RIOTUS

Some movies are just too big for one person. Weapons, is one such movie. In the case of Zach Cregger’s new horror epic, two savvy RIOTERS — Julian Lytle and William Goodman — are teaming together to talk about the new release.

William: Where to start with Weapons? Writer/director Zach Cregger made quite a name for himself off the strength of his debut feature, Barbarian, and returns with one of the year’s most anticipated films. 2025 has already proven itself to be a great year for horror films and original movies—Sinners says hello—so there’s a lot to live up to, both in terms of the precedent already set and as a sophomore effort for Cregger. 

I don’t want to give too much of the premise away, but the simple setup is this: One night, at 2:17 in the morning, a whole classroom of children get out of bed, run out the door, and never return, leaving a community reeling with the repercussions. All of that setup happens in about the first five minutes of the movie, rendering quite the hook to explore over the next two hours and ten minutes. 

Broadly speaking, Julian, what was your expectation heading into Weapons?

Julian: Before this opened, I saw a few seconds of Benedict Wong with his eye bugging out and looking crazy, and I thought – NOPE! This film ain’t for me. It looked disturbing and something that I didn’t need swirling around my brain with my powerful imagination, making me see things coming for me at all times. Yet, to honor the craft of film criticism, I attended this, and it ended up not being as disturbing as I thought it would be. I didn’t see Barbarian, so I was going into this almost completely blind. 

William: The film unfolds in a series of segments, each from a different perspective of key figures involved, including teacher Ms. Gandy (Julia Garner), one of the parents of the missing kids (Josh Brolin), a local cop (Alden Ehrenreich), and others. Splitting the viewpoint allows Cregger to do clever things with the chronology, coloring in the lines of things that happened either before or after the events of one character. If you followed the production for this at all, there was a bit of a hint towards this, with Weapons being described as “horror Magnolia.” 

From a structural standpoint, how did this work for you? Did you enjoy how it shaped the storytelling?

Julian: I did like the structure of the story; for me, it reminded me of Pulp Fiction in terms of how the events connect in terms of timeline. Focusing on specific characters felt like a distinctly different approach to dealing with a horror story for me. It’s not something I’ve seen often, particularly in how they used the camera to follow characters in the environments. There were some truly powerful moments where these viewpoints were used to excellent precision in building tension and dread. My favorite chapter in this film was with Austin Abrams’ Anthony, a drug addict whose sole goal is to obtain money for a new fix, and ends up in some strange situations. His reactions to these events and what happens to him are hilarious, and for that part of the film, it’s more of a comedy, as well as a bit more human and relatable. 

William: You bring up the tone, which is something I want to touch on a bit. Weapons is far funnier than I anticipated. Those who saw Barbarian and know Cregger’s background as a comedic force know he’s a funny guy, but based on the super spooky trailers, I wasn’t sure how that would align here. Turns out that Cregger can juggle both humor and horror in equal measure. The segmented approach, however, means that we do jump around a bit. Did you feel like we got a good sense of who each of these characters are and that they felt fleshed out accordingly?

Julian: Josh Brolin’s Archer Graff is the least realized character in the film. I feel the film uses his presence to do a lot of work for Archer. He’s just a dad who wants to find his son, but his life before is not explored much in his part. While it is important and features the best dream sequence in the film, his character feels more like a functional part, moving from one character to the next, while also serving as the big, strong male protagonist during the climax. I still liked his character, as the performance is good. The rest of the characters, especially Alden Ehrenreich’s Paul Morgan, where I feel we got a full understanding of these persons and how the whole situation is affecting them, along with their backstories being a factor in how they move through the world. 

William: Yeah, some of Archer’s backstory I had to infer through my own ideas—which I’m not against—but wish some of that was a little more textual. I do think Alden’s arc is quite good, and you’ve already hit on Austin Abrams, who I think most people will walk out very impressed with. Julia Garner’s having a hot year, and I was happy to see her anchor the film in such a strong way. I’ve followed her work dating back to The Americans and always felt like she had a real presence; Cregger gives her plenty of material to dig into, and there’s a real richness to what she’s doing with the role.

You mentioned the scare factor — how did that hold up for you? I found it to be more creepy than outright scary, even with some good jumps in it. 

Julian: Since I don’t like being scared or even shown real disturbing images, but this was alright, as it focused more on creepiness and atmosphere. While it did have some gross images that I did look away from, I was okay. I don’t think people should go into this expecting some big scares and gross uneasiness. I think this is a movie that works for horror fans and people who don’t really want to see most horror films. I’d definitely watch this again. And about Garner, her performance and character are a good focal point to carry you through this story. 

William: This managed to thread the needle by incorporating good jump scares and providing just the right amount of creepy visuals. But what surprised me is how effortless Cregger makes it all look. Sure, it might take a second to get going, but once it kicks into gear, it’s pretty relentless, building up to an all-timer of a conclusion that I can’t stop thinking about. More than anything else, Cregger’s command of filmmaking is impressive; some directors have worked for decades who aren’t as self-assured and skilled as he is here. If nothing else, it cements him alongside directors like Ryan Coogler, Jordan Peele, and Greta Gerwig as one of this generation’s best filmmakers. I’m officially all-in on everything he does moving forward — including his upcoming Resident Evil reboot. 

Any last thoughts here before we close?

Julian: Weapons does show some serious promise of Zach Creggar as a filmmaker. The look of the film was great and had a distinct view. With some great performances by all its leads and a great mix of drama, humor, and horror, Weapons is one of my favorite horror films I’ve seen this year. I will be on the lookout for his work in the future, and I have a little more confidence in a new Resident Evil film coming from him.