THIS REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS
After the success of the film “Barbarian” (2022), fans were eager to see what director Zach Cregger had in store for his next film, and when “Weapons” (2025) was released on Aug. 8, fans flooded the theatre. The film grossed over $100 million in just two weeks, surpassing its budget of $38 million, and has cemented Cregger as a great up-and-coming filmmaker.
Set in a small Pennsylvania town, “Weapons” follows six interconnected characters trying to navigate the disappearance of 17 missing schoolchildren. The kids, all from one third-grade class of 18, all quietly left their homes at 2:17 a.m. on the same morning, leaving the school staff, parents and the rest of the town in shock. Each of the main six characters gets their own designated chapter in the film, where viewers see their point of view and how they handle the events affecting the town.
The six chapters of the film follow Justine (Julia Garner), the children’s third-grade teacher, Archer (Josh Brolin), the dad of a missing child, Paul (Alden Ehrenreich), a local police officer, Marcus (Benedict Wong), the principal at the school, James (Austin Abrams), a homeless man living near by and Alex (Cary Christopher), the only child from the class of 18 that didn’t disappear.
I really liked the structure of the film and thought the different chapters made the characters and the story more complex. Oftentimes, when the perspective would switch, I would find myself thinking differently about a certain character based on their point of view. I thought this was a very unique choice for a horror movie and it added a lot of depth to the characters and the story itself. Each chapter slowly uncovered more of the mystery. By going forward and backward in time, Cregger wove together the six chapters in a very interesting way, helping the audience solve the mystery along with the characters.
About halfway through the film, a new character, Aunt Gladys (Amy Madigan), emerges and quickly changes the tone of the film. The film switches from a grounded mystery to a supernatural thriller. She joins the story as Alex’s feeble great aunt. However, soon after her arrival, it becomes clear that Aunt Gladys isn’t what she seems. She puts Alex’s parents into a trance and manipulates Alex into doing bizarre errands for her by threatening to harm his parents.
Ultimately, we learn that Aunt Gladys has put the 17 children under her spell and is drawing their energy in order to stay young and healthy. We don’t know where she comes from, exactly why she is there or how she got her powers. While this lack of explanation has angered some viewers, I thought that this ambiguity made Aunt Gladys more intriguing and terrifying.
Although I liked many aspects of the film, it still has several issues. The most glaring issue being how unrealistic certain plot points were, especially relating to Alex. It’s hard to believe that the police wouldn’t heavily question the only remaining kid from the class. Although Alex is questioned, the investigation is shallow, and his home isn’t searched until much later. The most improbable detail was when the police didn’t find it suspicious when a strange distant relative, Aunt Gladys, accompanied Alex and his entranced father to an interview, claiming that his father had had a stroke, with no suspicion from authorities.
Some fans also found issues with the tonal shifts, claiming they were disorienting. However, I thought this choice was very unique and interesting. The film changes between genres; it is a horror, dark comedy, mystery and thriller all wrapped into one. At the end of the film, my entire theatre was laughing, which I didn’t expect when I originally walked in to see what I believed would be a straightforward horror movie. I also enjoyed how the movie didn’t overly rely on cheap jump scares to push the horror elements. Although there were several jump scares over the course of the movie, I think they were very effective. Cregger did a great job of building suspense throughout the film with and without jump scares, instead choosing to build tension through the atmosphere and characters.
The message of the film is up to interpretation; many fans have claimed that it is a commentary on school shootings. While Cregger hasn’t confirmed if this was his intention, it’s hard to believe that a story about missing kids and the overwhelming grief that accompanies this loss isn’t a critique on gun violence. Cregger has stated that part of his inspiration came from examining the relationship between children and alcoholic parents. Taking inspiration from his own childhood, he explores the dynamic of a “foreign entity” entering a household and changing the dynamic between a parent and child.
Overall, I thought “Weapons” was an excellent and refreshing horror movie. While some of the critiques around tonal shifts, pacing and Aunt Gladys’ unexplained background are understandable, I personally found these elements to be part of the film’s unique charm. It’s clear that Cregger respects his viewers enough to let them come to their own conclusions. A film doesn’t need to lay out every detail for its audience and in the case of “Weapons”, the unknown makes it even more haunting.
