Directed by Zach Cregger, notoriously known for his film “Barbarian,” “Weapons” received immediate attention at the box office upon release in Aug. 2025. With a 93% rating on Rotten Tomatoes and recently crossing the $200 million mark for ticket sales (Variety), it is clear that Cregger has definitely made a relevant name for himself in the horror genre and will continue doing so. 

The film follows a teacher, Justine (Julia Garner), and a parent, Archer (Josh Brolin), as they unravel the case of 17 children vanishing from their homes one night at 2:17 a.m. 

However, New Line Cinema was about to not be the production company for the movie, Jordan Peele (“Get Out,” “Us,” “Nope”) lost the bid for the film to New Line by $7 million more than what he had offered. 

Allegedly, Peele even fired two of his managers after this loss. 

Then, “I had a whole different cast for this movie…And then we had the strike, and then Pedro Pascal’s schedule threw us into turmoil. I had to recast the entire movie,” says Cregger with Entertainment Weekly. Cregger reveals in this interview that Pedro Pascal was originally going to undertake Brolin’s role of Archer, along with Brian Tyree Henry and Renate Reinsve being in the film as well. Austin Abrams (James Anthony) was the only actor from the original cast to remain in the film. 

Both the possibility of Peele as a director of “Weapons” and an entirely different cast display the hardship that the movie went through before its final product. But, even after all these overcomings and demonstrations of enjoyment, does Cregger’s film live up to its expectations? 

Plot:

Compared to other modern horror movies, “Weapons” is divided into different chapters; each one with a perspective of another character. The film starts with Justine’s perspective, then Archer’s, Paul (a character struggling with alcoholism and a friend of Justine), James, and finally Alex, who is the sole survivor among the class gone missing. 

Through this, the audience is able to become more engaged with the mystery of the story as we are given small pieces of information more often as each chapter progresses until the finale. This is what I find to be the part of the uniqueness of the film and a highlight. 

The opening scene of George Harrison’s mystical, slow “Beware of Darkness” tied together with the eerie sight of children abruptly running out of their homes into darkness definitely sets the tone for the rest of the film – mysterious and ominous. The choice of soundtrack, cinematography, and buildup throughout the beginning of the movie showed the amazing ability of Cregger and what he wants the audience to expect for the duration of his story. 

However, I was a bit disappointed while watching the lack of horror that was brought into the plot, contradicting what was originally advertised for “Weapons”. While there is some gore towards the end of the film, I would characterize the movie as more suspenseful and even humorous. 

Then, as mentioned before, the build-up and thrill found at the beginning of the plot evolved into a bit of a let-down than what I had expected. The ‘plot-twist’ near the end of what had happened to the missing children felt simple and almost rushed compared to the rest of the film. 

That goes without saying, the rest of Cregger’s film was tremendous; unique, intense, and fascinating. But, even though George Harrison sang in the opening, “Watch out now / Take care, beware of falling swingers,” it still felt like there was very little to “watch out” for throughout the movie. 

Nonetheless, according to Rotten Tomatoes ‘Audience Says’ section, the film was “loaded with bold elements that make it not just a great horror film, but a noteworthy film overall. Weapons is ultimately an impressive, genre-bending experience that’s original, entertaining, and satisfying despite its faint air of ambiguity.” – to which I agree. The overall film is a highlight of movies at the box office this year, despite the lack of horror elements. 

Characters:

I believe that the choice of actors and the performance they displayed throughout the film was incredible, specifically Cary Christopher’s role of Alex, who is the sole survivor of the class. 

Christopher was phenomenal when displaying the true fear and “spell” that he was practically cast under by the antagonist – and his acting, even as a child, definitely stuck out among a cast of adults. 

However, this is not at all the first role he has had in the media.  He has played roles in numerous TV shows, such as 9-1-1, NCIS, and American Horror Stories. Christopher is even Emmy-nominated for his contribution across 37 episodes of Days of Our Lives. 

  Christopher mentions that his time on set was not at all stressful or scary as it might have seemed, “Everybody had an awesome time…Everybody on that film just made it so fun to work on. It was just amazing,” he tells People Magazine. He also mentions that his new biggest award is to win an Oscar one day, and with his performance on Weapons, he just might achieve it. 

Josh Brolin, who plays Archer throughout the film, does an awesome take on the obsessed, deeply involved father of a missing child, Matthew. In the film, Archer is emotionally unavailable, in deep grief, has the inability to sleep, and is blaming, in particular, Justine. 

But, besides Brolin’s role, we never really got to see the impact that the event had on other parents, which would have made the audience have a greater understanding and emotional relationship with the characters. 

Primarily, at the beginning of the film, but also featured in the trailer, there is a young, female narrator who adds an ambiguous, eerie addition to the movie. The ambiguous voice might be of numerous people. 

Some expect the child to be one of the missing students recounting the events in which she experienced. Others believe that she is an observer, based on how she refers to the town as “my town”, and the students as “they”. I loved this feature of the film; it added something that I felt like the movie lacked – horror. 

I think the cast’s performance throughout the entire film was another highlight and truly made the audience feel and connect with the dynamic emotions entirely. 

Purpose of the Film:

What I believe to be what makes this movie different from any other movie in the industry right now is the symbolism and underlying purpose that the film holds. 

“Weapons” demonstrates the idea that anything can be weaponized. But also, includes indicators of school shooting awareness across the country. 

The villain of the story, unnamed for spoilers, uses their powers to weaponize other people for their own success and capability. 

The parents and other individuals in the town constantly blame Justine as the perpetrator of the case, despite having no reliable evidence. 

Also seen in Justine’s alcoholism and James’ drug addiction. 

All three of these circumstances indicate how people utilize things negatively in a time of grief and blame, only in an attempt to solve their own struggles. 

The film also features a floating rifle in one of the scenes, and is meant to refer to the effects of school shootings across the country. Despite the situation being solved at the end of the film, the families and children still undergo everlasting, traumatizing effects – similar to shootings. 

However, some critics argue that “the most frustrating point among them is the argument shared by several critics and a wider collection of the audience that the film doesn’t have a deeper meaning and is ultimately about nothing”, says the Hollywood Reporter. 

But, I believe that, no matter the true intentions for the purpose of a film, there is no true, singular meaning to be applied. The real meaning of any piece of work, throughout any media, is how it correlates to you, and how you want to see the movie. 

Final Takeaways:

Overall, while I believe that “Weapons” is an amazing movie and definitely one that has stuck out this year, it’s hard to give the film the title of “Best Horror Movie of 2025”, when I wouldn’t even classify it as a horror movie itself. There were empty spots in the plot, extra information in the plot, things that they could’ve elaborated on, etc. That goes without saying, Cregger, without a doubt, put his all into this film, and I left the theaters in shock upon my first watch – and you will too.