doesn't love sex? They have fun and enjoy life, unlike the cult in Midsommar in which there is no semblance of a joyful society. Their cult is so rigid that it's like a hive mind.
3. Payoff.
Because the motiviations of the cult in Midsommar are never well-defined throughout the film, the payoff is weak and uninteresting. There's no moment of epiphany where the audience thinks, "Oh, so that's why this happened". At the end of the film you're just trying to put together puzzle pieces that don't really fit. And the protagonists are motivated because they want to write a research thesis- this is an incredibly bland reason for them to do what they do.
You never know what the people on Summerisle are up to until towards the end, and that's when you realize that the police officer has been trolled by killer furries for pretty much the entire film. This is both frightening and satisfying. It is a usurping of authority and a shift in perspective for the audience.
And when the sacrifice goes down, it is simply captivating. We see mounting hopelessness- a man at his wits' end, who wavers a bit in his faith but eventually goes down screaming his personal values even to his very last breath. That to me is both depressing and inspiring.
There is none of that in the end of Midsommar, where all the original protagonists are either dead or integrated. It is a good scene on its own but largely unsatisfying taken in the context of the entire film.
4. Conclusion
Perhaps it's not fair to compare the two films. Maybe Ari Aster was going for just a completely hallucinatory experience rather than an actual fleshed-out story.
There are certainly excellent elements of Midsommar. Individually, each scene is beautifully directed and shot. The soundtrack is also excellent, but The Wicker Man to me is still better in this regard since the songs in the film are actually incorporated into the plot. Acting in Midsommar is fairly strong throughout and so was the cinematography.
Regardless, I had a much better time watching The Wicker Man, as there were characters and plot elements that I could actually grab onto.
What are your thoughts?
Last year, there was a lot of hype about Midsommar. While watching the trailer, I was reminded of the original Wicker Man from 1973. After watching Midsommar, I went and re-watched The Wicker Man to see if it still held up after all those years. And yeah, I found that Midsommar was very weak in some of the elements that made The Wicker Man so good. Let me explain:
1. Cultural clash.
There is no interesting cultural dynamic between the visitors and the cult in Midsommar. The visitors are weirded out because it's "different". Because the visitors hold no rigid moral code of their own, they try to go with the flow and accept that people just "do things differently". It's almost like they're at a zoo. The morality of both sides is not well-defined, partially due to the rather vague characterization we see in a lot of the main characters in Midsommar.
In the Wicker Man, we see a strong clash between the devoutly religious police officer and the paganism on the island. He is constantly shocked and bewildered by what is going on- not because the actions themselves are inherently immoral but because they are "not Christian". The character dynamic between an authority figure and submissive villagers is also much more interesting than the dynamic between tourists and weirdos. There is more conflict created because each character interaction takes place between moral opposites.
As society becomes more secular, this is one aspect of the film that changes. Back in 1973, perhaps the audience would agree whole-heartedly with the copper and see it as a black and white matter, a fight between good and evil.
But today, the rigid standards of puritanical Christianity do not have as much of a hold and the film's moral message becomes much more ambiguous to the audience. The villagers, after all, are just trying to have fun and survive. They believe they will starve if the harvest does not come back, but even so they put on a cheerful face and do the best they can.
Due to the way that the villagers are portrayed, the film invites you to ask yourself, "Are the villagers really that bad?" "Can you be considered evil even if you truly believe what you are doing is for the greater good?" I believe the director intended this all along.
None of these questions can be asked about Midsommar because the cult is just so strange and unrelatable that they don't even feel like human beings.
2. Temptation.
There is nothing in Midsommar's cult that is really all that tempting to the modern audience. They drink pubic hairs. They live in the middle of nowhere. They do strange dances. They dress in mostly white. They have sex with zero privacy. It's just strange, not really all that beguiling for a developed society. Midsommar really goes overboard with the weird **** and that's where I lose the film.
In The Wicker Man, there is genuine temptation. The island is beautiful and the town is just a normal town, so many people could actually imagine living there without changing too much of their lifestyle. The people look normal and dress normal (at least for the 70s). People don't just kill themselves when they reach a certain age- in fact it is clear that the citizens are enjoying life (and sex) well into their seventies and eighties. The temptation is real; The "Willow's Song" scene is still one of the sexiest scenes put on film. On Summerisle, they are living in a much less sexually-restricted society, which is attractive for many people. In Midsommar, sex is still very formalized and ceremonial, which is a huge turn-off.
3. Motivation.
Character motivations in Midsommar are vague. We know that the arc follows the failing relationship between Dani and Christian, and we sort of know why they make certain choices. But as to the cult themselves, it's as if they're an alien race. Why do they commit suicide? Because that's what they believe. Why do they drink pubic hairs before sex? Because that's what they believe. Why do they burn human sacrifices? In order to purge evil. But we are so distanced from the culture of this group of people that we don't even know what evil means to them.
In The Wicker Man, the motivations of the cult are quite apparent. They had a failing harvest, and they genuinely believe that a human sacrifice will bring back the bountiful vegetation. Lord Summerisle mentions "crop strains" but he is so committed to the paganism that by the end of the film, it's ambiguous as to whether he truly believes in a scientific reason for failure. You are certain that he 's a pretty "normal" guy but his actions at the end of the film muddy the waters.
Also, The people on the island love sex because...well, who doesn't love sex? They have fun and enjoy life, unlike the cult in Midsommar in which there is no semblance of a joyful society. Their cult is so rigid that it's like a hive mind.
3. Payoff.
Because the motiviations of the cult in Midsommar are never well-defined throughout the film, the payoff is weak and uninteresting. There's no moment of epiphany where the audience thinks, "Oh, so that's why this happened". At the end of the film you're just trying to put together puzzle pieces that don't really fit. And the protagonists are motivated because they want to write a research thesis- this is an incredibly bland reason for them to do what they do.
You never know what the people on Summerisle are up to until towards the end, and that's when you realize that the police officer has been trolled by killer furries for pretty much the entire film. This is both frightening and satisfying. It is a usurping of authority and a shift in perspective for the audience.
And when the sacrifice goes down, it is simply captivating. We see mounting hopelessness- a man at his wits' end, who wavers a bit in his faith but eventually goes down screaming his personal values even to his very last breath. That to me is both depressing and inspiring.
There is none of that in the end of Midsommar, where all the original protagonists are either dead or integrated. It is a good scene on its own but largely unsatisfying taken in the context of the entire film.
4. Conclusion
Perhaps it's not fair to compare the two films. Maybe Ari Aster was going for just a completely hallucinatory experience rather than an actual fleshed-out story.
There are certainly excellent elements of Midsommar. Individually, each scene is beautifully directed and shot. The soundtrack is also excellent, but The Wicker Man to me is still better in this regard since the songs in the film are actually incorporated into the plot. Acting in Midsommar is fairly strong throughout and so was the cinematography.
Regardless, I had a much better time watching The Wicker Man, as there were characters and plot elements that I could actually grab onto.
What are your thoughts?
Last edited by Achoo42; 02-26-20 at 12:47 AM.