Review of The Witch (2016) by Malexandrews — 25 Mar 2016

Leaving the screening of this movie, I heard some teenagers snickering and deriding the movie, claiming it was “boring” and that they “couldn’t understand a single word.” Hearing that made me sad.

Story, for me, takes precedent over all else. Everything must serve the script. If a movie is slow, that doesn't mean nothing is happening. A slow shot of a wagon moving away civilization and towards a menacing expanse of dark woods isn’t boring. In fact, as the haunting choir voices and dissonant strings mount their haunting crescendo, it becomes almost unbearably tense and the perfect note to kick off this terrifying tale. I’ve heard people say, “It was nothing like the trailer” or “I was expecting something scary”. If I was expecting something more high-octane out of my horror, then I’d be hesitant about attending a movie set in 1600’s Massachusetts.

The subtitle of this film is “A New-England Folktale” and that perfectly encapsulates the tone of the story. What can we expect from a Folktale? An innocent child. Temptation from a nameless evil. Malevolent or violent parents or step parents, usually who die. Talking or otherwise humanized animals, and an atmosphere of magic. The story of “The Witch” is so simple, that is perhaps what people are finding, what? Boring? Slow? Somehow not enough? But a simple story is not a bad story, especially when it’s told as well as “The Witch”.

Blanket statements like, “It’s not scary” or “I couldn’t understand what they were saying” are not criticisms of the movie. They are non-critiques. Obviously, what is “scary” about a movie is subjective, but if a horror movie wasn’t as scary or gory or fast-paced as you were expecting, that doesn’t make it bad. And it doesn’t make you some kind of brave hero or disaffected callous soul if you declare you aren’t scared by something, in fact, if that’s all you’re seeing, then you are ignoring the other aspects of the movie that make it better than just a “scary movie.” And as for not understanding the Old English, a movie shouldn’t have to pander to an audience. If English is your first language, every word they are speaking is in your native tongue, you shouldn’t need subtitles to get through it. I’ll admit I can’t follow every single word of Shakespeare either, but that doesn’t make the story impossible to follow. Again, if every part of the movie serves the script, you can’t get lost. If anything, these blanket statements criticize the critics themselves. It says, “I’m narrow-minded, and if I can’t get an adrenaline fix from a movie I’ll dismiss it completely, heaven forbid I’m expected to think about anything other than how comfortable I am with the movie.” It’s a horror movie, you’re supposed to be uncomfortable.

This review is extremely condescending. Good. The people who don't like this movie because it's "too indie" or "artsy" or "not scary" deserve to be spoken down to if they can't raise or broaden their view to appreciate something that, while objectively may not be scary enough for you, is subjectively a masterfully crafted story.