(Photo: Warner Bros. Pictures)
"Weapons" is one of those rare Hollywood films that has generated massive buzz long before its release. This hype, however, isn't coming from the general public but from within the industry itself, fueled by high expectations among executives and palpable excitement within niche horror fan circles. The script for "Weapons" was a hot commodity from the moment it was pitched, largely because its creator, Zach Cregger, is the mind behind the critically and commercially successful "Barbarian" from three years ago. Studios are betting that the former comedian could be the next Jordan Peele, another funnyman who masterfully pivoted to the horror genre.
Since "Weapons" wrapped production, Cregger's stock in Hollywood has only skyrocketed. The film held several secret test screenings last year, and the industry reactions have been exceptionally positive—so positive, in fact, that Warner Bros. confidently moved its release date up to a prime summer slot. While the average moviegoer might not know Cregger's name yet, he's become one of the most sought-after talents in town. His momentum is so strong that last year he was already pitching a new take on a "Resident Evil" reboot, sparking a bidding war between Warner Bros. and Sony Pictures. For an IP that has stumbled spectacularly twice in less than a year and should be radioactive, attaching Cregger's name was enough to reignite massive interest.
(Photo: Warner Bros. Pictures)
Now that "Weapons" has finally been unleashed, I completely understand the hype that's been building within Hollywood since last year. It feels like witnessing the birth of a new master, akin to watching Quentin Tarantino emerge on the scene. If "Barbarian" was Cregger's "Reservoir Dogs," then "Weapons" is his "Pulp Fiction"—a confident, small-scale debut followed by a career-defining masterpiece that sends him into the stratosphere. I can't guarantee that all international audiences will fully connect with this hype, as tastes in horror can differ. Western audiences tend to embrace genre-bending films that don't always rely on constant scares, which may not align with everyone's expectations. But if your palate leans more towards American and European cinema, you'll see exactly what Hollywood sees in Cregger.
In some ways, "Weapons" absolutely feels like a Tarantino film. More accurately, it's a trait carried over from "Barbarian," with "Weapons" being the bigger-budget, deluxe edition. It’s similar to how Guy Ritchie followed up his breakout debut "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels" by immediately taking a larger budget and bigger stars to make the conceptually similar "Snatch." If Tarantino ever announced his final film would be a horror movie, it would probably look a lot like "Weapons" and "Barbarian," at least in terms of narrative structure and sense of humor.
(Photo: Warner Bros. Pictures)
What made "Barbarian" so stunning was its near-total unpredictability. You couldn't apply any familiar formula to guess where Cregger was taking the story. It’s like watching "Pulp Fiction" for the first time—you never would have guessed that a brawl between Ving Rhames and Bruce Willis would end with them tied up as sex slaves in a basement, or that John Travolta would get gunned down walking out of the bathroom. Another Tarantino-esque element is its non-linear, chaptered structure. It deliberately cuts away at the exact moment you're wondering, "What the hell is happening?!," then shifts to another timeline to fill in some backstory before circling back or letting the two storylines naturally converge.
"Weapons" employs this same technique but pushes it even further. With a larger scope and more characters, it feeds the audience clues from multiple perspectives. Initially, I was concerned that relying so heavily on this device would make the plot feel fragmented. Fortunately, Cregger knows the purpose behind every perspective shift. Call it a flex if you want, but it's a flex that not only effectively builds suspense but also gives every actor—Josh Brolin, Julia Garner, Benedict Wong, Austin Abrams, and Alden Ehrenreich—their own moment to shine. Each chapter's unique viewpoint clearly delivers clues while fleshing out the characters' personalities and backstories.
(Photo: Warner Bros. Pictures)
The central mystery of "Weapons" is, of course, who or what is behind the children's disappearances. And I absolutely love how Cregger unveils this secret. There's no grand, drawn-out ceremony, nor does he save it for the final act. Instead, the mastermind is revealed suddenly and with startling subtlety, appearing earlier than you'd expect. That understated entrance is what makes it so chilling—the sudden, dawning horror that this person was hiding in plain sight all along. Cregger's decision to not save the reveal for the end is deliberate; it leaves room to unpack more twists later. The villain's origins, motives, and methods are revealed sequentially, rather than being lazily dumped in a clichéd monologue at the climax.
(Photo: Warner Bros. Pictures)
I even think Cregger's casting strategy here is brilliant. For this kind of understated chill to work, the audience needs to be unfamiliar with the actor. Casting a major star would have been a mistake; viewers would just see the celebrity, not the character. Amy Madigan, while not an unknown—she's an Oscar nominee with a long TV career—is the perfect choice. She's not a face modern audiences see constantly, which is exactly what this role needed: a veteran actress who can command the screen while remaining just unfamiliar enough (the film's makeup and hair design also effectively disguise her).
Rather than calling "Weapons" a horror film, it's more accurate to describe it as a suspense thriller in the vein of "Prisoners"—both stories revolve around child abductions in a suburban setting. The stellar ensemble cast delivers performances on par with an Oscar-season film like "Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri." Horror feels like a secondary element; at its core, this is a rock-solid drama. Hollywood doesn't typically slot dramas into the summer blockbuster season, but "Weapons" is an incredibly entertaining one. The ending, in particular, offers a hugely satisfying release, allowing two hours of accumulated anxiety to erupt in a climax that is simultaneously bloody, exhilarating, and unexpectedly heartwarming.
(Photo: Warner Bros. Pictures)
Like "Barbarian," "Weapons" is laced with moments of dark, absurd humor. Justin Long served as the comic relief in the last film; this time, it's concentrated in the dynamic between Alden Ehrenreich and Austin Abrams. Cregger designs their comedic moments to feel natural, not forced. The laughs come from their characters' panicked, instinctive reactions to dire situations, not from witty banter. And speaking of Ehrenreich, after the commercial disappointment of playing a young Han Solo, he's had a fantastic resurgence, finding his niche in thrillers and comedies like "Cocaine Bear," "Fair Play," and now this. He excels at playing characters under extreme pressure.
Austin Abrams is also a standout. As a member of the "Euphoria" ensemble, and with co-stars like Hunter Schafer, Sydney Sweeney, Colman Domingo, and Jacob Elordi blowing up in film, it feels like his turn is next. Abrams seems to have already found his niche: playing characters who are a bit goofy but smarter than they look. He plays a similar kind of crucial, scene-stealing supporting role here in "Weapons" and did so in last year's *Wolfs*. Cregger has reportedly already tapped him to star in the new "Resident Evil," with a character cut from a similar cloth. This could very well become his signature on-screen persona.
Finally, the original score, which Cregger himself co-composed, deserves special praise. It syncs perfectly with the rhythm of the plot, functioning almost as sound design. It's seamlessly integrated, becoming the very heartbeat and breath of the film.