User Reviews

I read the book a few months ago and then discovered the movie on Netflix. The movie does follow the book fairly well, but the book just seems to explain things better and provide better background details so you don't feel so confused. I realized the ending of the movie skipped over a lot of details.

Blond woman who was in the hut helping Core recover from the arrow injury was the mom of the Medora and Vernon, who are twins and in an incestuous relationship. In the end, the twins wander off into the wilderness to live in secret and have another child to start over with. The first son's death is eventually simply accepted and the two move on. The mom provides them supplies. Throughout the movie there are implications about Medora messing with evil and such, and it's primarily because of her relationship with her brother and their child. She was instructed to kill her own child (I think by the wolf killer guy if I remember correctly), and she did. The wolf masks were more like curses in the book. The old lady who was killed was more of the local witch doctor or medicine woman who knew about the incest.

Very odd book, but the book definitely contains a better ambiance for understanding things.

Anyone who caught a glimpse of the trailer would be certain a genre-meshing treat was on the cards, but 'Hold the Dark' fails to fulfil on that eerie expectation by the time the anti-climactic ending happens.

The film stars Jeffrey Wright as a retired naturalist and wolf expert lured into an intriguing mystery about the disappearance of a young boy - supposedly taken by wolves. The setting imbues a sense of foreboding, an aesthetic the story deserves, at least initially. But the further into the narrative you go, the more everything blurs. The mystery goes from dark adventure to crime thriller with undertones of supernatural/occult themes that not only don't gel with the outset, but also don't unravel into anything that makes sense. You can tell that 'Hold the Dark' has the right recipe, but the ingredients are all under-cooked, and the result is never as tasty as the trailers promise.

The landscapes and visuals are undeniably the film's greatest strength, but there's only so long that the beautifully rendered, ice-cold bleak winter setting can keep you engaged before you need some narrative sustenance to satisfy curiosity. More an art film than an adventure, 'Hold the Dark' has a couple of lively sequences courtesy of bursts of violence that punctuate the monotonous pace, but because the plot isn't as tantalising as it should be, just like the setting, it feels rather empty before proceedings slow down again. The final impression is something you realise sustained your curiosity, attempted to test intellect, but failed to conclude events properly; ultimately leaving you baffled and disappointed.

6/10

I see this movie is a bit polarizing here on IMDB as some people describe it as a masterpiece and it is only us stupid Americans that do not understand its brilliance while others hate it saying it is a pointless movie with virtually no plot. Where do I fall in? I say it was an interesting movie that does fall apart due to the fact it literally had a non-ending. Seriously, us Americans may not be as smart as you Europeans, but this film literally had no ending, any idiot could see that. Oh, and by the way, movies here in America are made with explosives and all that stuff and pretty much dumbed down for European and other foreign lands so take that for what it is worth. I enjoyed aspects of this film very much and I thought it was racing towards some thrilling conclusion, but it seems to me someone did not know how they wanted this thing to end. Either the director did not like the original ending in the book, or the book had a really anticlimactic end to it and the director didn't want to change it (yes, this film is based on a book).

So, the story has a woman whose son is apparently killed by a wolf writing to a man who has written a book about a wolf he had tracked and killed. He comes to the very isolated community to at first try to reason with the woman, but then decides to try and hunt the wolf; however, he is not there one day before this woman is acting very strangely. Her husband is injured in the Middle East and he too behaves a bit strangely. At first, one thinks that perhaps they are just in shock over the loss of their son, but soon the wolf hunter learns that the boy was killed by his mother and she goes on the run setting off a violent pursuit by the husband who kills anyone in his way while the hunter looks on stunned by the violence that begins to rule the day.

The film at times seemed as if something supernatural was going on, and that could be the case, but I cannot say for sure because the movie just kind of ends without any type of real resolution. The film is about a descent into darkness where the husband and wife seem to be becoming more animal like in nature and me and my fiance started to think that perhaps the wife was a werewolf and she wanted the hunter to kill her, but then the husband comes in and starts killing everyone who had nothing to do with his son's death. Apparently, in the book the wife and husband were also brother and sister; however, this is not as clear in the film as only a couple of clues hinted at this relationship between the two. Still doesn't explain their motives or the lack of an ending.

So, it was an interesting watch and I would have scored the film higher, but the ending totally came out of nowhere and was so anticlimactic that it ruined all that had preceded it. I am curious to read the book now just to see if it too ended in such a fashion, or what I would hope to find something that brings closure to the story. I was watching this and then the film ended and both me and my fiance were like, "WTH!" Made me think the thing ended prematurely or something. Still, good acting, good setting, this film just needed some work in terms of the story and the finish.

After establishing himself as one of the most promising talents working in the film industry today with two back-to-back cinematic gems, Jeremy Saulnier hits a snag with his fourth feature film and delivers his first dud with Hold the Dark.

The story unfolds in a small village in the Alaskan wilderness and follows a writer who's summoned there by a young woman to hunt & kill the wolves that took her son, only to find himself in the middle of a vengeful rampage being carried out by the boy's father.

Directed by Jeremy Saulnier (best known for Blue Ruin & Green Room), Hold the Dark begins on a promising note, creating the required intrigue & mystery but it all fades away as the muddled plot goes a tad too awry. The viewers are given nothing to latch on to and the story wanders with no sense of direction.

Though the story teases with a feral angle, the mystery remains a mystery, leaving behind more questions than answers. The threads are left loose, not much material is provided to connect the dots, characters aren't fleshed enough to make us care, and whatever Saulnier was aiming for, he falls short by a considerable margin.

The only thing working in the film's favour is its dark atmosphere. Reeking of death & dread, the aura is that of an omen and it is well sustained from start to finish. The smart camerawork, desolate locations & grim score bring an uneasy feeling of their own into the mix. Yet it all amounts to nothing thanks to its convoluted structure.

Its slow-burn narrative makes its 125 minutes runtime feel twice as long. There are many scenes that don't add up and it's all emotionally distant. There is a shootout segment that will stand out for most but even that ends up overstaying its welcome. As for the ending, it's bound to leave many viewers baffled, frustrated & unsatisfied.

The violence the film has in store is brutal & unflinching just like the director's past features yet they don't leave much of an impact. Performances range from good to garbage and in a cast starring Jeffrey Wright, Alexander Skarsgård & Riley Keough, it's James Badge Dale who shines. Macon Blair also has a cameo and it's awful.

On an overall scale, Hold the Dark is a slow, meandering, overlong, blank & boring mess, and is undeniably Jeremy Saulnier's weakest film to date. A shoddily scripted & poorly executed thriller that brings the director's creative momentum to a sudden halt, Hold the Dark is an unexpected misfire that may require another viewing for a final verdict but for now, it is an absolute disappointment.

Ahh, if only I'd read the book first! A number of reviewers for the movie here on IMDb explain details that aren't made readily apparent in the movie, which on reflection make perfect sense, but are mentioned only briefly and casually in the picture so it's almost impossible to make the connection. I think the film could have been scripted to add a little more understanding of the relationship between Medora (Riley Keough) and Vernon (Alexander Skarsgård) Slone, because knowing their actual relationship would have added a lot of clarity to the story, if not a creepiness factor added to the proceedings. I did get engaged in the picture, but when it came to the very ending, I had the same kind of reaction as I did with "No Country For Old Men", which leaves the viewer with a huge question mark hanging over one's head. What I can tell you about movies cast with Native American individuals, I get the biggest kick out of the names of the players. This one had Julian Black Antelope as the renegade Yup'ik Cheeon, and a supporting cast that included Joseph Whitebird, Tantoo Cardinal and Karen Powderface. You can't get more authentic that that.

The mood looks promising. They you start watching it and it's all downhill from there. Starts with the cryptic, monotone voice over, which is now a cliche to tell you,"Ohh, this is so mysterious and spooky." Dialogue is terrible, a very bad imitation in terms of pacing of the movie Drive, which was excellent. And it just goes from bad to worse. Skarsgaard is useless. I'm still not convinced this guy belongs in anything but that silly show he was in about vampires. He's one note in everything he does. And you couldn't care less about him or anyone else in this film. And as 90% of all the other reviews state, the plot is unintelligible, slow, and pretentious. Skarsgaard goes around killing people. The end. It keeps you watching because you keep thinking, "OK, at some point, someone is going to tell me what the hell is going on in this plot. It never happens. I swear, it's like being on a bus trip to Idaho and thinking, at some point, we're going to get there so I can get off this crappy bus." But you never arrive. How does a script like this get greenlighted? Who reads something like this and says, "My God, people need to see this! Let's dedicate all this time and manpower to make this non-story?" I'm dumfounded.

After watching Hold The Dark I felt compelled to read the novel by William Giraldi. After my first time watching the movie I was really left with many questions that needed answering. The movie was well shot and every scene seemed to keep me wondering how the movie would come to an end. After reading the novel I then understood the movie in its entirety. Here is the movie explained.

The Slones are twins! Throughout the movie there is always mention of how similar they look or how they have shared a long past. Medora in the beginning of the movie when answering Core about how long she knew him says "I can not remember a memory without him in it." When Vernon is ruffling through clues in the cardboard box as to where Medora might be there is a picture of a little boy and girl sitting on a dock. A picture of him and her, brother and sister. While in the motel where Vernon sleeps in the same room where Medora did, the receptionist mentions how they look similar and have a "Scandinavian" look. The man who sold wolfs oil to Vernon's dad also mentions how they have similar eyes and a similar nose. Them being twins is revealed in the book where the mother of Medora and Vernon helps Core at the end. When Core sees her face he then realized that she was the mother and that they were twins. Although they do show this in the movie it is not explained that she is the mother and that they are twins.

The use of the mask by both Vernon and Medora releases the "wolf" inside of them. Whenever there is a scene where the mask is worn, it ends up violent or deranged. In the book an elder gives the mask to Medora while she is pregnant with Bailey. She says that Medora must kill the baby for it will be sick. Despite Medora and Vernon's reluctance to listen to the elder, (Vernon actually kills her) Medora keeps the mask.

There is so much explained in the book then in the movie. The silent but ever bonding relationship between Vernon and Cheeon. The history of Medora and Vernon's father (whom actually commit suicide). How infanticide has been a regular occurrence in the past among primates and mammals.

Of course there is also much that is not explained and left to the viewer to decide.

Overall I feel the movie was consistent with the themes and characters protracted in the novel. The film like the novel, was captivating and left you wanting more. I don't feel the low reviews that this film has received in IMDB by some viewers is just. I think if they were to investigate a little further in order to find the meaning behind things then it would have had a better review.