This article directly answers what The Strange Thing About the Johnsons is about and why it’s stirred so much controversy and discussion. It’s a disturbing, taboo-defying short from director Ari Aster where the shock comes not from stylized horror, but from reversing our expectations of family roles and exploring denial in a suburban setting.
What Happens in the Film—and Why It’s Shocking
The film follows the Johnson family. Sidney, a gentle poet, finds his 12‑year‑old son Isaiah masturbating—not at a typical trigger, but at a picture of Sidney himself. This moment flips everything we assume about family dynamics.
Years later, at Isaiah’s wedding, the abuse is revealed publicly when Isaiah gropes Sidney. Sidney tries to confess through a memoir titled Cocoon Man, but Isaiah violently pushes back. Sidney flees only to be hit by a van. At the funeral, Joan, the mother, confronts Isaiah. Their final battle ends in mutual destruction: he tries to kill her, she retaliates, and burns the memoir.
It’s grotesque and discomforting—but also deeply human in the warped choices people make to hide pain.
Breaking Taboos and Shattering Comfort Zones
Role Reversal as Shock Factor
The son abusing the father shatters conventional narratives. We’re used to one direction of abuse. This reversal forces us to confront our biases—what we imagine abuse looks like, and where we place sympathy.
Denial Woven Into Family Life
Each family member plays a role in hiding the truth. Sidney’s shame, Isaiah’s manipulation, Joan’s ignorance—all fuse into a toxic silence. This reflects psychological studies showing how abuse often festers through denial and complicity.
Normalcy Collides with Horror
The film’s clean, suburban look and calm dialogue clash with the horrific acts underneath. That contrast is what makes it gut‑chilling—this could be happening behind most closed doors.
Aster’s Bold Starting Point
This was Ari Aster’s thesis at AFI. He admits it was politically uphill—“what’s the worst thing I can make at AFI?” he said. His intent wasn’t shock for its own sake, but to see what storytelling can do when it pushes into places film rarely visits.
Visually, he stays cold and observational. Long takes, wide framing, unadorned lighting—all amplify how eerie the ordinary feels.
Audience Reaction: Polarized, Provoked, Engaged
When it leaked online, reactions ranged from awe to outrage. Some called it “effusive acclaim,” others “disgusted vitriol.” In internet terms, that’s a hit.
Viewers find the acting compelling. Billy Mayo and Angela Bullock capture both tenderness and terror. Reviewer voices echo that it’s one of the few shorts that non‑film fans will sit through and remember.
A Redditor put it bluntly: it went viral because people shared it as a “what-the-actual-fuck” moment—no marketing needed, just raw emotional reaction.
How It Foreshadowed Aster’s Later Work
This film laid the groundwork for Hereditary and Midsommar. You see the obsession with family trauma, emotional repression, and casual horror lurking beneath peaceful facades.
The sense that something is always off, that surfaces lie—these are Aster’s signature moves. The short is almost a laboratory for those later, bigger ideas.
A Quote That Nails It
“Ari Aster masterfully uses inversion and discomfort to expose the insidiousness of secrecy and denial—reminding us that horror is most powerful when rooted in plausibility.”
That nails the thrust: it’s not gore or monsters. It’s the horror of what we pretend doesn’t happen, and what stays hidden behind polite housing projects.
Final Thoughts
The Strange Thing About the Johnsons is brutal, uncomfortable, and unforgettable. It flips genre on its head, uses quiet visuals to heighten tension, and doesn’t offer redemption. Yet its strongest move is forcing us to question how family, silence, and denial can become horror. It’s not for everyone—but for those who watch, it burns itself into memory.
FAQs
1. Why is the film considered so controversial?
Because it tackles incest by reversing familial roles—depicting a son abusing his father. That inversion of normal archetypes intensifies the taboo and emotional response.
2. What is the central theme of the film?
It explores how denial, shame, and silence within a family can hide terrible truths. The dysfunction grows because no one acknowledges what’s happening.
3. How does the film’s style affect its impact?
The cinematography is clinical and detached. The setup feels ordinary and calm, which makes the underlying horror feel more real and disconcerting.
4. How did audiences react when it premiered?
Reactions were sharply split. Some praised its boldness and performances; others called it revolting. Its viral spread speaks to its power to provoke deep emotional responses.
5. Does this short connect to Aster’s later feature films?
Yes. It foreshadows his themes around family trauma, repressed secrets, and pure psychological horror—elements central to Hereditary and Midsommar.
6. Is it accessible to watch?
Though it’s a student film, it’s become a cult classic—widely shared online and discussed in cinephile circles. It’s short, but incredibly impactful for many viewers.
Leave a comment