Longlegs (Spoiler Free Review [aside from some basic plot details])

 Longlegs 

Genre: Horror

Director: Oz Perkins

Released: 2024

     If you missed the excitement, Longlegs is one of the year's buzziest surprise hits: an oppressive, nerve-shredding psychological horror movie and heir apparent to the legacy of The Silence of the Lambs that serves as another stop in the Nicholas Cage career revivification tour to boot. It was entranced with such marketing hooks that I found myself awaiting Longlegs in a sparsely populated theater a few weeks ago, and it was those promises that may have ultimately been the obstacle barring my access to the Longlegs hype train. 

     Let's be very clear up front: this movie is similar to Silence of the Lambs in its initial conceit and that alone. The movie is about a young, troubled, female FBI agent tracking down a serial killer of shockingly violent proclivities, but that, and I cannot stress this enough, is where the similarities end.

      Silence of the Lambs was more thrilling than horrifying, its bread and butter were the unexpected surges of surprise and uncertainty more than anything else. In fact, I'd even go so far as to classify elements of the film as pulpy, or at least pulpy adjacent. The charismatic Hannibal Lecter, the scenery-chewing Buffalo Bill, and the classic underestimated heroine all contributed to Silence of the Lambs ending up a very accessible kind of horror film, the kind that casual fans of the genre (me), could enjoy without worrying about being scarred for life. 

     I say all of this for two reasons: firstly because The Silence of the Lambs has been such a prominent talking point in the discourse surrounding Longlegs that I feel it is incumbent upon me as a reviewer to warn those of the audience with weaker stomachs for horror (again, me) that it is my opinion that liking The Silence of the Lambs is a very weak indicator of how you will respond to Longlegs because Longlegs is decidedly more horrific than its most frequent point of comparison. 

     Longlegs is not interested in thrilling you or even scaring you, it wants you uncomfortable. Longlegs is a thoroughly grim, lightless movie that, despite its relative lack of blood and gore, initially made me afraid in a way that movies really haven't since I was younger. This is psychological horror, the kind that makes you feel somewhat dirty for having seen it, the kind that's meant to immerse you in a true sense of genuine dread at what might be awaiting you in the forthcoming scene or even the forthcoming shot. 

     Everything, and I do mean everything, is geared towards getting you worried that you're about to see something you really, really don't want to, and it's here that we come to reason the second for my extended introduction about The Silence of the Lambs, because at each moment that Lambs may have introduced a moment of levity, a compelling character to root for, or even just an establishing shot not accompanied by quietly howling strings, Longlegs points the audience back to its one and only objective: making you feel scared.

     Put more succinctly, Longlegs doesn't so much prioritize style over substance as it subordinates its every possible facet to the task of promoting its style, and that style can best be described as dark. The plot is dark, the atmosphere is dark, the characters are dark, the lighting is dark, the beginning middle and end are dark. This, however, had the presumably unintended effect of blunting the movie's impact overtime. 

     What I mean is that Longlegs' style exerts such a heavily homogenizing effect over every aspect of its construction that, in the end, it became a bit dull. Every character has limited backstories and sometimes oblique motivations. None of them have particularly engaging personal stories, insightful dialogue, or even compelling struggles because the script seemingly doesn't have time to fit any of that in around all the brooding and disturbed looks cast into the middle distance. 

     Nor is the antagonist interesting or the general plot outline all that intriguing. The problem is that it's all just bleak and grim, and that precludes any chance for a fascinating contrast. Think about how Clarice Starling's determination, wit, and bravery played against the overwhelming darkness of her mission. The powerful contrast of her character and her setting went a long way to emphasize those aspects of her character and made her so easy to root for. Lee Harker (ably played by Maika Monroe), lacks that spark of light that makes such a powerful comparison to her foes. Longlegs himself has a bit of a Joker thing going on with his frequent laughter and high pitched voice, but he hardly interacts with Lee and a mid-movie addition to our antagonist lineup who then becomes the primary villain is just as detached, broody, and flat as Harker herself. 

     Obviously this all comes with a pretty sizable qualification: I am a horror lightweight and this movie seems to be playing to a different crowd, which will, of course, impact my final grade. If what I've described sounds like movies you enjoy, with all their lightless nihilism, then I would say you'll probably be well served with Longlegs. If, however, you're a greenhorn of the genre attracted by comparisons to other, lighter horror fare, or prefer stronger characterization in your films, then I would advise you to stay away. 



D