A straight-to-the-point marketing campaign and impressive word of mouth has made Weapons one of the most intriguing films of the year. That is all well and good, but once you’re sitting there in the cinema, it comes up short of these heightened expectations.
★★★☆☆
Three years ago, Virginia native Zach Cregger debuted as a solo director with Barbarian, a relatively divisive film in its own right. Weapons is his second crack at the whip of spearheading a project, starring big names such as Julia Garner, Josh Brolin and Benedict Wong and a buzzy advertising campaign.
One night, at 2:17am, 17 students from Maybrook Elementary’s third-grade class get out of bed, run out into the dark and never return. Alex is the only child remaining, alongside his teacher Mrs. Gandy (Garner), and the pair are instantly thrust into the heart of a sprawling investigation. Parents are understandably equal parts scared and angry, with the slightly unsettling Mrs. Gandy bearing a lot of the brunt of this—but the powers at play in this Pennsylvania town are far more sinister than a strange teacher.
As was the case in the trailer that was on the tip of everyone’s tongues, Weapons begins with a somewhat eerie voiceover from a young child explaining the goings-on that have thrown the harmony of a small town out of the window. A lot of the meat on the bones of the story was made apparent in that trailer, but Weapons is still able to take unanticipated twists and turns.
A factor that many would assert is far too common in modern cinema is the chaptered structure; perspectives shifting from one character to another. A convoluted narrative can easily bog down the story’s essence, but it proves quite effective on this occasion. Cregger and co do a very good job of ensuring that the shifts complement each other, as opposed to stepping on each other’s toes.
These perspective changes are enhanced by the camerawork, helping to elevate an already intriguing story. Larkin Seiple’s cinematographic flair shines through; not only are the movements of these peculiar youngsters well-tracked but they are even mirrored, creating a hair-raising atmosphere. As you’re sucked into the world of Maybrook, the fear creeps up on you from every corner of the cinema itself.
However, an overwhelming drawback structurally is that Archer (Brolin), one of the distraught parents, spends large parts of the film on his own as he grapples with the disappearance of his son, Matthew. As a result, he ends up talking to himself out loud. In theory this shouldn’t be a problem but, when he starts narrating what he’s doing or what he’s going to do, Weapons feeds into a current phenomenon of films being dumbed down and viewers being babied. The annoyance that this causes is difficult to shake and once it becomes apparent, it is hard to ignore.
Moreover, a number of whacky and weird filmmaking decisions are made seemingly just for the sake of it. It’s a regressive approach—there are plenty of films out there that are truly bizarre, but Weapons’ few half-baked attempts to reach those levels don’t have the substance to match. A floating gun appears above a house in one of Archer’s nightmares, and Cregger himself has admitted that he doesn’t understand the thinking behind it. That’s why the director loves it, he says, but it ends up just being an empty gimmick that the film could easily do without.
On the topic of guns, initial chatter about the film supposed that its title and the school setting pointed towards an allegory for school shootings and how out of hand they’ve become in the US. There doesn’t appear to be any legs to these discussions, though, with earlier theories more interesting than the actual product. The time of 2:17 does not refer to the 217 votes required in the 2022 House of Representatives vote on banning firearms after all. Nor does it simply reflect that two people in the class are left behind, whilst 17 others disappear. Cregger finally all but confirmed that it was a nod to Room 217, a key feature of The Shining. A prominent cultural touchstone, yes, but a choice that adds nothing to the story
For all of the credit in the bank that the film’s promotion accrued in the months leading up to its release, it really feels as if something is lacking in Weapons. Refining the script to make it cleaner and nailing down what ideas are important to the film would easily have elevated it to that next level.
The Verdict
With plenty of things to like about Weapons being restricted by the lack of conviction with other ideas and concepts, it ends up being quite an underwhelming cinemagoing experience. On the flipside, there is enough on show to be excited by what is to come next from Zach Cregger.
Words by Jamie Rooke
Weapons is in UK cinemas now
Support the Indiependent
We’re trying to raise £200 a month to help cover our operational costs. This includes our ‘Writer of the Month’ awards, where we recognise the amazing work produced by our contributor team. If you’ve enjoyed reading our site, we’d really appreciate it if you could donate to The Indiependent. Whether you can give £1 or £10, you’d be making a huge difference to our small team.