Written and directed by Scott Beck and Bryan Woods (65, Haunt, writers of A Quiet Place), Heretic is a so-called psychological horror that is disappointing on all fronts. After only seeing the trailer once months ago, I initially thought that Heretic was a film about a serial killer (Hugh Grant) who used his crazy mouse trap-contraption house to lure in religious, door-to-door service people and kill them.
While that is partially the case, Heretic follows two missionaries from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints; Sister Barnes (Sophie Thatcher, The Book of Boba Fett) and Sister Paxton (Chloe East, The Wolf of Snow Hollow). The two women go to the house of Mr. Reed (Grant) who has expressed interest in hearing more about their religion.
As Sister Barnes and Sister Paxton make their way inside, they soon find themselves trapped in Mr. Reed’s bizarrely intricate home featuring electricity on a timer, a front door that supposedly won’t open again until morning, and metal construction that blocks cell phone signals.
Reed, a theology major with vast knowledge of all religions, claims to have found the one true religion. Whether the two women will escape or if Reed knows what he’s talking about all factors into the cerebral aspect of the film.
RELATED: ‘Venom: The Last Dance’ Review – New York Venom
Martin Freeman constantly looked miserable and bored out of his mind when he appeared in films like The Hobbit trilogy and the Sherlock TV series. He suddenly looked like he was having the time of his life when he shifted film genres, plunged into horror, and starred in the 2017 film Ghost Stories.
It seems to be the same case for Hugh Grant. While this isn’t his first horror film, Heretic is his first film in the genre in 36 years (Grant starred in The Lair of the White Worm in 1988). Grant is noticeably lively in his performance in Heretic though and seems downright giddy to be torturing people.
Advertisement
With cinematography by Chung Chung-hoon (Last Night in Soho, The Handmaiden), Heretic has two visually memorable sequences thanks to how they’re shot. When Sister Barnes and Sister Paxton first arrive, Mr. Reed leaves the room to check on his “wife.” While he’s gone, Barnes turns the candle he blew out and discovers what the scent of the candle is. As she slowly turns the candle, the camera turns with it.
Reed has a miniature duplicate of his house complete with little figures that represent Sister Barnes and Sister Paxton. In a sequence when Sister Paxton is trying to run away from Mr. Reed, we’re following her movements in the miniature but it seamlessly transitions from the model to the real thing when she enters the room and slams the door.
RELATED: ‘Kensuke’s Kingdom’ Review – Striking Animation That Plays It Safe
The method in which Heretic is written is somewhat odd. Not quite horrific enough to be scary with its religion-defying dialogue taking center stage, Heretic is essentially a two-hour sermon attempting to destroy your faith with some splashes of blood and a raggedy woman or two dying in a blueberry pie.
It feels like if you walked into Heretic devoted to the Mormon religion, you’ll walk out of the theater a different person. Mr. Reed’s arguments regarding all religions stemming from the same concept are portrayed in a way that is believable and convincing.
Advertisement
He somehow rambles about Monopoly and board games, music, and vinyl records to demonstrate similarities between certain board games, how some songs are essentially the same tunes with different lyrics, and that all religions are more similar than dissimilar.
While the dialogue-driven film can be interesting, it’s also rather boring. There’s an unsettling aspect to Mr. Reed’s behavior that capitalizes on the tension in the film. But there are also these long stretches where nothing happens besides the next topic of conversation or a weak payoff where someone’s throat is cut with a box cutter or it builds up to a whisper.
Heretic is beautifully shot with a stellar performance from Hugh Grant, but its intriguing concept is drowned out by the desire to deconvert the audience and have a lukewarm reveal regarding whatever the one-true religion is. Watching the film is like being trapped in a church of a religion you don’t believe in with an overwhelmingly passionate pastor trying to dissuade you from ever coming back.
Heretic (2024), A24.
PROS
Hugh Grant
Well thought out dialogue
Strong writing
CONS
Talks the audience to death
Horror aspect feels secondary
Gets dull during final act
Mentioned This Article: A24 Heretic Horror Hugh Grant Movie Review psychological
Pottel, directed by Sahith Mothkuri and starring Ajay, Yuvachandra, and Ananya Nagalla in pivotal roles, is a rural drama that delves into the socio-cultural issues of the 1970s. The movie, which captivated audiences with its intriguing title, was released in theaters in October and recently debuted on OTT platforms Amazon Prima and Aha. With music by Sekhar Chandra, the film aims to strike an emotional chord with its thought-provoking narrative.
Plot Summary: The story is set in a remote village during the 1970s, where the powerful Patel family dominates the region. Believing that education empowers people to question authority, the Patels discourage the villagers from pursuing it. Mallanna (Chatrapathi Sekhar), who recognizes the importance of education, dreams of educating his son Gangadharam (Yuvachandra). However, his efforts are thwarted when Patel (Ajay) kills him to maintain control over the village.
The villagers revere a local deity, Balamma, and Patel manipulates their beliefs to suppress dissent. Gangadharam grows up in this oppressive environment, determined to bring change. He marries Bujjamma (Ananya Nagalla), defying her brother and societal norms.
Meanwhile, the village observes a ritual every 12 years, offering a Pottel as a sacrifice to their deity. This time, Gangadharam is tasked with overseeing the ritual. The stakes are high, as failure to perform the ritual properly could have dire consequences for him. Caught between his goal of educating his daughter and empowering the villagers, and the ritualistic traditions, Gangadharam faces immense challenges from Patel. How he overcomes these obstacles forms the crux of the story.
Analysis: The film effectively portrays the socio-political dynamics and superstitions prevalent in rural India during the 1970s. The director highlights the dominance of landlords like the Patels and their efforts to maintain control by keeping the marginalized sections uneducated. The screenplay weaves these themes with clarity, emphasizing the need for education as a tool for empowerment.
Advertisement
The movie also sheds light on superstitions and rituals like animal sacrifices, which were exploited by the powerful to manipulate the weak. The village itself feels like a character in the story, with its landscapes and traditions adding depth to the narrative. The realistic portrayal of the struggles and resilience of rural communities enhances the film’s authenticity.
Performances: Yuvachandra delivers a compelling performance as Gangadharam, capturing the character’s struggle and determination effectively. Ajay excels as the antagonist Patel, portraying the role with authority and menace. Ananya Nagalla impresses with her portrayal of Bujjamma, adding emotional depth to the story. The supporting cast, including Chatrapathi Sekhar, performs within the scope of their roles, contributing to the narrative’s strength.
Technical Aspects: Cinematography by Monish Bhupathiraju stands out, beautifully capturing the rural and forest backdrops, adding an immersive visual quality. Music by Sekhar Chandra complements the narrative well, with both songs and background score enhancing the emotional impact. Editing by Karthik Srinivas ensures a cohesive flow, although some scenes feel slightly stretched. The authentic depiction of rural settings and customs adds to the film’s credibility.
Final Verdict: Pottel is a sincere attempt to address important social issues like education, empowerment, and superstition through a rural narrative. While the film’s pacing and predictability in certain areas might deter some viewers, its emotional core and relevant themes make it a worthwhile watch for those interested in rural dramas.
1 of 5 | Robbie Williams appears behind the scenes of his biopic “Better Man,” in theaters Dec. 25. Photo courtesy of Paramount
LOS ANGELES, Dec. 21 (UPI) — Robbie Williams is the latest subject of a musician biopic. Better Man, in theaters Dec. 25, takes such a wild approach that it easily stands apart from films like Walk the Line and Bohemian Rhapsody.
Williams got the performing bug at age 9 in a school performance of The Pirates of Penzance. As a teenager, he auditioned to be in a boy band and landed a spot in Take That.
Williams went solo after friction with the band but still struggled to write original lyrics. By Better Man‘s accounts, Williams had a similar cinematic trajectory as Johnny Cash or Freddie Mercury.
However, Better Man represents Williams as a talking monkey. Director Michael Gracey explains in a pre-film video that he took Williams literally when the singer called himself a performing monkey.
Advertisement
So this is a Planet of the Apes visual effect. It’s Williams’ voice but Jonno Davies performing the reference footage, along with a few other performers for elaborate dance scenes.
The film never gets used to having a monkey as the lead character, a real-life figure who is still alive at that. It never ceases to be off-putting, especially when Williams sings and dances elaborate choreography, and that is part of the film’s power.
Now, when Williams goes through the stereotypical spiral into drugs and alcohol, watching a monkey recreate those scenes is avant-garde art. The visual effect captures Williams’ charm and emotional turmoil, so it’s not a joke.
It only becomes more shocking the more famous Williams gets. Once he starts sporting revealing dance outfits, even more fur is on display.
Advertisement
It’s not even a movie star embodying Williams. There’s neither the real Williams nor an actor’s persona to attach to the film, removing yet another layer of artifice but replacing it with an even more jarring one.
As if one monkey isn’t daring enough, Williams’ inner demons are also visualized as monkeys. So many scenes boast monkey Williams staring at disapproving monkeys too.
Other biopic traditions include a scene where Williams sings a rough demo of his future hit “Something Beautiful” and confronting his absent father (Steve Pemberton) over abandoning him. The biopic tradition of showing photos of the real Williams during the credits actually breaks the spell when audiences can see he was not an actual monkey.
The monkey is the boldest leap Better Man takes but it is not the only one. A disco ball effect lights vast outdoor locations, and the film includes a climactic action scene.
Musical numbers are dynamic, including a romp through the streets of London in an unbroken take. A duet between Williams and lover Nicole Appleton (Raechelle Banno) evokes Astaire and Rogers.
Advertisement
The film embodies Williams’ irreverent spirit, as if a drama starring a monkey could ever be reverent. In his narration, Williams is self-deprecating, and some of the dance numbers blatantly injure pedestrians in their choreography.
The new arrangements of Williams’ songs add dimensions to his hits.
Better Man is bold cinema. The audacity alone is worth celebrating, but the fact that it works is a miracle.
Fred Topel, who attended film school at Ithaca College, is a UPI entertainment writer based in Los Angeles. He has been a professional film critic since 1999, a Rotten Tomatoes critic since 2001, and a member of the Television Critics Association since 2012 and the Critics Choice Association since 2023. Read more of his work in Entertainment.