dex14

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7557108

Reviews from festival reviews are at 91%: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/saint_maud

Dan

Saw this back in September at Fantastic Fest.
Don't skip this one. It's damn good. But the silly "from the studio......" tags... I dunno. I hate when they put that in trailers because I don't believe this film is like those ones at all other than being part of this "deliberately paced horror" type of trend.
Just knowing it's A24 is enough for some folks, I guess.

dex14

Dan

For reasons I will not explain, fuck that trailer man. Skip it, and just go see the movie.

dex14

Dan

Delayed again. This time, indefinitely.

Dan

This may or may not be showing up at cinemas on September 25th. My local cinema shows it with that date, but who knows if it'll stick.

Either way, folks should avoid the trailer and see this one if/when they get a chance.

dex14

Dan

Nice. Zavvi has a Blu-ray steelbook set to be released Feb 1st. I'll probably just buy that instead of seeing it in the cinema again.

Dan

Prime in May. See it!!

GoldenJCJ

I hate the “From the Studio...” nonsense as well but A24 may be the exception. There’s something about their horror movies that feel like higher quality than your typical Twisted Pictures or Platinum Dunes movies.

I’ll check this one out when it hits Prime.

L Everett Scott

Caught this a while back and don't want to say too much as it's worth the watch. I will say this, though: I can see why this movie has no post-credits stinger...the ending proper is virtually impossible to top.

d2cheer



You can see the ending a mile away. I was not that impressed with it at all. But I wanted to like it based on what I had heard.

dex14

It premiered on EPIX a little while back and I used a trial to watch it there. It didn't do much for me.

L Everett Scott

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree. That other film started off great and then the wheels came flying off. Kudos to the filmmaker for sticking with practical effects, but there were a number of elements that the narrative flat out failed to link together. I read most of the book that the movie is based on and wonder why certain details were left out when they could've helped smooth out the rough patches in the film. As it is, the movie comes off as a serviceable first draft but really needed to get re-worked at least a couple of more times before being locked in as the final script.

Saint Maud on the other hand is a lot more consistent and the interplay between Clark and Ehle is phenomenal, easily outdistancing the work of the leads in the other film. While SM has fantastical moments, it also has parts that are really down to earthAs for the ending, it's all in the execution. Just based on hints and coy remarks that fans made, I knew going in there was going to be something at the end, but despite that anticipation, I thought it was exceptionally well timed, just brilliantly executed. For me and everyone else who loves the ending, it's not a matter being able to see it coming, it's a matter of how it's presented.

Obviously, this comes down to personal taste. I thought pretty much everything about SM was really well judged and have a tough time finding fault with any of Rose Glass's creative decisions. You might feel differently, and that's 100% fine. I'll probably give that other film another look sometime because I think it has some decent stuff in it, but I seriously doubt I'll ever think it's better than SM.

Paff

This, and this.

Saw it under the exact same circumstances, and got the same impression. But the ending really is a gut punch in the way it's done. Not sure if I can in good conscience recommend a movie based on less than a second of screen time, but it's a hell of a second.

Dan

While I liked that other film quite a bit (and getting to see it with a Q&A with the director was neat), Saint Maud is definitely the better of the two, given their kinda-sorta similarities.

I did like that the other film went

L Everett Scott

^ It did go pretty far out, but I think that was one of the issues I had with the movie. I suspect the filmmaker wanted to go there to put his spin on the story so it wouldn't be a word-for-word clone of the novel, but I don't think he did enough to connect that part of the story (along with several other things) with what came before it. It was also a bit trippy, which I know may have been intentional, but it may also have been a consequence of not including enough detail to make those later scenes be more internally consistent. Hope that makes sense.