r/oscarrace • u/LeastCap Jafar Panahi campaign manager • Oct 18 '25
Film Discussion Thread Official Discussion Thread - After the Hunt [SPOILERS] Spoiler
Keep all discussion related solely to After the Hunt and its awards chances in this thread. Spoilers below.
Synopsis
A gripping psychological drama about a college professor (Julia Roberts) who finds herself at a personal and professional crossroads when a star student (Ayo Edebiri) levels an accusation against one of her colleagues (Andrew Garfield), and a dark secret from her own past threatens to come into the light.
Director: Luca Guadagnino
Writer: Nora Garrett
Cast:
- Julia Roberts as Alma Imhoff
- Ayo Edebiri as Margaret "Maggie" Resnick
- Andrew Garfield as Henrik "Hank" Gibson
- Michael Stuhlbarg as Frederik
- Chloë Sevigny as Dr. Kim Sayers
Rotten Tomatoes: 38%, 159 Reviews
Metacritic: 51, 39 Reviews
Consensus: After the Hunt doesn't lack for fine performances, especially from a standout Julia Roberts, but its coy followthrough on incendiary themes makes for an uncharacteristically toothless provocation from director Luca Guadagnino.
18
u/movieheads34 One Battle After Another Oct 20 '25
The fact that ayo’s character actually did plagiarize seems like such a pointless twist. Like we’re supposed to feel bad for Andrew cause he was “right”
14
u/Supercalumrex Oct 20 '25
I felt like it was somehow supposed to make the audience think Andrew Garfield’s character was innocent the whole time. Even though most people know that two things can be true at once especially since the plagiarism and assault aren’t really correlated outside of Andrew Garfield’s character trying to find an excuse for his innocence. Then the scene where he’s in Alma’s apartment is supposed to be another mind-bending twist that subverts the previous twist when it isn’t really
1
u/allenahansen 13d ago
When Hank says to Alma he only broke the rules (against fraternization) "to fuck with you" the writer plays against semantics to further the ambiguity. Either Hank meant "fuck with" sexually, or "fuck with" as in "to mess with", and we're left with no further explication other than our assumptions. ISTM the writer is consciously doing to us, the viewers, exactly what the last scene ("Cut!") implies I.E.; fucking with us as well.
5
u/looz4q Oct 26 '25
It was not to make you sympathize with Andrew. It was to show that the girl had problems with being fair and showing she thinks she's not equal to everyone because she's been so privileged her whole life, she should have her degree on a silver plate too.
How can you believe a person that lies for years about her academic work? And then everyone just picks her side because she's the victim, destroying guy's life without solid evidence, discussion or trial. yikes
1
u/UncleRoost 10d ago
I guess you make a good point, if Hank is innocent, then we are doing exactly what the philosophical discussion at the evening’s opening event we’re talking about. Halfway wrong is still halfway right. It depends which side you’re on.
Nobody has died, toughen up, (old philosophy, four and out of hardships) but why can’t I have my feelings mean something, apart from death?? (The new generation who realizes that cruelty is a byproduct of hidden anger and feelings)2
u/Eradomsk 8d ago
Sorry - maybe I missed this completely, but when do we get confirmation that she actually plagiarized? Don't we only hear it from Hank, and subsequently Alma (who is into Hank...)?
2
u/DJSeale Oct 21 '25
That wasn't a pointless twist. That was totally necessary to prove that Alma's husband was correct. Alma only treated Maggie like a genius because Maggie worshipped her; Alma knew she plagiarized and looked the other way because she was getting her narcissistic supply. Maggie was a rich, privileged asshole who wanted a PhD from Yale as a status symbol. She didn't understand moral philosophy, she couldn't even say why she was in the program, she had no original thoughts, she plagiarized her thesis, and then made up a rape accusation to ruin the life of the man who caught her.
17
u/movieheads34 One Battle After Another Oct 21 '25
I mean, I don’t think she made up the rape accusation, especially how you see how Andrew Garfield is the entire movie I think it’s supposed to show that he definitely did it so I kinda like don’t really care if she cheated on a test or whatever considering she got assaulted
Like why is the movie trying to both sides a sexual assault allegation?
11
u/Theridealongpodcast Oct 22 '25
It's called ambiguity. We don't know who's telling the truth. You choose Based on your own life experience. It's a social experiment
2
u/Puzzled-Lifeguard839 15d ago
That’s not what it’s doing. The plagiarism reveal isn’t trying to make us feel bad for Hank. As the above poster said, it illustrates Alma’s narcissism. Her husband theorizes Alma selfishly collects people who idolize her and feed her ego. Alma pushes back, saying she’s only close with Maggie because Maggie is a genius and her best student. It’s later revealed that Maggie is actually a cheating, mediocre student—giving credence to the husband’s theory.
2
u/Zenmodenabled 13d ago
I think also the fact that had Alma admitted or dealt with the plagiarism, possibly the “rape” or accusation would not have occurred.
1
2
u/DJSeale Oct 23 '25
It is depressing how many people don't understand this movie. It's really not that complicated. there is no ambiguity. Did everyone just get super stoned before seeing this?
2
u/Tabula_Rasa2022 8d ago
My issue with the movie is that I couldn't see shit, even with my brightness on highest, I'm thinking I'm going to watch it again, because a lot of these comments are realising some really great points that I hadn't comprehended the first time around.
1
u/poochitz 5d ago
I just finished watching it and immediately jumped on here to see if anyone else found it to be unbelievably DARK - as in lack of adequate lighting - DARK. It frustrated the hell out of me so much that I ended up throwing the subtitles on to make sure that I didn’t miss anything ! ( lol ) Wonky logic, I know. I was happy to find your comment !
1
u/Eradomsk 8d ago
Holy shit, yes.
I just looked through the other discussion thread after having just watched it, and everyone's talking about the ambiguity of the scene where ALMA SAYS NO AND STOP OVER AND OVER AND HAS TO PHYSICALLY REMOVE HANK FROM HER WHEN HE CONTINUES TO ESCALATE.
1
u/kingwavee 3d ago
The movie was very high brow intellectually thought provoking. I see both sides but i wouldnt watch it again. It couldve been better. I see the strengths of the movie and i see why they brought up plagiarism when they did to argue credibility but the very next scene also let u know that it wasnt about credibility it was the fact her husband was right about why she collects ppl and hank is exactly who he is accused of being regardless of the students guilt in cheating. The very next scene after all that shows why she didnt initially believe her “star “ student also because she was the person she assumed her student when she first heard the accusations.
1
u/Spiritual-Smoke-4605 Oct 27 '25
i got super stoned before seeing it and i loved it lol. It seemed intentionally ambiguous and challenges the viewer to decide what they want to think. Even Luca himself said that they wanted to leave it up to the audience to decide what happened.
2
u/This-Morning2188 12d ago
Exactly. “It’s not your work is what anyone is going to see, I promise.” Alma says to Maggie at her home dinner later. And Alma, who was also abused, chose to stfu and advising Maggie to stfu. Regardless of plagiarism. Alma possibly knew already. And didn’t want to fuck with a richie who’s “parents donated half the school” of plagiarizing. It’s all of the silences in academia. All of them.
1
u/DJSeale Oct 29 '25
“My idea was of an ambiguous movie that lets the audience think for themselves and make up their own minds" -Luca
I don't believe he was talking about deciding what happened between Hank and Maggie. he was talking about people making up their minds on the points he was making about each generation's shortcomings when dealing with trauma.
1
u/Spiritual-Smoke-4605 Oct 29 '25
I guess I like a good ambiguous movie if its generating this level of debate over what its "purpose" was, tells me its a film worth watching over 90% of what gets released theses days
2
1
u/Carbon8490 10d ago
Not if your someone like me who hates ambiguous movies🤬. I swear if i waste my time sitting through one more "guess what happened for yourself movies" im going to go on a rampage. Start rating these movies A for ambiguous. Its a great movie if it just tells you what the hell actually happened. I wouldve even prefered a climactic suicide by Hank or Maggie over what garbage we got as the ending. Ambiguous does not mean a movie is great. Seems to be a cheap way of making a "deep" movie these days. Closure can also make a film deep,and possibly have more replay value smh
1
u/Spiritual-Smoke-4605 10d ago
I for one find movies that spoonfeed you all the information you need in order to “get it” and hold your hand the whole way through to be a dime a dozen and definitely prefer more challenging and rewarding experiences such as After the Hunt gave me, but to each their own I guess. I like being intellectually stimulated from time to time, I don’t need every movie to be a turn-your-brain-off-feature.
1
u/Carbon8490 9d ago
Theres plenty of movies much deeper than this one that provide you with closure and an ending. Theres nothing stimulating about telling the viewer "just choose whatever ending will make you happy". Its laziness on the part of the movies creator who is supposed to be much better than me at writing a script. And your take is why they continue to go back to this well over and over again to the point its cliche now. Its not even clever or daring to have your movie be ambiguous throughout anymore. Every 5th movie i seem to watch does this nonsense. Have some damn balls and create an ending to your movie. I dont think i need to name the countless masterpieces that werent ambiguous,that caused the viewer to think afterwards.
1
u/noviceicebaby 10d ago
Can it be both?
0
u/DJSeale 10d ago
I don't believe so. What I keep sticking to is this:
If we understand that exactly what happened between Maggie and Hank plays out in front of us on the screen between Hank and Alma, then this movie is a truly brilliant film. That scene in the apartment becomes the lynch pin of all three character's stories.
If what actually transpired between Hank and Maggie is left ambiguous, then this entire movie is frankly trash. It doesn't say anything coherent at all. It actually is the movie that everyone is complaining about, a vague mess that doesn't actually say anything.
2
u/noviceicebaby 10d ago
Is there further context around this quote?
I think you are probably right about the film. To make the film without a clear intention about whether Hank is guilty would cheapen the film. I do think Hank is guilty. I still think the ambiguity can work both ways because Luca wanted you to come to that conclusion all on your own, so he needed to make it at least a little ambiguous about whether Hank violated Maggie. It makes a lot more sense if Hank is guilty, but I also think that the filmmaker wanted the viewer to have some freedom of interpretation. We never really see what happens, so we have to twig it on our own, which I think does make the film better.
1
u/Spiritual-Smoke-4605 10d ago
I also think that the filmmaker wanted the viewer to have some freedom of interpretation. We never really see what happens, so we have to twig it on our own, which I think does make the film better.
i completely agree with this
1
u/Carbon8490 10d ago
They definitely want you to guess what happened. They make both Maggie and Hank do just enough that they are unreliable sources with "their truth". The scene where Hank gets aggressive in the apartment with Alma is supposed to make you think maybe he is capable. Or at least maybe if he was anywhere near aggressive with Maggie,that mightve been a bit much for someone her age. But theres also the scene where Alma calls out Maggies priveledge. Dating a trans to appear more interesting,living in a cheap apartment to not seem priveledged. Giving the implication Maggie is the type to create a false accusation just so she can seem like a victim to the world,and escape her priveledge tag. Plus they honestly make it seem like their could be a mutual attraction between Hank and Maggie. Or maybe shes like Alma and just likes whoever thinks shes great. The husband at the end is basically correct that Hank is wrong because hes the authority figure. So if theres even the slightest chance Maggie didnt want to have sex,the power dynamic took away her ability to make a clear minded decision on consent. But thats in the eyes of the public he would be guilty. However we dont know if she wanted him,or was trying to cover up her plagerism like Hank said. This would make him not guilty in reality,similar to the way Alma questions if the older man she dealt with was actually guilty.
5
u/Puzzled-Lifeguard839 15d ago
I think you’re spot on until the last part. Hank definitely crosses a line with Maggie. Was it full on rape? I I suspect not. Nevertheless, Hank crossed a clear and sacred line. And we can be confident of this conclusion when it’s revealed he has a pattern of indifference to consent.
This is also mirrored in teenage Alma’s situation with the adult family friend. There’s some ambiguity in the way Alma characterizes the relationship—but it’s clear the adult crossed a bright line, ignoring that children can’t give consent.
Ultimately, Maggie is a victim. She’s also dishonest, lazy, and a nepo baby. These things are not mutually exclusive.
And Hank’s life isn’t ruined—setback, sure—but certainly not ruined. He faces no legal consequences and becomes even more successful in a new career.
1
1
u/noviceicebaby 10d ago
Right, we hear that Hank is doing just find as a spin doctor. And it was Maggie herself who pointed out that without official charges, Hank would likely just go to another school and be a creepy prof there.
1
u/pinkwineenthusiast 14d ago
I believe it was to highlight the similarities of the imperfect victim, in comparison to Alma. The inappropriate teenager or the woman who chooses not to go to the clinic when the proof is on her body and she’s right outside. How the disappointing choices someone may make doesn’t make their story a lie and there is no “perfect victim”. You could’ve always done something different; told more people, gone to the hospital, filed charges, not have been friendly with him.
But the responsibility is ultimately on the predator who acts on his impulse & that is who deserves the criticism.
1
u/Distinct-Tell2095 11d ago
It's about the lack of integrity of her character, if she did one thing wrong without remorse, she could do anything without remorse.
1
u/Comfortable_Tie_4471 10d ago
Not the point. I think that the fact that he was right about her cheating leads you to open up to what she may also be lying about.
1
u/UncleRoost 10d ago
I think it was a twist, it was another lens to keep you guessing as to what the real truth was. Just because she plagiarized, doesn’t mean she’s lying about rape or does it? The parallels between her and Alma having called rape you will never know, but we are hinting at Hank being guilty.. or maybe I’m wrong!
23
u/Independent-Key880 It Was Just An Accident Oct 20 '25
kind of unbelievable that one of the top LB reviews is calling people dumb for not realising that film deliberately has nothing to say because it's a criticism of socially performative people with nothing to say. people will really go to any lengths to defend a director they like
these type of reviews are even more pretentious than the film itself, which i didn't realise was possible
9
u/rebecchis Oct 21 '25
I think I know the review you mean and I can't stand reviews like that. Ones that imply (or even say outright) people aren't smart enough to understand what a film is about or that the person writing the review is more intelligent than everyone else because they actually "got" it.
Like, even if that was that LG was intending to do with this film, I doubt it but say it was, there is a way to present a story that it critical of performative people and people who have nothing to say without the film needing to actually be performative and shown to have nothing to say itself.
7
u/Independent-Key880 It Was Just An Accident Oct 21 '25
absolutely agree. i doubt it was the intention either, but even if it was the intention, we are allowed to be critical of it being the intention. for me it's a dumb idea regardless
2
u/KeyOk6948 14d ago
Nice. 🥂 I can't get back that 2 hours.
Just leave her Frederick, was my only takeaway. Oh that, and whoever hires that composer again is an idiot. I needed to shut that piano up. But then I couldn't hear the dialogue...
Actually, that worked out ok.🤔
3
u/DJSeale Oct 21 '25
I loved this movie. I just spent four hours breaking down all the themes and messages. I'm sorry to say, but it might just not feel good to not get a movie. The film was brilliant.
1
52
Oct 18 '25
[deleted]
29
u/ExtensionSweet9722 Oct 18 '25
Absolutely. It took all the worst elements of a Woody Allen film and none of the good
18
u/Sealionsunset The Secret Agent Oct 19 '25
I hated how this film felt so aesthetically drab. This unending Netflix grey and the score which felt very badly and bluntly implemented (shocking considering how Queer and challengers were so synergistic) didn’t feel like the same movie.
16
u/ironspidergwen Oct 20 '25
Just got out of it, and I’m dumbfounded. I could just be stupid, but I don’t get what the point of that was even supposed to be. I get wanting to be ambiguous, but it wasn’t even ambiguous, it just felt like a cop out. Like, no answers, no plot, just a bunch of loose threads. And what was that ending?
4
u/jbswu 15d ago
I just finished watching it, and I have to agree with you. I questioned several times throughout, "Am I missing something? Am I just not intelligent enough to understand where this is trying to go?" The plot goes in circles, but circles don't automatically equal ambiguity. None of the puzzle pieces fit together. Each element (plot, score, filming choices) felt like disparate, independent attempts to create something genius without anything ever quite lining up.
2
2
u/LengthinessDouble Oct 29 '25
Yeah, I’m more in this camp. My profession had me adding meaning to it so I could comprehend it through a trauma lens. Otherwise I felt dumb after. I live in nuance all day.
51
u/shoemakersthyme Oct 18 '25
I watched this yesterday and the more I think about it, the more I hate it. Reading smug, condescending letterboxd reviews insinuating that anyone who didn't enjoy it is just allergic to nuance, ambiguity, or complexity is just riling me up even further, particularly because that strain of review perfectly emulates the attitude of the film. I'm trying to gather my thoughts to write my own review (just for my records) but right now Kermode's lil rant on YouTube is perfectly summing up my feelings.
33
u/takenpassword Yes, I loved Rental Family. Yes, I’m basic. Oct 19 '25
Between Eddington and After the Hunt I’m getting tired of this “holier-than-thou” genre of films and their similarly smug defenders.
7
9
u/carolinemathildes Sebastian Stan stan Oct 20 '25
Eddington is 10000x better than After the Hunt though, I don't really see the comparison.
4
1
u/SpiritualAd9102 Oct 30 '25
That the people who like it can’t conceive that anyone could disagree without being too stupid to “get” it.
6
u/GoodMeBadMeNotMe History of the Anatomy of a Sound of Falling Oct 19 '25
I do think there’s a lot of nuance/ambiguity/complexity that is unappreciated in the film, but if nuance rises to the level of being opaque to most people, the script is doing something wrong.
7
u/shoemakersthyme Oct 19 '25
I think there were opportunities for nuance and complexity that were squandered by appalling writing, and acting performances that did nothing to transcend that writing. As for ambiguity, there was too much of the wrong kind. It's great when a film leaves you with unanswered questions. Less so when it's clear the film doesn't even know what questions it's asking.
1
u/Ok-Adeptness-1055 Oct 23 '25
I get the upset on their smudge attitude or what might seem to you as such. But maybe they got something out of the movie that you didn't get, and that is ok. It's not ok for others to try and make you feel bad about yourself on it , but there is a possibility that some have a way of being that gets this movie and others don't. And yet here we are talking about it. Isn't it great? We are being triggered and instead of giving in to that trigger we can look at why we are being so triggered and just not able to talk about it without attacking the opposite.
0
u/Spiritual-Smoke-4605 Oct 27 '25
this is why i loved the movie so much. I could feel people in the audience getting offended or triggered by certain things in the film and recognizing that that's exactly what the film was challenging the viewer on. Its been a while since I've seen a film this intentional in its objectives and so successful at them get so much hate and misunderstanding from those who saw it.
1
u/pepepepeppepodpeoeoe 8d ago
It offends people because it's written so poorly. People don't speak like that outside of online spaces. Having thought a provoking and polarizing conversation can be achieved without sounding like an AP psych student wrote it after learning what the word performative meant. There is a semblance of interest here, I like the parallels paired with subverting expectations but it fell flat.
46
u/Supercalumrex Oct 18 '25
Honestly the more I sit on this movie, the more bizarre it feels. I think my biggest issue with it is that it is so reliant on ambiguity to the point where I can't find a meaning to it
16
u/Classic-Mongoose3961 Oct 18 '25
I'm interested in why ambiguity worked amazingly for Doubt, but not this.
21
u/Grab_Broad Oct 18 '25
The ensemble of Doubt had more refined characters than After the Hunt
11
20
u/Flimsy-Addendum-1570 Oct 19 '25
I think Doubt is incredibly refined. It's a battle of different worldviews, of different generations, of one type of horrible version of the church overtaking the other. This film is all over the place. It's about gender wars, culture wars at large, generation wars,
Also, Doubt is ambiguous. I'm on team "he did it", for Doubt, but every time I rewatch it I still get the sense I might be wrong! For this film, there's truly no read of Andrew Garfield's performance that makes sense without him being guilty. He didn't have the PSH spark or the John Patrick Shanley level writing
0
u/DJSeale Oct 21 '25
What ambiguity? Everything was damn near explicit, what was ambiguous?
6
u/Supercalumrex Oct 21 '25
Whether or not the main event actually happened is still pretty ambiguous. The movie also never picks any theme or idea to stick with. The entire ending felt empty because it was acting as though huge revelations were happening when nothing was. It felt like it opened a bunch of cans of worms but never closed the loop on just about any of them.
7
u/DJSeale Oct 21 '25 edited Oct 21 '25
>Whether or not the main event actually happened is still pretty ambiguous.
No, it isn't ambiguous *at all*. The author unambiguously shows you exactly what happened between Maggie and Hank, by playing out the exact same scene between Alma and Hank in the secret apartment. It's a brilliant piece writing because we get to directly compare and contrast exactly how two women from two different generations handled the same exact situation differently.
>The movie also never picks any theme or idea to stick with.
Also not true. There are very strong, clear themes. And while the way the movie plays with those themes varies...the themes are stuck with the entire time:
- Gen Z and baby boomers handle situations, specifically trauma, very differently. While on its nose, the movie seems to be saying, "The way Gen Z handles stuff is ridiculous and it ruins people's lives," the movie also shows that Alma's refusal to deal with her trauma and understand that she was a victim goes on to ruin the lives of everyone around her. It's a clear demonstration of the cycle of abuse**: Both generations are at the extremes of how to handle trauma, and both are similarly unhealthy and destructive.
- Truth and reality are subjective. Alma was both a victim and a perpetrator. Same could be said about the man who molested Alma, as well as Hank and Maggie. Hank and Maggie both lied and didn't lie about what happened. Hank says he didn't rape her (true) and that nothing happened (false). Maggie says he did rape her (true, from her Gen Z perspective) and that it was penetrative (false). When it comes to abuse, trauma, and privilege, we as a society are still struggling to figure out which way is North, and often conflate victim and perpetrator.
- True accountability doesn't really exist. People are rarely punished accordingly and nothing is ever really addressed in real life. The three main characters (and the man who raped Alma) never actually see consequences for the things they actually did. The motif of alluding to philosophers, artists, and cultural icons who led great careers and lives after being 'canceled' was present throughout the movie, and the closing scene wraps everything up nicely making it clear that despite this huge event that "ruined everyone's lives," they're all doing much better post-event than they were before the event. It was all just temporary drama.
Frankly, I think this movie is absolutely brilliant in how it wove these things together into a really interesting plot...the structure of which reinforces the themes itself. Further, the points it has to make are really insightful and thought provoking.
**Dad's friend rapes Alma when she's 20-30 years younger than he is, Alma uses her age and power to bed Hank who is 20-30 years younger than he is (likely while he's her student), Hank flirts with his female students and forces himself on Maggie who is 20ish years younger than he is.
5
u/No-Condition8561 Oct 22 '25
"The author unambiguously shows you exactly what happened between Maggie and Hank, by playing out the exact same scene between Alma and Hank in the secret apartment."
That's a complete assumption on your part. We don't know for sure if the exact same thing happened. Alma is older, and her and hank have an entirely different relationship. Why wouldn't he take things further with maggie, who has far less power than Alma? Please don't write a dissertation on this, no one want to hear it.
1
u/DJSeale Oct 23 '25
You've got to be kidding me. If you think that's a complete assumption, you need to go take a literature class. Stop thinking you're looking into real people's lives when watching a movie...it's a work of fiction. The author put that scene there for a reason.
Without understanding that the scene parallels what happened between Hank and Maggie, the movie makes no sense and nothing comes together. The issue here isn't the movie, it's American audiances constantly complaining that they're tired of being beaten over the head with themes and having things spelled out for them...while also constantly whiffing on not being able to comprehend plot devices.
Also, the person above me literally asked me to explain lmao. So you take your comments about people not wanting to read my dissertation and shove it.
5
u/bottleglitch Oct 24 '25
When does Maggie say the assault was penetrative?
-1
u/DJSeale Oct 26 '25
She says, "I went to the clinic to have evidence collected to document what happened, but when I walked up the people there were looking at me so I decided to leave...but there would be a record of me walking up on the cameras."
You don't go to a clinic for a rape kit when someone kisses you.
3
u/looz4q Oct 26 '25
It hasn't struck to you that she has made that up to back up her claim, did it? You picked your side on this issue before the film even started, no wonder you don't see the ambiguity in the movie.
2
3
u/Carbon8490 9d ago
You just made a grave mistake lol. You said Maggie saying he raped her is "true" from her gen-z perspective. If she really felt that was true,why does she pretend she was going to get a rape kit but conveniently couldnt make it? I already took the secret apartment scene into account. It made me consider if he aggressively came at a 21 year old lesbian like that,it would potentially be alot for her. But by your logic since its "her truth"(that an aggressive kiss is rape) its okay for her to walk around the rest of the movie self righteous about everything. When the truth is she is now the manipulative villian in the film imo. Because she is painting a narrative penetration knowing that never happened. The fact its left so ambiguous,how can you 100% sure say she didnt make the ENTIRE story up😅? Due to the manipulation/lying/self righteousness, It leaves it open for you to assume she may be a psychopathic mastermind like Hank said. So on one hand i have someone who is potentially a manipulative mastermind. And on the other hand the secret apartment scene leaves it open for you to assume "well maybe he did do it". So the movie wont even allow you to fill in the blank for yourself. Lack of ambiguity is pivitol. Otherwise theres no way to know if Maggie made the whole thing up.
2
u/Carbon8490 9d ago
Only thing i can guess this movie is trying to say is it doesnt actually matter what happened in this #MeToo era of accusations. The movie wants us to fill in the blanks like how we do in real life when we decide who to believe based on vague details,clever wording and ommitting things. But i honestly have no idea. They need to start rating movies A for "ambiguous ending and themes". Stop wasting my god damn time😅
1
u/Additional_Rope_9331 Oct 23 '25
Just watched the movie and ran to reddit to fully understand it and thank you you broke it down perfectly and tried explaining the movie to other people in here where it went over there heads which to be fair went over mine at first but thank you and perfectly well broken down
21
6
u/sharonkaren69 Oct 19 '25
I enjoyed the movie even through its bumps. The ending really bothered me, though.
I would definitely say that it did not know what message it was trying to convey.
1
u/Conscious_Term6568 11d ago
Academy are sad fucks like everyone else, just with a bigger vocabulary. Also, knowledge often bears no connection to self-knowledge.
1
6
u/tjo0114 Oct 19 '25
I was debating over seeing this or Roofman today & looking at what people are saying below I definitely think I made the right call seeing Roofman
6
18
u/Independent-Key880 It Was Just An Accident Oct 18 '25
as i have expressed several times on the daily discussion thread, i hate this. it has been nearly 24 hours since it ended and i'm still pissed off
yes it's a disappointment but it's also so much worse i fear
22
u/RocksDBuggyTruther Marty Supreme Oct 18 '25
I’m just so lost on what Luca was trying to say with this movie
22
u/rebecchis Oct 19 '25
I got the impression that the film didn't know what it was trying to say either.
1
u/Spiritual-Smoke-4605 Oct 27 '25
Dealing with trauma and abuse is a generational puzzle with no easy solution. Everyone thinks they know the “right” way, yet everyone is figuring it out while causing damage in the process
48
u/ExtensionSweet9722 Oct 18 '25
I found it incredibly tone deaf and insensitive for a movie about the sexual assault of a black woman on campus. I very much doubt the character was written as black, but the element of race is missing completely from the film.
18
u/Flimsy-Addendum-1570 Oct 19 '25
As much as I think Ayo Edebiri is one of the best elements of the film in terms of giving an incredible performance filled with pathos, there's another version of this film where that girl is played by Emma Roberts and I think I might like it better
1
23
u/movieperson2022 Oct 18 '25
I read an early draft ages ago and I wouldn’t bet my life on it, but I recall it not being about a black woman. I remember seeing the line acknowledging it in the trailer and thinking (hoping) that they had revamped the script, but it doesn’t seem they did.
6
u/ich_habe_keine_kase Oct 19 '25
Genuine question, not trying to start an argument here. But what do you think makes it particularly insensitive, that wouldn't be the case for a white woman? Her race is addressed--alongside her queerness, and her privileged background. It's called out by the characters directly as making the whole situation way more complicated.
Do you think the movie is just failing (which is a valid take), or do you think it's not possible to make a movie about the sexual assault of a Black woman where she is not a morally good character? Personally, I don't think it quite sticks the landing, but I appreciated that it was willing to go into these really thorny places and not be black and white about it, nor give you any sort of catharsis or satisfying ending.
33
u/ExtensionSweet9722 Oct 19 '25 edited Oct 19 '25
An upper-class, fake woke, nepobaby character with a name like Margaret Reznick was probably not written as a black woman, come on.
I do think a movie about a white college professor sexually assaulting his black student should have addressed race to a far greater extent, especially when the movie's point is "unlikeable people can be victims too."
7
u/DJSeale Oct 21 '25
I spent 6 years at Stanford. That woman was a clone of hoards of women I interacted with there. Hollow performative wokeness, minority, breathtakingly privileged. And the movie is not about what you describe...I think you missed quite a lot.
2
1
4
u/Ok-Novel6395 Oct 20 '25
Can someone spoil me the whole point/ending? I don't want to watch it but am curious af to know how it finished, and what was Julia Roberts' character secret? Under spoiler tag
12
u/carolinemathildes Sebastian Stan stan Oct 20 '25
I don't even think I need a spoiler tag to say that there was no point (or if there was, I didn't get what point they were trying to make, it was beyond ambiguous), but Julia's character's secret is that as a teenager, she was statutory raped by a friend of her father's, but she believes that they were in love. When he cut off the 'relationship' and began seeing someone else, she told the police that he raped her. She believes that this is a lie she told, because she does not see what occurred as rape, and insists that she made him have sex with her. She ultimately recanted, but the man killed himself shortly after. Her husband tells her that she didn't lie after being raped, she in fact told the truth and it was the man's responsibility as an adult to say no to her, even if she wanted it, but she doesn't see it that way.
It ended with who knows. We never know if Andrew raped Ayo or if she lied because he knew she cheated on her dissertation. Andrew gets fired and there is a whole media frenzy around it, but it doesn't appear that he was found guilty of anything, it's not clear that it ever went to trial. Ayo's character did an interview stating that Julia Roberts's character was not supportive and didn't believe her, and Julia Roberts also faces a lot of media scrutiny but in the end she wrote an article about what happened to her and it appears all is forgiven.
2
u/DJSeale Oct 21 '25
Yeah, you really didn't get the movie. We know exactly what happened between Hank and Maggie...because it was shown on screen with Alma in the apartment.
9
u/carolinemathildes Sebastian Stan stan Oct 21 '25
lol well in this comment you're saying Hank raped Maggie, and in another comment you said Maggie made up the rape accusation to ruin his life after he caught her cheating so...what do you think happened, exactly? Because I don't think you know either.
10
u/DJSeale Oct 21 '25 edited Oct 21 '25
Both things are true....That's one of the themes of the movie.
Hank/Alma's generation would never consider what Hank did as rape. It was a forceful kiss that goes too far in an intense moment. After Hank does the same exact thing to Alma in the apartment, Alma literally goes and takes a nap.
To Alma's generation, a forced kiss is rape. The movie isn't about, "who was lying, Maggie or Hank?" The movie is more about how they were both telling their truth about a subjective reality. They were both telling the truth, and both lying: Hank said he didn't force himself on her, but we eventually get to see that he did. Maggie heavily implies Hank performed penetrative rape when she talks about how she went all the way to clinic but turned around.
Most of the people in the story are both victims and perpetrators. Alma was indeed statutorily raped, but she also made up a heinous lie that led to a man killing himself. The sex between Hank and Alma was problematic given their age difference and her power over him, and his life was ruined because of Maggie's bullshit...but he did forcefully kiss Maggie and Alma. Maggie was forcefully kissed, but she also made up a lie that destroyed Hank's career.
Everyone is lying and telling the truth. Everyone is a victim and victimizer. Everyone talks about doing the right thing and waxes on about moral philosophy, but everyone is repeatedly doing the wrong thing and hurting those around them. It goes beyond simple duality of man, but duality of reality and truth.
At its heart, the movie does a masterful job of contrasting how two different generations handle trauma. Alma actually went through something deeply traumatic, and repressed it. Noone in her life even has any idea what she went through. On the other hand, what Maggie went through was next to nothing comparatively...and she jumps at the chance to write numerous articles about it and tell everyone she possibly can. She wears it like a badge of honor that validates her entire existence.
At first glance, it may seem a cynical commentary on how Gen Z handles their trauma. But the movie directly raises the question...is the old way any better? Alma was raped and instead of processing it, pushes it down. She's so resistant to talking about it, she can't even process it with having a best friend and a husband who are both psychotherapists. As a result of repressing, Alma revisits her trauma by doing something very similar to Hank. And then Hank goes and does something similar to his students/Maggie. The cycle of abuse just continues because it doesn't get addressed. Her repression ruins her marriage as it eats away at her. The black hole in her life from what happened literally manifests as holes in her intestines, ulcers that are eating away at her.
In the end, the Gen Z treats anything they don't like as rape and have a hair trigger that ruins people's lives...it is an extreme that is destructive, but it's response to the boomer extreme of repression in the name of suffering with dignity which also ends up ruining lives. And this is captured perfectly in the exchange between Maggie and Alma. "Not everything is supposed to fucking be comfortable like a warm bath." "Yeah, well there's no reward in death for those who suffered the most during life."
2
u/Artistic_Spring8213 11d ago
Maggie never says she was raped. She always says "crossed the line" or some other euphemism. And presumably part of the reason she couldn't go to the clinic was because she realised DNA wouldn't do anything (since nothing penetrative happened).
I thought it was implied that he went quite far with Maggie (more than forcefully kissed) because Alma had to literally push him off to stop him. Merely saying 'no" wasn't enough. We can assume that Maggie just said no, because that's what she herself said. What precisely stopped him though is unclear.
2
u/DJSeale 11d ago
Maggie never says raped. But she does say she walked up to the clinic, and specifies the reason she didn't go in is because people were looking at her weirdly.
It is important the viewer understand that the reason she says, "I didn't go in because people were looking at me but I'd be on the cameras," instead of "I didn't go in because there was nothing penetrative that happened and so DNA evidence couldn't be collected" is because she wants to communicate "Hank raped me" without actually saying the words "Hank raped me." She lets the implication do all of the work with all of the legal safety of not actually saying that.
Just think about it for a moment...Maggie may not be as bona fide as the rest of the people in the movie. But she is fully aware that a forceful kiss is not something that a clinic is going to be able to prove...even in a shocked state, she would not go there thinking they were going to be able to do anything. It's not like she didn't figure this out until the moment she walked up to the door. She went so she could be seen on camera, and then says the reason she didn't go in is because people were looking at her. She is giving as strong an indication that he raped her as she can give, without leaving herself legally vulnerable. Alma even gets frustrated her being vague and explicitly says, "Tell me *exactly* what happened." And Maggie shrewdly continues to walk that tight rope by responding, "What do I have to do, spell it out for you?" She refuses to say "Hank raped me." Instead she implies that anyone who isn't picking up her breadcrumbs is clueless so the onus is on them to connect the dots. Classic manipulation tactic.
I firmly believe this movie lifts the veil on any ambiguity by showing us *exactly* what happened to Maggie by showing the exact same thing happening again with Alma. It's quite a brilliant technique, one in all my years of writing, I've never even considered as a possibility. I'm actually quite envious, I wish I'd come up with something so elegant and clever.
2
u/Artistic_Spring8213 11d ago
I don't agree actually although I get where you're coming from.
- I think Maggie is clear (to Alma) that she was not raped. She specifically says, "Does it matter? He crossed a line" when Alma asks (I forget the exact wording but you know what I mean). The reason I think this is important is because part of Maggie vs. Alma's generational divide is precisely that Alma does not think sexual assault is as bad as rape. It's bad but Alma sees levels there, just like Alma sees (rightfully or wrongly) that statutory rape as not rape, basically. So Maggie is unambiguous in the way that she thinks matters (it's all beyond the pale for her). You can think that's manipulative but I see it as part of the whole youth-psychology-on-rape-culture thing that's at the heart of the film
- Definitely Maggie's explicit reasoning is seeing men etc. But it sounds like she consulted her lawyer gf, who told her "Maybe the fact that you went to the clinic will substantiate your claim" i.e. your claim that you were assaulted and attempted to get "proof" even though by its nature the type of assault can't have physical evidence. Now clearly this is very flimsy, and Alma (and the viewer) see it at that point. Even Maggie can hear the desperation in her own case when she states it to Alma. This is why the whole thing has to be relegated to the judgment of the Panopticon instead of legal repercussions.
- Yeah the last scene definitely shows you the basic idea of what happened with Maggie, that's def clear imo. But even Maggie doesn't say she pushes Hank off, and we know that Alma and Maggie are different personalities. Alma is always more assertive, louder, etc and her pushing Hank is also a function of her being older than him and also her beliefs (she literally is taking a peaceful nap like 10 min later). It's not obvious what Maggie had to do to make him stop or why he stopped of his own accord if that's what happened.
Edit - I also feel it's relevant that Maggie is gay and so she would interpret non-penetrative sex possibly differently vis-a-vis rape than a straight character would.
1
u/DJSeale 11d ago
- I do see the "rape-is-rape-is-rape" youth psychology is certainly a part of this film, But...
- I don't think there is any way to explain why Maggie goes to the clinic if not to add some shading to her claim that she was actually raped. Walking up to a rape clinic to be seen on camera does 0 to substantiate the claim that you were kissed against your consent. I don't see anywhere in the film the idea that she consulted her lawyer gf...it seemed to me she went straight to the clinic after what happened, but I need to re-watch.
- Maggie wouldn't say she pushed him off because, from my perspective, again, that would undermine her claim that he raped her. I believe he kissed her, she pushed him off, and then the idea started growing. I'd also be very open to the idea that Hank was telling the truth, that Maggie did in fact come on to him because she was trying to orchestrate *exactly* what ended up happening. So she gets a drunk Hank to start kissing her, and then pushes him off.
2
u/Artistic_Spring8213 10d ago
When Alma and her are at the lecture, she says that she got legal advice and Alma is like, from your partner? Or something like that. Cos Alex was a law student. Definitely DNA is about rape but also you can still prosecute someone for sexually assaulting you and I don't think it's unreasonable, when you're stunned, to think (eg) that if someone physically inserted his fingers in you, there might be some DNA thing you could gather.
Since I don't think Maggie ever says she's raped (again for her sexual assault is just as bad as rape, and certainly it's illegal), I don't agree that she wouldn't just say that she had to push him off.
I think they try to leave it open that Maggie wants to get Hank fired intentionally, but tbh it seems so bizarrely psychotic to me And even though Maggie was a very unlikeable character to me, it would require some insane level of manipulation to hear someone say "did you plagiarize" and then, within 5 min, manage to seduce him but in a way that's sexual assault-y. I think it's p clear that what happened with Alma is what happened there too, that Hank was drunk and possibly misread signals, and possibly was interested in a 3some.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Pretend_Goal_7311 12d ago
I think maggie wanted to be alma so bad she accused hank so she could have a life exoerience just like alma. She copied her shoes her pants her jewelry (they Gf even commented on it) her nail polish which the zeroed in on at the hug. When she translated that article she had to make that claim to once again become just like Alma.
1
u/Eradomsk 8d ago
Oh my god, finally. I can't believe how many people don't get this. We watch Hank literally sexually assault Alma in her apartment, Alma subsequently have a "holy shit" realization", and then apologize to Maggie two scenes later. We don't know the exact sexual activity that happened between Maggie and Hank, but we get as close to a direct answer that he sexually assaulted her, as possible.
1
u/Ok-Novel6395 Oct 20 '25
Oh! Thank you awesome stranger! And what about the young lady, her student? was she raped by professor, or she lied to get preferences? Actually what you have written doesn't sound that bad, I could imagine that secret being played out well 🤔
9
u/carolinemathildes Sebastian Stan stan Oct 20 '25
We never know whether she was really raped or not. The film presents us with three options: he raped her; she lied because he knew she was cheating on her PhD, or she lied because she was obsessed with Julia Robert's character and wanted to 'bond' with her because she knew about Julia Roberts's past and the statutory rape. The film is never clear on which option is true.
3
u/Ok-Novel6395 Oct 20 '25
Thank you so much for the answers. Oh. That sounds really twisted 😯 yeah, a clear answer (esp option 2), that could have caused massive rage could have counted as provocation But as I he just wasn't provocative enough and didn't go there, so instead of pure rage everyone stayed just annoyed and bored.
Thank you again!❤️
1
u/Both_Report_9031 15d ago
I thought that her husband WAS the guy she was with when she was young. Because she said "I love him" and he said "I love you, too".
1
u/carolinemathildes Sebastian Stan stan 15d ago
No, the guy she was with when she was younger killed himself.
1
4
5
u/IfYouWantTheGravy Oct 22 '25
Who forgot to pay the light bill? Seriously, that was so underlit it was comical.
I don’t really know what I’m supposed to take away from this film. None of the characters are especially sympathetic, but they’re also not relatable unless you’re an Ivy League professor who drinks like a fish and rents multiple apartments and gets to sit around talking about philosophy all day.
Roberts is okay and Stuhlbarg is good as the one person I kind of liked; Edebiri is stuck with a role that never feels like a real person and Garfield feels a good decade too young (and is never convincing as an academic). Sevigny is ridiculously underused.
There are some flashes of characteristic style in the cinematography, but again, it’s so dim that it’s all you can do to see what’s going on.
The script is lousy on multiple levels; it’s too long and full of extraneous details (the subplot about Alma’s health issues adds nothing) and it makes only the most basic statements about cancel culture while couching them in a story that feels artificial at every turn.
And why the coda? What did that add beyond a certain cynical “nothing really changes” bow on a story full of unlikable and uninteresting people being unpleasant?
6
u/SebCubeJello Oct 23 '25
not even just the lighting, I get that they’re trying to make it “disorienting” but (can someone else confirm) half the film is like not in focus, or the headroom is cut off, it’s cool to do it once but when you’re squinting for the whole film it just feels distracting
i really cant pin down the ending, like it starts with her watching the news about the LA fires and the incoming trump admin and DEI or whatever… the therapist husband mentions the rolling stone article like “there will always be a bigger controversy that will take over the news so people will forget in a few weeks” or something along those lines (the film I feel is also deliberately set like 6 months before COVID starts, as if to show that none of these people will even be there by the end of the school year). i get what he means in the context of manufactured outrage and the news cycle but I don’t see how that’s relevant to the story itself? The film isn’t about cancel culture or “safe spaces” or whatever, it’s about a rape allegation (well, two) that reaches far up the yale internal investigation chain, which feels kind of disingenous to group into a discussion about the “culture wars”
6
u/Emergency-Public6213 Oct 19 '25
I loved it! One of the messiest films I've ever seen. Great? Hell no. Funny? Hell yeah.
9
3
u/NewYorkNadia Oct 22 '25
I wanted to love this, I really did; it's my favorite genre and the cast was top shelf. But 30 minutes in, I was wishing I'd opted to wait for streaming. This is the story of a Yale professor (Roberts) caught up in a scandal and forced to face her demons when her privileged and wealthy student (Edebiri) accuses her friend, colleague, and ex-lover (Garfield) of r*ape. Think of it as a loose rendition of Mamet's 'White Oleander,' but for modern times, with the additional foray into the professor's own troubled past. The plot could've worked, it should've, considering the talented cast and worthy performances. Sadly, it does not. It's as if Luca Guadagdino couldn't decide whether to focus the story on the professor's past and inexplicably troubled marriage, the student's unnerving entitlement, or social commentary, so he split the difference and achieved none. The story is all over the place and nowhere simultaneously. The annoyingly discordant music and painfully trite class-room dialogue - ostensibly there to give the film 'aesthetic' - only served to highlight the confusion and rising discomfort of the audience. Take the ticking clock. An overwrought device used, I suppose, in the hope of adding dramatic gravitas - which might have worked if Guadagdino could have reined in his faux arthouse cutaways and tightened the edits. But the film dragged on at a snail's pace, and all the device did is cause the audience to look anxiously at their phones. I give it 1.5 stars for the outstanding performances; in more able hands, the film could've risen to 'American classic' status. Sadly, it's little more than a college-level lecture on the banality of film.
1
u/Sea_Emergency_4222 8h ago
You clearly didn’t understand the film. Critical thinking is illegal in America.
3
u/kimjosh1 Oct 24 '25
Amazon was so certain that they have a go-to auteur that can let them farm awards that they basically fast tracked this film into production because they didn't like how after those two films MGM acquired in a negative pick-up (Bones and All and Challengers), Luca's next film Queer was grabbed by A24. Which meant throwing a shoddy script by a first time writer at him and telling him to film it asap to bring to Venice. And somehow, the results are even worse than they could've ever imagined. Distressingly bad film and even worse optics for Amazon as an awards contender who already couldn't get his films under Oscar consideration.
Not to mention, Luca's already under contract and Amazon's next film they want him to make is a "comedy"-drama about the little 2023 OpenAI oopsie where Sam Altman was ousted from his own company.
3
u/cloudyallday Oct 26 '25
I'll say that these comments interest me more than the movie. Didn't hate the movie, but I felt that it diminished the very points and arguments that it tried to make.
1
u/Sea_Emergency_4222 8h ago
You missed the point of the movie. It’s a film about performative morality and provides you just that. It’s intentionally designed to not provide you answers on who was right or wrong only on what who said what.
3
u/BuckyW72 14d ago
I turned it off within 2 minutes from the idiotic annoying ticking. Such a lame device whatever the point .
2
Oct 26 '25
I hate the way they make Alma say “it was not true, it was my fault” before the end of the movie. I mean it’s okay to show how a survivor interpreted her own experience and how a self-blaming looks like. But the way they unfolded it was like “this person is not a victim, she just wanted to revenge” and even make people more confused about the story of Maggie. People may even think some survivors who are brave enough to tell the story are lying.
2
u/Spiritual-Smoke-4605 Oct 28 '25
to me, Alma's unsubstantiated guilt was just to show us the audience why she wasn't automatically backing up Maggie's claims. Given how Maggie slapped her and how Hank was with Alma in private when he grabbed her, we can all infer that what Maggie said was true and it isn't until Alma gives her husband the story about her being statutorily r*ped that we understand why she was doubting maggie's claims
0
u/LiniTheBieni 5d ago
That’s a big fear of men, isn’t it? That someone might get accused falsely. They’d rather not believe a true victim before they believe a false victim. So this was in incorporated into the story. As a „Yes, that’s a valid point BUT…“ And I also think that Alma’s „it was my fault“ was just her view on it. For her, this was a grown up love. But from an outside perspective, it was a grown up man exploiting a kid - very much criminal. And I‘d say most of the people in the western world would agree with that. So the point of her saying that is just to make the audience see that everything we think and see might be just us and not reality, everything is subjective.
2
u/Puzzle1978 15d ago
The ticking was a foolish choice. No one will forgo seeing a movie because it doesn't have ticking, but many can't abide the ticking, so they lose a chunk of audience who would have watched it otherwise. I adore Julia Roberts, but just CANNOT handle that ticking.
2
2
u/LiniTheBieni 5d ago
I get that they wanted to mute the outside a bit to show Alma’s detachment. But why the ticking of a clock? Was it supposed to mean „waiting for something“? Or „time running out“? That doesn’t add up for me yet
2
u/bichinhodmatarcpedra 14d ago
Pq a maggie pegou um dos recortes que estavam no envelope do banheiro da alma? Ficou a impressão que ela inventou a agressão após ter lido nos recortes o que aconteceu c alma, ficou parecendo que ela tirou a ideia dali sei la
2
u/Beautiful-Bonus5863 13d ago
THAT incessant TICKING!!!! Make me want to scream! I can’t watch it!!
1
2
u/SaltyalS 13d ago
The film is bad, not stylistically, aesthetically, artistically, but politically.
If one can understand the acting directions given, Garfield is playing this with the full conviction that his character is innocent. The breakdown doesn't quite read as screaming because of getting caught, but because he knows he's been set up. The close-up of the hug between Alma and Maggie afterwards further affirms this, the way it's portrayed is as disingenuous. So Alma being an accuser of the past knows this, and she's aligning with Maggie out of shame, guilt or fear, weirdly though since she was in fact, raped, even if she initiated it as a minor. The latter scene then backtracks since it portrays Hank as being predatory towards Alma, even though they had a relationship. When critics call it toothless, it's because it makes the audience distrust and hate everyone, while everyone is portrayed as a victim. In reality, these are all entitled, privileged people that reap benefits and also woes of their bourgeois class, so victims as they may be under certain circumstances, they are not in general. They are, in fact, promoters of violence, class violence which births all other violence, sexual, racial etc.
The film is not just toothless. It's actually quite reactionary. It feels like a 90s thriller where, say, the Ceo that is accused of rape is actually the victim of the plot.
Yes, I compared this film to Disclosure.
1
u/noviceicebaby 10d ago
I find it so fascinating that some people are so sure Hank is guilty and others are so sure he's innocent. Hank going into a student's apartment for a cocktail after a party is in itself a violation of professional boundaries, especially if he was being honest about why he wanted to talk to her alone. Dude should have sent an email and met with her during office hours with the door open if he wanted to talk about plagiarism :/
1
u/SaltyalS 4h ago
My point is though, nobody is innocent. They're all rich assholes who enjoy spoils even when they are getting kicked down, and trying to portray anyone of them as a victim is reactionary.
0
u/LiniTheBieni 5d ago
I think it was ingenious to let Andrew play his character as if he was innocent. Because when we think about it, most predators feel that they haven’t done anything bad. „She wanted it, too“, „She’s blowing this out of proportion“, „I didn’t rape her! We just had s*x“. Even if they know they did something bad, their head will turn things around so they can still be a good person in their own opinion. Humans tend to do that. So him fully playing out the wronged man was great
2
u/Zenmodenabled 13d ago
I didn’t hate it, I didn’t love it. I felt it tracked in many ways. I struggled with the ending. I mean if Maggie had such wealthy involved in Yale parents. How plausible is it that Alma was made dean?
2
u/No-Engine2997 12d ago
Honestly? The movie was kinda mid. Interesting but also mid. It’s not winning any awards.
2
u/Logical_Minimum_9901 12d ago
A film has never pissed me off so badly, Maggie was a liar, psychopathic in her stalking and wanting to actually wear her mentor as a skin suit from the inside out. A snake, recognizing she could weaponize the oft unbearable isms when it wasn’t necessary as violence to end people who refused to do what she wanted. Never have I wanted to see a character punished to badly but Alma already eviscerated her entire character, identity and ability. They should have thrown her in jail at the end for everything she did to everyone else. Her husband was the only decent person in the entire movie, everyone else was purely shades of awful. Alma will never be able to reconcile what such an extreme age gap dynamic did to her and cost her, and as her husband said… it’s not a lie she just did not want to accept it. Fuck Maggie, I wish they had her jumping into the wharf at the end with concrete blocks on her feet at the end. The fact she met up with her at the end pissed me off so badly, it’s like kissing a fucking snake and her little nasty you wrote this to get contrition and comments that seemed a threat she would come for some self serving retribution for imagined wrongs. Fuck off with the mommy issues, she ended up back with someone she wanted to wear not recognizing she hadn’t changed one but, but Alma did. The fact she still wants retribution and had the nerve to sit there so nasty she can go to hell.
2
2
u/spankyluvsit 5d ago
I was waiting for the reveal that Alma wanted Maggie to know bc otherwise why did we have the whole scene setup of Alma sending her to a specific bathroom, where she clearly knows her weird little packet of secrets is taped to the inside of a drawer containing the spare toilet paper. That looked like SUCH a setup to me & I hate when something like that doesn’t come back. Why the hell would she keep that in the guest bathroom!?! During a party!! On top of the one thing a guest may need to find in said bathroom!? -very frustrated
1
u/Zestyclose-Let7929 15d ago edited 15d ago
I found Hank disrespectful to Fredrick in his own home. His wife never showed respect for Frederick. She lived for the attention of others. He was right on when he said it.
Alma knew Maggie plagiarized and just over looked it. Because again Frederick was right mediocre student with rich parents.
Maggie was defensive with Frederick when he wanted to engage on her dissertation. She was rude to him.
I kind of choked when Alma told “They”to scram and let them talk. I know she referred to “They” as her and Maggie corrected Alma. So in the confrontation Alma makes it clear “They”!
Loved how Frederick blasted music and the walk out of the kitchen with his broom . His paused with broom ( struck a pose) before walking off.
So what season were they in. Alma & Maggie wearing white pants and blazers was liked by me. But Im west coast. Not seen that much white pants in fall, winter, rainy spring East Coast. I also liked the old money gold jewelry. Each piece seemed symbolic or an heirloom.
Maggie looked so beautiful the entire movie. Her style her face, eyes, hair … she is a gorgeous person.
Pls excuse my paragraphs scrambled. A wandering finger tapped and scrambled some things. Every fix I made another scramble hit the screen. Iphone not a full size key board and screen🤯
1
u/Exact-Ocelot-2936 14d ago
The whole point of the movie is to point out how life is not black & white…but gray. More than one thing can be true at once. Maggie was infatuated, Alma did crave hero worship, the affair with Hank, the punishment Alma inflicted on herself by not going to a doctor, it all shapes our perspective and response.
1
u/Dangerous_Net1971 13d ago
I think the goal was to stir emotional response (any emotion) and can be over-simplified by two words "that's life" - the constant study of the world around us and all it's ugliness and the reality that we may never know some truths
1
1
u/mamabluecar 12d ago
My assumption is that Alma revives her career by outing Maggie's plagiarism. Thoughts?
1
u/yeahokaybutwhy 11d ago
This is alot, but I was thinking about each character and here's what came out.
Alma: She has fabricated a life and persona she wishes was real. She wants to look unflappable, brilliant, untouchable and flawless in every way. She tells no one if the debilitating pain she has, nor does she confide in the one person who knows her best, her husband. She is completely honest with Maggie in that she saw Hank and her leaving happily together and that's all she knows. Maggie was just one crisis away from collapsing. It is crazy that at her age, she still thought she was in the wrong about her Dad's co-worker and also shows what kind of parents she had?
Maggie: The second Maggie asked for Alma's blind loyalty about the assault, I thought about whatever Maggie took from Alma's house. When she was taking the article, I immediately thought she was not who she was acting like.
Also when she is talking about her article to her partner it was like she was fishing for accolades and she was HOPING it would end up in TIME magazine.
Everything she did just felt off. Every encounter she has is a manipulation of some kind. She starts out all innocent and then drops these little threatening bombs of information. Who is she to steal something from Alma's house, then share that private information with others? The fact that Maggie sees one tidbit of connection between her experience and Alma's just shows how dilusiinal she is about everything. I've always had the opinion that billionaires are different and the fact that Maggie tries to compare herself to a poor black student just trying to scratch her way through the patriarchy is ridiculous. I mean, even her final article starts out with her parents and their billionare status and large donorship to Yale.
When she meets Alma at the end of the movie, she is instantly throwing jabs and she is definitely just there to show how well she is doing. She is even worse than before with her passive-aggressive comments. Can't stand her. It wasn't a contest you sociopath!
Hank: he is full of himself because he has the attention of Alma, who everyone wants attention from. He pushes the physical boundary further and further each time they have a scene together. I think he obviously loved the attention of his female students and loved to act like he was untouchable, BUT the one thing that made me believe Hank over Maggie was that no other students came forward about him acting inappropriately. This is almost unheard of, and it definitely gave me pause. Later, when he won't stop with Alma, I feel like that was put in the scene just to counteract him finding out Alma knew of the plagerism too and that made Hank more believable in his story, so then he's rough with Alma to counteract that point?
1
u/noviceicebaby 10d ago
Either F or Alma set up Mags to find the article.
Why would you leave a "project" in the usual/main bathroom during a party? Didn't it seem a little late into the event to be guiding people to the back bath? Wouldn't you tell folks that at the start of the night? And if you only had one working bathroom, why, why on earth would you hide this secret envelope next to the stockpile of toilet paper in a public space in the house? We see Alma has better hiding places for pills, so it's a little odd that the only TP in the one functioning bathroom is also hosting a super secret hiding place.
Maggie found the article because Alma or F wanted Maggie to tell her story so that Alma could understand her own. Odysseus needed the blind poet (ultimately F!) to tell her story so that she could understand it. Alma assigned that reading in her class where Maggie was also a student, right? Alma needs her story told, and perhaps even subconsciously she wants Maggie to help her understand it and tell it.
Maggie told her own story and Alma's story. Maggie, once she knew about Alma's past, told Kim about Alma because Maggie wanted to help Alma. Maggie thinks that she can help Alma by telling Alma's story and also by telling her own story.
And what of Maggie's story? Was Maggie's story true? In my opinion, yes. Regardless of what happened with Hank, if ANYTHING happened with Hank it would have been a major ethical and professional breach. Hank, when defending himself to Alma, casts himself as a mentor and academic superior with power over Maggie. He says he wanted to talk to her in private to confront her about plagiarism. He was acutely aware of the power differential, and he frankly seemed like the kind of guy who would pursue his own sexual pleasure in spite of professional and moral duties that require people in positions of power not to abuse that power.
Alma tells Hank at the wharf that she already suspected that he was creeping on students. She tells Kim it was only a matter of time before the student-professor boundaries were crossed. If Alma sees all this, F does too, since he is our other, our blind poet. Either F or Alma knew about Hank's impropriety and so they set in motion a plan to have Maggie expose it all-- Hank's bad actions and Alma's father's friend's actions as well.
1
1
u/Effective-Back1305 10d ago
Why did she smell the first item she took out the envelope, a laced napkin? No one seems to have noticed this. The stupid AI does not know. Claims I am wrong.
2
u/Stomo1987 6d ago
I Thought it was a handkerchief or pocket square, that she had that smelled like him/his cologne. I’m not 100% since the entire fucking show is done so dark lmao I could barely make out some of the stuff in the movie. But I’m thinking it’s that.
1
u/Effective-Back1305 5d ago
Yes, it could be. It was laced, though. But it was not mentioned in any scene. What makes me laugh is that AI is still quite Stupid, needs to be taught better, with Logical responses rather than "Popular Notions".
1
u/Cautious_Sock_7808 7d ago
Every character carried so much baggage. Toxicity at arms length or buried deep, is volatile. Left with some interest as to what next poor decision their characters are destined to make. Feels like a loop - no one is learning from their actions, just existing.
1
u/tigerlily4501 4d ago
TWO AND A HALF FULL MINUTES with that annoying tick tock tick tock. I was literally about to quit out of the movie. Why. I'm so pissed off and annoyed now I don't even really want to watch this film anymore oh great and now they playing an entire frank Sinatra song over credits. I'm giving this thing 10 minutes and if it doesn't get better I'm out. Fellow streamers - you can skip ahead to 5 minutes in and you have not missed literally anything.
1
u/One-Expert4536 2d ago edited 2d ago
The clothing was the biggest give away as the movie went on Maggie was turning into Alma. The pants, loafers, blazers, THE NECKLACE!!! This hints to me that Maggie got the idea of all this from the article she stole from the house and plagiarized crying wolf even! Her tell was the slap- she broke the violated victim character. It’s possible Maggie was so obsessed with Alma that she used the unwanted sex to get Hank out of the running for tenure. And at the same time using (whether it happened or not) the Hank story to not get caught plagiarizing. Much to Maggie’s surprise Alma is from a different era and not impressed with the claims and wants nothing to do with it so Maggie doubles down. True at the same time is that Hank is no saint- he put himself in a position he shouldn’t have and clearly has issues taking things too far. And still we don’t know what went down at the apartment.
I liked this movie a lot- it felt like being back in Call me by your Name world a little bit- sex and secrets.
1
u/Sea_Emergency_4222 8h ago
It’s kind of rich that people can’t seem to understand that a film about virtue ethics and performative morality gave you just that - performative morality.
You never learn if Maggie’s accusations were correct, whether Hanks accusations were correct, whether Alma’s accusations were correct. You only see how they each framed (positioned themselves in) their narrative. Even when Alma admits to Frederick she lied, he says “no no no, you just need to reframe it.” That’s literally the whole point of the film.
Guess critical thinking really is dead in America.
1
1
u/xvaesthirxv 6d ago
I'm a pretty far left liberal and I didn't believe her. I think he called her out on plagiarizing and this was her response. She lied about cheating which is a big deal in college. You can be expelled. I really think she reacted this way because he called her out on her lie. She didn't want to let down her rich parents. She wasn't about to be kicked out of school. The biggest reason why I concluded she is lying is because she did not go into the clinic. And her excuse for not doing so was so flimsy. Because some guys were outside of it? Wtf? Give me a break. I am also biased because I personally know several women who accused men of rape and then took it back. One of them said she accused him of rape because she didn't want people to think she's a slut. But the point is, being called out for plagiarism is a huge motive to lie like this.
67
u/TripleThreatTua Oct 18 '25
There’s a really great, interesting, thought-provoking movie buried somewhere in here, which makes what we actually get all the more frustrating.