I saw a lot of films (12) this year at SXSW, and Holland, was one of my most anticipated films of the festival. Not just because of the cast, including Nicole Kidman, Matthew Macfadyen, and Gael García Bernal, but also because of director Mimi Cave. If you’ve seen Fresh, you know she has a real talent for blending psychological tension with dark humor. And with Holland, she’s tackling something a little more Hitchcockian, in a domestic mystery filled with small-town paranoia and a thrilling element that takes its time to boil over.
Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to make the big red carpet premiere at the Paramount Theatre, which is honestly one of the best places in Austin to watch any movie. There’s just something about that old-school, grand theater experience—especially for a movie like this, where you want to soak in every shadow and detail. And, of course, with the cast being in attendance, it just adds to the level of excitement and the experience at a big SXSW premiere.
But I was able to catch the second screening in the Hyatt Regency ballroom, which was… interesting. It’s not exactly the same vibe as the Paramount Theater. You don’t get that cinematic magic of the Paramount, where the energy of the crowd fuels the entire experience. Instead, you’re in a big convention-style room with a makeshift setup. I’m not one to complain because it works, and I’m really glad SXSW made an effort to get 2nd screenings for their headliners this year, but it did take away some of that immersive quality. That being said, any movie should stand on its own no matter where you watch it, and Holland still had plenty to offer.
Plot
So the film follows Nancy Vandergroot (Kidman), a home economics teacher in the picture-perfect town of Holland, Michigan in the early 2000s. At first, everything seems quaint—think white picket fences, old-fashioned diners, and that ‘50s Americana aesthetic you’d see in a small town in the midwest. But when Nancy starts suspecting that her husband Fred (Macfadyen) might be hiding some seriously dark secrets, she begins unraveling a truth that completely upends her life.
Kidman is great, as expected. She brings this mix of naivety and sharp intuition to Nancy. There are moments of humor in how she stumbles through her amateur detective work, but the deeper she digs, the more you see her struggle with the realization that her safe, comfortable life might be a complete illusion.
Now, Matthew Macfadyen – I was so excited to see what he would do in this role. The guy is incredible in Succession, and of course, he’s been giving great performances for years. He plays Fred with this perfect balance of charm and unease. You’re never quite sure how much of what he’s doing is genuine or manipulative, and when the movie eventually reveals the full extent of his character, it’s… well, let’s just say it’s a bold and surprising choice that definitely caught me off guard.
The Problems
And here’s where Holland falters a bit. The movie wants to be a slow-burn noir thriller, but it doesn’t quite have the execution to match its ambition. The pacing is a bit uneven and there are stretches where it drags, and then when things finally start ramping up in the last third, it almost feels rushed.
The central mystery is engaging, but it holds back too much. There’s this intriguing backstory about Nancy’s seemingly troubled past and why she ended up in Holland in the first place, but the film never really dives into it. Instead, it focuses more on the unraveling of her marriage, which is fine, but it makes you wish there was more depth to her character beyond just reacting to what’s happening around her.
And then there’s the moderate chemistry between Kidman and Gael García Bernal, who plays Dave, a fellow teacher she begins confiding in. Their dynamic should be the emotional counterpoint to her relationship with Fred, but it just never fully clicks. You get that there’s an attraction there, but it felt underdeveloped, like the film needed just one or two more scenes to really sell that connection.
Final Verdict
3.5 out of 5 stars. Good performances, a solid concept, that almost lands.
I enjoyed Holland, and will probably watch it again, but I can’t say I absolutely loved it. There’s a lot to appreciate, like the performances, the early 2000’s setting, and the way it slowly builds an atmosphere of unease. And I do think Mimi Cave is a director to watch. She knows how to create tension, and visually, the film is stunning. The mystery isn’t as gripping as it should be, the big reveals don’t hit as hard as they need to, and the character relationships lack the depth that could’ve made this truly great.
That being said, I feel like it might have worked better as a limited series because they would have had more time to dive in to the missing pieces to develop a more stable story arch for all of the characters. I still think it’s worth watching when it lands in theaters and streaming on Prime Video later this year. If you’re into slow-burn thrillers and suburban noir, there’s enough here to keep you engaged.
If you got a chance to see Holland at SXSW, let me know what you thought in the comments. Did the twists work for you? Did you feel the chemistry between the leads? And if you were at the Paramount screening, was the experience way different than watching it in a Hyatt ballroom?