Film Review: Saint Maud
Photo courtesy of A24.
Many of the horror genre’s all-time classics, such as Rosemary’s Baby (1969), The Exorcist (1973), and The Omen (1976), are based firmly in Christian beliefs, in an association that continues through to modern-day favourites like The Conjuring (2013). While Saint Maud, the debut film by British writer-director Rose Glass, is also a horror film with religion as its central theme, its unique approach offers a refreshing change of pace from this long-standing stereotype.
Saint Maud is the character study of a young nurse named Maud (Morfydd Clark), who takes over as the private carer of Amanda (Jennifer Ehle), a 49-year-old retired dancer suffering from stage four lymphoma. Maud, an extremely devout Catholic, is unimpressed by Amanda’s lifestyle, perceiving her to be hedonistic and self-involved. Maud firmly believes she is destined for something greater than palliative care work, and finds a higher purpose in ‘saving Amanda’s soul’: attempting to help her find God before she succumbs to her illness.
The first half actually resembles a relationship drama more than a horror, and it is in this section where the film really shines. It follows the often belligerent relationship between Maud and Amanda, and the attempt they make at connection despite their profound differences. At a certain point, however, it becomes clear that Maud herself is mentally unstable, and in turn, the film shifts its focus more exclusively upon Maud, drawing further into her psyche and the darkness within. This descent into mania is accompanied by a more traditional, and somewhat derivative, psychological horror atmosphere, making it easier to see how this fits into the A24 slate (the American distributor of the film, who are also responsible for Hereditary, Midsommar and The Witch).
In depicting Maud’s religious mania, Glass chooses not to subscribe to biblical ideology like many horror classics, nor does she attempt a takedown of the perils of devotion. Maud’s mental state is neither a positive nor negative reflection of her religious obsession, as Glass skilfully paints a picture of religion as an object, a tool, something completely powerless without the will of an agent. While Maud is guided by her faith, her acts are more purely a product of her psychosis… Maud’s devotion to Christianity may be extreme, but perhaps in another timeline she would do good, save souls, and be heralded as the saint she believes she is. The film could almost be described as a heartbreaking portrait of the horror of loneliness. Had Maud been able to express herself to a friend, a lifeline, or had someone she was in contact with been more in tune to the darkness she was embedded in, perhaps she would have not gone down this path.
Saint Maud might not convert you: it’s limited in its scope, tells its story single-pointedly, and features a scarce amount of scares for something billed as a horror. But its approach to the religion horror subgenre is a unique and fascinating one, and is bolstered by brilliant performances from both Clark and Ehle. If you want something to scare your socks off, maybe look elsewhere, but if you’re willing to look further, you’ll find that Saint Maud has its own virtues to make it worth your while.
3.5/5