It’s time to cut out the cancer.
I was already interested in seeing Malignant; I’m a fan of James Wan as a director and horror in particular seems to be a genre where he typically excels. But it was only when the divisive nature of the film became apparent that I got downright excited. A guy I know on Facebook posted that he’d just seen it and that he thought it was “pretty meh,” in his words, until the last twenty minutes, which he called awesome. The first response was from another friend saying that they had really liked the movie up until that final twenty minutes, which, in their words, “ruined everything.” The second response was from a guy saying that the entire movie was a masterpiece. And just like that, I’m online buying a ticket. There’s something exciting about watching a movie when you know it’s inspired the entire spectrum of emotions. It’s always encouraging to go into a movie knowing that most people like it; it gets you in a hopeful mood. But knowing that a movie is both loved and hated? That’s a good time at the movies.
I’ll just tip my hand early: Malignant is a very flawed film and it’s also one of the most fun horror movies I’ve seen in . . . months, probably since Ready or Not, back in 2019. Wan signals to the viewer right away really that this isn’t going to be a Conjuring movie; this isn’t serious horror like that or A24 prestige horror. This is over-the-top, pretty gonzo horror and while some people were surprised at just how crazy it gets at the end, they really shouldn’t have been. The movie opens with a completely wacky scene at a terrifying hospital/mansion looming on a clifftop over a stormy sea as lightning flashes and thunder booms and the music bellows. Less than five minutes into the movie, I swear I heard someone say something along the lines of, “It’s like he’s DRINKING the ELECTRICITY!” If you haven’t figured out what kind of horror movie you’re in at that point, you’re not paying attention.
And was I on board? One hundred percent. The movie slows down after that sequence, but it retains that gonzo energy as it introduces us to Madison, a woman who finds herself somehow psychically linked to Gabriel, a psychotic killer that has a decidedly striking mode of locomotion. I pretty well dug this whole movie a lot. It has some downright scary scenes; an early scene of Madison’s husband being stalked through their dark and quiet house is the kind of tense, ever-tightening suspense Wan excels at. A later interrogation scene between Madison and the two cops investigating the murders is incredibly creepy once Gabriel phones in an appearance. It’s in scenes like that where you can see the giallo influences; Madison is clad entirely in black, including a kind of turtleneck, and swathed in shadows so that only her incredibly pale face pops out of the darkness at you. The killer’s gold-handled dagger and black gloves are right out of a giallo too. Yes, the film elevates its aesthetics over common sense and realism. Where exactly is that basement filled with old timey carriages and why is there a layer of fog exactly ankle deep blanketing the entire room? Who gives a ****? It looks amazing.
Wan’s direction really can’t be overpraised here. The film features a plot that revolves around Madison receiving visions of the killer’s gruesome murders as they happen and the way Wan takes us in and out of those visions is striking and unique. His use of color is magnificent and the murder scenes have a raw intensity, particularly the second one. And in Gabriel, I’m darned if Wan hasn’t kind of created a horror icon for me; not that I want to see him again or see this movie kick-start a franchise (please, God, no), but Gabriel’s weird, uncanny way of moving is genuinely unsettling and, once you realize that it’s not CG, but actually the work of dancer-contortionist Marina Mazepa, it’s downright jaw-dropping, especially in that insane massacre in the police station. Funniest chair throw in the history of movies? May . . . be. Maybe. If Wan takes first place in this movie for his direction, Mazepa’s probably right there in second. Other high marks go to Joseph Bishara’s over-the-top score and the stunt coordinators. (Did anybody else notice an EXTREMELY de-glammed Zoe Bell as one of the prisoners bullying Madison? That was fun.)
So, look, if you’re looking for intellectually challenging horror or genuinely disturbing horror or . . . well, really any kind of horror other than over-the-top, bonkers nonsense horror, look elsewhere. But you try to take a movie as it is and Malignant isn’t bad. Not even Annabelle Wallis’ performance is bad, though it must be said that the majority of the cast here are giving pretty one-note performances and Wallis does have one genuinely awful scene. It’s going for what it’s going for and if you’re willing to go with it, it’s one hell of a ride. Is this what I want all horror movies to be like? Absolutely not. Do I want this school of horror to ever die? Again, absolutely not. There’s one 80s horror movie that I absolutely adore that I’m dying to mention because it is obviously an influence here, but I’m not going to because if you’re still unspoiled on Malignant, you need to stay that way until you see it and to even mention the title of this absurd, ridiculous 80s movie would be to give away too much. I will absolutely go behind spoiler tags if anybody wants to talk about this movie though, so let me know your thoughts. As it stands, Malignant isn’t a perfect movie, but it’s a great one and it’s an absolute must-see. Wan’s done it again and in a totally new way. 4 stars.
tl;dr – over-the-top, gonzo horror movie goes for it & sacrifices common sense for style at every turn; it’s not sophisticated, but it’s the most fun I’ve had with a horror movie in years. 4 stars.