Weapons (2025)

[WingedSerpent]

It actually was pretty good.  Story was told in an nonlinear progression.  That's not something I normally love or hate, but it did work for this story.

Liked most of the characters.

Problem is its one of those movies you can't really talk about without spoiling.

[HappyGilmore]

This looks good. I don't really get to get out to theaters much after my accident, so I'll have to rent at home.

[M.10rda]

We just got back from the drive-in. I agree with WingedSerpent - I went in knowing nothing (besides what's on the poster) and I feel lucky to have done so. It's almost spoiler-y to even discuss the cast, though I suppose (as they both appear in the first few minutes of the film) it's okay to mention the always-welcome Benedict Wong and lady-of-the-moment Kelli Garner, whose $38 million thriller is currently kicking the box office butt of her $200 million + Marvel movie. Also very generally:

...SINNERS feels like a great horror movie because it announces quite baldly what it is and then delivers well beyond the best possible version one could ever expect from the premise. WEAPONS feels like a great horror movie at the moment because... well, it isn't even clear what kind of a movie it is until close to three-quarters of the way to the end, yet it still keeps one guessing through the final quarter. Is it an allegory? Is it PICNIC AT HANGING ROCK? Is it NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN?  No, wait, is it a David Lynch film?! I'm impressed that it's performing as well as it is - maybe American theatergoing audiences are perpetually underestimated?

W/D Zach Creggar also made BARBARIAN, which I happened to watch a couple months ago. I admired BARBARIAN for a while before it got totally ridiculous near the end. WEAPONS has all of BARBARIAN's virtues, redoubled, and it doesn't ever lose the plot - in fact, the over-the-top finale feels perfectly orchestrated and quite cathartic. Deciphering the allegorical potential of that finale (and the rest of the film) is a lot more slippery than it was to do likewise for the elegant yet plain-spoken SINNERS. Fortunately WEAPONS still delivers if you take it purely at face value. My wife says it was "terrifying" - I wouldn't go that far but she's a tough nut to crack w/ scary movies...

4.5/5
Creggar, you have our attention!

[Rev. Powell]

Minor correction to M.10orda's review: Julia Garner, not Kelli Garner, is the female lead. Other than that slight error, I agree with his review. (Including how BARBARIAN was cool but flawed, and this is a big improvement.)  My own review (my plot summary is narrated in the movie's first minute, so no spoilers):

WEAPONS: In a small American town, all of the children from an elementary school class--except one--mysteriously disappear in a single night. This horror/mystery is beautifully scripted, mosaic-style, following individual characters who each hold a piece of the puzzle before finally coming together for a classically satisfying conclusion. 4.5/5.

One minor quibble: people don't bleed enough in this movie. It's distracting.

Also, while watching the male lead, I kept thinking, "I know that guy, but I can't think of his name. He has a real Josh Brolin quality, but it's obviously not Josh Brolin." It was Josh Brolin.

Best horror movie of the year so far, and my second favorite movie of the year. I doubt Cregger has a better movie in him, but I'd love to be surprised.

[M.10rda]

I'm humiliated to admit I had no conscious awareness that Julia and Kelli Garner were different people. Who is Kelli Garner?! Is there a Kelli Garner?!

As to whether Zach Creggar has a better movie in him, he swiftly signed up for a RESIDENT EVIL reboot, so it's a safe wager that won't be the better movie.

[Rev. Powell]

There is a Kelli Garner. I can't think of anything I've seen her in, though.

[indianasmith]

Absolutely loved this.  Brilliant pacing, original plot, satisfying finale. FIVE STARS!

[M.10rda]

I'm thrilled you loved it!
This isn't a criticism - I loved it, too - I would suggest that WEAPONS isn't necessarily "original" (nor was BARBARIAN) but is very very very cunning and artful pastiche. As more of us see it, I hope it's less harmful to discuss more specifics. So:

...

Besides obviously PICNIC AT HANGING ROCK (unexplainable disappearance of children), WEAPONS is essentially similar to last year's horror hit LONGLEGS - no? Similar (totally bizarre) Antagonist - similar tactics of terrorism - similar (if equivocal) methods of influence. In fact, parallel early scenes of a blonde protagonist stalked in/lured outside of her home at night. For that matter, both films construct similar auras of mystery around the phenomena... only LONGLEGS at last rushes to explain most mysterious elements of its plot, which was my primary criticism of that film. WEAPONS keeps things comfortably vague - either you buy the premise of Sinister High Weirdness or you don't.

I've no problem w/ pastiche, BTW, if it improves on its ingredients, as WEAPONS does. BARBARIAN was essentially a rethinking of DON'T BREATHE but an improvement in most ways on the earlier film, plus BABARIAN kind of had "themes" or "commentary" whereas DON'T BREATHE was just exploitation. Creggar also sprinkles in allusions to other films to make things more interesting than a 1:1 remake. I'm convinced Creggar is a fan of David Lynch's THE GRANDMOTHER...