“After the Hunt” is a psychological-thriller, set against the backdrop of Yale University, that aims to explore how people from different walks of life – mainly socioeconomic and generational – view the world. To reveal these disparities, the movie uses a case of he-said, she-said when Maggie, a rich, black, gay female student whose parents donate money to the school, played by Ayo Edebiri, alleges that Frank a middle-class, straight, white, male professor, played by Andrew Garfield, sexually assaulted her. Now Alma, a middle-aged, white female professor, whose close with them both – Idolized by Maggie and more than just colleagues with Frank – has to determine who she believes, while ultimately grappling with an unearthed secret of her own.
Before I go further, I want to preface this review by stating this is not typically my type of movie. While I like psychological thrillers, I prefer the blockbuster variety – think “Shutter Island” “Minority Report.” This film feels more like an independent movie made by a big studio. So that’s the perspective I’m coming from.
I’ll start with a few interesting observations before moving on to what I didn’t like, and, since I like to end on a high note, finish up with what I did like.
Okay, action…
Interesting Observations
Maggie’s Sexuality. They made the character Maggie young and rich in order to play up or examine the generational differences, between, I’m guessing Gen X and Gen Z and the class differences between the middle-class and the rich. The only thing is they also made this character black and gay, both of which are attributes that seemed to be under utilized. Maggie’s gayness seemed to be used in two ways: one, to add to the mystery of whether or not she was telling the truth about being sexually assaulted by Frank. The viewer is left to wonder would a girl not into men throw herself at a man to sleep with him. It also plays into the idea that she didn’t simply admire Alma as someone she wanted to be like, but leaves it open for the viewer to consider that her professor is also someone she wants to be with, and therefore she may be jealous of the relationship Alma has with Frank. Her sexuality seemed to be used as a tool to move the mystery and suspense of the story forward, rather than to give more insight into the perspective of someone in this marginalized group.
Maggie’s Race. Then there’s the fact that she’s also black. The fact of the matter is black people don’t million and billionaire their way out of, they don’t Harvard and Yale their way out of the albatross that is racism. And yet the movie kept putting forth this idea that black-girl Maggie, had privilege because she was rich as if the privilege her wealth affords her was equal to that of wealthy, educated, white people. While wealthy black people may have facets of privilege that middle class and broke white folks don’t’ have, they don’t have the privilege of white people who are on their same socioeconomic level. And in some cases, they don’t even have the privilege of middle class and broke white folks. Maggie’s blackness doesn’t appear to be explicitly woven into whether or not her side of the story was believable. While there are some stereotypes tossed her way that were typical of the black experience, the movie seems to credit those stereotypes to her being spoiled and rich rather than black. The issue of race is vaguely addressed. It almost surfaces as an afterthought.
It makes me wonder if Maggie was originally written as a black girl, or was she changed to black to fit Ayo who they wanted for this role.
Alma’s Husband. If Maggie’s sexuality was written in to help move the story forward, Alma’s husband seemed to be as well. It’s almost as if the writer felt the movie needed a voiceover or narration, but that idea was scrapped, so she had to find another way to fill in the gaps, thus Alma’s husband – he has a name, I can’t remember it – was written in or expanded to serve as such. He serves as a voice of reason of sorts. He poses concepts to her as if he is posing them to students in a classroom. They have no chemistry. But I’m not above admitting that I may have missed the full purpose of their marriage as it’s intended to come across, too busy being bored by it.
Things I didn’t like
The pace. This movie is slow as fuck. Fortunately, the main question that drives the story is posed fairly early on in the movie. However, getting to the answer drags on without adding any real nuance that would justify the two hour and 19-minute running time. Instead, it just rehashes the same concept of the generational divide between Gen X and Gen Z, leaving other relevant concepts ignored or inadequately explored.
The lighting. It was a haunting choice of lighting – often very dark in Alma’s house, particularly in one scene in the kitchen when she was talking with her husband. There were these unnatural shadows that swept across the characters during this scene that I found to be a distraction. It took me away from looking at these characters as real people and reminded me that what I was witnessing was make-believe.
The acting. While this film may be jam-packed with heavy hitters, for me, their performances just didn’t pack a punch. I mean, you got Andrew Garfield of “Social Network” and “Spiderman” fame; Ayo Edebiri, who swept the 2024 awards season for her role in “The Bear” and who has since become a fashion it-girl, including landing on the November 2025 cover of Vogue magazine. Then you have Chloe Sevigny, the Academy-nominated actress who’s more critically acclaimed and admired by her peers (just check out Julia Robert’s reaction in this interview) apparently, than she even has celebrity. And finally, there’s Julia Roberts —Academy award-winning Julia Roberts, America’s sweetheart Julia Roberts; fucking Shelby from “Steel Magnolias” Julia Roberts. And yet there were times where I thought Andrew was over dramatic, Ayo was not believable, and Julia was clearly acting – that scene where she grabs Ayo’s head anyone? It seemed so contrived. Oh and Chloe? I have no complaints.
The score. The score that’s heard at the beginning and parts of the middle of the movie is reminiscent of, what I can only describe as orchestral shrieks typical of a horror movie. In addition, there is this tick-tocking of a clock sound that reoccurs throughout the movie, each time, especially the first, lasting a little too long, becoming a nuisance rather than a compliment to the film. Personally, I feel like the score should be like an extra in a movie, while you notice them there, they enhance the story not distract from the story. This score, at times, was like an extra turning to the camera and waving hi mom during a scene. It was so intrusive. Towards the end of the movie, the score became jazzier. I wish they would have adopted that style for its entirety.
Things that I liked
The style is necessary. Even though I’m not particularly a fan of arthouse films, I love that a big studio like Amazon MGM put out a movie that doesn’t have your typical formulaic blockbuster vibes. This film is quirky. It’s a bit off the beaten path. This is even demonstrated in its pacing and its score. While that’s not the style of movie that typically interests me, I think these types of movies are important to the art form. In order to keep cinema fresh and vibrant, the unusual has to occur. I’m happy that the studio made some space for it.
The suspense was suspense-ing. I flipped back and forth, several times, between thinking that he did it and he didn’t do it. Even in the scene that supposedly reveals the answer, I had to take a beat and be like so it that our answer?
I would see this movie again. I’m acutely aware that, at first glance, some things in this movie may have simply went over my head, not to mention, I did dose off a couple of times. They were only short snoozes I assure you – no more than a minute or two.
I appreciate the opposing generational perspectives. While I to some extent I think the movie drops the ball when it comes to enlightening us to different people’s perspectives, to the extent it did touch on it via the different generations, I think it did a pretty good job.
The screenwriter. Nora Garret wrote the script and is the only one given a writer’s credit, plus this is her first feature film. As a writer, I have to give her her props for that –what an accomplishment.
So those are my thoughts on “After the Hunt.” Will you be seeing this movie? It’s in select theatres now with a wider release on Friday, October 17th.
Leave a Reply