“Longlegs” is a new horror film starring Maika Monroe, Nicholas Cage, and Blair Underwood. While it was regarded as one of the most highly anticipated films of the year, this retrospective will discuss several aspects of its reception. From where the film went right, where it might’ve lost audiences at points, and where it perhaps could’ve gone farther, this horror flick did one thing for certain: created plenty of discourse.
Potential spoilers ahead
Some elements of the film were completed with absolute mastery, such as Andres Arochi’s cinematography, as well as the acting by the central cast, notably Nicholas Cage, who disappears into his role as the main villain, Longlegs. Another feature that was truly beautiful about the movie were the stylistic choices, flipping from a 1.33:1 aspect ratio to the ultra-wide 2.39:1 to communicate past and present, as well as intense color schemes in certain moments that offer stark juxtaposition with the rather dreary color palette throughout most of the film.
If every element of the movie was done with this level of creativity and perfection, this would without a doubt be a contender for horror film of the decade. But alas, there were clear issues with the film that has seemingly turned the film from “great” to “good” for some.
Many of these issues branch from the fact that the film doesn’t seem to want to be too much of its own thing. Through story beats, all-too-familiar horror tropes, somewhat underwhelming scares, and imagery that doesn’t carry as much weight as it could, the film unnecessarily downgrades itself. Where highly acclaimed horror movies like “Hereditary” and “Get Out” succeed with their excellent use of subtlety to slowly clue the audience in to the horrors behind the initial plot, “Longlegs” seems like it wants the audience to know exactly what’s going on at every moment.
This lack of uncertainty makes the horror aspect fall flatter than it could, because the audience is given no time to imagine the terror that might actually be afoot, and is then underwhelmed by what the film “reveals” to us. But do these issues ruin the film? Absolutely not. The reason these problems are so apparent is likely due to anticipation, because the bar was set so high.
So what exactly is the general reaction to this film? With an average of 3.5/5 stars on Letterboxed, a critic rating of 86% and audience rating of 62% on Rotten Tomatoes, and a 7.2/10 on IMDB, it is quite clear that audiences feel this movie was (drumroll please): Good. It could’ve been great, it could’ve totally flopped, but it stayed in the green for most audience members and many would argue that it would be worth the watch.
While I stand by the critiques in the paragraphs above, I do agree that there are too many creative aspects and fun ideas thrown in for this movie to go completely ignored by anybody. If you’re looking for a fun, spooky horror with some decent, hard hitting moments to put you on the edge of your seat for an hour and forty minutes, this movie will suit you perfectly.
Overall, I’m grateful for a fun, decent summer scare, and although not everything worked to a tee, the movie succeeds at pulling off a good story with some truly captivating elements.
