Review of Horns (2013) by Brett B — 16 Oct 2014

HORNS is almost a really good movie. It's got a very strong central premise, and a cast doing fine work in the service of that story... but it's also marred (almost - but not entirely - beyond repair) by 180-degree swings in tone and mood.

But the good stuff first: the fundamental idea at the heart of the story (from a novel by Joe Hill) is unique and full of dramatic potential, and it's exploited to nearly its fullest possible effect.

Daniel Radcliffe is very good as the lead, and the fact that he's embraced genre in his post-Harry Potter career is very admirable; he's surrounded by both up-and-coming young players (like Temple, Minghella, and Anderson) and seasoned vets (such as Morse, Remar, and Quinlan).

It's a fine ensemble. The movie's chief problem (and it's a big one) is a side effect of one of the story elements, which hinges the main character's ability to force those around him to volunteer their deepest desires or innermost truths; many of these moments are treated with such a kind of absurd silliness of tone that they undermine the straight dramatic moments that are meant to land with a more tonally serious impact on the audience.

Also (though this might be a problem inherent to the source novel), this ability that the main character has almost always reveals those around him to be truly perverse or just-plain-awful human beings, and in that sense it's a hugely cynical view of humanity.

Much of this is seemingly played for dark comedy (see my comments above about the tonal shifts), but these moments do run the risk of being somewhat unpleasant; personal mileage may vary. There's enough effective stuff in the movie to warrant a recommendation, but it feels like there could have been a stronger, more cohesive film to be made from this concept and with this cast.