Latest news with #Rashomon-style
Euronews
6 hours ago
- Entertainment
- Euronews
'Weapons': Why no one needs a prequel to the box office hit of 2025
While it was highly anticipated, Zach Cregger's Weapons has become the breakout hit of the summer no one expected. Not only did the American filmmaker's sophomore horror film top the box office during its debut weekend and has raked in a reported $92 million internationally at the time of writing (on a budget of $38 million), it's also become one of the most critically acclaimed films of 2025. For those who haven't yet had the pleasure, Weapons is a mystery horror gem that takes place in the aftermath of the disappearance of 17 children, who all leave their homes one night at precisely 2:17am. They run into the night and are never seen or heard from again. In our (glowing) review for Weapons, we wrote: 'Cregger skilfully employs a Rashomon-style narrative construction to craft a distressing fairytale that starts off as a small-town mystery thriller with shades of Twin Peaks and Denis Villeneuve's Prisoners. And his novelistic approach pays off, as it only furthers quite how much Stephen King must be green with envy that this suburban US nightmare isn't his baby.' We added: 'Weapons has become the tense and deliriously entertaining horror film to beat this year. Considering 2025 has already been good to the genre, with Presence, Sinners, The Ugly Stepsister, 28 Years Later and Bring Her Back – to name but a few highlights – that should tell you plenty.' But because we can't have nice, self-contained things, there's trouble afoot... There are only three certainties in life: death, taxes and Hollywood greed. The slightest whiff of buzz and box office glory and opportunistic studios start getting ideas, seeking to milk creative properties dry. And because Weapons is a hit, a prequel has apparently been tabled, with Cregger reportedly in early talks for a time-reversing follow-up. Per an exclusive report from The Hollywood Reporter, Cregger is in early discussions with Warner Bros. Pictures and New Line Cinema for an origin film set in the Weapons universe – with the prequel focusing on the film's mysterious antagonist. Warning: mild spoilers ahead. The prequel would focus on Amy Madigan's character Gladys – this demented fairytale's witch, who cast a spell on the kiddies and ends up meeting a particularly gruesome end. On a surface level, a prequel could make some artistic sense. Weapons is a non-linear story that explores multiple viewpoints, and the film never gets Gladys' perception. There's no doubt that Madigan would ace it if she were to return to the role, and Cregger has proven that he's not to be underestimated. However, one of the many reasons why Weapons works so well is a lack of backstory for the evil character. We don't need answer dumps or to be clued up on the 'why' behind her nefarious motivations; it's a lot creepier when these elements remain unknown. Prequels not only run the risk of botching continuity, canon and tension, but dish out unnecessary explanations. Recent examples like The Hobbit trilogy, Furiosa and Wonka prove it. Moreover, they are always poison when it comes to the most interesting characters: villains. A villain origin story that reveals motive ruins mythology, quashes audience imagination, and tanks the scare potential of a truly excellent antagonist. Norman Bates is far more scary without a motive. Darth Vader definitely lost his threatening edge when George Lucas decided to go back and unveil his entire backstory. Hannibal Lecter is much less frightening once you've been force fed the origins of his cannibalistic ways. And the nightmares triggered by aunt Gladys will be more underwear soiling if audiences are purposefully kept in the dark about why she's parasitically invading families' spaces and terrorising small towns. 'It's a lot scarier when there's no motive, Sid.' Wise words from Billy Loomis in the first (and best) Scream film. So, Mr. Cregger, if you're reading... First of all, congrats and enjoy your moment – it's merited. Secondly, please don't bend to studio pressure and fight for Weapons to be a standalone. We understand you're already busy with the upcoming Resident Evil film, as well as an original film you're reportedly working on titled Flood. Do those. And if you won't listen to Euronews Culture, please listen to Billy. Murderous tendencies aside, he had a point.
Extra.ie
4 days ago
- Entertainment
- Extra.ie
FILM OF THE WEEK: Weapons - Reviewed by Roe mcDermott
Zach Cregger's Weapons opens with so much eerie confidence that, for a while, it feels like something truly great. The concept is irresistible: at precisely 2.17am, seventeen children from the same class wake up and walk out of their homes, arms outstretched, into the suburban dark, running out of view of any camera until they disappear. It's an image that strikes like a match – odd, arresting, already iconic – and the sequence that follows is thick with mood, mystery and that rare kind of horror-film promise that anything could happen, and probably will. A child's voice narrates, sweetly and ominously, setting the story up as something between a local legend and a modern parable. As George Harrison's 'Beware of Darkness' swells on the soundtrack, it becomes clear that whatever Weapons is, it won't be ordinary. Cregger is a born mood conjurer – his camera glides with menace and his tone is confidently off-kilter. Like Osgood Perkins' 2024 Longlegs, Weapons thrives on atmosphere. The comparisons go further: both films offer meticulously crafted openings, strikingly unsettling world-building and the promise of something psychologically shattering, only to later reveal something stranger and sillier. Where Longlegs gives us a bizarre villain who slightly deflated the dread, Weapons goes further, introducing a theatrical, camp antagonist whose late arrival will delight some and derail others. There's a gallows-humour energy that kicks in around the midpoint, and while Cregger clearly relishes the tonal shift, it sends the film down a more cartoonish path, pulling focus away from the human horror it set up so well. The story unfolds in chapters, each showing the same days or hours from different perspectives – a teacher (Julia Garner), a parent (Josh Brolin), a police officer (Alden Ehrenreich), a troubled teen (Austin Abrams), and others best left unspoiled. It's a Rashomon-style structure that seems to promise a prismatic emotional complexity. While it's cleverly constructed and delivers some satisfying plot mechanics, the effect is mostly aesthetic. Characters remain thin, serving the puzzle more than the plot, and the repetition doesn't deepen the mystery so much as stretch it out. Still, the cast – especially Garner and Brolin – bring texture where they can, and the sense of being spun around in an elegant, escalating web keeps you engaged, if not always emotionally invested. There are flashes of something weightier under the surface, and for a while it seems like the film is edging towards allegory. The town turning in on itself, the violence of fearful parents, a dream sequence involving a machine gun, and of course the image of a class of children disappearing without trace all hint at the shadow of school shootings, the terror of not knowing what your child might be exposed to, or what kind of world they are inheriting. But these echoes remain faint and unfulfilled, breadcrumbs rather than a path, and any political or emotional resonance is quickly overtaken by the story's more outlandish twists and truly silly visual choices (some of which were spoiled in early trailers that are best avoided). Still, it's hard to deny the film's magnetism, while it lasts. Cregger has grown more ambitious since Barbarian, and in many ways, Weapons is a better film. It's more confident, inventive and carefully composed. But for all its polish and promise, it still feels like a genre exercise in search of a centre, a film more interested in playing with structure and style than saying something lasting. By the time the climax arrives – gruesome, bizarre, darkly funny and occasionally slapstick – the haunting power of that first hour has mostly drained away. What began as a nightmare ends as a bit of a joke, and a particular choice about the resolution avoids a harrowing and complex reckoning that would have been far more intriguing. For some, that might be the point: a nasty fairy tale with no moral, no safety net, no grappling. But for a film that seems to promise something bigger, stranger, and more profound, Weapon hits a little wide of the mark.
Euronews
6 days ago
- Entertainment
- Euronews
Film of the Week: 'Weapons' - Why did 17 children vanish at 2:17am?
From the get-go, writer-director Zach Cregger aims to get under your skin. A child narrator sets up the 'true story,' in which 'a lot of people die in a lot of really weird ways.' The unseen youth is not wrong. Before we get to those deaths, we're presented with Weapon's central mystery through enduring imagery: 17 children in the small town of Maybrook wake up one night at precisely 2:17am. They all rush out of their bedrooms and run off into the night, arms outstretched in a particularly eerie fashion – as if they were flying off to Neverland. They are never heard from again. Why did the kids vanish en masse? A kidnapping? A prank gone wrong? Mass hysteria? An updated case of the dancing plague of 1518 – with less dancing and more disappearing? The whole community is baffled by this terrible riddle, and tempers are rising among the grieving parents – like Archer Graff (Josh Brolin), whose son has gone missing. Things aren't helped that all 17 children were part of the same Maybrook Elementary School classroom, led by Justine Gandy (Julia Garner). Suspicion quickly falls on the young woman, who is a caring teacher, enjoys a good swig of vodka every now and then, and finds the word 'WITCH' painted on her car in red. Despite the pitchforks brandished by the townsfolk, she's just as confused as everyone else. Ignoring the warnings from the school head Marcus (Benedict Wong), she decides to investigate. You see, her classroom has 18 pupils. Which means that one boy, Alex (Cary Christopher), was spared... Cregger's second feature film after 2022's Barbarian is not the easiest to review, as to go into too much detail about what makes Weapons work would be doing it (and future audience members) a great disservice. It's really worth going into it willing to be blindsided. Safe to say that Cregger skilfully employs a Rashomon-style narrative construction to craft a distressing fairytale that starts off as a small-town mystery thriller with shades of Twin Peaks and Denis Villeneuve's Prisoners. And his novelistic approach pays off, as it only furthers quite how much Stephen King must be green with envy that this suburban US nightmare isn't his baby. The episodic construction allows Cregger to ratchet the dread, as each chapter follows a different character POV – Justine, Archer, local cop Paul (Alden Ehrenreich), hapless drug addict James (Austin Abrams), Marcus and finally Alex – and work as intersecting clues. Only as the sinister jigsaw pieces fall into place do you realise the meticulous nature of Weapons' structure, and that the time-hopping exercise is anything but a cheap gimmick. Again, to reveal where it all leads and anything about a third-act character – a tricky role played to perfection by Amy Madigan - would be to detrimentally spoil. Mark these words: you'll remember her. Throughout, Weapons benefits from an unnerving use of silence and open spaces, some terrific camera pans and unbroken takes, as well as earned jump scares. Moreover, a majestic feather in its cap is its rather startling tonal playfulness. As Cregger moves away from the Brothers Grimm / Pied Piper-tinged enigma and embraces some dreamworld imagery – one hallucinated armament apparition in particular is as bizarre as it is metaphorically haunting – he also introduces sight gags and a smattering of gallows humour. Granted, the bleak comedy was there to begin with, as the doorbell video camera footage of the kiddies rushing away from their homes is soundtracked to George Harrison's 'Beware Of Darkness'; but the gleefully macabre levels are upped considerably towards the end of the film. Whether it's a well-timed expletive from Brolin's character after a fright or the grand guignol and slapstick-sensitive finale, Weapons reveals itself as surprisingly cathartic. It's quite the feat. When the film goes for scary, it'll make you jump out of your skin. When it decides to crawl under said skin, it'll make you meditate on the 'weapons' and 'targets' in even the most seemingly safe all-American suburban spaces, and how paranoia can be... well, weaponised. When it goes for gory, even hardened gore-hounds will wince. When it chooses to be funny and unexpectedly camp, it's a demented riot. And at the end of the day, no one's going to be acting valiant when clocks read 2:17 anymore. While some may take issue with how some questions are left unanswered and how the central mystery loses its serious edge once revelations do come, Cregger's masterful offering proves that his hellish Airbnb in 2022 was no fluke. More than that, Weapons has become the tense and deliriously entertaining horror film to beat this year. Considering 2025 has already been good to the genre, with Presence, Sinners, The Ugly Stepsister, 28 Years Later and Bring Her Back – to name but a few highlights – that should tell you plenty. Once more, good luck if you happen to be awake at 2:17am. Weapons is out in cinemas now.
Pink Villa
29-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Pink Villa
Weapons Movie Explained: What Zach Cregger's 2025 Horror Mystery Is Really About
Weapons, directed and written by Zach Cregger, is one of the most talked-about horror movies of 2025. Set in the fictional town of Maybrook, the story begins one month after a shocking event where 17 third-grade children leave their homes in the middle of the night and vanish without a trace, except for one student. The only child who didn't disappear is Alex, played by Cary Christopher. Video footage shows the missing kids running with their arms out at their sides, but no one can explain why. Their teacher, Justine Gandy (Julia Garner), becomes a key figure in the mystery. Though she has a history of misconduct and an unspoken drinking problem, she genuinely cares for her students and begins her own investigation after being placed on leave. A multi-character puzzle of horror The film weaves together the stories of several characters linked to the children and each other. Josh Brolin plays Archer, a grieving father desperate for answers. Alden Ehrenreich plays Paul, Justine's ex-boyfriend and a beat cop, who has his own set of issues and is not assigned to the case. Benedict Wong appears as Marcus, the school principal, and Austin Abrams plays James, a meth-addicted thief. As these characters' stories unfold, new clues and perspectives come into play. Each character-driven vignette adds layers to the overall narrative, which slowly reveals the horrifying truth. The film doesn't follow a traditional linear structure. The review by Cinema Blend explained that it isn't just a Rashomon-style collection of different perspectives, but rather an anthology-style movie with a single continuity and interconnected characters. This unique format keeps the audience engaged and constantly guessing. Here's what makes weapons stand out Zach Cregger, known for Barbarian, brings back his signature storytelling style. The movie is filled with jump scares, silence, and brutal horror without ever feeling cheap. According to Cinema Blend, the film's editing by Joe Murphy (from Barbarian) and cinematography by Larkin Seiple help elevate its visual and emotional impact. Weapons is set to release on August 8, 2025, and is rated R for 'strong bloody violence and grisly images, language throughout, some sexual content, and drug use.' It runs for 128 minutes and stars Julia Garner, Josh Brolin, Alden Ehrenreich, Austin Abrams, Benedict Wong, Cary Christopher, June Diane Raphael, Toby Huss, and Amy Madigan.
IOL News
12-05-2025
- Entertainment
- IOL News
'Good American Family': a heartwrenching tale of adoption gone awry – when family ties turn toxic
Ellen Pompeo and Imogen Faith Reid as Kristine Barnett and Natalia Grace in 'Good American Family'. Image: Disney+ Some years back, I happened upon "The Curious Case of Natalia Grace", a documentary about a Ukrainian girl who was adopted by an American family, only to be abandoned two years later. There was nothing ordinary about this story, as there was uncertainty around Natalia's real age. Suffering from spondyloepiphyseal dysplasia congenita, a rare form of dwarfism, she looked much younger than certain physiological changes that were observed by her adopted mom. However, Natalia's behaviour presented as a little girl prone to tantrums. Disney+ has revisited this true-life story in an eight-part dramatised series, "Good American Family". The narrative is drawn from allegations, court proceedings, as well as what has been publicly reported on the story. Of course, some creative liberties have been taken to ensure it's an engaging story. The writers employed a Rashomon-style narrative, intentionally creating a polarised viewer perception of Natalia. The first episode opens with Kristine Barnett (Ellen Pompeo), Natalia's (Imogen Faith Reid) adoptive mother and a celebrated author on raising children with autism. What started out as Kristine wanting to be a good mother and helping as many children, including those she adopted, somehow goes pearshaped. At first, you see this picture-perfect all-American family. Kristine is doing her best to run her home with her three boys: Jacob, Wesley and Ethan. Jacob is Kristine's proudest success story as he is about to start university and is making waves for his genius-level IQ. She comes across as most busy mothers do; doing drop-offs, planning meals and taking care of her family. Her husband, Michael (Mark Duplass), is supportive and quickly bonds with Natalia when she joins their family. At first, Kristine fobs off Natalia's strange behaviour; she doesn't like to be treated like a child, doesn't like being told what to do, and doesn't want to be bathed by her mother. However, her gut instinct tells her there's more to the unruly behaviour and outbursts. Her suspicions are slowly confirmed when she finds a knife in Natalia's room, notices she has been menstruating and hiding it and finds her coffee spiked with a cleaning product. It isn't long before the nurturing mother changes her attitude towards Natalia, especially when she causes her to have an accident and tries to kill one of her brothers by throwing his toys into oncoming traffic. Imogen Faith Reid as Natalia Grace in 'Good American Family'. Image: Disney+ Aside from being at her wits' end, she spots something amiss with Natalia's paperwork and starts to suspect that they have been misled on Natalia's real age. Hellbent on proving her theory and getting Natalia, who Kristine feels exudes sociopathic tendencies, out of their home, they legally changed her birthdate from 2003 to 1989, moved her into her own apartment and distanced her from the family. That's one version of the story. The other centres on Natalia, her struggles with feeding and taking care of herself. She wrestles with anxiety over being abandoned, being physically abused by her stepmom. Her actions suggest underlying trauma and fear. After being abandoned by her adoptive parents, Natalia meets Cynthia Mans and her husband Antwon, who invite her to stay with them and their seven adopted children. There are hints of Cynthia's concern being financially motivated, but Natalia is oblivious to it, as she only sees her kindness. In watching the series, I've gone from taking a strong dislike to Natalia to empathising with her. Again, this is attributed to because the story is being told from different perspectives, and so the roles of victim and abuser constantly shift. Pompeo and Faith Reid cover a wide gamut of emotions with the varying stages of their respective characters. They are the anchors of the series, and they are marvellous to watch in a Jekyll and Hyde sense. Rating: **** a standout series with exceptional qualities. Update on the real Natalia Grace… Like the Menendez Brothers, this story has seen streamers develop renewed interest in the real-life Natalia Grace. Born in Ukraine, she was adopted by Dyan and Gary Ciccone of New Hampshire in 2008. However, she was placed back for adoption in 2010 for her 'disruptive behaviour'. That year, she was adopted by Kristine and Michael Barnett and took on their surname. Two years later, the Barnetts petitioned the court to have her birth date legally changed from 2003 to 1989, which immediately made her an adult. They moved her to an apartment in Westfield, Indiana, and later Lafayette, Indiana, before relocating to Canada. Not long after, she found a home and family with Antwon and Cynthia Mans, which then led to charges of neglect being brought against the Barnetts. However, living with her new family wasn't without challenges, and after years of being abused, she eventually managed to escape and find a home with Nicole and Vince DePaul, who have helped her find an attorney and recoup the money she lost. She's reportedly thriving and leading a good life with her new family, and she has a boyfriend.
