Originally published July 2018

Netflix has started to get more involved in making movies, instead of simply steaming them, and I'm sure other streaming services will follow in their footsteps, so long as it's a financially viable path. I've watched a few movies that were Netflix-produced that might as well have been released in theaters. I don't want to say anything of their quality as films out of context, but in terms of their look and production quality, it could have come straight from Hollywood for all I knew. The latest Netflix-branded film I watched was 1922, a horror movie based on a Stephen King novella. The track record of Stephen King's stories transformed into films is a long and erratic one, ranging from some of the worst horror movies, like The Langoliers, all the way to some of the best, like The Shining. So, where does 1922 land in the Stephen King spectrum?

I'd say 1922 falls just short of the middle of the road. There are some qualities to the movie that help give it a little flair to stand out from other King stories. There are, however, plenty of details and traits to the movie that make it bland and occasionally dull. There were several moments where I considered stopping it out of boredom, yet there were enough things going on that kept me curious enough to see it to its conclusion.

Pros

• Thomas Jane does a great job as the protagonist

• Off-putting string and orchestral music from Mike Patton works well to add tension

• Creepy moments that occasionally arise

• Narration is consistent throughout the film and works to its benefit

• Nice cinematography in certain spots

Cons

• Slowwwwww movie

• Not enough creepy horror; too focused on gore that doesn't even look good

• CGI looks pretty bad at times

• Convincing as the characters are, none of them are worth latching on to

Plot & Thoughts

As the title of the movie suggests, the story takes place in the year 1922. Thomas Jane plays Wilfred, a simple corn farmer in Nebraska who is very content with farming corn and continuing to do so till the end of his days. He has a wife and a son. His son is also content to continue farming alongside him so long as he gets to keep dating the girl next door. His wife is the stick in the mud and desperately wants to leave the farm behind. Due to her recent inheritance of a ton of land that is connected with the farm and the home they're living in, she is doing her best to convince both of the boys that the best action is to sell it all to a meat-packing company and move to the city. The stubborn nature of everyone prevents any sort of compromise among them, so the only logical thing left to do is to kill the stick in the mud, right?

Well, that's what Wilfred decides on, anyway. Though, it takes some time to get to the dirty deed. In fact, it takes so long for it to finally happen, it almost seemed too late in the movie to share without considering it a spoiler—good thing that the trailer for the movie, which Netflix insists on playing, tells you right away that he kills his wife. This movie is 25% plot to kill wife, 25% cleaning up and hiding the murder, 50% dealing with the repercussions of the evil act. With the involvement of some aggressive rodents and haunting ghosts of angry corpses, 1922 is a blend of HP Lovecraft's Rats in the Wall and Edgar Allan Poe's Telltale Heart.

What I mean to say is that this movie is not very original and pretty much goes how you expect it to. After committing such a foul act as murder, bad stuff starts happening to Wilfred and everyone around him to make it seem like he cursed himself in the process. Guilt has some part to play in the downfall of these characters, but a lot of it also just seems like a Murphy's Law potpourri of the worst possible thing that could happen for each circumstance that pops up. By the end, you're just watching it to find out how much worse everything gets for any character involved and if they'll survive it. Since it's a Stephen King story, you probably already know the answer to that.

The saving grace of this movie is Thomas Jane. I've always liked Jane in every movie I've watched with him in it, including Deep Blue Sea and The Punisher. I think he's only gotten better as an actor over the years. He does a very convincing accent for his character and his charisma manages to keep your attention on the screen. If a less compelling performance made by a less compelling actor were the protagonist of 1922, I don't think I would have cared enough to finish it.

1922 moves too slowly for the type of horror it ends up being. You can make your horror movies slow-paced so long as there is some tension to keep them moving—relying on a great musical score only goes so far. The focus is instead on relatively bland characters dealing with a looming curse. When the supernatural hauntings finally start occurring, it feels like a breath of fresh air because there's actually something happening that is a little interesting. It just never quite builds to anything meaningful and most of the horror parts of 1922 end up being unnecessarily gory or gross.

TL;DR (Conclusion)

1922 is a disappointing, slow slog that doesn't really go anywhere new or interesting. The preference to focus on the gore as opposed to the creepy and more abstract horror prevents the film from being very interesting. If it weren't for the random gore or the fleeting moments of tense hauntings, it wouldn't really be a horror movie. It's mostly a character drama with relatively uninteresting characters. Aside from Thomas Jane's performance and the musical score, the experience is a somewhat tedious and disappointing affair.

Fan of death metal? Check out my band on Bandcamp and Soundcloud. If you like what you hear and want to hear more, head to HoundsofInnsmouth.com for more info!