Weapons Review (Spoilers!)

After hearing the script for Zach Cregger’s second feature sold for over $30M, my expectations skyrocketed. This anticipation only doubled when Weapons premiered as the highest-rated horror movie of the decade. But when a film gets such universal acclaim, I also grow skeptical. Would this be another Longlegs, full of interesting ideas that go absolutely nowhere? Centered around a small suburban town rocked by tragedy when a classroom of middle schoolers goes missing, its epic scale is supported by a somewhat disjointed story that still manages to be topical for our political moment.

How can anyone see a film about several children being torn from their parents without thinking of the concentration camps being erected throughout the USA, or the countless innocent lives lost in the Palestinian holocaust? This notion of violence haunts the film, making its suburban setting particularly effective at commenting on the current state of America. Horror has always been a political genre, and when the town’s worst nightmare happens in their very own neighborhood, right beneath their feet, I can’t help but think how the foundational violence of slavery and native genocide currently shape America’s policies toward those in Sudan, Palestine, or even those at our own borders, how it's all a reflection of the way we treat each other and ourselves. Maybe that’s what makes the structure so interesting, jumping from one townsperson’s perspective to the next, capturing the horrific tapestry of western modernity.

This structure almost gives viewers the same sensation one gets from looking at the same photograph from several angles, as if we were the ones pouring over evidence, seeing timelines intertwine as different characters’ stories come together. While it made for a fun experience, I do think Cregger’s choice of when to cut out of a particular storyline was ill-advised. If we’re seeing the same events from different perspectives over the same amount of time, always cutting into a new POV right when things get interesting, it can get somewhat elliptical, so much so that when we reach the finale it almost feels deflated by so much buildup. Along with the lack of fulfillment, this structure also prevents audiences from really getting to know any of the characters beyond surface level portrayals that almost feel archetypal, even with a cast this stacked. Nevertheless, I applaud Cregger’s willingness to just go for it. This is a bold movie, and that’s refreshing in an age where ambiguity for its own sake causes many films to write themselves into a corner. Using humor to provide a tonally dynamic viewing experience, I think the script at least gives us much to think about, especially when it was brought to life by such purposeful cinematography.

            Camerawork here is something to behold; the frame not only shows great attention to detail, but DP Larkin Seiple manages to even think about the speed at which he pans, sometimes slowing it down to build tension. But the film doesn’t have an overreliance on this one method. There’s great use of crash zooms and a handheld camera to inject tons of energy into the frame at key moments. Along with a cool palette and a cold feel from the lighting, this feels like Fincher remaking Cure with a bit of slapstick comedy thrown in for good measure. It was enough to overpower what I thought to be a terrible score that was wildly on the nose. The actors also do a great job of distracting from this flaw.

            I went in with high expectations for Julia Garner and was honestly somewhat disappointed in what felt like a very hollow performance. On one hand I don’t think she’s completely to blame—that’s impossible when the script refuses to break from the alcoholic teacher cliché—but I do think some of the line deliveries here lacked commitment, whereas Benedict Wong and Austin Abrams did an amazing job of really embodying their characters with very lived-in performances. And then there are the children.

            At the end of the film, as the kids tear their attacker to shreds before being reunited with their parents, I couldn’t help but feel a huge swell of emotions. How many people will never get to know that feeling? How do we as a society manage to not rip those responsible to shreds when entire villages are flattened under bombs? The characters in this film are flawed, selfish and often short-sighted, very much like us. Maybe we, too, have a sliver of hope to cling onto.