Freaky horror cinema is here to stay. Ari Aster has been known to be that sort of filmmaker for some years now. Still, his work on last month’s Eddington just doesn’t hit the same as his prior feature and short films. French filmmaker Julia Ducournau has shocked audiences in the past decade with Raw and Titane; and Osgood “Oz” Perkins dropped a mind-blowing masterpiece in Longlegs last summer.
To name some others, the Cronenberg family—David and two of his three children, Brandon and Caitlin—has become a household name. They’ve given genre fans Scanners, The Fly, Antiviral, Possessor, Infinity Pool, and many more. James Wan, Guillermo del Toro, and Jordan Peele also lean into this subgenre with works such as the earlier Saw films, Get Out, The Shape of Water, Us, Malignant, and NOPE. Although, I would dispute that del Toro and Peele just don’t get a disturbed response from movie-goers like the others.
“Freaky” feels like a flexible adjective to describe whatever the hell this subgenre of cinema is. I’m quite fascinated by the range of psychology to surrealism imbued in each title. Zach Cregger is another filmmaker who has made a name for himself among the “freaky” category, starting with his 2022 surprise horror hit, Barbarian. This summer, Cregger’s much-awaited film, Weapons, has finally come to theaters. His sophomore feature centers on the aftermath of a classroom of seventeen third-graders who collectively run from their homes in the middle of the night. As a result, the class’s eighteenth student remains the sole survivor as a town-wide investigation is conducted. In terms of genre classifications, it’s a tug-of-war in multiple directions.
Zach Cregger’s Approach to Horror
As a part of horror cinema, Weapons is excellent in its production elements. Editor Joe Murphy’s assemblage of cuts maintains the film’s layer of suspense. Cregger’s storytelling ability to build up to what would otherwise be a jump scare and then skip forward some minutes or hours is masterful. His juggling of various points of view via an in media res narrative structure is awesome…for the most part. He writes individual sections or chapters to a point and cuts them off. This is done similarly to episodes of Charlie Brooker’s Black Mirror series.
In turn, some character stories in Weapons are greater than others. I couldn’t care less for the protagonists, Maybrook Elementary School teacher Justine Gandy (Julia Garner) or parent Archer Graff (Josh Brolin). Additionally, police officer Paul Morgan’s (Alden Ehrenreich) portion is acceptable for the progression of the overall story. Even so, I would love to see how his ties to the female lead affect his relationships with his wife, Donna (June Diane Raphael), and her father/ his police captain, Ed Locke (Toby Huss). Heck, if we’re getting a runtime over two hours, then we might as well learn more about parents Erica (Sara Paxton) and Gary (Justin Long).
The following character portions are more to my liking, but to each their own. I would also like to know more about Maybrook Elementary’s principal, Marcus Miller (Benedict Wong), and his partner, Terry (Clayton Farris). Regardless, their portion of the story concludes on a hard-hitting note. As a collective plot, Cregger has magnificent screenwriting than, arguably, any anthology film may ever come to satisfy.
The Maybrook Atmosphere
The combination of director of photography Larkin Seiple and production designer Tom Hammock’s set pieces offers a wicked balance between reality and surrealism.
I hate the irksome interior architecture of Gandy’s home, which resembles the poorly arranged interiors of the Barbarian home. While both films are intentional in this regard, I’m still annoyed by Gandy’s movements around her living room. The unrealistic fact of her being a single woman on a public school teacher’s salary is just the tip of the iceberg. I also dislike that she will leave her front door wide open and her car doors unlocked. From her bed, she can easily see all the way to the front door, and vice versa for intruders. I just don’t favor her as a character all that much.
On the surrealist end of the spectrum, dream sequences feel reminiscent of the horror comedy entries of the A Nightmare on Elm Street film franchise. At night, Maybrook Elementary’s hallways and Gandy’s classroom, as well as the neighborhoods of Maybrook, are filled with open spaces. Unfortunately, I feel as if these aren’t as explored much compared to the town’s streets during the day. Ultimately, Weapons will not prepare anyone for the kind of rabbit hole it creates for itself—no, not even in the fan theories that only scratch the surface of batshit craziness.
The Cross-Genre of Weapons
As with Radio Silence, Stephen Shields, and Guy Busick’s vampire film, Abigail, last spring, horror comedy atmospheres that are intentionally stupid and succeed in being so can be impressive. Sure, I love severe and grave horror as much as anyone. However, there is something memorable about horror comedies reaching Scary Movie-levels of nonsensical. Zach Cregger’s inclusion of a specific type of weapon in a certain dream sequence is utterly hilarious. It’s just kind of left up in the air—literally—for no reason. I believe it might be as a representation of bloodshedding, albeit through surprising means.
Additionally, I love the double meaning of Coca-Cola in the first act. Soda is stereotypically offered during police questionings, to either victims or potential suspects. In a bar setting, it’s chased with certain liquors. In both circumstances, they’re used to help people cope with their depressive states. For a mystery film, that’s a clever narrative device to have, one that might go under viewers’ noses. Then again, given the nature of Cregger subverting the audience’s expectations, funny enough, the overall truth transcends the aluminum can.
His cinematic influences are no secret—the Mad Max: Fury Road and Ready Player One movie posters on one missing child’s bedroom wall thanks to set decorator Gretchen Gattuso, or the obvious homage to Stanley Kubrick and Diane Johnson’s psychological horror film adaptation of Stephen King’s The Shining in a visual cliché that I feel is starting to be overdone in movies. The world of Weapons is one for exploration. Yet, Cregger deliberately chooses not to go into the deeper details of matters. The filmmaker is currently working on a new, original reboot of the Resident Evil film series starring Austin Abrams. If Weapons‘s thrills are any indication of what more horror fans can expect, then game on, Cregger.
Character Developments and Performances
The switching out of a few lead actors in 2024 due to the prior year’s writers and actors strikes and other commitments are rather beneficial to the film’s final product. The roster for the final cut is pretty good, yet the character stories are a bit imbalanced.
Morgan and criminally confused vagabond James’ (Abrams) dynamic is a demented evolution of slapstick comedy. To reiterate, the former’s story deserves more time to flesh out some development. Aside from having the town’s police captain as a father-in-law, Morgan is in disarray. Ehrenreich performs well, but the personality is not too far from his role as Han Solo. The film’s ability to switch perspectives with James is brilliant. Abrams acts his butt off in this role, offering a lot of the dark comic relief. Unlike Morgan, I don’t mind that there is little to learn from James, who’s treated as the bottom of the social hierarchy. However, he’s an underdog and one of the most valued people in the film.
Family: Foes and Woes
Weapons‘s psychological horror mystery ends are resolved in the Lilly family’s chapter, juxtaposing so well with the other characters’ chapters. What type of third grader in the 2020s takes up an interest in the Super Nintendo? Also, how messed up in the head is Cregger that he takes entire audiences across the world through his sick, sadistic versions of that Chef Boyardee commercial? (You know, the kind wherein the tin can follows the child home.) Surviving student Alex Lilly’s (Cary Christopher) childlike POV should be cherished for its sense of naivety and purity, and I have faith in Christopher’s future as an actor.
Before Weapons, I had no idea who Amy Madigan was. With Christopher performing well as Lilly, Madigan is one of the few stand-outs for adult roles. Seriously, what she does as “Aunt Gladys” is frightening in places. The character’s personality brings me back to Anjelica Huston’s Eva Ernst in Nicolas Roeg and Allan Scott’s dark fantasy horror comedy film adaptation of Roald Dahl’s The Witches. Madigan earns my respect from here on out because very early on, she brilliantly presents Gladys’s red flags to a tee.
Final Thoughts on Weapons
Outside of the theme of grief—and the five stages represented by characters—, there isn’t a concrete point to this film. I don’t suppose that is a detriment to the narrative. The resolution offers more levity than answers. For the “weapons” of Weapons, Cregger asserts that human beings themselves are heavy tools of destruction that can also be triggered and let off in different environments. The schoolchildren’s disappearance is explained in the final act, but fortunately, just not through exposition. Despite some problematic characterizations and distracting product placements, it’s a solid, almost unrelenting dark comedy horror film.
Zach Cregger’s Weapons is now playing in theaters.
Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars
Other Articles
Epic ‘One Battle After Another’ Ends with Raw Hems
Sequel ‘Nobody 2’ Is Full of Adrenaline and Fun
