Written, directed, and produced by Zachary Cregger, Weapons (2025) is taking theaters by storm with its promise of a fresh and unpredictable new horror. 

Starring Josh Brolin as concerned parent Archer, and Julia Garner as caring schoolteacher Justine, they and the rest of their town are shocked when 17 kids from Justine’s class mysteriously vanish overnight. 

Like Sinners (2025), this film was a great theatrical experience and if you are looking for something fresh and unexpected, I would avoid the spoilers and go see it immediately. However, as I will explain in full detail below, it’s not all perfect and some opportunities feel wasted or misused. 

Alright weapons, let’s get weapon-ing.

Rating: 7.5/10

Spoilers Imminent!

The Story and Themes:

The story of Weapons (2025) is surprisingly straightforward, despite being told in a non-chronological order. It is told very clearly and delivered at a pleasant pace. In fact, it’s almost too pleasant. Arguably, the film doesn’t quite make you squirm in your seat and sweat the clock as much as it should for a scary film. 

The plot doesn’t have too many twists and turns. There’s early foreshadowing of a parasitic dynamic at work, but it culminates into a fairly linear reveal. In fact, I’m surprised the cops don’t actually solve this mystery themselves. There’s only two real leads in the case, one of them was bound to yield results. 

I mean, Archer, with his skills as a general contractor, was able to break open the case by following the trajectory of only two kids. By the end, the only piece of the puzzle he’s missing is the location of Alex’s house. Which, Justine conveniently provides. The film makes no attempt to throw suspicion around and create an atmosphere of distrust, which is a shame.

To the film’s credit, the segment from Alex’s perspective introduces a uniquely tense and immersive atmosphere. It puts us directly into his shoes and struggles as we feel the tension and drain of coming home to an “abusive” household. However, he’s not just dealing with an emotionally unstable family member; he’s dealing with a parasitic creature he neither knows nor understands.

Alex is thrust into a position of having to selflessly take care of all those around him. As a result, some viewers might interpret that Justine acts as a surrogate mother for Alex, caring for his welfare when everyone else is isolating him. Like Ripley and Newt in Aliens (1986) However, it’s hard to justify this allegory, or any deeper meaning in the film actually, which marks a bit of a problem.

If there is an allegory at work, it might be that weapons explores the dangers of using people as a means to an end instead of as ends in themselves. Basically, manipulating people to do things for you can eventually backfire badly. Hence, the title “Weapons” and shoutout to Immanuel Kant. Unfortunately, the best evidence for this is when Archer compares the kids to heat-seeking missiles. Reinforcing the idea that a weapon can be indiscriminately turned on its own creator as well.

Ultimately, despite the intriguing concept, the film is simply not that deep. It has a very unexpected and somewhat inexplicable concept to it, but the themes are kind of shallow and there are some inconsistencies in the plot. For example, Alex is seen as the last person to give an order to the possessed kids, so why are they released only when Gladys dies? Also, Archer immediately snaps out of it, but the kids and Alex’s parents do not. Is it implying that time is a factor? Furthermore, for what reason does Gladys possess the kids? Is the implication that she’s some kind of witch feeding on them? 

The film wisely leaves some details ambiguous, creating a sense of dread that these horrific events can never be fully explained. However, taking a bit more time to clarify themes and logic to the audience might have benefitted the film.

Character Dynamics and Themes:

Fortunately, the film redeems itself with its grounded, believable characters and natural dialogue. The acting in the film is also great. There are no jarringly bad performances that take you out of the film, but nothing next-level to really draw you in either. I was most impressed with the performances of Austin Abrams as James and Alden Ehrenreich as Paul Morgan. I felt these two really embodied their roles and I was able to lose the actor in the character, so to speak. 

I enjoyed seeing the perspectives of morally gray characters who weren’t outright villains. It was refreshing to get away from the caring teacher and grieving father for a few moments. It added necessary texture and weight to the film.

Unfortunately, there isn’t much chemistry between the leads and we actually don’t see them interact much at all, which is kind of a shame. Weapons isn’t really the film to see if you want to be enthralled by dialogue. If you’re expecting intense, character-driven dialogue like in Heat (1995) or Reservoir Dogs (1992), this isn’t that.

Due to the lack of interaction, the characters don’t have any foil and they don’t really arc. In layman’s terms, no one forces them to think or act differently by the end of the film. Potential for characters being foils is set up perfectly between Justine and Archer, but nothing comes of it. Ideally, their dynamic would have shown us two characters, who don’t trust each other initially, but then they display the same investigative behavior and pursue the same leads until they are forced to bond and learn from each other. Maybe Archer learns to be softer and then his son, Matthew, stops bullying Alex. In turn, Justine cleans up her act and learns to be more pragmatic and professional with the kids and parents.

If some of that sounded familiar, it is because it was definitely inspired in part by Prisoners (2013). Which reminds me, another problem I have with the film is that Archer’s character is pretty similar to Hugh Jackman’s character in Prisoners, Keller Dover, but lacks all the same depth and internal conflicts. Brolin’s character seems sad he’s lost his son, but Jackman’s character becomes a madman obsessed. Unfortunately, Josh Brolin just doesn’t match that same obsessive intensity.  

The Technical Aspects:

Mentioning Prisoners leads me into my point about the mood and tone throughout the film. It starts off very Prisoners-esque, with a dark, dreary, investigative tone, but lightens up drastically by the end. It’s not all sunshine and rainbows in the final act though, as the bloody and uncompromising aftermath helps ground the film and leaves the viewer feeling queasy as they exit the theatre.

The cinematography shines in places with the slow pans and zoom-ins really putting us into the characters’ perspectives. The camera also frames open doors like they are mysterious portals where you never know who or what is going to come in or out. I also loved the tracking shots from low and behind angles, or from the side in very intense moments. This gave the strong sense of the story moving forward and contributed to the smooth pacing.

The soundtrack and sound mixing are very serviceable. The dialogue was never drowned out by the sounds of music or action. Sound effects also synced accurately the on-screen action, allowing for easy interpretations of scenes. The soundtrack wasn’t too memorable, but it wasn’t overly invasive either and provided the appropriate atmosphere to each scene.

The set designs and costumes all felt authentic and like they belonged in the film. The junkie squatter looks like a junkie squatter and not like Hollywood hired Ryan Gosling to play a heroin enthusiast. Aunt Gladys also manages to look creepy and memorable without being over the top with her makeup and demeanor (cough Longlegs (2024) cough). The blood and gore visual effects also looked realistic enough for the movie. I recall the effect when Justine peels Paul’s face was especially impressive to me.

Final Thoughts:

Overall, this film has a lot going for it, but it doesn’t live up to its full potential. It left me feeling unsatisfied and I don’t know if that’s intentional or not. It didn’t particularly resonate with me emotionally, but I did enjoy the ride and thought the concept was fresh and memorable. I look forward to seeing what horrors Zach Cregger will come up with next!