Film Review – Holland

March 30th, 2025 | POSTED BY Allen Almachar

I didn’t grow up in the Midwest as depicted in Holland (2025), but I was raised in a similarly small town. Many of the sights, sounds, and textures rang familiar to me. There’s the sense of community where everybody knew everybody else, one main street lined with small mom and pop shops, and any building more than three stories tall was unheard of. And just like the film, we had an annual festival that featured a parade that drew the attendance of everyone in town. It’s the kind of place parents brought their kids to live, and kids dreamt of escaping as soon as possible. In that regard, the film feels true to life. Sadly, when it tries to reach out beyond the aesthetics is where things unravel. 

Of course, “Smalltown U.S.A.” isn’t all white picket fences, minivans, and high school football. Films like Fargo (1996) and Blue Velvet (1986) aim to strip the façade of suburbia to reveal as much malevolence as anywhere else in the world. Holland tries to do the same but isn’t nearly as successful. Director Mimi Cave (with screenwriter Andrew Sodroski) drops us into the Dutch-centric town of Holland, Michigan, where things look picture-perfect but in reality are not. We meet Nancy Vandergroot (Nicole Kidman), a mother and teacher. She’s married to Fred (Matthew Macfadyen), an optometrist, and has a young son, Harry (Jude Hill). On the outside, the Vandergroots appear as upstanding members of society. They even have a large train set in their basement that closely resembles the town. They’re a family ripped right out of a 1950s lifestyle magazine.

Things take a turn when Nancy starts to suspect Fred of having an affair. She enlists the help of fellow teacher Dave (Gael García Bernal) to investigate and find proof of Fred’s infidelity. What follows is an odyssey of twists, red-herrings, and increasingly erratic behavior. It’s at this point where the troubles begin. The writing and direction tries to establish a thriller/dark comedy tone, as Nancy and Dave attempt to pin some wrongdoing on Fred. But the problem is that it doesn’t build enough momentum to keep us engaged. There’s no juice here – no intrigue or suspense to keep us glued to the edge of our seats. Nancy and Dave go in circles, either convinced they are right or wanting to drop the whole thing entirely. They flip flop back and forth repeatedly. For a duo in search of any evidence of someone’s lies, they sure do seem to lie just as much – if not more. It makes us wonder what exactly the two want anyway. Are they in it to find the truth and do the right thing, or are their motivations more selfish in nature?

That’s the question that kept running in my head. It’s unclear what the narrative is trying to say about suburbia, marriage, or just about anything at all. Cave’s direction adds a layer of menace, as though underneath what we see lies some sort of danger waiting to spring out. What that is exactly, is hazy. One of the more visually interesting sequences has Nancy fantasizing herself inside the trainset, surrounded by artificiality. Suddenly, the bodies of all the townsfolk materialize, laid out by her feet. It’s an arresting image, but what is it trying to convey? Are these thoughts a reflection of Nancy feeling trapped inside her cage of domesticity? What does that have to do with her sneaking around following Fred’s every move? Is she using Fred’s supposed affair to break out of the cultural norms of the town, or is she trying to expose Fred to maintain them? These are a lot of questions, and the inconsistencies only get more noticeable the further we go along.

To the film’s credit, things finally start to pick up in the third act, when it shifts gears and goes for a straight thriller approach. But by then, it’s too late. Whatever satire there was is dampened beyond repair. The overall result is a bizarre, tonal mess. Because characters are so contradictory – changing in their hopes, fears, and desires – we feel like the rug gets pulled out from under us every few minutes. I don’t mind being surprised or taken down unexpected avenues. The problem is that the writing seemed to intentionally do this for the sake of messing with the audience. Characters don’t change or grow in fascinating ways. If anything, they become less interesting the further we go along. Things turn south in the back half, with plenty of blood and violence. But it plays like the story were attempting a last-ditch effort to inject some life into the proceedings. 

Nicole Kidman has been a star for a good while now, and has more than proven her abilities as an actor. So why does it feel like she’s still a bit underrated? She gives her full commitment as Nancy, diving into the role with as much energy and pizzazz as possible. Even though the character is a bag of contradictions, Kidman tries her best to make Nancy dynamic – pulling us along by sheer force of will. This is now the second time in a row I’ve seen Kidman playing an unsatisfied housewife, following up on last year’s Babygirl (2024). I hope this isn’t the start of a trend for her at this point of her career. She’s more than capable to do whatever she wants. If anything, these roles are way below her skillset. 

There are pieces of Holland that I liked: the costuming, set design, and locations in particular. The textures are great – just about everything else was not. I came away uninterested by the themes, unmoved by the drama, and unaffected by the thrills. There are so many other productions that tackle this exact same subject matter in far more effective ways. On the list of movies that cover the dark side of middle-class suburban life, this one sits far away from the top.

Andrew Sodroski, Babygirl, Blue Velvet, Fargo, Gael García Bernal, Holland, Jude HIll, Matthew Macfadyen, Mimi Cave