Review of the film “Heretic”: Hugh Grant is too charming to play a villain

About the risky change of pace that Hugh Grant made in an overrated, underdeveloped horror film called ” Heretic that it seems pointless to contribute more. I’ll just say he deserves applause, but the question is, “So what?” He’s a good actor who can easily switch from a charming romantic lead to a menacing, diabolical villain and the monster he plays Heretic is not only cleverly freaky, but also not entirely without charm. It seems like a natural fit. The question: Is it scary? In my opinion, the answer is a big, yawning, “Absolutely not.” Since I was shaving too quickly with an old razor blade, I was more scared than anything Heretic from my bathroom mirror.

Led by Scott Beck and Bryan Woods, the writing, directing and sometimes producing team responsible for it B movies like Track And The Boogeyman, heretic has been mistakenly seen as an innovator in the horror genre, but there’s nothing innovative about it about it. Instead of horror, Heretic emanates more of a long and tedious ideological debate about the horror of religion combined with the horror of bad films. You could call it “Whydunit” and not “Whodunit”. The premise begins with a promise. Two lovely Mormon missionaries (Sophie Thatcher and Chloe East) on a mission to convert unbelievers to salvation arrive at a spooky, imposing house (amidst fog, rain, and an impending blizzard, of course). The creaking door is opened by a friendly, smiling Mr. Reed (Hugh Grant with his usual charm), who invites them in and offers them a slice of blueberry pie, freshly baked by his wife, who never appears. But instead of cake, Mr. Reed delivers a challenging debate about the role of religion through the ages. Whether the women are raising funds or simply hoping to find a kind soulmate is left to the imagination, although the dark and gloomy mansion soon becomes evidence of the host’s behavior and his dangerous plans for unsuspecting visitors, many of whom turn out to be locked out in cages in underground dungeons below. Before you can say, “Girl in Danger Movie, Who’s Seen It?” Psycho Should know better than to go out after dark,” the action becomes a shout-fest, and the charming Mr. Reed turns into a serial killer, verbally punctuating each of his murders with mumbo-jumbo, with menacing questions like “How are you?” You? What do you think of polygamy?

It should come as no surprise when the girls discover that the exit doors are locked, the blueberry pie is poisonous, and there is no woman there. As the blizzard rages outside, the girls flee to the basement, where future victims await their turn for execution. “Why are you doing this?” asks one of the misguided missionaries in one of the film’s unintentional comedic misfires. “The question,” Mr. Reed replies with a deadly grin, “is, why are you all letting me?” That’s the only point of the film – that’s it Is no sense.

Heretic There are occasional moments of tension, but nothing is based on any kind of logic, largely leaving Hugh Grant to carry the shaky, disorganized and pointless third act to its cruel conclusion with maximum eye-rolling, lip-licking glee. He is the only reason to keep one eye on the screen and the other eye on the exit door. You can’t teach an old pro new tricks, and this is an actor who can’t shake his charm even when asked, which no one does. Even when he cuts off a victim’s hand finger by finger, he appears cheerful. Let’s hope that after proving he’s more than capable of gory nonsense, he’s offered a meatier role next time. In the disappointing greeting card finale of Hereticeverything falls apart into hearts, flowers and butterflies, but only one person is still alive. I won’t say who it is. All I can tell you is that when Hugh Grant leaves the screen it has a similar effect as if he was saying goodbye to Casper the friendly ghost.