Review by CJ
Thomas Jane, Dylan Schmid, Molly Parker
Other notable appearances:
Kaitlyn Bernard, Brian d’Arcy James
Watch this if you liked:
The Mist, Pet Sematary, The Invitation, A Good Marriage
Wilfred James (Jane) is a proud farmer who loves his son (Schmid) but has come to hate his wife, Arlette (Parker). Wilfred’s hate burns stronger when Arlette decides to sell the neighbouring land her father left her and take their son to live in the city. Wilfred’s fatherly instincts run as deep as a well and he will stop at nothing to keep his son.
1922 is based on a novella in the Stephen King book Full Dark, No Stars, the same collection that featured A Good Marriage. The film adaptation of 1922 is a slow burn with a low key pay off as a stand alone film, but is an enjoyable accompaniment to the novella.
1922 suffers from feeling overlong due to many superfluous sequences that I’m sure were intended to build atmosphere and suspense. Failing that, the scenes just bloat the film that could easily have been cut down to an even hour and a half for a tighter
As far as suspense goes, there isn’t a lot since the film gives the main plot point away early on. But rather than being based around suspense, mystery or shock, 1922’s horrors come from the consequences of Wilfred’s choices.
Thomas Jane’s portrayal of the simple but conniving Wilfred James is outstanding. Jane is almost unrecognisable in the role he plays as gaunt, perpetually filthy and with a fitting drawl.
While at times frustrating due to pacing, 1922 is a good movie in its own right. However, I feel it is best served as an accompaniment to the novella. If you have some time and love atmospheric, eerie supernatural or moral horror then 1922 is worth checking out. If you love fast paced horror with a high body count, this is not the film for which you are looking.
“In the end, we all get caught.”
One thought on “1922 (2017)”
I just watched this the other day. The biggest surprise was that I couldn’t tell it was Jane! Truly a character change. I didn’t think much of the movie — I thought with Stephen King’s name attached it would have been more, I dunno, macabre. It was a one time only view.
LikeLiked by 1 person