“Weapons” Starts Sharp, Ends Dull
In 2022, Zach Cregger made a name for himself in the world of horror with his debut feature film, Barbarian. It’s one of those movies that you have to see to believe, especially its third act, when things really go off the rails. Barbarian became an instant box office success with a minimal budget, and that laid the path for Cregger’s sophomore feature, Weapons. Like Barbarian, Weapons’ initial marketing promised a large mystery while holding its cards largely close to the chest. In a time when trailers seem to be giving away the best parts of movies, it’s a strategy Weapons doesn’t fully capitalize on.
One night, at 2:17 a.m., seventeen children from Ms. Justine Gandy’s (Julia Garner) third grade classroom woke up, opened their front doors, and ran away. Only one child from the class, Alex (Cary Christopher), showed up to school the next day. Weapons presents the strange series of events that take hold of the small town of Maybrook from the perspective of multiple residents. We see Justine, the parent of one of the missing kids (Josh Brolin), a low-level cop (Alden Ehrenreich), the school principal (Benedict Wong), a burglar/drug addict (Austin Abrams), and Alex, all living in the aftermath of the unprecedented disappearances. As the film shifts to each perspective, another piece of the puzzle drops into place.
courtesy of Warner Bros. Pictures
Much like Barbarian, Weapons is not what it initially presents itself as. The first third of the film feels like the directorial vision of David Fincher possessed Cregger. It’s not a flagrant rip-off of Fincher’s style, but it oozes the essence of him. The film initially puts us in the shoes of Justine, the teacher whose (nearly) entire class disappeared. Cregger frames much of this early section in ways that feel purposefully off-kilter. The camera presses in, showing the audience the mundanities of Justine placing a bag on her countertop and fruit rolling around. Because of the premise of the film, we’ve been trained to look for clues in these banal moments. Is the answer to the disappearance in something so small?
It’s along those lines that Cregger delights in making audiences wait for a jumpscare. The film uses these scares sparingly, which makes them all the more effective. When the moments arise, when the audience knows a scare is coming, Cregger takes his time. It’s as though he’s on a leisurely stroll around the block on a Sunday afternoon while the audience is sinking further and further into their seats. Bracing for the moment when the proverbial dam breaks and the horror is unleashed for a fleeting moment. There are moments in Weapons that move so dastardly slowly that their ultimate release packs more of a punch than some horror movies are able to manage in their entire runtimes.
courtesy of Warner Bros. Pictures
Where Weapons stumbles is in the ending. Without spoiling, the movie ends in the way you’d expect if you’ve seen your fair share of horror movies. Call it personal preference, but there’s something to be said for writers and directors who are able to land the plane as confidently as they’re able to put it into flight. Weapons presents the audience with a delicious mystery, one that’s begging to be solved. The sort of impossible question that’s turning over in the viewer’s head as the film plays out in front of them. The problem with a mystery so enticing is that the mind often wanders to an ending more fulfilling than the one they’re given. It’s as though the focus of the film is on the cool concept or imagery and the ending falls by the wayside. It’s not a problem to have an ambiguous ending, because the fact of the matter is that we live in an unknowable world where some mysteries don’t have answers. The issue is the discrepancy between the set-up and the payoff. The Twilight Zone is a masterclass in balancing these two forces. Some episodes are better than others, yes, but when the ending doesn’t fully land, the distance between concept and execution is never too wide. If it’s not an outright home run, it’s at least a double that gets batted in.
Weapons is hazy in its thematic purpose. Cregger makes a statement about American individualism and how some of the greatest threats to our community exist on our neighborhood blocks, but it’s undermined by the half-cooked rationale of the film’s antagonist. Weapons proves Cregger’s deft directing abilities, but begs the question – couldn’t there be a better reason for some kids to run away in the middle of the night?
support your local film critic!
~
support your local film critic! ~
Beyond the Cinerama Dome is run by one perpetually tired film critic
and her anxious emotional support chihuahua named Frankie.
Your kind donation means Frankie doesn’t need to get a job…yet.
Follow me on BlueSky, Instagram, Letterboxd, YouTube, & Facebook. Check out Movies with My Dad, a new podcast recorded on the car ride home from the movies.