…Or the film “Heretic” was done quite effectively.
My husband and I recently went to see this with an ex-Mormon friend. If you don’t know what the film is about, it tells the story of two LDS (Mormon) missionary “Sisters,” Sophie Thatcher as Sister Barnes, and Chloe East as Sister Paxton, who knock on the wrong door of a sadistic atheist, Mr. Reed played by Hugh Grant. Bedlam ensues.
If you haven’t seen the film, spoilers below.
This is a horror flick, but it is an odd horror flick. It is very talky. The action and gore are punctuated and happen mostly at the end. So much of it is lecture and demonstration by Mr. Reed as he leads the young women into his house of horrors. But this sets up an enormous amount of tension, and the effect is riveting.
When the “Sisters" arrive at his door, he courteously invites them in. They respond that they are unable to enter unless his wife (or roommate) is present – as long as it is a woman. He assures them that his wife is in the kitchen happily (and shyly) baking a blueberry pie.
With that, the trap is set and the girls enter. They are immediately locked in, but they don’t know it yet.
They sit with Mr. Reed in the cozy but creepy living-room, where a candle glows softly on the coffee table. After several minutes of talking, they sweetly ask to meet Mr. Reed’s wife.
Mr. Reed disappears to fetch her, and the girls discover the candle is a ruse for the wife. It is blueberry scented and they have been duped. There is no baking. There is no wife.
“Fuuuuck,” they would say, if they weren’t Mormon. But they are, so I think they say something like “Oh shoot.”
They try to leave, but it is then that they discover that not only have they been lied to, they have been locked in the house. So they are forced to venture deeper into the lair.
Mr. Reed then uses his trap to make a point about the faith of these girls. There was no wife. That had become more and more apparent, but the girls went along with the notion that, at any moment, she would step into the room to join them.
They were told something and they believed it without question, even as the evidence against the thing that was told to them piled up. Might the same be true of their religious ideology? Is this something they had even pondered? He ensnared them and then used their ensnarement to build a metaphor that attacked their faith.
Interesting.
He leads them further into the house, and lectures them about the many, MANY iterations of the story of Jesus Christ through different cultures at different times – the virgin birth, the sacrifice, the resurrection, etc. This is a regurgitated story. None of it is new to the man named Jesus. His story is not unique, it is a myth that has been assigned to many figures over millennia.
He then asks them to choose between two doors in order to “leave” his home – one labeled “Disbelief,” and the other labeled “Belief.” Sister Paxton chooses “Disbelief,” as she thinks this is what Mr. Reed wants. But Sister Barnes sticks to her guns, and convinces Sister Paxton that if they are going to be good, faithful Mormon missionaries, they need to act the part, and always choose belief.
This leads them to a hellish basement/dungeon, of course.
From there, he stages the murder and resurrection of an old woman he calls a “prophet.” This later turns out to be another slight-of-hand, and Mr. Reed scores another point for atheism. The first woman was actually murdered and stealthily replaced by another live woman when the girls weren’t looking.
This is where it gets really interesting. As the girls are becoming more and more desperate to escape (and it is more and more apparent that this is unlikely), it is revealed that their own faith may be shaky.
After slicing Sister Barnes’ throat, Mr. Reed pulls an implant out of her arm, which turns out to be (gasp!) birth control. Mormons do not have sex outside of marriage (this is convenient for the church, because it forces young people to marry early, further committing them to the church, and more importantly to their 10% tithing). Sister Barnes’ dedication is not as sturdy as appearances would indicate.
Mr. Reed then tells Sister Paxton that he is going to show her the “one true religion.” He leads her to a cavern full of caged old women, ostensibly victims who had made the same choices and suffered a similar fate as Sister Barnes and Sister Paxton. It is implied that Sister Paxton will soon be caged and trotted out to score a point for atheism to two unsuspecting future missionaries.
“You did this to yourselves. You made all the choices that led you here,” Mr. Reed tells her.
She chose to be manipulated, and like the missionaries who came before her, these choices would lead to her imprisonment. Much in the way people who choose religion, and particularly high-demand religions like Mormonism, are imprisoned by their own belief systems, often causing damage and trauma.
The “one true religion” is control. Clever storytelling.
Sister Paxton prays, and Mr. Reed chastises her for it. But not so fast. She immediately claps back that she knows prayer is ineffectual. She has read the peer-reviewed studies. She doesn’t pray to affect an outcome. She prays because it soothes her. It provides comfort when there is none.
I have to say, this moment got me right in the feels. I am fairly certain that this is the only horror movie during which I have teared up. I am an agnostic leaning atheist. But I pray. Just sort of to the ether or the universe, the void, whatever. But I do it. I do it because it feels nice. Apparently Sister Paxton has the same reasoning, even though she is a devout Mormon. She should believe in the power of prayer through Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior, but she understands deep down that this is bunk. She does it anyway because it feels good.
This may be one of my favorite moments in a horror film ever. It artfully and delicately makes a point about human needs, the need for asserting control over our lives, even when we have none, the need to believe in something greater, and the comfort religion can provide in these moments, even though that comfort is an illusion. Clever storytelling.
I wanted to see this film as soon as I saw the trailer several months ago. I was bummed I would have to wait until November. I watched it in the theater on opening night.
For the last three years, I have lived in Mormon central, just outside of Salt Lake City, so I have become well-acquainted with missionaries. They ring our doorbell from time to time, and much to my husband’s dismay, I always invite them in. They fascinate me.
Much like the two Sisters in “Heretic,” these missionaries soon regret their decision to enter our home. Of course, I don’t lead them through a hellish labyrinth to their death/imprisonment, but I ask them lots of questions about the idiosyncrasies of their faith like, “Why are you allowed to drink caffeinated beverages like soda, which is a chemical shitstorm, but not coffee or green tea (!!) in the name of health?” Or, “Why does the church demand a ‘temple recommend’ in order to fully participate in the religion, when Jesus accepted everyone and that was kind of his thing? Don’t you think he would be pissed to discover this practice?” They usually make their exit quickly.
So this film immediately appealed to me. I was thrilled to watch a dramatized, heightened, horror version of this interaction. I was looking forward to watching the “heretic” best the missionaries with reason and logic.
When the film finished and the lights came up, my husband, my ex-Mormon friend, and I all exclaimed how much we loved the film.
“But those poor girls,” my ex-Mormon friend said.
“Erm…I was kind of rooting for Mr. Reed,” I replied. “Me too,” my husband said.
And this is what is wrong with me, or maybe what was so very right about this brilliant film. I know he is the bad guy. I know he’s the antagonist. But I just didn’t want the girls to “win.”
About a week before I saw the film, a current Mormon told me he had seen a screener, and he loved it.
“Really?” I asked. I was a little disappointed, because if this guy loved it, the plot was probably different from what I had assumed. I had assumed it would be a fun cat-and-mouse horror, with an atheist besting Mormon missionaries and their idiosyncratic faith at every turn. But if this current, devout Mormon loved it, it must be about faith triumphing over logic and reason. Bummer.
But, and here’s the genius of this film, it was kind of both.
What an incredible feat of the writing. Appealing to two different perspectives so deftly that people with opposing worldviews can walk away and believe their story, their point of view was highlighted on the screen.
Wow. Masterful, clever storytelling.
And it does this right from the start. In one of the first scenes in which the girls are going door to door with their bikes, a young person on the street asks if she can take a selfie with them. The girls oblige, and the young person asks, “You wear those magic underwear, right?”
This is a little bit of a joke for those of us who live among Mormons but are not Mormon. Magical underwear is kind of hilarious. I belly-laughed at the comment.
But the young person then pulls the missionary’s skirt down, exposing said magical underwear, then runs away laughing and taunting her.
Yikes. Not cool. Violating someone is violating someone, magical underwear or no. This sets up an immediate zig zag that reoccurs throughout the film. Magical underwear is funny to non-Mormons. Making fun of magical underwear maybe isn’t so nice, and pantsing someone (or in her case skirting someone) is humiliating and violating.
The film zigged. And then it zagged. It made me laugh at the notion of magical underwear, and then it shamed me for my judgment.
As sharp and cunning as Mr. Reed is throughout the film, the girls, while naïve and maybe not super worldly, are thoughtful and strategic in their responses and in plotting their escape. It’s just that Mr. Reed has the home court advantage. They are always one step behind, but could it really be any other way since he set the trap for them and knows the way through the labyrinth he created?
From my perspective, this film was about reason and logic beating irrational faith at every turn. I enjoyed watching Mr. Reed manipulate the girls to force the point about religion and control.
But kind of like that dress and its color that no one could agree on, or the great “Yanny/Laurel” debate, a person of faith could (and did) walk away from this film believing that their perspective was upheld through the plot.
Clever storytelling indeed.
Comments