Weapons

The movie is great, but I'd like to explain what it was all about and where it came from.

The movie is gorgeous and ends not as usual - worse than the movie itself, but even better.

P.S. And from the same director, "The Barbarian" 2022 can be watched by anyone who wants to.(and Justin Long in both cases, the director's friend?)

for my taste, the movie started very promisingly, but I didn't like the main villain. Baba Yaga personally brought down all the suspense for me. it was just a pity for the baby, who was under her terrible pressure. The plot is interesting, and I liked it overall. Everyone except the crazy old woman.

surprisingly, it's a pretty unusual horror movie)
it was interesting to watch, I liked it)
it's a good move to show the story from the perspective of different characters
, although the ending is weak, of course

It's a damn good movie, if you're a Stephen King fan in terms of atmosphere, certain ideas, this movie will be just a balm for the soul.

Excellent shooting, presentation, dialogues, characters. The barbarian was good, but this one is just better at everything. The new film based on rezik is in good hands. I'm waiting for more works by the director.

I understand that sometimes I also want to escape in the Naruto style in the middle of the night from everyone and everything somewhere far away, and after that they would still be looking for me for about a month.

Is it coming on the big screen?

It's certainly not horror, but it's a great picture. Despite the sprawl in places, it was interesting and intriguing, it was not enough for a high level of informativeness - opening the cards from and to, and now I'm sitting thinking why and why all this happened) I advise you to watch

😳 film of the year

Quite mixed feelings
The film is cool, the storytelling style is interesting

I wouldn't call it straight horror.
It also has a detective and comedic component.
Well, personally, we were laughing.

I have a few questions for the villainess.
1. What was the point of flashing before the eyes of the characters. For example, in the forest in front of narik?
2. Why cut off the teacher's hair in order to kill later, instead of killing immediately ... ?

Well, I think it's because of the villainess that something was missing in this movie. It's hard to explain what exactly, but they just didn't make it.

Although the ending is cool.
A one-time movie.

We started for health, finished as it turned out, but it turned out, in my opinion, badly.
The plot is interesting, intriguing, and the actors are good, but questions remain after watching.
At least the most important "What are these rituals for? What's the motive?"..

I wonder how the first 20 minutes I was like, well, a pretty ordinary elevated horror, here's the main character, she has such a problem, most likely her parents are to blame, and they'll ruin her life for nothing. And after 20 minutes, I'm like, "Oh, this is a Zack Kregger movie, I'm not even going to try to predict the plot and enjoy the experience." And I enjoyed it. Director Varvara shot Varvara at maximum speed, there is no main character, the characters can die at any moment, and they are all colorful, described in just two words, the chronology goes wherever it wants, well, and humor. Some absolutely terrible events were filmed deliberately funny, although it seemed that it was ridiculous to direct it and at the same time it was impossible to preserve the drama, but this is the second time Kregger has succeeded. I really liked it

Just from the movies

I laughed at the moment where the junkie was constantly passing out, then jumped up again and attacked the man, each time it was funnier.
The moment where the children run after the grandmother is also funny.
I don't remember anything else. I still don't understand what's what, why was it all?
Think of a movie like this for yourself. 😅

It's fresh, cool, I want to shake the director's hand) for me, his "Barbarian" was like a breath of fresh air, I agree with the commentator above that you don't have to try to guess what will happen next in the plot, that's probably why I liked the film. Plus, my favorite is showing the action from different points of view.

One of the greatest horror films and a great movie! I definitely recommend it for viewing. So far, my Movie of the Year!

The film was shot according to his script by director, actor and producer Zach Kregger, who was already familiar to me from the very strong film "The Barbarian" and it turned out perfectly once again! At first, of course, nothing is clear, and the concept of a story being told on behalf of different characters is not new. But then the movie accelerates and ends with a really hard tin! Amy Madigan, who played Aunt Gladys, is simply charming in her abomination, and in general, the cast was pleased with both famous names and excellent acting. In addition to Josh Brolin and Julia Garner, there are also Alden Ehrenreich, Benedict Wong and Justin Long, albeit in a very small role. And sometimes it's really scary, because you don't really understand what's going on, and when you show an explanation, it also becomes uncomfortable. Yes, there are hints, and Gladys's appearance will help a lot, but still, surprise is guaranteed. I watched it with pleasure, I love such films with intrigue and bloodshed and a little mysticism. I recommend it, of course, but be careful!

This year's soul collector. It's a great atmosphere, and there's enough suspense and humor, but knowing the intrigue doesn't make it so interesting anymore. It's as if the degree, instead of going up, drops sharply down. At the same time, the last scene is wonderful, but apparently it will only remain in memory. That's not bad, but I wanted more.

A good movie that holds up to the screen.
It starts, of course, everything is not clear. First, the teacher's story. Then the father of one of the missing children. Which seem to be interconnected, but somehow shaky. But with each new story, a new point of view, a new facet of the answer to the main question of the plot opens up - what happened to the children? The puzzle adds up, in other words.
Well, the outcome is quite unusual. First of all, there was even something to laugh about. Secondly, it doesn't seem to be a happy ending.
Although the main villain really reminded me of Nicolas Cage from Soul Collector.
But personally, I liked it.

Well, as we wrote above, it would be nice, on the one hand, to explain: where, how and why did all this happen in the first place? Who was this aunt really?
And on the other hand, to increase the timing even more... and a prequel would probably be superfluous here.

I also liked the beginning much more than the final outcome. It's kind of... anticlimactic. The initial impression was of something more global and comprehensive, but in the end, some crazy grandmother with an incomprehensible wand, from where and what it was at all, is not explained.
But the movie is well directed and shot, the actors are pleasant, the atmosphere is good. The plot was a bit disappointing.

It reminded me of the Reincarnation of director Ari Astaire. Rituals, cursed people, obsession, terrible deaths, and if you dig deep, even the themes of family and parenthood can be found. It's not that deep, of course, but I liked it.
I had enough explanation - my grandmother had certain powers and unwillingness to die, very simply and clearly. The details would ruin a certain mystery, imho; the finale is clear enough, the timing is sufficient - I see no point in describing the obvious. Well, there would have been a cult, or she would have been some kind of shaman, or there was a curse on her - well, what difference does it make in general, we have an abundance of motive and execution. The element of mysticism and slight understatement would be gone.
I liked it more than other similar horror / thriller films of this year - One whole, Bring her back from the dead, etc.
The soul collector, with whom they compared, or Two, three from the Philip brothers lose heavily - a good build-up, a strong sagging in the middle, an indistinct end. I don't even want to compare it.
I'll bet you a solid 8/10. It's creepy, well done.

The movie fire. Googled the whole movie with a friend.

It's really "fresh". A very interesting narrative concept, the actors are a tower, and the idea was also very exciting and intriguing to the end!

It's not exactly a horror movie, it's more of a mystery detective story. I liked the plot of the film, I liked the narration of events on behalf of different characters - this way the picture looks more complete. But by the end of the movie, it seemed a bit long. All in all, it's a pretty good movie that's definitely worth watching.

I liked everything, but the villain is so caricatured.
What a Pennywise! All this gloomy and oppressive atmosphere went to hell because of her.
Of course, there were a few funny moments without her, but still I would like her to look a little different.

Has anyone figured out why the letter W popped up in the upper-right corner several times during the movie?

Gladys looks like a Sim citizen in Sims 4 when My Mods are off

About the same impressions as from the director's previous film "The Barbarian", a good horror with a catchy plot. The reviving narik will remain in the memory for a long time. But, despite the fact that all the answers were given at the end of the film, I would like more backstory (it's good that a prequel about a witch is planned).

Omg why it is so hard to create a good horror movie, this one is one big f*cking fail

The trailer is fire, but in fact it's like that.
Just for once.

The scene in the tent with the cop and the syringes is the funniest scene of the year

I don't want to describe it for a long time
I just want to say that I liked the movie and it's worth watching!

The chronology of the "Cannon" avoids the central character of the story in exactly the same way as in the "Barbarian". The story is divided into six separate chapters, each of which gradually explores the space of the town from the point of view of one of the local residents. It's not necessary to guess what the plot will lead to, it's better to give the film the opportunity to enjoy the moment while Zach Kregger once again masterfully weaves several lines together, carefully arranges small details, leading the viewer to the finale with a touch of madness, thrash, fear and laughter. As in Kregger's previous film "The Barbarian", it's better not to know anything about "Guns" before watching, so as not to deprive yourself of a considerable share of pleasure – this is a movie from the group where each new twist changes the perception of the film and almost completely reverses the plot.

The film fundamentally avoids complex metaphors, sharp social commentary and self-reflection, since in this case it was not necessary. Kregger prefers to laugh at genre cliches, destroy and violate them in every possible way. Some compare his films to Stephen King's films, others find parallels with the new wave of horror, but in my opinion, Kregger's work does not belong to either one or the other – his "Barbarian" and "Guns" stand out from the rest due to his incredible ability to create harmony in not the most harmonious genres, comedy and horror. It's one thing to come up with a parody of the horror genre, another thing is not to devalue scary moments with laughter. Kregger has everything working everywhere at once: suspense, comedy, drama, and a touch of the absurd.

I also found an interesting parallel between the horror "Guns" and the TV series "Ozark" (besides the fact that Julia Garner plays in both projects). There are four pictures on the movie poster that give us hints about what awaits us. It was exactly the same in every episode of "Ozark".

Throughout the film, the mood about the film constantly changed. But in the end, the film turned out to be cool. It has everything, but it combines horror and comedy so masterfully, I have never seen such a thing before. Delight! 👏

Please excuse me, has the film been released digitally yet?

We wrote earlier, and it also reminded me of The Soul Collector. And if it was Nicolas Cage again in the role of Aunt Gladys, then I didn't recognize him at all. I love Cage. It turned out cool.

Shtosh. It's an interesting movie. I say this at least because 2 hours flew by unnoticed. It doesn't seem to be that scary for the viewer, but it would definitely be scary (for the same viewer) if many of us were in the place of the main characters in real life. However, for me, as a viewer, this film seemed to be a detective story in some places, and a comedy in others.

The witch told her nephew not to tell anyone about her, and she covered the windows with newspapers. What else could she do to avoid attracting attention to herself? That's right, you need to dress up for a meeting with the headmaster as brightly and strangely as possible! Well, damn-she's supposed to be a witch, not a fool.

It wasn't bad until the middle. The W icon that popped up in the upper-right corner of the screen was intriguing, there was a feeling that the children were being influenced by digital or radio frequency, especially since the child of Josh Brolin's character was running towards the tower. But no, everything turned out to be prosaic, there were more questions by the end of the film, and I was already tired of this "fashionable" concept of turning a horror film into a comedy. "Varvara" is better, but "Bring her back" is worse. I'm comparing them because both films were released at about the same time.

With a rifle over the house I did not understand

We watched it with my friend yesterday and were actually satisfied , the movie is not bad , it keeps us in suspense , they laughed at the ending)

The film has a good atmosphere, although it wasn't very interesting at first and I almost fell asleep. When it becomes clear, the narrative has already become interesting. It's good that the voodoo grandmother was defeated and effectively with the help of children, but the grandmother herself, on the other hand, is too random. She arrived, immediately "took a shit" in the house where she lives, a couple of days later she harnessed 17 children, and then what? Tick to a new place where to do it again? You expect some kind of planning from an old voodoo grandmother, since she's been doing this for a long time. In the middle, something more interesting than voodoo granny was expected because of Archer's dreams.

Of the many dozens of films I've watched in this genre in recent years, this one is really good.

Yes, these are not exactly horrors, as they claim. more of a psychological thriller detective with a vibe of urban tales and mysticism. but the hype around the film does its job, of course.

With all this, the film keeps its entire timekeeping in suspense.
The atmosphere is a thrill. I want to delve into it all without being distracted at all. there is a place for metaphors and black humor, and the very presentation of the film from different angles adds more interest.

creepy, sometimes violent, but very atmospheric.

They gave me a lot of footage. I listened to podcasts like "burning tanker truck", "not brought in" . They praised it so much, they praised it so much that nothing had ever been like it before, "I love 10 out of 10, at my fingertips, brilliant!!!11". The plot essentially breaks through as soon as the grandmother is shown. It was shot well, the idea of chapters is also interesting. But the plot... Something reminded me of last year's "soul eater" with its advertisement for "the scariest movie in the history of mankind." In the end, yes, not bad. But no more than that. For me, the last "Bring her back from the dead" will be stronger in terms of "this is a twist."

The idea for a pair of costumes for halloween 2025: Gladys and Longlegs

Listen, it's an interesting black comedy, the intrigue of everything, the plot, the tension. It's a pity there's no explanation, like think for yourself what the fuck it was, but in the end it's interesting and funny in places.

4 out of 5, or 8 out of 10

More funny than scary
But I liked the movie

As is usually the case with films that are praised too much, they are full of nonsense, on the verge of unreliability. The last chapter finishes off an already barely functioning structure with its absolute banality. What kind of a fucking witch? What kind of bitch are sticks with thorns? Did we suffer for an hour and a half and try not to fall asleep for the sake of such a denouement?

The above-mentioned people either watched something else, or collectively went crazy and are now staging a Naruto run, along the way shouting "Zach Cregger," "The Barbarian is a great movie," and "Urgently go to the cinema Guns."

It was a great movie, except that the ending let me down. I didn't really like the witch theme.

The ending is gorgeous. I've watched it several times to the music from Benny Hill.

Mixed feelings after watching. I won't say that I didn't like it, but I also liked what I liked. Something was missing, there were few scary moments, a lot of conversations, protracted moments like a teacher and a cop getting laid, and how a drug addict pawned things, and so on, and it's hard to call it a horror movie either. As we wrote above, this is rather a psychological thriller detective with elements of mysticism, a straight accurate description. The basic idea turned out to be so simple that in the end you really sit and wonder "is that all?". And yes, there was so much hype that, in principle, it took out the whole film and forced it to gather a good audience. I'm glad for a good ending, if you can call it that. A one-time movie, between three and four. But I would have watched the prequel, because it was tense at times, and I still wanted to find out what happened to the children, I hope there will be something similar in the prequel.

But I still have a question. When the kid's grandmother and father were interrogated, no one was confused that the father was sitting like a vegetable, he couldn't say anything, and he was pale as a toadstool? Detectives should have developed their instincts and logic, but the teacher and the friend of one of the missing children turned out to have more logic and intuition. But we weren't really shown the detective part of the film, like police investigations. In general, yes, after watching it, the feelings are exactly like that - IT WASN'T ENOUGH. I would like to know what's next with the children and the boy's parents, otherwise they said a few words, and that's it.

Plus sign for the cast)

Yes, the movie came in with a bang)) especially Naruto-style running)

There are so many horror films this year, as if the renaissance of the genre has suddenly arrived))). It was great. Come on, that's great for a modern horror movie! And it's noticeably better for my taste than Varvara, even though it's good. Aunt Gladys turned out to be pretty creepy, I'm quite happy with such a villain). And he didn't need any explanations either, because he had seen enough stories about various witch grandmothers who were extremely sophisticated in prolonging their lives. Unless the boy could have played better, there is not enough fear in Alex with a hint of horror for the image of an intimidated kid. On the other hand, there are very few children of genius, and you shouldn't pretend to be Stanislavsky.

It's a fucking awesome and funny ending. It's a pity not to the music of Benny Hill. But overall, the film is good. Due to the non-linear narrative, it looks intriguing and in one go.

By the way, why did Grandma need children? She hasn't eaten a single one in 30 days.

Bowling for the Pennsylvania Pied Piper

Once, in a provincial American town, 17 students of the same third grade simultaneously ran away from their homes in the middle of the night, at 2:17 a.m. A month has passed since the mysterious mass disappearance, but the police have not found any leads. Some of the parents of the missing students suspect Mrs. Gandy, the teacher of the class, in which only one boy, Alex, remained - the only one who for some reason did not escape that ill-fated day. However, the investigators, having carried out operational measures, did not find evidence on which the teacher or the boy could be involved in the case. In this regard, an explosive situation is gradually brewing in the city.

Three years ago, comedian Zach Kregger flew into the horror genre with two legs, conquering the box office and critics with his comedy horror film "The Barbarian". If anything, I also wrote a review on it a couple of years ago. Then Kregger applied to join the club of the best modern horror directors. With his new project, "Guns," Kregger has finally staked out a place, and now he's unlikely to be kicked out of there.

I'll make a reservation: the "Guns" had a weaker effect on me than on professional critics who give 9-10 points. I'm out of sync with them right now. The licked Nosferatu, for example, didn't come in at all. Here, the situation is much better, but there are nuances.

Kregger has not changed himself. "Guns" is divided into six chapters. The same "Barbarian" was divided (albeit without the use of titles) into two very different halves. But "Guns" are kept in the same stylistic plane, while in "Varvara" the change of subgenre was strongly felt. Also, Cregger again does not produce a pure-blooded horror film, but a detective horror with elements of a black comedy. There are not many frightening moments here - they mostly come down to screams in the form of the sudden appearance of a local Pennywise. But the oppressive atmosphere a la Denis Villeneuve's "Captives" can be cut into slices with a knife. Kregger described his previous project as "Fincher on the ground floor, Raimi in the basement," but this time he shot "an epic horror based on Paul Thomas Anderson's "Magnolia" formula." These are the words of Kregger himself. By the way, Fincher personally helped with advice this time.

Each chapter is conducted on behalf of one of the characters. Teacher Gandy (Julie Garner) has already become a regular in the genre. I recently wrote about "Wolfman" with her) does not want to put up with false (or not?!) accusing himself and trying to figure out what really happened. Archer (Josh Brolin), the emotional father of one of the missing children (the child's name, by the way, is Matthew, that is, Matthew, and in the New Testament, verse 2:17 refers to the beating of infants on the orders of King Herod), suspects the teacher and tries to find evidence against her, but along the way makes an unexpected alliance and goes on a new trail. The viewer will also be given a look at the events through the eyes of a cop (the former teacher is played by Alden "Han Solo" Ehrenreich, who here looks like Pablo Escobar played by Wagner Moura in Narco), a school principal, a homeless drug addict (Austin Abrams played a great role - I'm waiting for him in the next Kregger project based on the Resident Evil game) and a boy Alexa. Each story begins plus or minus on the same day and shows an already known story from a new angle, complementing it. At the same time, sometimes the technique of an unreliable narrator is even used imperceptibly, but without affecting the plot, but as a pleasant little thing that better reveals the characters. Each chapter ends in an intriguing way, to put it mildly, leaving the hero in a not very comfortable position. The next one starts relatively calmly. At the same time, the cumulative effect is felt. The spectator tension does not go away and does not reset, even though the new character is just starting his journey. With every increase in the stakes, you realize that something very bad is coming. And in the end, Cregger doesn't disappoint, delivering a shared explosive climax for all the characters.

"Guns" is one of those films that leaves a pleasant aftertaste. I just want to sort it out. EVEN DESPITE SOME LOGICAL INCONSISTENCIES! You know for sure that it's multi-layered, and it won't be possible to track everything at once. By the way, Larkin Ciple, who shot the Oscar-winning "Everything Everywhere at Once," acted as the cameraman here, and in terms of pictures, "Guns" do not disappoint either in times of calm or in times of action, and he is here, yes.

On the surface, including thanks to the name, lies the topic of mass shootings, the so-called "mass shootings" in schools. The whole film is actually a metaphor for how the public copes with such terrible events, how they look for the perpetrators, how everyone shifts responsibility to each other, how everyone looks for their own ways to cope with grief, and that, in fact, such an event will be swept under the carpet as soon as possible, and even those who those who have experienced this will sooner or later get a chance to recover. In general, after the recent TV series "Transition Age" - that's the thing, yeah.

Speaking of grief. Cregger started writing "Guns" after his close friend and fellow sketch show "Urban Primates" (The Whites Kids U'know - I recommend watching, they used to play on 2x2) Trevor Moore died by accident [blue is evil!] from the balcony. The time was at 2:30 a.m., which is very close to the tragedy in the film. The chapters of the painting trace the stages of acceptance of grief: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance. There are characters who have a clear parallel, and some have more borderline states. In an interview, Brolin gave a slightly different interpretation, more individual for Kregger, but the meaning remains about the same. There was shame, loss of control, resentment, isolation, etc.

A red line through the film is the theme of addictions, both physical (here are our favorite cordyceps mushrooms with ants on TV and posters about parasites on school walls) and psychological. It's a complete mess: the teacher is an active alcoholic, the cop is a former alcoholic who has "X days without incident", the homeless man is not stupid to smoke and beat up, the father would take anger management courses, the school principal would burn in hell for gluttony (there are hints about this; by the way, an Easter egg with seven hot dogs on the sketch from the same "Urban primates"). And the perpetrator of the tragedy is dependent in every sense. Kregger is also autobiographical here - his father died of alcoholism, and young Zach had to take care of his parents who were in a deranged state. The symbols in the form of a circle and a triangle, which are found everywhere in the film (including in the credits), are generally about the Alcoholics Anonymous club, they have such a sign. In general, not only and not so much a reference to "Charmed", haha.

There was supposed to be another full-fledged chapter in the film, but it was cut due to the timing. She would have clarified a lot. I'm sorry for the loss, but not much. There are enough hints at the moment. And as George Martin used to say, "I'll never write a chapter on behalf of someone who knows too much." Or something like that. Given the phenomenal success of the film and the studio's requests to make a prequel, Kregger will probably return in a few years (after Resident Evil and, most likely, another project) and reveal the moments that were left on the cutting room floor this time. Plus, during filming, he gave the actor a choice of two explanations for why this character behaves exactly the way he does, so that he could play the role appropriately. Knowing these clues, let's just say the prospects for the development of the series are interesting. What's in the prequel, what's in the sequel.

Even the strange way kids run away from home has its own meaning. And no, it's not described by the words from the song.: "I watch anime, I'm very cool, Mom, look, I'm like Naruto." However, I also had associations with the "Attack of the Titans". Anyway, this is a reference to a photo from the Vietnam War, where the photographer captured a naked girl running, whose village had just been burned down with napalm by the noble brutes of democracy. And in general, the movements of many characters here resemble the movements of puppets (on the issue of parasites).

I hope Alex doesn't start messing with it, I tried it once anyway.
The rating is good, maybe part 2 will be filmed, and they will show how it all started, and the reason for that. Quite watchable.

How happy horror films have been in recent years, it's like a new era and a new dawn of this genre. This movie is no exception, Kregger makes 2 great movies in a row. There are a lot of references, so much social connotation, the style is visible, it's great.

There was an interesting TV series called Tales from the Crypt, and the film reminded me a lot of it.

I didn 't like it ( there is a tie, but there is no result )

Did someone understand what the weapon was for during his father's sleep? (The gun is above the house at 2:17 o'clock).

A stylish, non-banal film. Two hours flew by unnoticed. An intriguing plot

I'm sorry, but Gladys is Aunt Lyuda from The Big Show, performed by Konstantin Butusov, especially when she wasn't fully shown yet, she just flashed like a screamer, take a closer look - it's impossible to see it anymore

How he ran. This run is familiar to me. Can I show you?
Look, it's called Naruto, that's how ninjas run.

I didn't remember the trailer, but from the poster I expected it to be the Corn Kids or the Class of 1999. In fact, it's a little better mediocrity than the Soul Collector, but it's actually a copy of it. That is, there is a villain in dark makeup who is absent most of the time. There is a vague, boring, confusing narrative. And magic.

At first, I thought it was just another slowbanner, which is why it's so bad. But the last 40 minutes turned out to be watchable, because they somehow explained what was what. However, I still didn't understand what the point of all this was. In particular, why did the director vomit black goo on his xs? If the grandmother was cursed, then some kind of ritual was clearly needed. If she was restoring her health with the help of people, then she was doing it somehow wrong.

In general, the idea of returning to the classic voodoo zombies is normal, but it had to be shot differently. There is not a single frightening moment here. But there are at least two rzhachny ones. Which I mentioned at the beginning and the second, when the children ran after the grandmother. It was just hilarious. The director also forgot to tell them that they were still supposed to run like in Naruto, not any other way.

Another trash with high marks.

Caused a double impression.On the one hand, it was shot with high quality, the atmosphere was oppressive, all the time I was waiting for something to happen, there were creepy moments. On the other hand, there's still something missing, not the horrors I imagined when I saw the trailer.Mixing genres is rather off-putting, and this humor is also out of place.I remembered Drag me to hell, there's also a wild grandmother, humor and a bit of horror. The grandmother here is, of course, as vile as possible, with a demonic look and a twinkle. It turned out to be an author's film, you can watch it once, but no more.

As much as I was waiting for the movie, it didn't come to me that much. 4 out of 10, I just like Garner since the days of Ozark and Brolin played well. The first hour is 10 o'clock, you're generally trying to figure out if I've turned on the movie and what kind of genre it is. I understand that important topics have been touched upon, a la bullying, impotence of law enforcement officers, parental detachment, etc., but why is the presentation so boring? Grandma Hedgehog has not gone into the role of evil, apparently, it's better to go and review Bring her back one more time and get high, but at the very least there is still Together. Disappointment

It was a good movie, I even remembered some childhood fears of witches, and specifically the 1990 film "Witches" (I didn't watch the 2020 version), which made a very strong impression on me at the time. 4/5

a good, unusual representative of the genre, it was interesting to watch, many of the characters are vivid and memorable, I liked the method of revealing the story from different angles. Of course, I would like to dive into the psychology of the grandmother more deeply, although her motive is clear.

as for me, the downside is these humorous inclusions. for me, they were just knocking down all the atmospheric pressure, as it was in the same longlegs, the whole movie was wildly disturbing, and then you just start to strain yourself - some carbon monoxide addict immediately comes out, who rises back and forth and that's it, the moment is lost😅

it was unusual to see Benedict Wong not in a superhero movie))

Another "smart" movie turned out to be somehow very passable. The narrative feature on behalf of different characters doesn't work, it's boring, corny, and this twist from "voodoo" is disappointing. I was pleased with Benedict Wong, that's all.
Sadness-sadness-disappointment.

Well, the film has a very high rating. It's just a one-time pass, even though the acting is great

I've just seen this piece. It's interesting to find out where the grandmother came from, what happened to the rest of the characters.

The film is certainly not bad, but something is being praised too much.

I screamed at the children's pursuit of my grandmother when the slasher turned into a comedy. The film is basically normal, it draws you in. The moves aren't exactly trivial. I felt sorry for the kid under the pressure of my grandmother... I wonder if he then threw a stick into the water to remove the obsession from the children?)

What a nasty old lady, it was just disgusting!
The movie is great, but they didn't really explain anything to us!

The film went in, the presentation of the story is interesting, although they didn't give any answers about how and why) 4/5

The movie is a drug addict's dream.

"Guns" is not just a horror movie, it's a kind of puzzle where the pieces of the plot come together, then fall apart, and you sit and think: "Is this all real or is someone fucking me...?" The film is hooked by the atmosphere — a calm American suburb turns into an arena for a creepy drama, where weapons are not only iron, but also a symbol of fear, power and violence hiding under the pretty facades of houses.

The story works in layers: teenagers, family, community — everyone seems to be infected with some kind of internal evil. And now you realize that the horror here is not in the "boo-moments", but in how the decomposition of society from the inside is shown. In places, it looks like a mix of "Donnie Darko" and "Solstice" — beautiful, dark and creepy.

Yes, not everyone will enjoy the movie. There are slags, the scenes are delayed, the ending leaves more questions than answers (in the style of: "thank you for watching, figure it out for yourself"). But at the same time, there is a feeling of anxiety, that sticky atmosphere that the director pulls out to the maximum — that's why you want to slap a strong four.

And yes, "Guns" is a movie, after which you really want to close your laptop and think: what's going on under our noses? Who in our city carries guns, and who is actually scarier — the monsters or ourselves?

The result: an unusual, atmospheric and oppressive horror. Not for those who are waiting for a simple "scary movie for the night", but for those who are ready to sort out the subtexts and catch the existential shit in their head.

Movies from the category I like, like "We won't tell you anything, you'll figure it out for yourself, but if not, then not"😁The villainess Aguzarova is charismatic, the ending with the runners is even funny🤣It's a very cool movie.

Overall, it's not a bad horror movie, but in my opinion, the beginning turned out to be a bit long. At least some interesting action began only after an hour of screen time. Well, I expected something more serious and mystical from the ending, but as it is, it looks more and more like some kind of scary fairy tale.

the director clearly has some kind of special attitude towards poor old women))
what's here, what's in "the barbarian"

just like in "the barbarian", the beginning is very depressing, but by the end everything comes to naught, and even the comedy slips)

but I liked the movie, basically. It would be nice to see the second part, preferably with explanations.

I randomly turned on the movie, and it turned out to be very good. it was very interesting to watch, and yes, I would like a better explanation of why all this happened and why) and how grandma came to all this🧐
actually, we are waiting for the second part!!

At some point, it occurred to me that the boy himself, having spied on his aunt, had bewitched his classmates because of bullying. And then she didn't know what to do about it. And anyway, imho it would be interesting to look at all this from the point of view of the witch herself, but in the sense that she was trapped in some kind of desperate situation and forced to create all this nonsense because of a more global threat.

whether it's a mystery, or a horror movie, in general, some kind of game, without a background, there are just a lot of questions both during and after watching.

Let’s say that the movie is great enough and surprisingly fresh in comparison with other stuff which was created during past years. Highly advisable to watch 👍

Spoiler alert!:
The plot has its’ logic, but one small detail in the end would be great to accomplish it fully: there should be some kids with sucked out youth before the moment OLDBOY finds the witch in the basement in the final episode.

I don't even know how to evaluate this picture.
The beginning was very exciting, but all the interest and intrigue immediately disappeared as soon as I saw the grandmother ...
I thought there would be horrors, but I got more of a detective story and a little horror🙂
When the parents were breaking into the kid, I caught flashbacks to the Shining
Total... As a movie for the evening, it's very good, but no more... I expected more, though.

Well, it's like a sequel to the Substance 😅 The grandmother did not calm down, but decided to return youth through magic)))

I liked the Barbarian more, but this movie is good too. It takes a long time to accelerate here.
Well, in vain people are waiting for answers and a sequel. I doubt that these answers are available or even necessary.

A perfectly shot, edited and directed film.
Without lapses of tempo and whistling.

It's a great dynamic movie, and the kids were having fun with their aunt at the end.

Xs, where's the hype from the movie. I waited 20 minutes for something. I couldn't wait, so I turned it off.

If you watch a horror or a thriller, you treat it accordingly. Then you read a couple of articles, it turns out that there is either a theory or the truth that the film is an allegory of the difficult life of teenagers in a family of alcoholics, or that each character, as a stage of the Kubler-Ross model, experiences the director about the death of a friend. Like in school, these "what did the author of the work mean," and the author is a drunken rake in depression) go figure out his meanings.

Not a bad movie! It's fresh and intriguing. I don't know about the revision, but the first time it was very interesting and unpredictable to watch! Although the afterword would have been more detailed.) At the same time, most of the plot dragged on rather slowly and looked more like something not a la "fargo" with a fantastic flavor than a horror movie. But the final part with the boy is tough, especially when viewed from his point of view.

Where does this estimate come from? You piece of shit is dumb, or I'm dumb..but imho the mist and so on is better
Watch 1.5hours of something to be explained later? It's easier to read a book, apparently

For the first 20 minutes, I didn't understand why this movie had such ratings at all, but after the first creep, it became interesting! The role of granny also turned out to be gorgeous, throughout the film it caused a specific disgust!

The most interesting, incomprehensible, inexplicable thing for me was where the film got such a high rating on IMDb. An exciting intrigue.

ㅤThe Darkness is an unusual film that has not left many indifferent to one degree or another . I gave him the highest rating due to the fact that I personally, an obvious ordinary consumer of horror content, liked everything.
I liked the suspense that lasted right up to the chapter with Justin. I liked the scarecrows, which were few and far between, but they were quite decent. I liked the "adult" fears that they managed to cram into the film – getting pricked with a needle and being amazed by a vegetable peeler.
All the actors played well, especially the child actor, I admire. The actress who played Gladys also distinguished herself by creating a character in her image that was cute on the outside, rotten on the inside, but not annoying at the same time.
I don't understand Haight in the direction of a movie from the category: "is this what it turns out, we have a witch in the ordinary world"? Because when it suddenly comes to ghosts and curses in America's homes, no one has any questions.
A film for an amateur, which does not imply a hard, straightforward analysis, but which is very pleasant to watch without it. At least the picky viewer will be able to enjoy the picture with several interesting and pleasant design solutions and shots.

Cast: gorgeous
Acting: on the level
Narrative format: it was interesting
Attempts to scare: so-so
Scenario: piece of shit. Well, nothing is clear. For what. Why. What's all this about. It's not clear at all

If I were Gladys, I would just pick up all these pieces of paper myself and drag the children far into the woods. And I would have called them there. There is zero logic in the actions of the antagonist. The most infuriating thing is that everyone praised this movie as something scary, and in the end it was just another soul collector....

It's a good movie that makes you think about a lot of things. The plot is not hackneyed, the topics are relevant.

Hints for those who don't understand anything, but are very interested.:
"Aunt Gladys is a powerful witch. At first, she fed on the energy of Alex's parents to defeat the disease. She did this with a lock of hair, a bowl of water, a bell, etc. Then, with the help of various manipulations, she begins to take the vitality from the children.
- it shows how the scapegoat mechanism works. The parents don't know what happened to the children or where they are at all. According to this, the teacher is blamed for everything, although there are no facts of her involvement in the disappearance. It's easier to find the "culprit" and absolve myself of responsibility than to think about whether I, as a parent, could be to blame for what happened. Instead of looking for a solution, the residents of the town spend their time bullying.
- The film shows how uncertainty is harder than the truth itself, even if it is bitter. The brain completes the picture of its own fears, and the person begins to fear even more, because it seems to him that exactly what he fears most will happen.
- the meaning of the ending: all our actions have consequences. Even if it seems that the monster has been defeated, it is only on the surface. The children returned physically, but the trauma remained, and they are no longer the same inside.
- What the director wanted to say: the witch is a metaphor. She represents the parents of alcoholics and drug addicts. Their children take on the role of an adult from an early age and become guardians. Alex has also taken on the role of an adult, feeding them and caring for them. At some point they try to kill him. The same thing happens with parents with addictions, they attack their children. Alex sees that his aunt is doing bad things, but continues to "help" her, as he believes that this saves his parents and his family.

Oh, my God, what did I just watch...
And could I tell you more about this Mary Poppins (supposedly aunt) who suddenly appeared out of nowhere??
What a nightmare.. It was very unexpected. I'm sorry for the boy, but he did well, he held on to the last and took care of everyone, coped and learned to live alone.
If it turns out that the witch is not this teacher at all, but this terrible aunt. As I understand it, she wanted to regain her youth at the expense of the lives of the young. You can see that even her hair has started to grow back.
In general, an unexpected turn of events has occurred..
It seems that at the beginning it seemed like a typical movie, someone disappeared, most likely kidnapped by some kind of maniac, but here it is as it turns out.. I'm shocked. But the film is good, keeps you in suspense and intrigued you to the very end.
I recommend the movie

The norm film

Movies cause both laughter and fear 😅 unusual

super

The last 5 minutes were not scary, but funny)

And I liked both the movie and the ending. Suitable

It's a pretty cool movie, I was interested from the first minute of watching it. The narration kept me in suspense and it was very interesting what happened there anyway. But by the end, of course, there was no wow effect, I think they almost put the squeeze on it. But because of the interesting story, even if it doesn't have the steepest ending, it's quite attractive. I advise you to watch, the film is not a masterpiece far away, but it is quite good. It caused us a lot of emotions, and that's the main thing when watching horror movies.

For some reason, the visit reminded me a little

It's a cool movie, a great soundtrack, and the shooting is awesome. The plot is good and the actors played perfectly. I haven't seen good films of this genre for a long time. 5 out of 5

A terrible movie

The story is very well told, beautifully structured, and has such a non-standard and fluid pace that you will enjoy the film immensely. The interpretations are fantastic and very natural.

One of the best films of 2025 for me👏🏽

The film is strange, but funny, there is enough blood and dismemberment. It reminds me of Stephen King's novels. In the end, the movie became a bit like a comedy.

I didn't understand why the movie was called the cannon. And why did the guy see a machine gun above the house in his dreams?

Not a bad movie, several times even jumped from fright.Мабуть apparently I'll review it sometime;)