Midsommar is a horror movie about a summer festival, and it spends almost two hours building toward a ritual that is more disturbing than anything in its trailer. Writer-director Ari Aster built a reputation on Hereditary, and Midsommar doubles down on the dread. This is a slow-burn film about grief, cultural difference, and the thin line between hospitality and terror. It is also, by design, a film that will split audiences. Some viewers will find it a masterclass in atmosphere. Others will call it a slow, cruel joke. Both reactions are fair.
Trailer, via A24.
The Hanea Family
The film opens with Dani, played by Florence Pugh, grieving her sister’s death. Her boyfriend, Christian, played by Jack Reynor, invites her along with three friends to a remote Swedish village for a midsummer festival. The village is called Hanea, and its residents are welcoming, curious, and far more organized than the young Americans expect.
The group arrives expecting a vacation. They get something closer to a pilgrimage. The villagers are preparing for a fertility ritual, and the foreigners are the sacrifice. That premise is simple, and Aster takes his time with it. The first hour is a study in discomfort, as the characters try to understand why the locals treat them with warmth and then seem to forget who they are.
Pugh carries the emotional weight of the film. Her performance is a controlled burn, and she makes Dani’s descent from grief to horror feel earned. Reynor is less successful. His character is a blank space, a placeholder boyfriend who exists to be rescued and abandoned in equal measure. The chemistry between the couple never quite lands, and the film suffers for it.
The Village
Hanea is the heart of the film. It is a sunlit, orderly community that looks like a tourist brochure and feels like a trap. The architecture is clean, the colors are bright, and the people are smiling. That contrast is the point. Aster is making a horror film about the beauty of fascism, and the village is the perfect stage.
The rituals are the other centerpiece. The film shows the villagers doing several things:
- Gathering flowers
- Weaving wreaths
- Performing songs that feel ancient and cheerful
Then the masks come off. The violence is not hidden; it is performed openly, in front of everyone. The film wants you to see the beauty and the horror at once, and it mostly succeeds.
The cinematography deserves credit. The film is shot in daylight, which is unusual for a horror movie. The light is harsh, and the green fields look almost radioactive. It is a visual argument that sunlight can be more terrifying than darkness.
The Festival
The midsummer festival is the climax of the film. It is a daylong celebration that includes games, dancing, and a final ritual that the audience has been warned about since the opening scene. The film does not rush this moment. It builds it slowly, with shots of the village waking early, the villagers preparing, and the foreigners feeling increasingly isolated.
The ritual itself is a mix of ceremony and slaughter. It is graphic, and it is meant to be. Aster is not interested in subtlety here. He wants you to feel the horror, and he delivers it in full. The sequence is the film’s boldest move, and it is also its most divisive. Some viewers will find it cathartic. Others will find it exploitative.
The ritual is the film’s boldest move, and it is also its most divisive.
The Tone
Midsommar is not a jump-scare movie. It is a slow-burn film that uses dread as its weapon. The tension comes from the environment, not from a monster in the dark. The film is at its best when it is quiet, and at its worst when it tries to force a reaction.
The problem is pacing. The middle section drags. There is a stretch where nothing happens except the characters wandering around the village, talking to each other, and looking uncomfortable. That is the point, but it is also the weakest part. The film needs a tighter edit, and it does not have one.
The film also leans heavily on its themes. The idea of the village as a cult is presented as a moral lesson about purity and exclusion. That is a valid reading, but it is not the only one. The film could be read as a satire of American exceptionalism, or as a warning about the seductive power of community. The ambiguity is deliberate, but it also makes the film feel less focused.
The Music
The score is sparse. Most of the film relies on ambient sound and natural noise. The music only enters when the ritual begins, and even then it is minimal. The lack of a traditional horror score is a deliberate choice, and it works. The silence is more unsettling than any scream.
The film also uses folk songs performed by the villagers. These are cheerful, almost bouncy tunes that sit uncomfortably next to the violence. The juxtaposition is effective, but it is also repetitive. The songs are used in multiple scenes, and they start to lose their impact by the third time.
The Payoff
The final act is where Midsommar either earns its keep or falls apart. The ritual is a brutal payoff, and it is executed with precision. The film does not shy away from the gore, and it does not apologize for it. That honesty is refreshing.
The aftermath is where the film stumbles. The resolution is rushed, and it leaves some threads unresolved. The characters who survive are left with questions that the film does not answer. It is a frustrating ending, but it is also honest. The film is about trauma, and it does not offer closure.
The film also ends on a note of hope, which is unexpected. After everything that has happened, there is a small moment of peace. It is a strange choice, and it is the kind of ending that will divide critics.
The Verdict
Midsommar is a flawed but ambitious horror film. It is at its best when it is slow, atmospheric, and patient. It is at its worst when it is repetitive and rushed. The performances are strong, especially from Pugh, and the visuals are striking. The film is a must-see for fans of the genre, but it is not for everyone.
The film’s biggest strength is its commitment to its own rules. It is a horror movie about the sun, and it stays true to that promise. The weakness is its pacing. The film is too long in the middle and too abrupt at the end.
The final score is 7.2 out of 10.
Get the Notebook.
The day's best stories and every fresh verdict, in plain English, in your inbox by seven. One email a day, no more.
