Martha Marcy May Marlene (2011) User Reviews (234)

What's wrong with you?

[ferguson-6 · 7/10 · 26 August 2011]

Greetings again from the darkness. This one has been on my radar since the Sundance Festival and all the raves about Elizabeth Olsen's performance. After attending a screening last evening, I find myself at a loss to adequately describe not just her stunning turn, but also this unusual film from writer/director Sean Durkin.

On the surface, this sounds like just another movie peeking inside a creepy cult that brainwashes, and psychologically and physically abuses women, and is led by a charismatic (and creepy) religious style figure-head. There are many similarities to the Manson-family story of which much has been published, but Mr. Durkin takes the film in a much different and very creative direction by concentrating on what happens to Martha (Olsen) after she escapes the cult.

In the Q&A, Durkin states he did much research and found the most fascinating story to be that of a cult escapee and what she went through during her first three weeks of freedom. Martha sneaks out early one morning and places a panic call to her older sister, whom she hasn't communicated with in two years. Settling in to the lake house with big sis and new brother-in-law, it becomes quite obvious that Martha doesn't know how to fit in society and has absolutely no interest in discussing her recent past.

The sister is played very well by Sarah Paulson, and her husband is Hugh Dancy (so very good in Adam). This seemingly normal yuppie couple is trying to do right by Martha, but the fits of paranoia, outbursts of anger, and societal goofs are just too much for them.

The genius of this film is in the story telling. The cinematic toggling between today and moments of time at the cult farm house leads the viewer right into the confused mind of Martha. We don't get much back story but it's obvious she was "ripe" for cult world when she was chosen. We see how Patrick, the quietly charismatic leader, sings her a song and steals her heart ... she wants so much to belong. We also see how she bonds with the other women at the farm house, and ends up in a situation that seems to snap her out just enough so she finds the strength to leave. The editing of scenes between these two worlds in outstanding and serve to keep the viewer glued to the screen.

Last year I raved about an independent film called Winter's Bone. I chose it as one of the year's best and it ended with some industry award recognition. I am not willing to say this film is quite at that level, but I will say that the younger sister of the Olsen twins, Elizabeth, delivers an incredible first feature film performance and Sean Durkin deserves an audience for his first feature film as writer/director. Another bond between the two indies is that John Hawkes plays the cult leader Patrick, and Hawkes was a standout in Winter's Bone.

There will undoubtedly be some debate about whether this is cutting edge independent filmmaking or just another snooty art-house mind-messer. All I can say is, I hope the film grabs enough audience for the debate to matter ... it deserves it.

Surprisingly good

[Hildr · 7/10 · 7 November 2021]

I'd never heard of this and when scrolling to find a movie it popped up.

A slow, intense, psychological character study. There are some distressing scenes (sexual assault, violence) that were acted brilliantly.

The silence throughout the movie added to the intensity and put the viewer firmly into the mindset of the main character (Martha), who was excellently portrayed by Elizabeth Olsen.

Sarah Paulson (I should add I am biased towards her as she is an exquisite human) added depth and a gentleness that was required for the character of Martha to explore her situation in the scenes between them.

The aspect and post production on this was beautiful, the lighting throughout was spot on. The way that many scenes in the 'cult' were in near darkness contrasting to the light filled space once she left gave excellent visual cues and a sense of the tumultuous emotions being felt by Martha.

Would definitely watch again to see if there were background things I've missed.

Ending, like the rest of the film, is perfect

[deproduction · 8/10 · 22 December 2011]

Don't read this if you haven't seen the film yet. Don't read any of these, just go see it! Though unresolved endings are nothing new in film, the abrupt ending to Martha Marcy May Marlene is one of the most apropos uses of an ambiguous ending I've ever seen. The film is designed to leave the viewer in the same state of mind as the title character throughout, wondering if we're experiencing the present or the past, dream or reality. The point of the ending is that the fear, instability, and un-easiness isn't going to fade for Martha. Her experience will not be wrapped-up nicely in some storybook ending, but will continue to haunt her for the rest of her life. She will always live in fear that her world is going to be ripped apart. Other comments have asked about the car at the end, the identity of the bartender, the appearance of Patrick at the lake, and I'm sure the Director could ask for nothing more than for them to be confused. Martha herself doesn't know the answers, and neither should the viewer. My personal opinion is that Martha imagined Patrick at the lake, the car at the end was just odd happenstance, and maybe even the SUV she damaged was unrelated to the Cult, but Martha is going to question those and countless other events for the rest of her life. She'll never hear creaks or rattles the same again... she'll never sleep soundly and consistently... she'll never trust her view of reality, and that's exactly the point of the ending. Great performances, great direction, great movie!

Tons of potential

[itamarscomix · 6/10 · 3 June 2012]

I'm tempted to give Martha Marcy May Marlene a higher rating than it deserves for what it could have been, not for what it is. It boasts two young talents who are showing tons of potential - director Sean Durkin and lead actress Elizabeth Olsen; Olsen's performance is subtle and effective, and Durkin's directorial work creates a strong sense of atmosphere, which is aided by the superb cinematography of Jody Lee Lipes (who also had very little prior experience in feature length films). It's a film that looks and sounds great, but unfortunately it doesn't mesh into a satisfying experience.

It's probably because there's so much potential and so much to explore, and so little of it is actually brought to fruition, that I left the film with a bitter taste of a missed opportunity. The cult, for example, is fascinating, seductive and nightmarish, and John Hawkes delivers outstandingly, but on closer inspection it looks like a perfectly generic hippie cult of the classic Manson prototype, and we get no hints of what their philosophy actually is, or about the personalities of any of the members. The same goes for the relationship between Martha, her sister and her brother in law, and most of all the ending, which suggests some very interesting subjects which the rest of the movie doesn't really explore.

To be clear: I don't object to open endings or films that leave a lot of information out to allow viewer interpretation, but in this case I felt it was done as a cover up for lack of decision on Durkin's part - a flawed script that doesn't really feel complete. I'll definitely check out his work in the future, but this film isn't quite there yet.

Weird, but in a Good Way

[BookSplotReviews · 7/10 · 29 March 2012]

Elizabeth Olsen's acting in Martha Marcy May Marlene is really fantastic (it may or may not be her first feature film, not sure which she did first this or Silent House). Her acting combined with the background we get make it easy to see how someone could be drawn into a cult - and stay for so long despite the abusiveness.

The interactions between Martha, her sister and her brother-in-law are downright strange at times but not in a 'hunh?' way at all. They're strange in a way that actually makes perfect sense for the characters and the experiences they've had.

I was really disappointed by the very, very, very end of the film - but I liked the other 100 or so minutes enough that I can forgive it (or forget about it). That and I really can't wait to see Elizabeth Olsen in something else.

The most boring thriller ever made... and I loved it.

[rooprect · 9/10 · 24 October 2019]

Even the title "Martha Marcy May Marlene" is so boring that most thriller audiences will fall asleep before they finish reading it. But before you click away in search of Saw IX, consider this question: Which is more powerful, a bunch of quick forgettable shocks, or a slow intensifying charge that builds up over 102 minutes? M.M.M.M. definitely takes the latter approach, slowly seeping under your skin, never quite giving you the cathartic release of a good zap, but overall delivering just as much power as any popcorn-spilling slasher, but in a very different way.

And yes, I purposely used the analogy of slow electrical torture because that may be how it feels to some of you. It may feel frustrating, annoying, outright boring and torturous, but if you like your movies on the slower, more cryptic, artistic side, then I guarantee you won't be disappointed. So let's hope my 1st two paragraphs were enough to help you make a decision on whether or not to watch this flick. I'll be the first to admit that some days I'm just not in the mood for "2001: A Space Odyssey" and I'd rather just pop in... Saw IX.

Yay you're still here. Ok here's what you can expect if you choose to watch M.M.M.M. It's the story of a young, late-teen, early-20s girl who escapes a bizarre cult commune, and now she's attempting to adjust to a normal existence. Mystery surrounds her, as she doesn't want to talk to anyone about it (brushing it off with a manufactured lie about some ex-boyfriend), and we the audience are kept in the dark for almost half the film. Why was she there? What did they do to her? Are they hunting her down? Perhaps stalking or planning to kill her?

There are no quick answers, but instead the film jumps back & forth between 2 timelines: the current one after she escaped, and the past one where she is slowly being initiated into the cult. And in order to get a grasp of what's going on, you really have to watch the whole 102 minute experience.

But as suspenseful and powerful as the plot is, that's not the point. The point is to draw us, the audience, into the mind of a person who's suffering severe Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. And it accomplishes that masterfully. This is not some Hollywood cliché about PTSD, but it's a complex, heavy, powerful depiction of the anxiety, delusion, paranoia and growing madness of someone who is haunted by ghosts that just won't go away.

Elizabeth Olsen absolutely knocks it out of the park with her performance. Her approach is very layered: on the surface she acts like it's no big deal and that she's a normal person in control of her life, but she frequently exhibits bizarre "socially unacceptable" behavior prompting others to wonder "what the hell is wrong with her??" even though she herself doesn't understand what she did wrong. At the same time you can feel the rising tension and paranoia, especially as the timeline cuts back to darker & more disturbing episodes, and even though there aren't any car chases and chainsaws, we start to feel every bit of her disturbing, confuse existence.

If this slow, powerful approach to cinema appeals to you, then don't hesitate to check out M.M.M.M. I would group it alongside other slow, "uneventful" psychological films like "Shadows & Lies" with James Franco, "Ginger and Rosa" with Elle Fanning, or maybe even the iconic Soderbergh flick "Sex, Lies & Videotape". All of these movies are somewhat slow, heavy and extremely non-Hollywood but they deliver a powerful shock that you won't soon forget.

Star-Making Turn From an OLSEN Sister...

[Its-GJNagy · 7/10 · 21 October 2011]

....Or Hot Hippie Cult Love Gone (Very) Bad The schizophrenic, abstract story unfolds almost languidly at a very deliberate pace evoking Bergman with its Euro overtones, serene cinematography and bucolic backgrounds. It's not quite like any American indie films of recent memory. In someways this year's "Winter's Bone", (sharing John Hawks) but with its character study involving sanity slowly, sadly slipping away. Sean Durkin wrote and directed the film with a meditative tone and in a spartan, concise manner that thankfully doesn't suffer from the time-shifting storyline thanks to mostly seamless editing. (Durkin won best director at Sundance last January for this, his first feature.)

Youngest Olsen sister, Elizabeth plays Martha, (who's ripe to play an early '20's version of Vera Farmiga, or Maggie Gyllenhaal's little sis'-you're welcome Hollywood!). It's a marvelous, virtuoso performance, haunting and understated, natural yet very calculated. Olsen straddles the thin line between coherence & madness in a way that's almost endearing and frightening-but ultimately just tragic while side-stepping the mines of caricature and melodrama. She captures the sublimely tortured soul of Mary in a nuanced, organic way that's award-worthy. (And much more realistic and believable than a certain related, crazed ballerina portrayal, but one could argue that one was SUPPOSED to be over-the-top.) Her torment is palpable from the moment she opens her mouth.

The story begins in what appears to be a cult-like commune (is there any other kind in Film-land?) in the Catskills run with an iron fist by Patrick (John Hawks). He's basically a cool, calm, collected version of Charlie Manson-even uttering a few Manson-inspired lines. Hawks can play this type of weaselly, Lothario in his sleep. His quiet menace, vehemence and nihilism seems to be cat nip to his conquered concubines. His word is law, and everybody knows it. Even going as far as renaming Martha "Marcy May", branding her in his own way as you're sure he's done to the other girls in his "flock". But it's not just Patrick to blame for her subservience-the whole cult seduces her! Everyone gets along, & the love is free-flowing in this pastoral, Utopian paradise with many pretty, fresh-faced young women and a few young men (procurers) as well. But all's not well in Well-ville as soon, our protagonist is sneaking out of her home at first light. We don't know how she got there or why she's leaving-although the latter is revealed in the film's third act.

Having no resources, Martha connects with her estranged, older sister Lucy (Sarah Paulsen) and her stressed husband Ted (Hugh Dancy) both in largely thankless roles. Claiming she hooked up with an a-hole boyfriend and just lost track of time the past few years, she won't elaborate any further on her past adventures. Lucy senses the undercurrents beneath, and her guilt gets to her. She sees Martha reluctantly as the cross she must bare being that she's parent-less to the growing consternation-and eventual rage of Ted. The younger sister has obviously changed, running the gamut from playful to feral. Martha the solipsist at first starts out innocent enough with inappropriate behavior like skinny-dipping in full view of Ted, challenging the couple's class consciousness and asking strange questions regarding married couples' mating habits. That's nothing though compared to what's to come and soon, it becomes obvious this is no mere existential crisis-she's become unhinged and needs to be committed. Cult life has been one long mind-f**k she never got over as she tries to fit in to her sister's straight world. When Lucy finally lowers the boom on Martha, (Paulsen's best scene) she recoils and calmly hits her with a cynical, vindictive comment meant to exact a devastating toll on her older sister that almost knocks the wind out of Lucy.

In between these scenes of family revelry, we're given glimpses into the sequence of events that lead to Martha's escape. From her sad, drug-induced deflowering, sorry, "initiation" by Patrick, to the special song he has written for his new main squeeze, (You get the feeling he's gone out of his way to find horrible musicians as his minions thereby making him Clapton by default.) to the tragic turning point. (The only scene in the movie with an obvious outcome.) One thing's for sure, Lucy's kid sis' is a mess, she begins to doubt her decision, her sanity, and herself. She's disintegrating-and she knows it. Even as she clutches the very fragments of who she thinks she is: "I'm a "teacher and a leader!" Martha is like a cat ready to pounce, always on edge. In fact, the more you dive into those lost, mesmerizing eyes, the more you're reminded of the kitten who's found herself up a high, narrow fence not knowing how she got there or having the faintest idea how to get down-or even which side to get down on.

As an actress, Olsen is able to wire walk confidently and has the potential to be this generation's Jodie Foster. (Yeah, I said it.) Even when Martha's waking life seems to blend into her dreamworld, and you can practically see her drowning in emotional quicksand, the actress is able to keep the character grounded in the real and the surreal at the same time-no mean feat for someone barely out of her teens. The direction, and story are well-served by the dark and unnerving score by Saunder Jurriaans & Danny Benasi, bubbling under nicely and melding with Martha's encroaching paranoia. The seamlessness of the two story lines come to a head with a THOROUGHLY maddening, tantalizingly teasing, made-for-sequel final scene-only the joke's on you-there won't be one...

Cast: John Hawkes, Sarah Paulson, Elizabeth Olsen, Hugh Dancy, Brady Corbet Director/Screenwriter: Sean Durkin Producer: Josh Mond, Antonio Campos, Chris Maybach Genre: Drama/Thriller Rating: R for disturbing violent and sexual content, nudity and language. Running time: 120 min. Release date: October 21 ltd.

Heart-Shattering

[shanletsreview · 10/10 · 28 August 2021]

Beautifully written movie! Elizabeth Olsen as always was just a dream in this. Really Traumatic, and realistic depiction of harm that can be done by a violent cult!

Not Great

[rebecca-ry · 6/10 · 7 June 2012]

This film got a lot of praise and was even described as one of the best films of 2011, after watching it I find it hard to see why people would say that.

The content is good, the story is of a girl trying to adapt back to normal life after escaping a cult. It is edited in a very clever way, with flashbacks to memories of the cult dotted throughout. Each flashback's beginning is similar to the real life situation. As the film progresses the flashbacks become longer and her reaction to them becomes more severe but this is as far as the film goes. Elizabeth Olsen was very good and this is a great debut for her. Other performances in the film were pretty weak and the storyline at some points can be weak too.

At some points it feels like the film is trying too hard to be unique. It deliberately doesn't explain certain things like why the sisters' lives went on such different paths perhaps because they wanted to leave so much of this film's content for the viewers to question. It just makes you more and more frustrated, especially when the credits begin to roll and you realise that there was no real climax or even a resolution worthy of making this film one of the best of 2011.

The way in which this film is shot is great, the saturated colour scheme portrays Martha's bleak perception of life and works wonders for the tone of the film.

Overall, this film would have been great if they had just finished the story. Elizabeth Olsen has proved her capabilities in this and hopefully will move onto better films. I would not really recommend this film, it's not a film anyone NEEDS to see but it's not terrible, the film is good but more would have been better.

Martha Marcy Maggie Mae

[spiral5441 · 2/10 · 11 July 2012]

Woman escapes from cult and fears reprisals from remaining cult members. There's your premise. So many endless, exciting possibilities for what a writer could do with such a premise, and yet what we are presented with is this: Martha Marcy May Marlene, which may as well have been called "Oh my god, you're not middle class anymore".

First of all, this is not a psychological thriller as has been described. It's not even really a drama. It's 2 hours of watching three people (one of whom has recently been through the interesting experience of joining, participating in, and escaping from a cult, but you never really get enough info about that to satisfy your intrigue) eat, drink, sleep, cook, clean, and make small talk, interspersed with the main character - Martha - displaying signs of being "deeply disturbed". But, with the exception of kicking her brother-in-law halfway down a flight of stairs, most of this supposedly outrageous behaviour is actually quite subtle etiquette-based faux pas that do not exactly make for an engaging cinematic experience.

As for the cult, you never find out what they're about, what they believe in, or what their purpose is. Occasionally, you'll get a little snippet of some half-baked philosophical belief, but not enough to build up any sort of idea of what they stand for. It's painfully obvious that the writer has put hardly any thought whatsoever into the background of the most important feature of the entire film.

On the plus side, the acting is OK, and the scenes are well-filmed. Big deal, not much of a consolation when you've just wasted 2 hours watching the cinematic equivalent of waiting for a kettle to boil, only to discover that you've forgotten to switch the plug socket on.

Oh and another thing I hated is that it's one of these films where you have to keep adjusting the volume because every so often there will be a scene where the actors mumble inaudibly for a little while, followed by a scene which is then way too loud in comparison. So also not a good movie if you like to watch films in bed and/or when someone is sleeping in the room next door.

Character development is not one of the film's strong points

[howard.schumann · 8/10 · 6 November 2011]

In first time director Sean Durkin's Martha Marcy May Marlene, Martha (Elizabeth Olsen), a young woman in her early twenties joins a commune in a wooded area in upstate New York and endures psychological and sexual abuse at the hands of charismatic leader Patrick (John Hawkes). Patrick is a Charles Manson look-alike, who calls Martha "Marcy May" (all women must use the name "Marlene" when answering the phone). Nothing is said about the reason the commune exists or what its philosophy may be, other than Patrick's misinterpretation of the Buddhist word "Nirvana", and his remark that death is but a continuation, not an end. We are not told the circumstances that led Martha to join the group, but we do know that her parents are deceased, and that her relationship with her older sister Lucy (Sarah Paulson) has been strained.

In the commune, women's role is subservient. They work in the garden and prepare the food but are allowed to eat only after the men are finished. They have no beds but sleep on mattresses on the floor in the same room. Their initiation is to be given drugs and brought to Patrick's room for sex. Apparently, the house has many babies but it is unclear who takes care of them. Although it is possible, even probable, that fringe groups such as these do exist, and that the director may have personal knowledge of them, the members of the commune, as depicted in the film, seem little more than dehumanized caricatures of how some think "free-love hippies," should look and act.

Without explanation, Martha suddenly leaves the commune and escapes into the surrounding woods, reaching town, though followed by Patrick's assistant Watts (Brady Corbet). Strangely, she goes to a restaurant in open view and, even more puzzling, Watts makes no attempt to restrain her and bring her back to the commune, odd behavior for a cult that doesn't hesitate to resort to murder. Somehow, Martha finds the inner resources to call her sister who brings her to their upscale lake house where she and her husband Ted (Hugh Dancy) live.

It is clear almost immediately that Martha is having trouble reconnecting with society, but she is apparently too traumatized to communicate with Lucy or Ted about her present emotions, recent past, or plans for the future.

The film continues on parallel tracks, flashing back to scenes from the commune and her life with her sister. The reason she left the commune becomes clearer when a flashback depicts a home invasion in which an innocent man is murdered. Martha's behavior at Lucy's home is unconventional, to say the least. She swims in the nude and inappropriately climbs into bed with Lucy and Ted when they are making love. She fears that she is being tracked down by cult members, but it is not clear whether this is real or imagined. Martha's trajectory continues downward, but no one seems to be able to get a handle on the situation.

There is no intervention by the family when it is clearly required, no growth or adjustment on Martha's part, and not a single moment of sunlight lightening the film's dark mood. There is also no evidence that her sister or her husband have the empathy to create a space safe enough for her to communicate. In a home seemingly shut off from the outside world with no television or Internet to be seen, and no thought of contacting a counselor or psychologist, all Lucy and Ted can do is to shout repeatedly, "What's wrong with you?" "There's something wrong with her," until it becomes risible. Ultimately, Ted and Lucy decide to act but it may be too late. In an ambiguous ending, Martha's fate is left open for the viewer to interpret.

Although the performances by Elizabeth Olsen and John Hawkes are outstanding, character development is not one of the film's strong points. Though it is billed as a psychological character study, Durkin does not provide enough insight into Martha's character, philosophy, or motives for us to identify with or care about what her fate may be. Martha Marcy May Marlene is a psychological thriller that is beautifully performed and, at times, gripping, but ultimately does not seem to have much point other than to tell us that destructive cults are …well…destructive, that they mess with your mind, and that failure to talk about them afterwards can mess up your head even worse.

Beautiful cinematography and interesting performances by the supporting cast of this Sundance award winner make it worth a couple of hours of your time.

[cjkirk6 · 7/10 · 7 February 2011]

Elizabeth Olsen is surprisingly dour and convincing as the main character - Martha/Marcy May/Marlene Lewis. When I read that she was the sister of the Olsen twins I wasn't sure what to expect - but she displayed none of the saccharine characteristics of Mary Kate and Ashley. She is striking-looking - perhaps this is enhanced by the beautiful cinematography of this movie. John Hawkes, as Patrick, the leader of the cult family, is great. Creepy and bizarre - he makes you cringe but you can't take your eyes off him. Louisa Krause, who played the freaked-out high school prostitute in The Babysitters, is also fun to watch as Zoe, the seeming Godsend of a friend to Martha/Marcy May in the cult family, but who is actually just as creepy as Patrick. The discomfort that Martha brings to Lucy and Ted (Sarah Paulson and Hugh Dancy) - the real-family sister and brother-in-law - is palpable, even if it is what makes the story kind of a bummer overall. The dense forests, fertile farmland, and beautiful lake are characters themselves. Martha's connection with them brings her otherwise ethereal (or maybe just spaced out or tweaked-by-something unknown) character to earth - for me it made her someone I could like and feel sympathy for, even when her relationship with Patrick and Zoe inspired not much.

Unsatisfying and disappointing despite a strong performance

[phd_travel · 4/10 · 23 July 2013]

It is a fascinating subject for a movie to see the after effects on a member of a cult. Elizabeth Olsen acts as the title's Martha who escapes from an upstate cult and stays with her sister played by Sarah Paulson and her husband.

First the strong points. Elizabeth Olsen is a watchable actress who takes on this difficult role convincingly. The matter of fact way the cult is depicted is chilling and realistic.

There are two major flaws in the movie. The shifting between present and flashback are too difficult to distinguish for the viewer. Even if they were trying to make it seem like a blurring of reality for Martha, it just ended up being confusing.

The second unsatisfying plot element is that they didn't show her sister and brother in law discovering what happened to her in the cult. It made them seem not understanding. Maybe that was the purpose. But it just felt annoying that they didn't find out. Hand in hand with that is that the ending could have been a more conclusive.

Overall it is unsatisfying and disappointing.

Depressing, but elaborate story that obscures the boundary between normal and abnormal

[Arit · 4 February 2011]

I watched this film last month in Salt Lake City at the Sundance Film Festival. Even though I didn't find it particularly entertaining, I noticed this Jury Award winner for directing had no user review yet, so I thought I'd throw in my two cents' worth.

The film starts out with the lead character Martha (Elizabeth Olsen) running away from what seems to be a self-sustaining rural establishment of several youths led by a middle aged man (John Hawkes), and trying to rediscover herself as she seeks shelter under her older sister's roof. The story then unfolds in two convoluted threads; one that takes place in reality where she tries to adapt to her sister's and brother-in-law's high-maintenance life, and one that harks back to the memories of the cult that exploited her in the name of a meaningful relationship. As the boundary between the two threads becomes vague, we see Martha plunge into abysmal depression, to make us all fret that she may be already damaged beyond the point of no repair.

The depiction of the main character's endless descent is a turn off for a casual film watcher like myself, who'd like to see a glimmer of hope in the most depressing of films. However, there is no denying the film is well-executed, shot in serene rustic settings with grappling performances by the cast.

Elizabeth Olsen swings back and forth between Martha's normal and abnormal moments with great authenticity. Not only she is effortless in doing so, she also hints at sibling rivalry with a terrific nuance. This film should put her on "25 emerging actresses under 25" or some similar lists if she hasn't been recognized yet.

Fans of John Hawkes's will not be disappointed, as he gives another solid performance as a backwoods haggard, but this time sans the heroic aura he had in Winter's Bone. In one scene, he even takes the guitar out and serenades Martha with disturbingly eloquent lyrics.

The director, Sean Durkin, is certainly on top of his game and succeeds in just showing the "basic human needs to belong to a group." However, what he expects us to take away from the film is not entirely clear to me. I just hope he uses his great skills for more pleasant themes in the future.

good surprising performance

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 17 December 2014]

Martha (Elizabeth Olsen) escapes from an abusive male-dominated communal cult where she lived as Marcy May. Her sister Lucy (Sarah Paulson) eagerly takes her in. Lucy is married to Ted (Hugh Dancy). She has difficulties reintegrating into the world despite her sister's efforts. The movie flashes back occasionally to her time with the charismatic leader Patrick (John Hawkes).

It was my first time seeing Elizabeth Olsen act and it was quite a good surprise. Other than being the younger sister to the twins, I wasn't really expecting to see this mature performance. The story has very disturbing sections with her in the cult. It's uncomfortable which a good indie sometimes becomes. It does need to be more consistent with its intensity. It's a bit too slow in a few places.

The ending (again)

[hxamaranth · 7/10 · 5 July 2015]

Yes, it could have been the cult coming after her and yes they might have forced or coerced her to return or killed them all but it could also have been no more than some stranger that they almost hit and the rest could be Martha's intensifying paranoia constructing what we were seeing.

The goal though was to get the audience to ask these questions but I think Durkin failed in defining the intent of posing this question which was to illustrate Martha's own confusion and uncertainty about her paranoia, not the audience's confusion about what happened. I could possibly suggest that he use a tighter close up on Olsen to capture the nuances of her expressions showing her fear and uncertainty but I think he tried to use a different tactic...

Note that at times of her most paranoid, she is visually alone in the scenes. In the back of the car we don't see Ted and Lucy in the front seat. At the dinner party she is alone with the bartender despite the fact that there were dozens of people nearby. During her final swim she is alone when she sees the man sitting across the lake watching her. Even when she awakes in a panic and pushes Ted down the stairs we don't see his face or Lucy until after the fact. When she breaks the window on the black SUV, when she hears the pine cones hitting her window at night... she is alone.

I think we as an audience just weren't offered a way to tie our own questions with Martha's state of mind. Maybe if there was a scene in which Martha asks these same questions to Lucy. Maybe if they shot from a first-person perspective. I don't know but it just didn't quite work for me.

More Than Meets the Eye

[tappingjeff · 8/10 · 6 December 2011]

Sean Durkin's first feature is quite the trip. Durkin's sensibility as a director shines with this film, and shows undeniable promise. The really crazy thing about this film is that it's quietness is only juxtaposed by the really messed up things that are happening in the plot. An intriguing analytical mess of reality, memory, and fantasy, Martha Marcy May Marlene is about a paranoia, an extreme desire to escape the past, though it always comes back to haunt you. It is the isolation and the trouble that comes with that, that Martha really suffers from-- the cult has a certain way of thinking and the film geniously explores the psychological persuasion into a way of thinking…the way that the cult tries to make their ethics and morality universal is a terrifying, and intriguing thing. Elizabeth Olsen does a helluva job as Martha, giving her dewey eyed complexity, both bewilderment, shock, disgust, and intrigue. She gives quiet moments great momentum, and is an actress to keep an eye on. Jody Lee Lipes' cinematography is eerily distant and then uncomfortably close; the mixed bag reflects Martha's psyche in an interesting way. The scariest thing about Martha Marcy May Marlene is that it actually could happen. It may have even benefited from taking that dive a bit further, let us know just how paranoid and altered Martha is, and especially contrasting that with the old Martha, and the only complaint I might have is that we never get to see what the original Martha was like; it is only inferred as to why she would even accept and join this group in the first place, or what exactly she was running away from. But perhaps that makes the film only more intriguing—running away brought her to this society, and of course it looks fine on the outside, with it's acceptable living conditions and always a "family' of sorts around you. But, ah, there's always more than meets the eye. B+

A variation of Charles Manson and crew

[calmly · 7/10 · 19 July 2021]

Charles, Tex, the Girls and Spahn Ranch are not hidden from those that remember. The acting is good, but the story line lacks.

The director accomplished his mission of creating an open end ending, albeit, not very lucid. I, for one, was not left wondering. After all, it's Hollywood.

Should be retitled "A Star is Born"

[DonFishies · 8/10 · 24 September 2011]

Moments after the credits began, I knew Elizabeth Olsen was destined for the Oscar red carpet for her work in Martha Marcy May Marlene. It was a quiet thriller I knew very little about content wise before hand, but knew all about the acclaim it has received since premiering at Sundance and Cannes earlier this year. When it came to the Toronto International Film Festival, it was one of the first films I clamoured for tickets for. And now I know why.

Martha (Olsen) has fled an abusive cult lead by Patrick (John Hawkes). After years of being off-the-grid, she calls her estranged sister Lucy (Sarah Paulson) to pick her up from a bus shelter. Lucy brings her to the lakeside cottage she shares with her new husband Ted (Hugh Dancy), where they are to spend some much needed time away from their lives in the city. But as Martha tries to adjust back to a normal life, she is continually haunted by the memories of her life in the cult.

I was initially underwhelmed walking out of Sean Durkin's debut feature, loving Olsen's performance but not much else. But as the days have gone on, I continually find myself obsessing on every moment of Martha Marcy May Marlene. Despite the backwoods feel and its atmospheric similarities to last year's Best Picture nominee Winter's Bone, this film is just simply unmissable. It is deeply unsettling throughout, and one of the few films that succeed in making the audience deeply uncomfortable. I usually find myself shifting in my seat from boredom. Here, I was shifting just because of how quietly terrified and incredibly disgusted I was with what was going on on-screen. It is a moody piece, but one that sticks with you and scares you more every time you talk and think about it. And it is that feeling, that earnest inner torment that keeps bringing me back and appreciating it more and more.

Durkin brilliantly frames the film in a similar vein to Memento, jumping back and forth between Martha at her sister's cottage in the present and her life in the cult in the past. He weaves in and out of the timelines with care, never once confusing the audience. We simply watch as Martha tries to get on with her life, but keeps finding things that remind her of moments she spent in the cult. He frames the story entirely around her, allowing her unreliability to throw the story into off-putting and disturbing directions. I found myself simply stunned by some of the unbelievable things that occur without warning. Nothing too horrific physically happens, but Durkin makes the implications of what is even more so. More impressive is how no one thing in the film feels insignificant. They all just add up on top of each other magnificently, and help drive the paranoia that plagues Martha from scene to scene, just as much if not more than it does for the audience.

Olsen has appeared in a few films before her work here, but this is an incredibly impressive true debut film for her. Her performance is simply unbelievable and unmissable. Watching her transformation from naïve teenager to paranoid, PTSD victim on-screen is one of the few absolutely amazing moments of film we have had this year. It is made even better by the fact that the film is not even told in sequence, so we are forced to watch her navigate between the depictions with relative ease. Watching her character's arch blossom into something terrifying is something that has become truly rare for such a young, unaccomplished actress. But she makes it work, and forces the audience to never take their eyes off her. She just ups the ante with every scene, and undercuts every actor who she shares the screen with. She is magnetic, and commands the screen with such strength that you would never even pretend to imagine that she is related to the Olsen Twins. Whatever doubts I may have had about the film did not even come close to quashing her compelling and spectacular performance.

Hawkes continues to prove what a remarkable supporting player he is with his work as the leader of the cult. He is always frightening and nightmarish from the very beginning, but seeing him differing forms of sincerity make him a genuinely scary villain. We practically scream at the screen before and after what he puts Martha (or as he calls her, Marcy May) through, and his performance is one of the key reasons why the film is so vividly unsettling. Watching Hawkes playing the guitar and serenading her with a tune he wrote "about her", may go down as one of the most horrific scenes in film history.

Paulson and Dancy do a fairly great job in their thankless roles as Martha's actual family. They help propel the film forward and make Olsen's role all the more fantastic, but I found that they were not given all that much to do outside of helping move the story forward. Paulson does get some very juicy moments, but I think their roles could have been all the better if they had so much more to do. They just seemed like mere plot devices more so than anything else.

While there is still something I still cannot quite describe that holds Martha Marcy May Marlene back from being the best film of the year, I cannot stop thinking about how powerful and great it really is. It is an ambiguous film that stays with you long after you leave the theatre and one that packs one of the single best performances of the year. This is an incredible directorial debut for Durkin, and an even better one for Olsen. Missing this film when it hits theatres is quite simply unacceptable.

8.5/10.

Slightly less than the sum of its parts...

[gillman11 · 7/10 · 19 May 2012]

Martha Marcy May Marlene (2011)

Synopsis: A young woman escapes a cult commune and attempts to reconnect with her sister. Her increasingly erratic behaviour is counterpointed with her experiences in the commune….hilarity ensues.

Might be spoilers…

It makes me feel slightly small, criticising someone who has managed to achieve something that I've never even got close to doing. Particularly when that something is executed as well as Martha Marcy May Marlene is. This review is more an attempt to explain (to myself chiefly but if anyone finds it useful, it's a bonus), why a film I expected to be awarding an 8 or 9 star score only ended up being a 7.

So, let's get the praise out of the way first. The film is technically excellent – although the cinematography is occasionally fuzzy, for a lower budget film it makes excellent use of some distinct locations and scenery.

Elizabeth Olsen and John Hawkes make the most of the meatiest roles on offer but the cast are all uniformly excellent, especially laudable as in some ways the performance supersede the material that the actors have to work with.

The editing and inter-cutting between the "safe" Martha and the imprisoned "Marcy May" are imaginatively handled and provide specific counterpoints to guide an understanding of where the film is trying to go

There's also a definite feel of Durkin adopting the visual language of exploitation cinema, many of the wide vista shots mentioned earlier reminded me of Meir Zarchi's I Spit On Your Grave (1978) particularly the lakeside ones and the claustrophobic interiors of the main commune house had a Texas Chain Saw feel. Given the themes of the film this struck as not being accidental and provides an additional element of fun for those who like to play spot the homage.

You knew this was coming, but…

Technical excellence is one thing. The fact that the film struggles to tell a coherent or believable story is another.

A refusal to drip feed the audience is laudable and the fact that we are offered a choice of believing Martha's paranoia is genuine or a figment of her imagination provides an interesting post screening debate point.

That said, the lack of back story dilutes sympathy for the central characters, why did Martha and her sister's lives turn out so differently when presumably they both had the same experiences up to a point? There is no suggestion that both sisters have ended up in similar situations but from different angles – Lucy's husband is clearly decent, successful and tolerant to a point, albeit slightly dull.

This lack of anchor in the sister's relationships and experiences makes it difficult to understand the situation, leaving the only conclusion being that Martha was already psychologically weaker than her sister.

This leaves the audience with little to work with in terms of sympathy for her situation, other than an obvious empathy with the horror of the cult's rape and brainwashing of its female members but its fairly one dimensional and the characterisation is not far beyond the usual cookie cutter horror film.

The actions of the sister and husband also stretch credulity as Martha's behaviour becomes more and more erratic. Whilst seeing nothing wrong in skinny dipping can be passed off as an eccentricity, when a grown woman curls up on your bed for comfort while you're having sex, it would surely strike you (even as an accumulation of circumstance) that perhaps she's had some bad experiences and needs some professional help.

The fact that the pair only seem to consider getting this help when Martha completely and violently breaks down seems driven solely by the need to get the film to a particular place as opposed to being true to what would actually happen in a situation like this and as a point of conjecture, it becomes increasingly irritating.

The commune is an obvious cipher for the Manson family Barker Ranch, from the leader's metaphysical pseudo philosophy to the "creepy crawlies" to burglarise suburban homes (another slightly clunky plot device that seems to only exist to bring Martha to her tipping point).

It would have been interesting to see an attempt to do something different rather than another rehash of the Manson scenario (in my opinion, done definitively in Jim Van Bebber's film The Manson Family).

In conclusion, the film is a curio, in many ways it's an excellent example of the way cinema can be used as a medium for storytelling in ways other than the ones we traditionally expect but conversely it can be extremely unsatisfactory when the characters and story are frustratingly oblique.

Expect to come away both impressed and dissatisfied.

This is an unfinished movie....

[ravebounty · 3/10 · 1 January 2012]

*******SPOILER********* This was a film that started with excellent potential but cop-ed out at the end by having what people are defensively calling a "Non-Ending", which is utter bullshit.

Basically, the movie is fairly well made, keeping the viewer entranced enough to want more but always questioning where things are going. The movie is purposely vague and in the end, when you expect to finally learn something substantial, the movie simply goes to black without any resolutions; literally no pay off and no closure. It left a very bad taste in my mouth.

This is one of those lazy films that rather then entertain the audience with intrigue and then finally a climax, uses the viewers investment against them and pisses them off to get them to talk about the movie after it's over. Writing a movie with it's buzz in mind rather then it's context shows how much integrity the director has. For that reason, I say don't waste your time with this film because most regular film goers will feel betrayed and disappointed that the movie builds up to literally nothing.

The main protagonist was pretty decent, I must admit, but when you go over the entirety of the movie, it becomes pretty clear that it accomplished very little, always teasing that it had more, but then coming up completely short. You will be disappointed, guaranteed.

Martha, Marcy May, and Marlene all caught between truth, sanity and madness

[napierslogs · 8/10 · 12 November 2011]

Martha (Elizabeth Olsen) is a character who has forgotten what it means to be normal. Marcy May is a character who has been taught to ignore social values and any definition of "normal." Martha and Marcy May is the same person and that's where the conflict lies. "Martha Marcy May Marlene" is a dramatic character study which edges towards psychological thriller.

Martha has run away from the hippie commune where she was living as Marcy May. She calls her sister. Lucy (Sarah Paulson) is worried but happy to help. With a good night's sleep, dinner and breakfast, and better clothes, Martha should be fine. But the longer she lives with her sister and brother-in-law (Hugh Dancy), the harder it is for her to separate memories from dreams, right from wrong, and good people from bad people.

Overall, the film is slow and silent, not usual traits for a psychological thriller. But concerns for Martha's mental health grow wildly. The character of Martha, Marcy May, and Marlene is just so endearing, she's somebody you want to care for. I'm not one for the hippie lifestyle or their false ideals (and I don't think the filmmaker is either) but Marcy May just embodied the innocence of it so beautifully. Olsen has this tender powerfulness that suited the character (or characters) perfectly; she made you hold on to her with her all-knowing eyes and earnest desire to understand who she is.

With a modest budget and a somewhat original way of showing madness mixing with sanity, shot and performed beautifully, "Martha Marcy May Marlene" should be in the running for all the major Independent Spirit Awards. As the first feature for both writer/director Sean Durkin and star Elizabeth Olsen, it certainly is a stunning debut.

Before you venture into the mind of "Martha Marcy May Marlene" I will leave you with a final thought. Marlene will not tell the truth; Martha doesn't tell the truth mostly because she can't because she doesn't know what it is anymore; Marcy May wants to tell the truth.

"We're never really dead or alive; we just exist."

[drewnes · 7/10 · 30 May 2021]

What an interesting, terrifying and realistic look into how cults brainwash and affect people. Elizabeth Olsen's performance is great and anyone who is a fan of her should check this film out.

Great idea in theory, not so great in practice.

[nik-w-1 · 2/10 · 16 February 2012]

Girl escapes insane cult, attempts to get her life back to normal but keeps having flashbacks. Sounds reasonable in theory, but it just does not work in this film.

Firstly, Elizabeth Olson acts her part pretty well, but it's not the hardest role to play - it basically consists of two mini-roles: 1) a normal 20-something girl, 2) A complete nutjob. Also, John Hawkes as the cult leader was played very well too. Sadly, no-one else acts particularly well, but a lot of that is because their parts are even worse. Her sister's part is basically to keep saying "Are you okay?" and "Why are you acting so crazy?", whereas her sister's husband has an even smaller repertoire - basically to continue going on about how he doesn't trust her, doesn't particularly like her, & thinks she needs sectioning.

There are some truly ridiculous plot lines in this film. Firstly, she goes to great lengths to run away from the cult & hide in the forest to avoid the people chasing her, yet she decides to go to the local burger bar in the town just down the road. Firstly, where does she get the money, and secondly - when one of the guys from the cult finds her, why is he content to just leave her there? All very bizarre.

There are so many jumps back and forth that it's hard to work out any kind of timeline as to what's going on. I get that she doesn't know if she's remembering or imagining, and that's good, but some sort of hint at a timeline would have been helpful.

The film lacked any kind of sense that it was going anywhere after the first 15 minutes... she escapes and goes to live with her sister until her and her husband get bored when they take her to an asylum - except she appears to be being followed by the cult leader (or is this just her imagination?)... there's no ending, no progression, and just a feeling of being no wiser at the end of the film than at the beginning and there was no sense of caring for the characters. Was I sad that she'd joined the cult? No. Did I feel for her sister and her husband at having to put up with her? No. Was I scared for her when it seemed the cult leader may be chasing her? No.

Bad kundalini rising

[chaos-rampant · 23 December 2011]

This is an exercise in controlled emotional damage, channelling oblique hurt and social condemnation from Haneke, or softened from Bruno Dumont. It plays well for a debut, a studied work referencing 3 Women and Bergman's Glass Darkly among others, the result a carefully tuned psychologic thriller, but raises a few questions along the way.

It troubles me more because my primary interest in film just so happens to be Buddhist and linked with meditation as the means for a true perception into the nature of things.

What does it mean for example, that the philosophy of the character who looms the most elusive but enormous behind the whole sordid thing is based on a complete, foolish misunderstanding of the Buddhist nirvana? Of course we could wave away any such concern by falling back to exactly this sort of skewed understanding as the cause of so much pain, a harsh, selfish understanding of a selfless awareness with none of the boundless compassion that is primarily stressed in Buddhism, but we are clearly expected to use the worldview from this man to challenge the privilege and complacency of the couple having a spacious lake-house in Connecticut to retreat to just for the weekends. Why not swim in the nude, we're meant to ask this much. But does the filmmaker posit a horrible man or merely horribly understood, this much remains for our consideration.

It hinges all its power however on us being charmed along with Martha, then be appalled that we were, even as or exactly because there is too much Nietzche in John Hawkes' spiritual leader.

The whole idea here of course is that she is not simply damaged by an irrational world, here as well as there, but that we're not given any rational world to fall back to for the healing. Both worlds are called under scrutiny, each one secluded in its own microcosm. It makes for some cheap shots along the way.

Since this is, above all, a swim in the flotsam of a world falling apart, with less and less stable footing between the overlaps, it does well to work the way it does. We are meant to be baffled for easy answers. We're meant to not be able to tell ahead of time where we always land, say scrubbing what kitchen floor. With suffering a given response anywhere, we're meant to wonder even for a moment what microcosm is finally the more comforting, and then shudder that we did.

So in terms of structure it's dealt really well by the first-time filmmaker, let's see what he does; as our first go round the commune approach with trepidation a kind of soothing reverie about new exciting freedom and openness as dreamed and controlled by this man, himself equally soothing and strange, gradually allow the haze of nightmare to seep in, all the while fanning the fumes from the hallucination to distort the view and coherence of the safe haven above while troubling us that it may be in the same breath revealing its true essence. Then for the second go round, with the arrival of a new member in the reverie, make us firmly a part of the nightmare being dreamed by showing us the controls, while outside reality is shattered almost beyond recognition.

It is careful work. Is Martha's initial apprehension for example, a fear of what is being shared or of sharing herself? Did her sister's husband make a pass at her, or was he merely trying to wake her up? We can make our calls by the end, but we have only broken pieces of her by that time.

Broken pieces then that no longer fit together, mirrored in the many names for this woman, the many facets of the one image irretrievably lost, that this man hangs on his wall when no one else wouldn't. He sings well but it's a sinister, ruthless song.