In an interview with “The Hollywood Reporter,” Zach Cregger, the writer and director of “Weapons,” one of the best films of the year, said something intriguing about it.
“I hope people have fun, honestly,” Cregger says. “It’s not really my business what people make of the movie. I have nothing to say about it, because the movie should speak for itself, and if I have to comment on what people should get from it, then I’ve failed as a filmmaker.”
THIS, as they say on social media. I am thrilled to report that Cregger has not failed as a filmmaker, and instead has succeeded, wildly. He has also succeeded in laying out, clearly, how art works. The reactions to “Weapons,” while almost universally positive, has also been all over the map in terms of what it all means, man.
What is ‘Weapons’ really about?
There are all kinds of theories, including that it isn’t really about anything. Despite what “Seinfeld” claimed, everything is about something. That Cregger is intent on leaving just what to the eye of the beholder is spot on. And one of the reasons the movie has been so successful, both critically and financially.
I loved it.
If you haven’t seen it, the premise is, like the film, simultaneously simple and complex. On a Wednesday in a Pennsylvania town, at 2:17 a.m., 17 children go missing. Just up and disappear. Thanks to Ring doorbells — and there is nothing creepier than seeing the world through that lens — we see some of them, in one of the iconic images of the summer, running through the dark streets, single-minded of purpose, arms extended like they’re playing airplane.
The mystery thriller “Weapons,” out Aug. 8, 2025, keeps crowds in suspense over what happened to a classroom of third graders that disappeared into the night.
What’s weirder still is that all of them are students in one classroom, the one taught by Justine (Julia Garner). Except one boy remains. Alex Lilly (Cary Christopher, excellent) sits alone in the classroom, silently, while the world freaks out around him.
Where did the children go? And why? Those are the questions that drive the movie, and like most of these kinds of set-ups, it’s more fun before we know the answers, though the answers are plenty unhinged, as well.
The film is told from several points of view, some more compelling than others. Archer (Josh Brolin) is a grief-stricken father obsessed with finding out what happened. Paul (Alden Ehrenreich) is a police officer having an on-again, off-again affair with Justine. Marcus (Benedict Wong), Justine’s principal, is trying to navigate an impossible situation, and puts Justine on leave. James (Austin Abrams) is a junkie with a line on the big reward for finding the children.
There are echoes of contemporary life, like school shootings
There are so many echoes of contemporary life here. School shootings are an obvious one, made explicitly so by Archer seeing a giant AK-47 with the number 217 in red floating above a house. So many small lives gone. And for what? Why? How do you answer the unanswerable?
A town meeting in which Marcus tries to let parents and town residents air their concerns goes horribly wrong, as blame shifts immediately and solely to Justine. She must have done something wrong, must know something, must play some role in this horrible mystery, they figure, though no one can figure out quite what. The anger evokes town hall meetings, school board meetings, library meetings, any gathering where people are trying to figure out what is going on in the world right now, without any sufficient explanation.
If that sounds like a serious drama, it’s not. Cregger directed the excellent “Barbarian,” and co-founded the sketch-comedy troupe The Whitest Kids U’Know. This is definitely a horror movie, increasingly by the minute. It’s also really funny — in places — and the finale combines horror and comedy in a way that doesn’t cheapen either one. You laugh at some of what’s going on because there isn’t really another sane reaction.
Is it the best movie of 2025? It’s sure one of them
Awards season is approaching, but the two best films of the year so far are horror films — this, and “Sinners.” If “Sinners,” the better film, takes a more straightforward, if overtly supernatural, take on racism and bigotry and the promise of release, that doesn’t diminish what is going on in “Weapons.”
Which is, as Cregger says, whatever you think is going on. Which is as it should be. It’s open to interpretation. My interpretation is that it’s a scary, funny film with a lot beneath the surface. And it’s certainly preferable to watching the news.
‘Weapons’ 4.5 stars
Great ★★★★★ Good ★★★★
Fair ★★★ Bad ★★ Bomb ★
Director: Zach Cregger.
Cast: Julia Garner, Josh Brolin, Benedict Wong.
Rating: R for strong bloody violence and grisly images, language throughout, some sexual content and drug use.
How to watch: In theaters.
Reach Goodykoontz at [email protected]. Facebook:facebook.com/GoodyOnFilm. Media commentary with a side of snark? Sign up for The Watchlist newsletter with Bill Goodykoontz.
Fall movie season is going to be wild. These are 15 films I can’t wait to see
This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: ‘Weapons’ is one of the scariest and best movies of the year
‘ The preceding article may include information circulated by third parties ’
‘ Some details of this article were extracted from the following source www.yahoo.com ’
