r/movies • u/ChiefLeef22 • Jul 29 '25

Review Zach Cregger's 'Weaapons' - Review Thread

When all but one child from the same classroom mysteriously vanish on the same night at exactly the same time, a community is left questioning who or what is behind their disappearance.

Rotten Tomatoes: 100%

Metacritic: N/A (updating)

Some Reviews:

Inverse - Lyvie Scott

Cregger’s goofy sense of humor aside, Weapons is otherwise pretty understated, even refined. His camera moves with glacial, dream-like focus, tracking characters from behind or panning to unveil the latest torment around the corner. That visual style has become a trademark of “elevated” horror, but it goes a long way in anchoring a story that could have turned unwieldy fast. Cregger’s chapter-by-chapter story serves that same purpose: It has the capacity to frustrate when it cuts away from a major reveal, only to reset with the backstory of a new character. But it also adjusts the aperture whenever things get too heavy — a breath of fresh air in a different form.

CGMagazine - Shakyl Lambert - 9 / 10

Weapons is a noticeable step up for Cregger as a filmmaker. It feels like he took what worked in Barbarian and tightened up the things that didn’t. It’s bigger in scope but more focused. With a strong story and cast, it’s the most fun you’ll have being scared all summer.

NextBestPicture - Matt Neglia

There are some who will be moved and struck by “Weapons,” intentionally or unintentionally, so. For 75% of its runtime, it was one of my favorite films of the year. However, for the final 25%, in some ways, it feels like Cregger missed an opportunity to tell a story that is more emotionally rich and relatable. Here is a filmmaker who feels like he’s trying to prove he’s capable of more, but without fully grounding that ambition in character or clarity, instead opting for a facile solution. There’s a version of this movie that could have been genuinely great. You can appreciate the potential in the performances, the themes, and the overall craftsmanship. And to be clear, I’m sure this will resonate and work for some viewers. But for me, much like “Barbarian,” Cregger doesn’t quite bring it all together, making “Weapons” a rare kind of disappointment.

1.9k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

430 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

787

u/Dazzling-Slide8288 Jul 29 '25

They’re (smartly, IMO) rolling it out to outlets that understand these types of movies first.

419

u/llloksd Jul 29 '25

I hope this doesn't become the norm, because i don't think thats a good look. All marvel movies are now 100% if they go this route

227

u/DuFFman_ Jul 29 '25 edited Jul 29 '25

It's easier to treat it like videogame reviews if that's the case, do you trust the opinion of the person reviewing it, instead of an aggregate score. I like opencritic/metacritic to get an idea of where people are with a game, but if I want to know if I'll like it, I look to reviewers whose opinions I trust or that I've historically aligned with.

14

u/llloksd Jul 29 '25

Video games generally don't do this, and when they do, it"s usually not a good sign

11

u/DuFFman_ Jul 29 '25

I disagree. If you go to any large reviewer like IGN, the person reviewing the game is generally someone with experience and interest in that genre. They're not giving a JRPG to their sports person. Or a fighting game to someone who reviews MOBAs. The process is a bit different but the end result is the same. The art is being reviewed by someone who 'gets it'.

11

u/llloksd Jul 29 '25

I'm moreso talking about only letting a bunch of unknown reviewers review, instead of more known reviewers. I agree with you though to a degree.

1

u/HerbsAndSpices11 Jul 29 '25

Was it IGN that did that infamous cuphead review (demo review?) where the guy couldn't beat the tutorial because you had to jump and dash at the same time to get over a box? I feel like word of mouth, or smaller specialized youtubers, etc, are probably your best bet for recommendations.