🔗 Share this article

The acclaimed actor may be the optimal selection for a bold horror film about Jesus Christ, though not for the motivations certain audiences could guess. In reality, Cage doesn't actually play Jesus in the new film: his character is credited simply as The Carpenter. He is positioned as the Joseph within this story, working to maintain his faith as the teenage character (portrayed by the young actor), their adolescent foster child, begins to display supernatural abilities. The explanation it's hard to envision a different major actor taking this character is that although his character grows stricken with multiple trials, the actor appears nearly emotionally confident that the murky, bleak feature is a valuable project.

Cage's Current Projects

Nicolas Cage has been spending that time more carefully recently. He continues to does more movies than most casual fans will ever see — for instance, are you aware that the actor has made several separate Westerns recently? — yet he also mixes in prestige A24/Neon gigs like Dream Scenario, another notable movie, and Longlegs. This new film sounds like in that category, in that it’s borderline horror, likely to stir debate, and takes a exaggerated premise in a earnest manner.

Movie's Premise and Execution

Regrettably, filmmaker the director does not justify viewer engagement. The Carpenter’s Son opens in a interestingly wandering context, positioned as drawing from an unknown scripture concerning the early years of Jesus. Cage's character, The Mother, and their child travel frequently, anxious of faith-based hostility or suspicion about The Boy’s strange powers. “Calamity follows us,” Cage sadly observes. This persists as dark forces focus on the household where they currently live, beginning on that familiar Biblical temptation for The Boy.

At times, this production resembles an demonic possession-type supernatural thriller, though none of the central roles are clearly inhabited. Instead, they are progressively isolated from each other, while these entities infect a resident female (Isla Johnston, credited as an outsider) who the son forms a relationship with, and gives all unsettling premonitions of a bleak destiny. Cage's role in particular struggles with his place in this story, at times chastising his child he can’t fully understand.

Debate and Sensitivity

This material is likely to court controversy, and Nathan approaches it with a lot of sensitivity — too much, perhaps. The concept of a young man dealing with his eventual sacrifice and tempted by mysterious forces is truly terrifying, but Nathan could be hesitant regarding looking exploitative and eager to signal his aims, so he often retreats into dimly foreboding cinematography. The roles continually reflect — FKA Twigs, who demonstrated genuine potential in another movie, of all things — yields her acting to her religious attire, at times punctuated by several disturbing frightening scenes.

The Star's Portrayal and Film's Shortcomings

Meanwhile, Cage dabbles in just the sort of overacting that his more snickering appreciators could be expecting. One scene (featured) in the trailer where he loses control and shouts “My belief is broken!” Should such of theatrical release is included in a Jesus-themed horror movie, maybe a more brazenly silly method would make better use of the actor's readiness to be extreme when necessary. Rather, the film more closely resembles the weaker low-budget productions the actor filmed during the 2010s — excluding the campy action films so much as the dramas and paranormal movies that typically appear interesting, and often contain several notable actor's highlights, but finally come across like, well, low-budget DTV material.

Honestly, a number of those, although simpler, were more entertaining overall. Here is where I must violate my personal rule, not faith-based but work-oriented: Previously, a respected mentor persuaded me to eliminate adjectives like “tedious” or “uninteresting” from my reviewing language. These phrases convey little except a individual and generically described impatience, disengaging from the job of clearly expressing the thoughtful and feeling of viewing a particular movie. It’s difficult to communicate tedium without seeming uninteresting personally. It's just as unclear as labeling a movie “interesting.” “Say more,” that is.

However, I admit, I grew weary for a large part of the film. To the movie’s non-exploitative credit, it’s a devotional type of stultification, not due to this movie is preachy, but since it takes a sort of obedient endurance to sit through it. After a while early on, the movie settles into a repetitive rhythm of ongoing suffering, and does not