1922 (2017) Review

 

1922 (2017)

1922 follows Wilfred James, who, with the help of his son, conspires to murder his wife for monetary gain, though the two are delusional and left reeling as they then attempt to continue their lives. 

With the adaption of this little known King story, 1922 sets itself apart from the usual horrors that King fans are accustomed to, instead opting to take a more psychological route of dread and tragedy that is more in line with past literary efforts, like Edgar Allen Poe’s A Tell-Tale Heart. It’s almost biblical take on the ‘reap and ye shall sow’ principal takes center stage and allows this to become a movie that is all about showing and less about telling, leaving you in brutal suspense to gather all of the pieces and interpret the work for what it is—a cautionary tale of greed and the grim horrors of marriage. 

Now as I mentioned above, this is much less of a horror and more of a suspenseful tragedy, as we see Wilf and his son kill to preserve their lives and legacy (and in turn, prevent the future from materializing) but in the process, destroying them and all the hold dear. Which goes hand in hand with the common theme of the rats, a metaphor for Wilf’s gnawing conscience and invasive thoughts of the death that has and will forever trail him from that day on, looming over him and his son like a plague.

 

We get a great cast as well, in Brian d’Arcy James, Neal McDonough, Kaitlyn Bernard, Molly Parker, Dylan Schmid, and Thomas Jane.  Jane puts in one of his best performances to date here, so much so that it’s almost unfair to the rest of the cast (who aren’t bad at all) as he is just so brilliantly tenacious. 

Based on the novella by Stephen King, 1922, directed by Zak Hilditch, is a harrowing tale that acts as more of a visual stunner and moral message than a movie per se, but that’s to be expected when drawing out a short story for feature length purposes, especially when adapting the intricacies of Stephen King. 

8.4/10