The writer and the director wanted to go in too many directions with this story. First, there was the obligatory "anti-religion" theme. Second, there was the obligatory class disparity theme. Third, there was the obligatory bias theme. Fourth, there was the obligatory abuse theme. Fifth, there was the victimized female theme. Finally, there was the obligatory poorly thought-out homicide theme. All these themes were loosely bound by the frame story in the book Mary' father owned, which in itself was poorly explained. A much better story could have been told with three of these themes eliminated. It doesn't matter which three, as long as there was additional room to explain the frame story of the book.
Better characterization would also have been nice. The only empathetic character in the story was the little boy and he had two very minor scenes before the end scene. One of his scenes was, you guessed it, poorly explained. It seemed to exist only because someone needed to know the boy left the house. Neither Elizabeth nor Mary were pleasant people. It would be impossible for me to explain their attraction to each other, other than they needed to be attracted to move the plot forward in the manner the director desired. The guard did everything that could have been expected of his character, but again, he was a mere plot device. With a tighter plot, his role could have been expanded a bit more to give him enough backstory to make him even slightly rounded as a character. The same for the wandering stranger. He showed up when the writer and director needed for him to show up, without benefit of foreshadowing, with the exception of five seconds display of a book illustration.
One thing the director did well was to create atmosphere. Movies filmed in the dark have been done to death. However, being a period film and many scenes necessarily taking place at night, the candlelight was perfect for scene-setting. I would have liked to see a contrast with bright daylight (continuing the idea of "healing" the girls with sunlight being the best disinfectant), but that's me. I also would have liked to see a better explanation of the end. Mary's twitching finger suggests that she survived the hanging and the mutilation, but was it due to the old woman's/father's book? Or was the connection to Elizabeth's smile and her failure to answer Mary, suggesting that she was more than she appeared to be?
Overall, I think this story had a lot of potential, but suffered due to the convoluted twists and turns needed to fill all the boxes the writer and the director felt obligated to check. It was not a bad effort, and I don't regret watching it, but I feel it could have been a much better film.
Better characterization would also have been nice. The only empathetic character in the story was the little boy and he had two very minor scenes before the end scene. One of his scenes was, you guessed it, poorly explained. It seemed to exist only because someone needed to know the boy left the house. Neither Elizabeth nor Mary were pleasant people. It would be impossible for me to explain their attraction to each other, other than they needed to be attracted to move the plot forward in the manner the director desired. The guard did everything that could have been expected of his character, but again, he was a mere plot device. With a tighter plot, his role could have been expanded a bit more to give him enough backstory to make him even slightly rounded as a character. The same for the wandering stranger. He showed up when the writer and director needed for him to show up, without benefit of foreshadowing, with the exception of five seconds display of a book illustration.
One thing the director did well was to create atmosphere. Movies filmed in the dark have been done to death. However, being a period film and many scenes necessarily taking place at night, the candlelight was perfect for scene-setting. I would have liked to see a contrast with bright daylight (continuing the idea of "healing" the girls with sunlight being the best disinfectant), but that's me. I also would have liked to see a better explanation of the end. Mary's twitching finger suggests that she survived the hanging and the mutilation, but was it due to the old woman's/father's book? Or was the connection to Elizabeth's smile and her failure to answer Mary, suggesting that she was more than she appeared to be?
Overall, I think this story had a lot of potential, but suffered due to the convoluted twists and turns needed to fill all the boxes the writer and the director felt obligated to check. It was not a bad effort, and I don't regret watching it, but I feel it could have been a much better film.