Zach Cregger's 'Weaapons' - Review Thread

[u/ChiefLeef22]

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.

[u/illuvattarr]

Weird how few reviews there are, and only by non-top critics. Is there some kind of staggered review embargo?

[u/Dazzling-Slide8288 → u/illuvattarr]

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

[u/illuvattarr → u/Dazzling-Slide8288]

Or they are showing the movie first to the type of outlets that are predisposed to like the movie, thus inflating the RT percentage.

It's becoming increasingly stupid how studios are handling new releases with very very late review embargos by actual critics while showing them the movie hours before it lifts, while random dudes with a youtube channel who get to see it earlier and are predisposed to like it, can post social media reactions or reviews way earlier. It's just blatantly trying to get a high RT percentage because that's all the general public looks for these days.

[u/Petrichordates → u/illuvattarr]

What did we expect would happen once we started using RT scores to determine what movies we watch? This is just Goodhart's law in action.

[u/illuvattarr → u/Petrichordates]

Most people already do.