Weapons

Bluesky

Like most things in Weapons, the plural in the title isn't accidental. The multiple extends to viewpoints, interpretations, in a way too endings. Overlapping sequences framed by a child's narration give us repeated glimpses of the extended impacts of one horrifying event.

At 2:17 in the morning almost all of the children in a single school class leave their houses and run away. The usual occupants of that room, whose walls are decorated with drawings and facts about nature number nineteen. One teacher, 18 students. After that time two are left, 17 missing. To say that Weapons is about what happens next is to ignore how often it shows us what happens before, or around, or in parallel.

The recursion in Weapons is not as tight as in Oppenheimer but it's as portentous. The six chapters are named for their central character, their viewpoint reflected in how events unfold, literally in cinematography. Twitchy and dreamlike for a drug user, isolated for the depressed, from below for a child, martial and militarised for a cop. Call them chapters is as much a convenience of labelling as a reflection of how much this resembles the better works of Stephen King. The extent to which his prolific output reflects suburban paranoia and its repeated unwillingness to explain are both present here. The Pennsylvania setting and the small town sensibilities are key. However fantastic things get these are kids, teachers, builders, folk with jobs that are more easily explained than most. With more than 50 filmed adaptations of King's works his influence is palpable, even indirectly.

Whatever caused the disappearance is tangible too, invisible at first but indirectly we have clues. Within each of the sequences we've different flavours of fear. The odd jumpscare will get hearts racing but uncertainty abounds to the point that even those on screen will ask "What the fuck...?" It was Jordan Peele who observed that "The difference between comedy and horror is the music".

Zach Cregger joins the list of horror-multihyphenates, writing, directing, composing like Cronenberg and others before him. He's joined in the latter with bandmates the Holladay brothers, with whom he sometimes performs as Sirhan Sirhan a name recognisable to some for other work. Weapons is not his first feature, beyond short-term let nightmare Barbarian his first two were with sketch troupe The Whitest Kids U Know. Like Peele the line from comedy to horror is as solid as the line between them can be blurred. There are moments in Weapons where audiences will laugh either at absurdity or from relief, if not both.

Some of that is from perspective. None of our viewpoint characters are entirely reliable, selectively blinded by depression, grief, rage, meth and other addictions, bureaucratic procedure, and youth. The returns and revisitations mean that the line "where it really starts" gains extra meaning with each pass. What we see is framed from the perspective of those after whom the chapters are named but we get the consequences of their visions too. We also see what they're afraid of, and how that intersects and overlaps is where Weapons is sharpest.

Strong performances from Julia Garner, Josh Brolin, Alden Ehrenreich, Austin Abrams, Benedict Wong and Cary Christopher give them the chance to explore "a lot of emotion." Their slightly different angles across the chapters give them the cast the chance to offer and observe detail that is subtly changed each time. What's on walls, doors, even licence plates might matter.

One truck says 'Witch'. Another says '610IANS', which might be Ephesians "Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might." or Galatians "As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith." The former before the armour of god, the latter after whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. There could be more. "Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God." "As sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, and yet possessing all things." From the Corinthians. Some perspectives. That one word invites more speculation than the four choices, the others having not the chapter and verse to count. It might be nothing. It might be the clue to unravel it all. It could be the secret ingredient. It could be nothing.

It's that ambiguity that makes Weapons the kind of horror I adore and could cause problems for others equally but differently devoted to the genre. It isn't a film that delivers all its answers wrapped up and tied with a knot, structurally, tonally, it revels in what feels inconsistent in the same way that the kind of restaurant that is setting for The Menu will present a dish called 'Trio de maquereaux' and in that fish three ways feed not five thousand but potentially for prices approaching that number. To others that might just smell suspicious.

There's more than one target for weapons, and as finely guided as it is there will be some who find it indiscriminate. With multiple focuses and mechanisms it isn't perhaps a broad brush as much as pointillism. In the eyes of beholders that held horror too. While some may feel its scope such that it'll take out their enjoyment as collateral damage, for others it will be devastating in just the right ways. They should seek it out, unerringly, immediately.

Source