Spoiler alert: This article contains minor spoilers on “weapons”, now playing in theaters.
The second feature of director Zach Cregger, “weapons”, is a story in a small town exceeded by a malicious force. One night, all the children in a specific classroom have fled, and the city dwellers are becoming increasingly furious than the police have no tracks. The story follows several inhabitants – including the teacher in difficulty Justine (Julia Garner), whose class has disappeared; Paul, a cop (Alden Ehrenreich); Archer (Josh Brolin), whose son is one of the missing children; And a young burglar (Austin Abrams) – while they trained in the central mystery.
Although he is unable to speak of specific spoilers at the end of the film, Cregger has broken many key elements of “weapons”, including the use of the humor, gore film and this surreal moment with the floating assault weapon.
You quoted the “Magnolia” of Paul Thomas Anderson as an inspiration for certain structures and ideas of the film. When did you realize for the first time that you wanted the “weapons” to have an equally unconventional history construction?
I think the idea of the structure arrived very early. I knew once I got out of the opening of the cold and I started with Justine that she was not going to be the only perspective of this story. I was quite enthusiastic about having a romantic structure where we follow different protagonists, but I wanted to set a rule that I would never come back. Once I have evolved, their chapter was finished. If I could stick quickly, the film would be better for that, and it was not an easy thing to do for me, but for the better or for the worst, I got involved in this structure. And it’s not Really The structure that “Magnolia” follows.
“Magnolia” is more a reference point for me because of the ladder and the tone. And John C. Reilly’s mustache is in my film on the face of Alden. Honestly, there is something in John C. Reilly’s stuff where he loses the pistol and seeks it in the rain that looked like a northern star. Just the atmosphere of that, I want to live there, so I wanted to write a film that feels like moving in this direction.
You said that writing the script was a way to deal with sorrow after a person close to you died. Now that the film is finished, do you feel like this process has given you a closure or the answers you are looking for?
No. I mean, it doesn’t work this way. Someone dies and you will feel this absence for the rest of your life. Maybe the bite can decrease, but I don’t know if it’s time or the community or what. I do not think that making this film exorcised the demons. It just gave me the opportunity to engage with these feelings in a healthy and constructive way. Rather than going to drink to death, I am able to write a character who drinks in a problem. I can make my anger and panic Josh Brolin, and it’s better than me.
There is a surreal moment in the film where Archer has a dream and sees a giant assault weapon floating on a house. Could you talk about what this moment means for you?
I don’t know. It’s a very important moment for me in this film, and to be frank with you, I think what I love so much I Don’t understand it. I have some different ideas about what he could be there, but I don’t have it RIGHT answer. I like the idea that everyone will probably have their own kind of interaction or their own relationship with this scene, whether they don’t have a shit and whether it is boring, or if they think it is a kind of political declaration, or if they think it’s just cool. I don’t care. It’s not mine. I just like it that that’s here.
You come from a comedy background, and although a large part of this film is played directly, there are dark comic moments. How can you find the beats where humor is logical to tell the story correctly?
You just have to let them come organically to the situation you write and not try to inject anything funny in the film. There are a few jokes that I wrote in the film where I thought I was intelligent, and they are all on the floor of the cut room. The rule I have learned for myself is to let the situation dictate humor. Let the film ask me for humor, don’t try to put it. Be at the service of history, do not try to be smart.
There is very macabre violence in this film. Did you have to cut anything after the studio or the rating card?
I have everything. I mean, it’s not that macabre. I guess I could thank “terrifying 3” for getting out and completely raping everyone’s eyes so that everything I am going to do is feeling PG.
There were Lots of Smooshed heads.
Yeah, but I still work on it because I tried it in “Barbarian” and I did not understand well, and I try it in “Weapons”. I did not quite understand, but one day I will get this “irreversible” fire extinguisher smash. It’s my white whale. I have to try again.
David Fincher is thanked in the end credits. How did you help you with the film?
He’s just a very helpful guy. He was at my disposal during the preparation, then he was very available during the post process. He watched the film and had a lot of truly constructive thoughts and gave me a ton of ideas. He helped me know more about the editing process and how to think about it in a new way that was not available to me when I was “barbarian”. So he just opened me a lot of mind.
What ways specifically?
There are things I thought I just had to be satisfied. I thought: “Well, this is the catch I have. It is the best catch. And it’s not perfect, but by God, nothing is. ” Dave’s attitude is: “It can always be better, and there are a lot of tools you have at your disposal that you may not think.” So from cropping to stabilization through ADR to all kinds of things, it was really cool. Honestly, I learned a lot about how to prepare, what goals to use. I turned this mainly anamorphic, and I did not quite respect how limiting the anamorphic is in the post-proro. So things like that, technical things.
There are so many performances in the film that work Tricky Tonal Tightropes. How did you know that your key players would be the perfect people to be on the same wavelength as this film?
I saw their work, so I know what tones they can take. I know Josh can be really funny and really serious – I saw “No Country for Old Men”, and I saw “Hail, César!” I know what he can do. Julia in “The Assistant” … I looked at that and I thought: “That’s what I need. It’s incredible. ” She is incredible, but this film has changed the scale for me. Alden, I have been a big fan since I saw “Hail, César!” Austin Abrams is a miracle, and I woke up with him when I saw “Brad’s Status”, which is a Mike White film in which he was. I said to myself: “Who is this child who has total courage in this film, and he does nothing, and that rocks?” And then Amy Madigan, I’m a big fan. I have to recover people I have always liked to look.
Could you see yourself working on another story taking place in this world?
Certainly. I actually have … It’s funny that you asked for that. I can’t help it: I have another idea of something in this world that fascinates me a little. I’m not going to do it afterwards, and I will probably not do it after my next film, but I have one and I would like to see it on the screen one day.
I know you are making the next film “Resident Evil”, and you are a big fan of the games. What would you hope to bring to the cinematographic experience which will be excited by fans colleagues?
These games were the pioneer of something special. The rhythm of these games is so unique and effective, and simply be locked up with a character passing from point A to point B, knowing that you will go through this terror glove, and you must be methodical and reflected on this subject. It’s great. It’s cinematographic. So I want to tell the story in the world of games that honors the tradition of games, but it’s a new story.
