Directed by:
James WanScreenplay:
Akela CooperCinematography:
Michael BurgessComposer:
Joseph BisharaCast:
Annabelle Wallis, Maddie Hasson, Jake Abel, Jacqueline McKenzie, George Young, Michole Briana White, Paula Marshall, Mckenna Grace, Rachel Winfree (more)VOD (3)
Plots(1)
In the film, Madison is paralyzed by shocking visions of grisly murders, and her torment worsens as she discovers that these waking dreams are in fact terrifying realities. (Warner Bros. US)
Videos (2)
Reviews (13)
You can definitely tell this film is directed by James Wan, especially in the second half where it really hits its stride. As many have noted, it nods to classic Italian giallo films, which is a nice touch. However, before the story picks up — and don’t expect much logic here — you’ll have to endure a stretch of dull moments that feel surprisingly out of place for Wan.
()
If the film, especially in the end, didn't crap on the rules of its world so much (the monster suddenly can't overpower a single bloke, but then it cuts a whole police station into shreds) and didn't offer a parody of Matrix-like action, I'd give it a happy 4*. The 80s concept of Basket Case driven by Wan's dark visuals and grindhouse violence is great, and even though we can see the twist coming, it's still fun to wait for it. An interesting genre flick, too bad Wan didn't stick more to the atmosphere and mystery of the first hour. 70 %
()
A festival of bad decisions and red herrings, including some outright lies during the exposition. I am glad that James Wan is gradually trampling into the ground any expectations for the next variation on The Conjuring, but the direction he's taking is very wrong-headed for the given moment. The inferno of the last half hour does show how good of an action director he is, but I simply did not have the capacity to take anything happening on the screen seriously, even for a second. And yes, I understand that there are a lot of references and homages here, but when the source material you're referencing is a genre questionable at best, and you're replicating it in the majority of factors, I won't give you credit for imitation when the result is such a B-movie.
()
Pure fun. The trailer touted a completely different film, but in the end James Wan actually made a Giallo purely for fun, but not the 70s Giallo, the serious kind that worked with pretty colours, a classic detective line and a masked killer in a black cloak, gloves and a knife; Malignant is closer to the later Giallo, which used to be spiced up with some completely insane fantasy element. It's hard to write about it without spoilers, but it would be a shame to reveal the film's plot twists. The script is fun because of the speed to which it builds up the plot, which is actually terribly silly and trashy. If it were another filmmaker, you might well wonder whether they are joking or being serious about this kind of film, but Malignant is clearly anchored somewhere in between. It has a lot of exaggerated details that seem downright comedic, which is obviously the intention, and it should be taken as some sort of playful joke with which the director had fun on the set, and which the viewer should also have fun with. That some of the details don’t make sense, it doesn’t matter.
()
It seems Wan intended on making an insane horror movie about a mysterious killer. However, in doing so, he then got bogged down in all the carefully well-thumbed techniques and methods he learned from various ghost stories, and so he ended up with an overcomplicated, unintentionally ridiculous, and in every way an over-the-top piece of horseshit, in which a lot of things just do not make any sense at all because they have been thrown in simply for effect. Even so, the central idea (albeit patched together from all sorts of things that have come before), is quite interesting and thought-provoking. However, it should have been developed in a more restrained manner, with a smaller budget, and more concentrated approach. Why does this movie need those ambitious digitally enhanced CGI landscapes, megalomaniacal set design, and a running time of nearly two hours? It does not need all that really. All it would have taken was that instead of going off in an undisciplined way, doing whatever the hell he wanted. Also, if I see that every scene in his next movie is just an exaggerated onslaught of flickering lights, light-bulbs suddenly burning out, grainy images on phones, and radio static noise (because it is all supposed to be spooky bug-a-boo), I am going to be finished with him as a director for good.
()
Ads