‘Weapons’ (dir. Zach Cregger) | Warner Bros (8/8)

[Marco Zen]

this was definitely scarier than sinners... and in my opinion an overall better movie. i think sinners was way too over hyped, evrybody was just riding the coogler/mbj, train praising a movie that was meh at best outside of the dope 10 min music scene, but ill die on that hill another day

seems like people are trying to have it both ways in here..

i remember people claiming sinners is "the best horror movie theyve ever seen" now its "sinners isnt a horror movie so comparing it to this is dumb"


which is it

 

[blackestofpanthers]

I don't understand why Alex would be a person of interest.

Yeah they'd question him but some of you cats seem to forget, we know we're watching a horror movie. The characters don't know they're in a horror movie. The kids are seen leaving of their own (as far as the police know) free will. Alex didn't. It's odd and it would warrant some scrutiny but not to the extent some of you are suggesting.

As far as most of the other complaints....I know the unreliable narrator trope is worn out, but the whole movie is a kid telling you what happened. It's in the opening monologue. So it may or may not be completely accurate.

As far as "Sinners", it's light years ahead of this (and I like this movie) but I'm legit confused why there's a comparison. There's a ton of horror in 2025, why these two movies?

Fred.

I mean, in general in 2025 if 17 kids go missing, the fbi is involved, there would have been a ton of news coverage for this story. That town would have been swarmed with true crime internet “detectives”. There’s no possible way this witch gets away with this for this long in the present day.

 

[Dr. Narcisse]

I don't understand why Alex would be a person of interest.

Yeah they'd question him but some of you cats seem to forget, we know we're watching a horror movie. The characters don't know they're in a horror movie. The kids are seen leaving of their own (as far as the police know) free will. Alex didn't. It's odd and it would warrant some scrutiny but not to the extent some of you are suggesting.

As far as most of the other complaints....I know the unreliable narrator trope is worn out, but the whole movie is a kid telling you what happened. It's in the opening monologue. So it may or may not be completely accurate.

As far as "Sinners", it's light years ahead of this (and I like this movie) but I'm legit confused why there's a comparison. There's a ton of horror in 2025, why these two movies?

Fred.

Im not sure you can wave it off as a horror movie because it involves 17 kids missing.

The one boy who came to school would still be a major focus. I listened to a podcast that said this might have benefited even more from a series. Because the media attention in that small town wouldnt just go away. That aunt would have to be working overtime and even then you'd wonder why she's want to put herself in that situation. Although I try to argue she was just desperate. Some journalist would have been snooping around. Some cops would still be checking in every now and then. Neighbors would be questioned if they seen anything funny or if there are suspicions.

Dad had a storke. Ok, where is the mom? Mom had a stroke too? 80 year old aunt looking out for him? Yea lets monitor to see if he needs additional help.


Maybe thats why he set it a month later to excuse why the attention wouldnt be as heavy, but it then puts it in conflict with whats actually happening with the kids.

 

[Scaaar]

That and I was expecting a more sinister tone. This felt…dare I say…M. Night Shyamalan-ish.

I definitely came in expecting some Sinister type vibe.

 

[Scaaar]

Spoiler

They did search Alex's house and investigate his family. Gladys was throwing them off the scent.

That doesn't make sense. Cause the dogs would have led them to the house even if the kids were running around the woods. If all the kids scent led to the house that means they were at the house at one point

 

[hex]

I mean, in general in 2025 if 17 kids go missing, the fbi is involved, there would have been a ton of news coverage for this story. That town would have been swarmed with true crime internet “detectives”. There’s no possible way this witch gets away with this for this long in the present day.

I agree with your over all point but the movie had a very limited time frame. I think from start to finish it was about a month. So there wasn't really much time for that sort of thing to start.

Also if 17 kids disappeared I think it would attract the types you're talking about. But 17 kids running away from home? On video, leaving by themselves?

I don't think many people would personally go to investigate because what would they even be looking for? I could see internet conspiracy theory types going nuts, making videos, etc.

Im not sure you can wave it off as a horror movie because it involves 17 kids missing.

The one boy who came to school would still be a major focus. I listened to a podcast that said this might have benefited even more from a series. Because the media attention in that small town wouldnt just go away. That aunt would have to be working overtime and even then you'd wonder why she's want to put herself in that situation. Although I try to argue she was just desperate. Some journalist would have been snooping around. Some cops would still be checking in every now and then. Neighbors would be questioned if they seen anything funny or if there are suspicions.

Maybe thats why he set it a month later to excuse why the attention wouldnt be as heavy, but it then puts it in conflict with whats actually happening with the kids.

As the pod mentioned they could have had a Carrie like situation with Alex where he kinda wanted those kids outta the paint

Man after the media black out and misinformation campaign in Uvalde, Texas I don't know how anyone can watch this movie and think the police would be reliable and/or open with the media.

The couple of times the police mentioned the case in this movie they seemed pretty about it.

Fred.

 

[Scaaar]

Leaving things up to audience interpretation will never not be corny and cop out for movies.

That's what I'm saying! It was a half full theater today and a lot of people walked out confused or pissed. There's a lot of plot holes in this movie or unexplained and convenient things happening that just pushed the thin plot along. Plus it wasn't even scary lol

 

[8WON6]

That doesn't make sense. Cause the dogs would have led them to the house even if the kids were running around the woods. If all the kids scent led to the house that means they were at the house at one point

Spoiler

Gladys was moving the kids around whenever she needed to. She was shown doing this when the detectives came to the house to look around again. Right after Justine told Marcus that Alex's parents were zombies on the couch, Marcus told investigators and they sent people to the house. Marcus unknowningly spilled the beans to Gladys when he met with Gladys at the school during the conversation about "consumption". So Gladys told Alex to clean up and take the newpapers off the windows and she moved the kids that night temporarily.

 

[kdslittlebro]

I personally think that Jordan Peele film "HIM" looks kinda meh. The idea itself just isnt that appealing right now to me.

He’s not writing or directing it, just going through his production company. I was 100% in on it off the reputation, but the preview took away a lot of hype, especially when I thought he was directing

 

[Supa]

denied that had anything to do with it which is why it came across hollow to me.

It seemed like thats what it was building up on/playing into. But nah...just wacky shyt in the area from a reactionary force that has nothing to do with the community.

It was a dream. Dreams are filled with random things that don't have meaning. The fact that the director said it meant nothing to him should be enough for people to stop trying to attach meaning to it.

Out of curiosity… how is this better than Sinners to you?

You're not asking me but the 3rd act in Weapons is better. Sinners' 3rd act was the weakest part of the movie. For that reason I give the edge to Weapons as a better movie. Sinners needed to bump up the horror. There's wasn't anything scary about it.

 

[Dr. Narcisse]

It was a dream. Dreams are filled with random things that don't have meaning. The fact that the director said it meant nothing to him should be enough for people to stop trying to attach meaning to it.




You're not asking me but the 3rd act in Weapons is better. Sinners' 3rd act was the weakest part of the movie. For that reason I give the edge to Weapons as a better movie. Sinners needed to bump up the horror. There's wasn't anything scary about it.

The problem with this though is that most of Weapons "horror" takes place in dreams. Nothing was scary once the reveal happened outside of the basement scene.

Edit: I'll add the walk out of the house with the scissors. It wasnt scary but was creepy.

Weapons has a better wrap up of the villain. That was brilliant. Im not sure the overall quality of the 3rd acts are that different in quality. They both are the weakest parts of both movies.

Smoke/Stack fight was better than whatever was happening with the junkie/Brolin/cop fight.


And regards to the dream....why would the aunt enter his dreams when they have no connection? And if she's omnipresent then why would SHE scare him and identify herself to him in his dreams?

 

[blackestofpanthers]

Spoiler

Gladys was moving the kids around whenever she needed to. She was shown doing this when the detectives came to the house to look around again. Right after Justine told Marcus that Alex's parents were zombies on the couch, Marcus told investigators and they sent people to the house. Marcus unknowningly spilled the beans to Gladys when he met with Gladys at the school during the conversation about "consumption". So Gladys told Alex to clean up and take the newpapers off the windows and she moved the kids that night temporarily.

Dogs would catch that scent easily
That’s such a terrible explanation, you might as well just stop using it my dude. It’s still an 8/10 for me because it’s a very entertaining and enjoyable movie, but come on man.

 

[Supa]

The problem with this though is that most of Weapons "horror" takes place in dreams. Nothing was scary once the reveal happened outside of the basement scene.

That's still more horror than Sinners had. You can't disqualify things because they happened in dreams. There's still visually horrific things that occurred when characters were awake.

Nothing was scary about the vampires.

Weapons has a better wrap up of the villain. Im not sure the overall quality of the 3rd acts are that different in quality.

I disagree mainly because the vampires weren't offering anything different in that fight. It was the usual holy water, garlic, wooden stakes, and sunlight. That part of the movie was a letdown.

Weapons felt fresh because it established it's own set of rules.

Smoke/Stack fight was better than whatever was happening with the junkie/Brolin/cop fight.

Was the Smoke/Stack fight great or something? It was whatever and didn't even conclude on screen.

I'm talking about the overall climax. The Vampires being invited in vs the battle in the house. The tension in Weapons was way higher and scarier and then you got the payoff of taking out the villain.

 

[MenacingMonk]

Gonna try watching it next week. Been a while since I went to the theaters.

 

[Dr. Narcisse]

That's still more horror than Sinners had. You can't disqualify things because they happened in dreams. There's still visually horrific things that occurred when characters were awake.

Nothing was scary about the vampires.



I disagree mainly because the vampires weren't offering anything different in that fight. It was the usual holy water, garlic, wooden stakes, and sunlight. That part of the movie was a letdown.

Weapons felt fresh because it established it's own set of rules.



Was the Smoke/Stack fight great or something? It was whatever and didn't even conclude on screen.

I'm talking about the overall climax. The Vampires being invited in vs the battle in the house. The tension in Weapons was way higher and scarier and then you got the payoff of taking out the villain.

Yes, knowing they were dreams just killed whatever momentum it had. In fact the Brolin scare didnt hit because the Justine's story established it was just going for dream scares.

I dont think the vampire fight was as well executed as it needed to be either. However, there wasnt a noticebable difference in tension once Remick and Stack are fighting with Smoke/chasing Preacher Boy than whatever Brolin and crew were doing. Im talking about once hey were on top of the stairs.

Again that just had the added benefit of a great climax of the VILLAIN. That was much better than a sneak kill in Sinners. However, Sinners keeps going on after that. You reflect on what just happened. You get the Klan shootout/emotional death scene, etc. Preacherboy keeps the guitar and drives off. And then you get older Preacher Boy.

Sinners didnt wrap up the Vampires as well it should have, but the 3rd act wasnt noticably different than Weapons in quality. Unless the movie just truly ended for you when the vampires died.