User reviews

In Heretic, Hugh Grant (Mr. Reed) gives one of the best performances of the year. He is very unnerving in this role and that alone is worth the price of admission to see. I hope this isn't a one and done for him because we need him in more horror movies, he is a natural. Sophie Thatcher (Sister Barnes) and Chloe East (Sister Paxton) give top notch performances as well. This is a very religious horror movie. It is a dialogue heavy film, which I personally enjoyed but some people might not. It doesn't rely on cheap jump scares because just Hugh talking in this film can send chills down your spine. Could've been better towards the end but this is still a solid entry into the genre.

Heretic is as unpredictable as it is messy. While the film keeps you on edge for most of its runtime, the plot begins to fizzle out in the final act.

Hugh Grant delivers a standout performance, with Sophie Thatcher and Cloe East also shining in their roles. The director, cinematographer, and set designer deserve credit too, as they gradually immerse you into the growing madness of Grant's character and his eerie home.

Unfortunately, the plot is the film's weakest point. The tension and mystery build beautifully at first, but around the two-thirds mark, it starts to unravel. The climax left me slightly underwhelmed, as I was expecting something more profound. Still, 'Heretic' is an excellent horror film in its own right - enjoyable, but not quite as memorable as I had hoped.

What the hell is Hugh doing here? Hugh doesn't belong here...

Or maybe, just maybe, Hugh does belong here! Maybe horror is Hugh's true calling, and did he waste 30 years of his career on romantic comedies! That's an exaggeration, of course, and I still love most of his silly rom coms. Fact is, though, that Hugh Grant gives away a perplexing performance as the disturbing and terrifying villain in "Heretic".

There's a lot more about Scott Beck & Bryan Wood's "Heretic" that deserves praise and attention! I didn't expect a horror script full of theological enquiries and debates, and I most certainly didn't expect that I would be so fascinated by the subject! Perhaps it's purely thanks to Hugh Grant's uncanny charisma as Mr. Reed, and the way he intimidates and petrifies two innocent young Mormon girls that show up on his doorstep, but the more talkative "Heretic" became, the more I loved it. Reed is like an eloquent big bad wolf, preying on two cherubic but naïve Little Red Riding Hoods. It's an absorbing thriller spectacle that keeps you gazing at the screen with amazement for half the film. And you know what's most intriguing? Many things Reed says about various aspects of religion make total sense!

When "Sisters" Barnes and Paxton are lured into Reed's eerie basement, "Heretic" maneuvers into more familiar and grotesque territory. Theory is put into practice and verbal terror turns into physical horror, which somehow makes the film less unique. Some action was necessary, I reckon, and luckily "Heretic" remains entertaining and suspenseful throughout.

PS: the link with Radiohead's "Creep" in the first couple of lines isn't coincidental. The film makes great use of the brilliant song, as well as of "The Air that I Breath" by The Hollies.

Hugh Grant ventures into the dense world of theological debate, tackling themes rarely covered on mainstream film. The film is undeniably intriguing, pulling viewers into complex discussions that feel both timeless and urgent. Yet, as I watched, I found myself grappling with an elusive question: was The Heretic a compelling film or merely an ambitious attempt that fell short?

Grant's performance is engaging, but there's an intangible quality missing, something that keeps the movie from fully resonating. Perhaps it's Grant himself, who doesn't quite shed his familiar charm to embody a character steeped in philosophical conflict. Alternatively, it might be the script, which seems torn between delivering an engaging story with a profound message and indulgent lecture through Grant as the medium. This identity crisis leaves the film feeling somewhat ungrounded, making The Heretic a fascinating watch but ultimately difficult to categorise as either wholly successful or lacking.

The supporting cast did an excellent job in quite difficult roles for them to play alongside Grant as the lead.

If like me you watched this movie because you wanted to see Hugh Grant play a creepy villain, then you won't be disappointed.

Heretic is the story of 2 young Mormons visiting the house of Mr Reed, Played by Hugh Grant. However, things aren't what they seem.

Out the gate, you meet the 2 Mormon's, Sister Barnes played by Sophie Thatcher and Sister Paxton player by Chloe East. For me personally, I came into this movie for the Hugh Grant show, but these 2 actresses held their own and both gave a great performance. With this movie only really consisting of 3 characters, it's important that 2/3rds of the cast deliver, and they did! Sophie Thatcher's character, Sister Barnes, I'd say is the more in-depth of the 2 Mormons and is the more experienced of the 2. Chloe East's character, Sister Paxton, who is the newer missionary who feels like more of a believer than her counterpart and is eager to convert and spread the word of God. Both their performances mainly consist of being terrified of Mr Reed and fortunately neither fall into the dumb protagonist trope.

Now for Mr Reed, played by Hugh Grant. It's difficult to pinpoint exactly how Hugh Grant plays this character so well. Because the way he acts isn't innately creepy or scary in any way. It's more of a case of context that makes Mr Reed creepy. The way he delivers his dialogue is so calm and, in a way, like he's giving a lecture. Which he is. He's trying to educate and enlighten the 2 Mormons. The way Mr Reed gave me the ick was the way he's condescending and speaks down to you. That and the fact we're in a strange spooky house, where the lights are on a timer and the ceiling is dripping. Mr Reed just feels off!

Above I mentioned the dialogue. Writers/Directors Scott Beck and Bryan Woods wrote Heretic beautifully. Giving each character their own identity through their dialogue. Heretic had great cinematography with effective use of close ups and panning shots.

Sounds design was simple yet effective. The sound of creaking floorboards, drips, and old metallic locks and doors really punctuated the idea of this being an old rustic house.

Now this is a spoiler free review, so I'm not going to discuss this part too much, but one aspect of the movie I wish they'd explore more of was the idea of the labyrinth. The figurines and the model labyrinth are featured in the poster and the movie trailer but aren't all that important in the movie. So, if you were expecting a horror like labyrinth movie, then I'd be disappointed. That being said, the set was quite minimal, not much to really discuss. But what was there was simple and effective.

The key theme of Heretic is religion and belief. This movie does a great job at showing both sides of the coin without feeling like it's favouring or attacking one opinion over another. It managed that balancing act well, which is important, as to not feel like it's attacking its audience's point of views or believes.

I will say that I didn't think the movie was that scary. That doesn't bother me much, but it was released around Halloween and was advertised to be a horror movie, so that may affect your enjoyment of the movie, depending on what you were expecting. I'd say it leans more into the thriller mystery elements, which is more my cup of tea.

Overall, I enjoyed Heretic. Didn't feel too long and went at a brisk pace.

I'm not sure what I was expecting from Heretic, but it certainly wasn't deep theological discourse and intense religious diatribe courtesy of Hugh Grant. Not that I have a problem with that: when Grant's character, Mr. Reed, is challenging the doctrines of organised religion, the film is actually very engaging and frequently funny, the actor putting in a marvellously offbeat performance, Reed frequently making a lot of sense. Of course, this is a horror film, so even though a lot of what Grant's character says seems logical, the extremes he eventually goes to to prove his point are not at all reasonable.

Chloe East and Sophie Thatcher play Mormon missionaries who pay Mr. Reed a visit with the hope of converting him to their religion. Reed, however, has his own sinister agenda. What follows is an intense game of cat and mouse, the missionaries desperately trying to reason with their host while trying to find a way to escape from his home.

The film's strongest scenes are those in the first half of the film, in which Reed disquietingly questions the girls' beliefs while positing plausible alternatives - Grant is both affable and subtly menacing. Much of the first hour is simply conversation between Reed and the missionaries, and yet it is superbly unsettling, hinting at the man's craziness without going over the top. The latter half of the film is slightly less effective, visceral horror replacing the verbal dread, but it is still entertaining, and the film closes leaving the viewer with plenty of food for thought.

7/10.

This was an engrossing and intriguing movie. It played with tropes and mixed them up.

Annoying missionaries, and to the missionaries the annoying 'customer' who wants to debate at length.

The film played expertly with the sense of unknown and the accompanying dread that was created from it.

Hugh Grant's Mr Reed playing so well at walking the line but not crossing it. Moving things forward without giving an inkling of where it was going. Giving the impression of choice but was there really any?

Where it faltered for me was in the 3rd act where it revealed probably too much about him. Just another nutter, but wouldn't it have been cool if we were never quite sure.

I loved that they toyed with the current dilemma of not know who to trust about what. Things seems bad but then they gave a plausible explanation etc etc. We're engulfed in it and there is no clear sign that one party still holds to reason logic and honest over the other.

A world of Plausible lies, or is it the truth? You simply can't tell any more.

The script was detailed and pop culture referential.

Lots of clever asides, ("You're thinking of the butterfly effect").

I liked the ambiguity a lot, and the central "what's in the afterlife" conundrum, or was Reed basing his con on that set up? It was intriguing, and I was buying it.

It was almost a runaway original and innovative great script apart from a handful of loose end points which took it down several notches from the very high standard it set for itself.

Where it fell down was the very quick lesson about "the one true god". I didn't follow the reasoning and up to this point it played very well. Then the caged entourage who "do it willingly"? That was an interesting point not sold very well either. I loved how it tied to the following of religion, but it lost me here too.

And the final failing was the saviour who managed to bleed out but then climb several stairs deliver a death blow, although it wasn't clear what Reed was trying to do at this point anyway, and then he passed away.

This could have been a timeless great movie if they'd managed to solve a few niggling contrivances.

As it was it was better for the questions it asked, thought experiments and warping tropes.

I haven't seen a good movie purely based on good acting for a longer while now. This movie is definitely one of them. Small sceneries, not a great deal of props not mentioning it's played by handful of actors- this can only be saved by building up the climate and this is what this movie is doing perfectly. It is a very good movie that is aspiring to be great. The only thing that it is missing to achieve that is a more surprising finishing punchline. Very enjoyable experience overall. I hope the younger generation can appreciate this sort of acting art. Heretic is a proof that cinema is still alive and it doesn't need to cost millions to attract the audience.

Grant, known for his prowess in other genres, takes a bold step into horror with Heretic, and while he introduces a fresh perspective, it's the performances of the young female leads that truly anchor the film.

Directorial style is evident in the film's atmospheric tension, with suspenseful silences and startling visuals to build unease. The pacing is deliberate, allowing the horror to seep in slowly, but it's also in these quieter moments that the actresses truly shine. They deliver a nuanced performance, shifting from fear to defiance in ways that elevate the film beyond typical genre fare. Despite some familiar plot elements, Heretic manages to craft an engaging, if slightly conventional, horror experience.

Ultimately, Hugh Grant might have found a promising new genre away from rom coms, but it's the girls of Heretic who truly handle the horror with skill and grace.

Always love watching movies with theological theme, like Matrix (1999) and Sign (2002). But this movie falls into the psychological horror genre, so the undertone may not be the governing factor of its quality.

Superb build-up of atmosphere for the first 30 mins, and then it just went downhill. Even though it bounces back up a bit in the end, that's not enough to make it a classic. Perhaps it may have some real potential if it were a serious drama. (Probably because of the preference of the funding source. No?)

I love how Hugh Grant belittled that green horn girl when they first meet by muttering "Voltaire", who happens to have some word of wisdom that I love:

"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."

Is this a movie about advertising? No. Religion? You may say so, but not necessarily true for me. I would say It's a reminder of how misinformation and disinformation (i.e. What Hugh Grant has been preaching) affects you and I, what are their true natures, and whether we should avoid these "lies" using our own wisdom, or simply embrace them just because of how good they make us feel?

In the end, it's another "red pill, blue pill" question.

Heretic (2024) delivers a tense and atmospheric horror experience, blending psychological dread with eerie supernatural elements. The film builds its tension slowly, relying on unsettling imagery and an ominous atmosphere rather than cheap jump scares. The cinematography enhances the feeling of isolation, while the sound design keeps the audience on edge. The performances are compelling, drawing viewers into the characters' struggles as they confront fear, doubt, and the unknown. However, while the film excels in mood and suspense, its pacing may feel sluggish at times, and some narrative choices leave lingering questions. The story offers a unique take on religious horror, but it doesn't always break new ground. Still, Heretic is a gripping watch for fans of slow-burn horror that relies on atmosphere and psychological terror rather than outright gore. It lingers in the mind long after the credits roll, making it a haunting cinematic experience.

Sisters Barnes and Paxton enter the house of Mr Rees in order to spread the word of God, unfortunately for them his motive for welcoming them into his home isn't as innocent as first imagined.

Talk about a film of two halves, the first half had me well and truly on pins, it was both unnerving and uncomfortable, I found it very easy to empathise with the girls, you got a true sense of a growing unease and a malevolence from their host.

There is a mystery, but somehow it doesn't feel like the right mystery, I didn't care for the second installment of the film, it went in a bizarre, almost disappointing direction, fortunately the performances are enough to carry it over the line.

When I think of Hugh Grant I still think of the floppy haired, beautifully spoken nice guy, what a departure for him, as has been said his performance is sublime, he is phenomenon, I'm not sure if it's just his acting, or if it's due to it being such a departure.

Sophie Thatcher and Chloe East were excellent, two hugely sincere and credible performances.

It's not quite a horror as such, in that there aren't any jump scares or shocks, I'd instead put it more in the psychological thriller category.

An interesting game of cat and mouse, no issues at all with the feline or the mice, the game however went off on a slight tangent.

7/10.

1. Hugh Grant is a tour de force-God, I love that man! What a career he's had, and he's absolutely at the top of his game here.

2. The two female leads also deliver superb performances.

3. "Heretic" comes across as a watered-down version of the French horror classic Martyrs, one of my all-time favourite horror films.

4. As a cynical 💩 that I am I found myself surprisingly aligned with many of the film's controversial points (couldn't help but feel seen by Hugh Grant's character-didn't see that coming, haha).

5. I probably wouldn't recommend it if you're very religious...unless you're open to it?

6. The movie has some uneven pacing and falls flat in parts - cutting 20-30 minutes could have made a huge difference, as all the tension it builds up just starts to fade halfway through.

7. And the ending? So anticlimactic, I can't even!

8. Still a very worthwhile watch if you're a horror fan.

Heretic begins with a familiar premise but it stays away from classic tropes and evolves into a surprisingly thought-provoking narrative. The dynamic between the three main characters is compelling, driving the story with intensity. Its exploration of religion offers deeper themes than expected for a psychological horror film. Hugh Grant delivers a mature, calculated performance, elevating the film. The plot is sharp, though one late twist feels slightly over-the-top. The ambiguous ending, while intriguing, might feel unsatisfactory to some viewers. Despite minor flaws, Heretic is an engaging and intelligent horror thriller.

Acting was stunning. Hugh Grant plays a perfect psychopath who is creepy and occasionally funny. The film would stand strong in a suspense/psychological thriller category without the, in my opinion, unnecessary supposed supernatural scene that I guess puts it in the horror category. The premise of the film is great and leaves you with lots of interesting musings regarding religion and how people believe things just because they are told. Overall it's a thought provoking, fun jump scare film. Don't have high expectation if you're a horror fan. It's more of a suspense film that gets the heart rate up!

A24 once again strikes another good thriller/horror flick with a great sense of atmosphere, interesting concept, and strong performances from the entire cast. Filled with a good balance between some dark comedy and tension, the writing provides interesting themes and character dynamics that helps to establish the atmosphere surrounding them. Including some impressive camerawork and production designs despite being a more simple setting.

The performances are great, particularly Hugh Grant as he is wicked, hilarious, and creepy at the same time. Alongside some good dialogue, musical score, and direction throughout. The characters I found to be interesting, although I do wish some of the characters could have been a bit more explored at times. Including some certain choices with the narrative (especially the third act) that I thought could have been a bit better. But as a whole, A24 knocked it out of the park again.

You may wonder who Hugh Grant really is in this movie? Hugh Grant is a character who creates his world (symbolized by the wooden labyrinth). He behaves like God - he tells his "prophets" what they are to say to others. Yet the prophets, all women (thus a caricature of biblical prophets, who are generally men, even if talmudic Judaism sees them as women too) are imprisoned by him. That excludes him being a devil, who as we know, is very partial to women. Yet he clearly is not a good God too.

Creativity, control, imprisonment, dislike of women - that are known features of that evil god, known as Demiurge, and introduced by Plato. Towards Demiurge points also the otherwise absurd "simulation theory" as who would simulate this world for us ...?

In some sense, the "prophets" are living in a Platonic cave, where the only light comes from Demiurge Reed (interestingly, only he is able to bring fire there, not the Mormon sisters with matchsticks, who, by the power of this comparison, do not live in light/truth), who sells some truth after all (he says that his "prophets" do not want to leave this place, exactly like the Platonic dwellers of the cave). It is regrettable that this piece of truth exposed by Reed- similarities in religions point to the kernel of truth at the beginning of all religious iterations - is not really discussed here.

Also the ending, which could be seen as rebirth can be perhaps better interpreted as leaving the Platonic cave.

Heretic (2024) is an original psychological horror film written and directed by Scott Beck and Bryan Woods. It follows two young Mormon missionaries who visit the home of a mysterious man, Mr. Reed (played by Hugh Grant), only to find themselves trapped in a sinister game of faith and survival. The film premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival and was released by A24.

As always, A24 is testing the boundaries of both visual and conceptual elements, which makes this movie unique and quite good actually.

While Heretic fits neatly within the horror genre, I found it to be less focused on delivering genuine scares. This may be due to Hugh Grant's portrayal of a charming, almost romantic character, or perhaps because the jump scares felt somewhat predictable. Ultimately, the film seems more intent on conveying a deeper thematic message rather than instilling fear, although it does not save on bloody scenes near the end.

Viewers should be prepared for a slow-burning narrative, much of which unfolds within a single location. The film is heavily driven by extended dialogues on faith and biblical interpretations, making it a contemplative experience rather than a conventional thriller. Those who prefer fast-paced horror may find its approach less engaging. Otherwise, definitely worth a watch. Exact rating: 73 / 100.

Shortly, Things I liked :

• the acting was great, specially Hugh Grant, God I like this man and how he can adapt to age, like The Gentlemen, the sisters were very good and done the job competently
• The characters are well written, again Mr Reed (Hugh Grant) someone who is charming & plausible gives the air of a scholar, yet unsettling & though how calm he's can be frightening in the needed moment
• the directing, the atmosphere of uncalled for uneasiness, the camera angles, the design of the house, the debate, how smart the arguments were made big success in scenario & dialogue

Till Things I didn't like:

• The third act was cliché & disturbed
• The conclusion felt like undercooked
• at least one jump scare was expected and silly.

If chase scenes, jump cuts and monsters are your thing then Heretic is not for you.

If poignant, interesting conversation and a menacing air are your thing then you will love Heretic.

All the acting is wonderful especially the spooky Hugh Grant in his first horror movie where he is the antagonist for a change.

The writing and directing team from the Quiet Place do a great job of creating a creepy atmosphere that permeates everything throughout the 110 minute runtime.

If I had to have one slight quibble it would be the that the ending is a little convenient. As if the writers painted themselves into a corner and then did a deuce ex to get themselves out to an ending that didn't quite land.

I suppose that many of us have had the god-squad on the doorstep trying to peddle their philosophising but I doubt many are quite as prepared, or as tempting, as the butter-wouldn't-melt "Reed" (Hugh Grant) when the enthusiastic sisters "Barnes" (Sophie Thatcher) and "Paxton" (Chloe East) arrive at his door. Promises of a meeting with his wife and some blueberry pie lure them in and soon they are having a meaningful debate that rather puts the girls on edge. That anxiety only gets worse as there's no sign of the wife and the scented candle proves to have a most unusual, and illuminating, aroma. They conclude that getting out of his home is the best plan, but that isn't going to be straightforward. He has other plans, and they are going to have to play a game of belief/disbelief if they are to have any hope of getting back to their church. The horror aspects of this are not especially interesting - it's a sort of competent hybrid of "Escape Room" meets "Cluedo". What helps this stand out a bit more is a subtly menacing effort from Grant and the standard of the writing. The conversation between the three for the first half of the film is quite thought provoking in itself. It asks questions that are truly valid and worthy of consideration amongst those of or without organised faith. The assertions around "iterations", burgers and games of "Monopoly" also raise a few solid questions about carts and horses that I rather appreciated as we are invited to question or evaluate the whole scope of monotheistic religions and their role in our lives. The two women gel well together here too, realising that they are in some sort of peril - both intellectual and physical, and that latter threat is well demonstrated by some creepy settings and creatively used audio. I didn't love the conclusion - I actually found it really quite disappointing, as if Scott Beck had just run out of ideas or didn't quite have the courage of his earlier convictions, but this is the most substantial part I've seen Grant play in a while and he holds it together well. Not your typical psychological drama and worth a watch, I'd say.

Well, that was a surprise. I was expecting a schlock horror, but this is something a tad more thought provoking - and worth going to see.

There are three main characters. The two female leads Sofia Thatcher and Cloe East, do a good job with their roles and are eminently watchable. However, Hugh Grant (for me) steals the show - he does creepy very well, although there's a small flavour of campness to his characterisation.

The script is above average. This isn't a spoiler, but the main theme is religious belief, and whilst the debate is first year Uni philosophy standard, it's still thought provoking and well written. I think this adds to the richness of the film. The Direction is simple and straightforward, with nothing too elaborate, but that helps with this type of film. Neither is the horror overplayed, it's reasonably (relatively) subtle.

I didn't find the film that scary, but it was still tense and did have the odd jump scare. A good way to spend a couple of hours.