Recensioni degli utenti

I am going to echo what some others have said. The first half of this movie is brilliant. It lost me about halfway through, though. I wish so much that the writers would have chosen a different path. Heretic could have been one of the most genius movies ever written if their villain would have been a different sort and had different motivations. While hard to choose a number for this movie, I think I'm feeling 6 1/2. Great acting. Great cinematography. And, like I said, brilliant script in the first half. A thought-provoking film until it isn't. Also, the ending is more ambiguous than I would like it to be. If the whole movie were like the first half, this would be a solid 9. But alas.

In Heretic, Hugh Grant (Mr. Reed) gives one of the best performances of the year. He is very unnerving in this role and that alone is worth the price of admission to see. I hope this isn't a one and done for him because we need him in more horror movies, he is a natural. Sophie Thatcher (Sister Barnes) and Chloe East (Sister Paxton) give top notch performances as well. This is a very religious horror movie. It is a dialogue heavy film, which I personally enjoyed but some people might not. It doesn't rely on cheap jump scares because just Hugh talking in this film can send chills down your spine. Could've been better towards the end but this is still a solid entry into the genre.

Heretic is as unpredictable as it is messy. While the film keeps you on edge for most of its runtime, the plot begins to fizzle out in the final act.

Hugh Grant delivers a standout performance, with Sophie Thatcher and Cloe East also shining in their roles. The director, cinematographer, and set designer deserve credit too, as they gradually immerse you into the growing madness of Grant's character and his eerie home.

Unfortunately, the plot is the film's weakest point. The tension and mystery build beautifully at first, but around the two-thirds mark, it starts to unravel. The climax left me slightly underwhelmed, as I was expecting something more profound. Still, 'Heretic' is an excellent horror film in its own right - enjoyable, but not quite as memorable as I had hoped.

What the hell is Hugh doing here? Hugh doesn't belong here...

Or maybe, just maybe, Hugh does belong here! Maybe horror is Hugh's true calling, and did he waste 30 years of his career on romantic comedies! That's an exaggeration, of course, and I still love most of his silly rom coms. Fact is, though, that Hugh Grant gives away a perplexing performance as the disturbing and terrifying villain in "Heretic".

There's a lot more about Scott Beck & Bryan Wood's "Heretic" that deserves praise and attention! I didn't expect a horror script full of theological enquiries and debates, and I most certainly didn't expect that I would be so fascinated by the subject! Perhaps it's purely thanks to Hugh Grant's uncanny charisma as Mr. Reed, and the way he intimidates and petrifies two innocent young Mormon girls that show up on his doorstep, but the more talkative "Heretic" became, the more I loved it. Reed is like an eloquent big bad wolf, preying on two cherubic but naïve Little Red Riding Hoods. It's an absorbing thriller spectacle that keeps you gazing at the screen with amazement for half the film. And you know what's most intriguing? Many things Reed says about various aspects of religion make total sense!

When "Sisters" Barnes and Paxton are lured into Reed's eerie basement, "Heretic" maneuvers into more familiar and grotesque territory. Theory is put into practice and verbal terror turns into physical horror, which somehow makes the film less unique. Some action was necessary, I reckon, and luckily "Heretic" remains entertaining and suspenseful throughout.

PS: the link with Radiohead's "Creep" in the first couple of lines isn't coincidental. The film makes great use of the brilliant song, as well as of "The Air that I Breath" by The Hollies.

I enjoyed this a lot.

It's creepy and sinister and had me guessing right up to the climax.

Hugh grant is really excellent. He is darkly mischievous, charming and unsettling. Both Sophie Thatcher and Chloe East give fantastic turns too and are ably directed by the duo of Scott Beck and Bryan Woods who craft a really sinister feeling movie.

It's an atheists wet dream and some of the exposition will trouble people of all kinds of faiths but it isn't really a critique of religion so much as an in depth look at manipulation, psychology and the impressionable nature of the human condition.

It's unlike anything I've seen and I enjoyed it quite a lot.

In Heretic, Hugh Grant steps into the brooding shoes of Mr. Reed, delivering a performance that's nothing short of captivating. Grant's portrayal, layered with a quiet intensity, draws us into the mystery of Reed's character, skillfully weaving charm and menace. The dialogue is elegantly crafted, with a razor-sharp wit that is self-aware and relatable enough that you can imagine a similar dialogue (and maybe just as scary) happening after thanksgiving dinner between a few salty relatives. It's the kind of banter that delights as much as it disturbs, showing that screenwriters knew how to dance with words and really capitalize on Grant's electric everyman charm.

But, for me, they fumbled the choreography of the plot itself.

The atmosphere in Heretic is ripe with tension, a steadily simmering suspense that feels almost Hitchcockian (I'm being generous, but it's good). Yet, unlike Hitchcock's masterpieces, where each action feels inevitable, Reed's journey teeters precariously on the edge of believability, but never really lands there for me. While we're willing to suspend disbelief for a while, waiting to hear Reed's motivator, the film's premise ultimately strains under the weight of its own ambitions. Mr. Reed's improbable decisions-and the film's insistence that these are plausible-leave one questioning not only his motives but perhaps even the script's own coherence. It's as though the filmmakers were intent on building a labyrinth but forgot to place a satisfying prize at its center. Sure, the payoff leads to Reed's main point, philosophically, but his actions in the end seem so bizarre and unjustified by the plot that I was scratching my head trying to figure out why he didn't just start a skeptics YouTube channel and be done with it.

In the end, we're left with a hollow aftertaste, a sense of having been led to a precipice only to find the bridge unbuilt. While Grant's performance deserves commendation, even his talent can't fully bridge the gap between the film's fascinating setup and its underwhelming resolution.

And, without spoilers, the mild final nod to the OTHER possibility was a weak plot move that feels like throwing a bone to the losing philosophical side on the off chance you offended someone.

In sum, Heretic is a beautiful journey through the maze with Grant manhandling the role from start to finish, even if it leaves you feeling somewhat lost upon reaching its incomplete end.

If only the filmmakers had paid as much attention to plot structure as they did to Reed's impeccable, if confounding, choices, Heretic might have stood among this year's most memorable thrillers.

Whatever I think of THIS movie, I can't wait to see more Hugh Grant in the horror genre. That was a true joy. Also, honorable mention to the two leading ladies who played well off of each other. This movie was never held back by the cast, that's for sure.

What else can really be said? The initial premise is interesting and it certainly leaves you wondering what could possibly happen next- especially with a man who just meanders and talks and doesn't directly "threaten". A Very solid first half.

But after the over halfway-ish point of the movie, it felt like it was trying to be smarter than it was with the most generic of truths, and sudden Sherlock Holmes levels of noticing (she noticed, but didn't tell her friend????).

The ending ultimately sours the entire film. Honestly, anything would have been better than the ending we got.

6/10, More than Decent.

Hugh Grant ventures into the dense world of theological debate, tackling themes rarely covered on mainstream film. The film is undeniably intriguing, pulling viewers into complex discussions that feel both timeless and urgent. Yet, as I watched, I found myself grappling with an elusive question: was The Heretic a compelling film or merely an ambitious attempt that fell short?

Grant's performance is engaging, but there's an intangible quality missing, something that keeps the movie from fully resonating. Perhaps it's Grant himself, who doesn't quite shed his familiar charm to embody a character steeped in philosophical conflict. Alternatively, it might be the script, which seems torn between delivering an engaging story with a profound message and indulgent lecture through Grant as the medium. This identity crisis leaves the film feeling somewhat ungrounded, making The Heretic a fascinating watch but ultimately difficult to categorise as either wholly successful or lacking.

The supporting cast did an excellent job in quite difficult roles for them to play alongside Grant as the lead.

If like me you watched this movie because you wanted to see Hugh Grant play a creepy villain, then you won't be disappointed.

Heretic is the story of 2 young Mormons visiting the house of Mr Reed, Played by Hugh Grant. However, things aren't what they seem.

Out the gate, you meet the 2 Mormon's, Sister Barnes played by Sophie Thatcher and Sister Paxton player by Chloe East. For me personally, I came into this movie for the Hugh Grant show, but these 2 actresses held their own and both gave a great performance. With this movie only really consisting of 3 characters, it's important that 2/3rds of the cast deliver, and they did! Sophie Thatcher's character, Sister Barnes, I'd say is the more in-depth of the 2 Mormons and is the more experienced of the 2. Chloe East's character, Sister Paxton, who is the newer missionary who feels like more of a believer than her counterpart and is eager to convert and spread the word of God. Both their performances mainly consist of being terrified of Mr Reed and fortunately neither fall into the dumb protagonist trope.

Now for Mr Reed, played by Hugh Grant. It's difficult to pinpoint exactly how Hugh Grant plays this character so well. Because the way he acts isn't innately creepy or scary in any way. It's more of a case of context that makes Mr Reed creepy. The way he delivers his dialogue is so calm and, in a way, like he's giving a lecture. Which he is. He's trying to educate and enlighten the 2 Mormons. The way Mr Reed gave me the ick was the way he's condescending and speaks down to you. That and the fact we're in a strange spooky house, where the lights are on a timer and the ceiling is dripping. Mr Reed just feels off!

Above I mentioned the dialogue. Writers/Directors Scott Beck and Bryan Woods wrote Heretic beautifully. Giving each character their own identity through their dialogue. Heretic had great cinematography with effective use of close ups and panning shots.

Sounds design was simple yet effective. The sound of creaking floorboards, drips, and old metallic locks and doors really punctuated the idea of this being an old rustic house.

Now this is a spoiler free review, so I'm not going to discuss this part too much, but one aspect of the movie I wish they'd explore more of was the idea of the labyrinth. The figurines and the model labyrinth are featured in the poster and the movie trailer but aren't all that important in the movie. So, if you were expecting a horror like labyrinth movie, then I'd be disappointed. That being said, the set was quite minimal, not much to really discuss. But what was there was simple and effective.

The key theme of Heretic is religion and belief. This movie does a great job at showing both sides of the coin without feeling like it's favouring or attacking one opinion over another. It managed that balancing act well, which is important, as to not feel like it's attacking its audience's point of views or believes.

I will say that I didn't think the movie was that scary. That doesn't bother me much, but it was released around Halloween and was advertised to be a horror movie, so that may affect your enjoyment of the movie, depending on what you were expecting. I'd say it leans more into the thriller mystery elements, which is more my cup of tea.

Overall, I enjoyed Heretic. Didn't feel too long and went at a brisk pace.

I'm not sure what I was expecting from Heretic, but it certainly wasn't deep theological discourse and intense religious diatribe courtesy of Hugh Grant. Not that I have a problem with that: when Grant's character, Mr. Reed, is challenging the doctrines of organised religion, the film is actually very engaging and frequently funny, the actor putting in a marvellously offbeat performance, Reed frequently making a lot of sense. Of course, this is a horror film, so even though a lot of what Grant's character says seems logical, the extremes he eventually goes to to prove his point are not at all reasonable.

Chloe East and Sophie Thatcher play Mormon missionaries who pay Mr. Reed a visit with the hope of converting him to their religion. Reed, however, has his own sinister agenda. What follows is an intense game of cat and mouse, the missionaries desperately trying to reason with their host while trying to find a way to escape from his home.

The film's strongest scenes are those in the first half of the film, in which Reed disquietingly questions the girls' beliefs while positing plausible alternatives - Grant is both affable and subtly menacing. Much of the first hour is simply conversation between Reed and the missionaries, and yet it is superbly unsettling, hinting at the man's craziness without going over the top. The latter half of the film is slightly less effective, visceral horror replacing the verbal dread, but it is still entertaining, and the film closes leaving the viewer with plenty of food for thought.

7/10.

I saw seven films at this year's TIFF, and the one that got my vote for best picture was HERETIC starring Hugh Grant (who also would have gotten my vote for best actor if that was a voting category). I was very impressed seeing him get in touch with his dark side in the HBO miniseries THE UNDOING, but here he takes it to 11 playing an affable, religion-obsessed psychopath. It's a break from his rom-com persona of schizophrenic proportions.

Co-stars Sophie Thatcher and Chloe East are also excellent playing two Mormon missionary girls who think that they will be calling on someone interested in converting to Mormonism. But Grant turns out to be far more erudite - and questioning -- about religion than they expected. When they realize that he's not really interested in converting but more in debating religion, they try to depart but discover that they're trapped inside. So begins a cat and mouse game where Grant puts their faith to the test.

As horror goes, it's solid, but doesn't reach the extremes of similarly claustrophobic horror films like FUNNY GAMES (original) and SPEAK NO EVIL (2022 version). The outcome is refreshingly unconventional. My only cavil is that the choice of Mormonism for the religion seems a tad calculated.

In short, see this movie if you've ever enjoyed a Hugh Grant film and want to see him at the peak of his game. I haven't felt this sure about an acting Oscar nomination for a TIFF film since I saw Allison Janney in I TONYA in 2017

Side note: There was a Q & A after the film and several people commended me on the way out for a question I asked: "Was Richard Dawkins an influence?" Co-director Bryan Woods confirmed that he was.

The first half was absolutely fantastic, deserving of a 10/10 rating. However the second half of the movie was absolutely horrible. It's as if the brilliant writers were fired halfway through writing the script and a completely different set of terrible writers was brought in to finish it. I am so disappointed with this movie. It was on track to be something truly great, but crashed and burned in a terrible fashion. Rather than being like a car wreck that's you can't look away from, the second half of this Film is a car wreck that's just so horrible, you can't stand to look at it. That said, the first half is definitely worth watching.

This was an engrossing and intriguing movie. It played with tropes and mixed them up.

Annoying missionaries, and to the missionaries the annoying 'customer' who wants to debate at length.

The film played expertly with the sense of unknown and the accompanying dread that was created from it.

Hugh Grant's Mr Reed playing so well at walking the line but not crossing it. Moving things forward without giving an inkling of where it was going. Giving the impression of choice but was there really any?

Where it faltered for me was in the 3rd act where it revealed probably too much about him. Just another nutter, but wouldn't it have been cool if we were never quite sure.

I loved that they toyed with the current dilemma of not know who to trust about what. Things seems bad but then they gave a plausible explanation etc etc. We're engulfed in it and there is no clear sign that one party still holds to reason logic and honest over the other.

A world of Plausible lies, or is it the truth? You simply can't tell any more.

The script was detailed and pop culture referential.

Lots of clever asides, ("You're thinking of the butterfly effect").

I liked the ambiguity a lot, and the central "what's in the afterlife" conundrum, or was Reed basing his con on that set up? It was intriguing, and I was buying it.

It was almost a runaway original and innovative great script apart from a handful of loose end points which took it down several notches from the very high standard it set for itself.

Where it fell down was the very quick lesson about "the one true god". I didn't follow the reasoning and up to this point it played very well. Then the caged entourage who "do it willingly"? That was an interesting point not sold very well either. I loved how it tied to the following of religion, but it lost me here too.

And the final failing was the saviour who managed to bleed out but then climb several stairs deliver a death blow, although it wasn't clear what Reed was trying to do at this point anyway, and then he passed away.

This could have been a timeless great movie if they'd managed to solve a few niggling contrivances.

As it was it was better for the questions it asked, thought experiments and warping tropes.

There will no doubt be some people who saw the trailer for Heretic and thought, "People being held against their will? I've seen that a hundred times now," but that's just the thin wrapping paper that covers this intricate puzzle box.

Enormous credit goes to the writers who played such a big part in making this film so refreshing. Rare is it that characters, who would be easy to be two dimensional, in a premise like this feel so human. From the way the discussions the missionaries have together, to the intricate details the viewer may have thought were ignored, it's all covered so well. Sophie Thatcher and Chloe East are excellent in their roles, being friends who outside of their faith, may not have forged a relationship at all, with their respective cynicism and naivety both being fleshed out. Unsurprisingly, Hugh Grant steals the show with his brilliant performance as a rational thinker who goes to irrational lengths. He's so disarming and so... Hugh Grant, that there are numerous times one can't help but smile, even as things take a turn for the worse, demonstrating how everyday monsters use their charm to do terrible things.

It also makes a nice change to feel genuinely tense and worried for the characters, instead of because you're expecting a jump scare. The atmosphere is superbly woven and its clever intricacies leave the viewer constantly wondering what's to come.

Founded in 2012, production and distribution company A24 has become synonymous with quality. Generally, if a film or TV show bares the A24 logo, it is worth watching, and probably made by an auteur. The likes of Jonathan Glazer, Denis Villeneuve and Sofia Coppola have partnered with the company, to brilliant results. A24 is also now associated with- what some refer to as- "elevated horror," which, despite the pretentious title, basically refers to a horror movie that's actually good.

From Robert Eggers' 'The Witch' and 'The Lighthouse,' to Ari Aster's 'Midsommar' and Alex Garland's 'Men', A24 has consistently delivered original horror films that don't just scare, but explore deeper themes, evoking a sense of dread that lingers long after the credits roll. Their latest horror offering, 'Heretic,' follows two Mormon missionaries, Sisters Barnes and Paxton, who find themselves in a sinister situation after visiting the home of Mr. Reed, a reclusive Englishman. Does it live up to the A24 standard?

For the most part, it does. Written and directed by Scott Beck and Bryan Woods, 'Heretic' is a suspenseful exploration of faith, fear and the unknown. An unsettling atmosphere is fostered for the first two acts, and one is unsure in what direction proceedings are heading. It's also got a little bit of dark-humour, mainly in the demeanour and dialogue of the Reed character; whose good nature and charm mask a hidden darkness.

Moreover, Reed's monologues about religion raise genuinely interesting points, exploring the conflicts between faith and doubt, and the struggle to reconcile belief with the harsh realities of the world. His comparisons between religion, boardgames and popular music are especially provocative, challenging the protagonists- as well as the audience- to reflect on their own beliefs and the societal structures surrounding them.

The narrative engages throughout, though loses steam in the third act, where things boil down to a predictable riff on classic horror tropes. While the initial buildup is masterful, the resolution feels somewhat rushed and less impactful compared to the film's earlier intricacies. This slight dip in momentum, however, doesn't overshadow the film's overall success.

Visually, 'Heretic' is stunning. Chung-hoon Chung's haunting cinematography ably captures the eerie isolation of Reed's home, creating an atmosphere that is both beautiful and eerie. Chung's use of extreme-close-ups heightens the film's ominous atmosphere, as does his utilisation of light and shadow. Furthermore, Philip Messina's intricate production design is arresting; the contrasting interiors of Reed's home being highly impressive artistically, while also speaking to the development of Reed as a character.

Initially, Reed's house appears quaint and unremarkable, much like the man himself. As the plot progresses and the Sisters venture further into his home, it undergoes a metamorphosis, becoming grander and more imposing, before sinking into base seediness. This transformation not only serves to heighten the tension but also symbolizes the unveiling of Reed's true nature; a canny piece of visual storytelling.

In addition, Chris Bacon's original score enhances the film's ominous tone, keeping viewers on edge, while he makes clever use of music from the likes of The Hollies and Radiohead, with the latter's 'Creep' being used to particularly strong effect. It is also a well-edited picture, rocketing along at a brisk pace (and feeling a lot shorter than an hour and fifty minutes).

Hugh Grant stars as Reed, and has arguably never been better. The character is a far cry from the charismatic rom-com heroes he's best known for, and he seems to really enjoy playing such a creep. Although over the last few years he has played quite a few villains- from a cannibal in 'Cloud Atlas' to a billionaire arms dealer in 'Operation Fortune: Ruse de Guerre'- few have been as calculating and as cruel as Reed. With a mischievous, menacing twinkle in his eye, Grant steals every scene.

Chloe East and Sophie Thatcher star opposite him as Sisters Paxton and Barnes, respectfully. East, as the uncertain, sheepish Paxton, is terrific, believably portraying her evolution over the course of the film. Thatcher is similarly good as the more assertive, self-assured Barnes, and the two share a believable chemistry.

In conclusion, despite the narrative losing steam in the third act, Scott Beck and Bryan Woods' 'Heretic' is another fine film flying under the A24 banner. Combining terror with thought-provoking themes, it stands as a memorable addition to the pantheon of so-called "elevated horror". Visually and auditorily striking, and with a marvellously macabre Hugh Grant at its centre, 'Heretic' is something of a revelation.

I was both surprised and disappointed by this. The first half was set up beautifully. A highly engrossing, suspenseful and edgy psychological mystery with a seemingly benevolent hermit inviting two green Mormon missionaries into his foreboding home for a religious chat. The topic is refreshingly intellectual for the genre and is actually thrilling until you see what it is building to - standard horror cliche. High Grant gives by far his best ever performance, riffing on the easy going charm of his romantic screen persona until something far more sinister is revealed. The two Mormon characters though are very poorly written and behave both stupidly and inconsistently to how they have been established which makes the whole thing a lot less engaging. What initially is exciting becomes very unsatisfying as contrivances pile up. Still an interesting watch but only for the first hour.

I haven't seen a good movie purely based on good acting for a longer while now. This movie is definitely one of them. Small sceneries, not a great deal of props not mentioning it's played by handful of actors- this can only be saved by building up the climate and this is what this movie is doing perfectly. It is a very good movie that is aspiring to be great. The only thing that it is missing to achieve that is a more surprising finishing punchline. Very enjoyable experience overall. I hope the younger generation can appreciate this sort of acting art. Heretic is a proof that cinema is still alive and it doesn't need to cost millions to attract the audience.

I don't normally write reviews, but this movie provoked me into writing something. There's nothing quite as disappointing as a movie that begins with brilliance only to collapse under the weight of its own ambition. This film, which promised a gripping story and masterful execution, is unfortunately one such example.

The opening act was a masterpiece in suspense and intrigue. And the setup hinted at a narrative filled with twists and emotional depth. The cinematography complemented the tone perfectly, creating an immersive world that drew the audience in. For the first hour, it felt like we were witnessing something truly special.

However, as the story progressed, the cracks began to show. The pacing, once tight and deliberate, became erratic.

In the end, this movie serves as a reminder that a strong start alone isn't enough. Without consistent storytelling and thoughtful execution, even the brightest beginnings can dim into disappointment. It's a shame because the potential was undeniably there-it just wasn't realized.

What began as a captivating experience ended as a disjointed effort. A missed opportunity, but a frustratingly memorable one.