I know this is coming in pretty late reviewing Weapons as the film’s original release was in August. But I only got to watch it recently on HBO Max here in the Philippines. I did say in my review of the movie how I believe Weapons is a “one and done” deal. It’s not something I’m really interested in watching it again. But I still did.

I didn’t re-watch it because I had a great yearning to. Rather, I re-watched Weapons because there were some things that bugged me. If you must know, I have a habit of dissecting a movie and noticing the little niggling problems it has. These are usually very inconsequential questions that stick out in my mind. And Weapons had a bunch of them. So much so I needed to see it again to check if I missed anything. I didn’t.

By the way, these inconsequential questions will ultimately deal with specific plot points and scenarios. So, I will be putting up the mandatory SPOILER warning here. You have been warned.

So, here are five inconsequential questions I have after watching (and re-watching) Weapons!

#1 Who is the kid doing the narration?

Like I said in my review, the biggest reason why I wanted to watch Weapons was the premise. A bunch of kids in the middle of the night simultaneously ran out of their homes and into the darkness. All of that was mentioned during the first trailer by a little girl. Intriguing! Shut up and take my money!

But who is the little girl doing the talking? The disembodied voice only shows up at the start of the film and the end of the film. They never introduce who this little girl is in the middle of the story. There is a possibility that it was one of the kids from Justine, Julia Garner‘s character’s, class. Then again, it’s probably now as she wouldn’t be able to explain what happened afterwards.

I also have a bone to pick with this kid. She mentions at the start how the kids ran out in the middle of the night and “they never came back”. Well, that’s a blatant lie! She even comes back in the end and tells how all of the kids have been returned to their parents! So, I need to know who she is so I can sue her for false advertising!

Speaking of Julia Garner’s character…

#2 Who rang the doorbell and knocked on the door of Justine’s home?

Near the start of the film, we are introduced to Julia Garner’s character, Justine. As almost every kid from her class were involved, the townspeople are quick to blame her. After the town meeting, she shuffles back to her home (after buying two bottles of vodka). She’s obviously paranoid as it does seem as if the entire town is out to get her. She gets rattled when someone rings her doorbell but she doesn’t see anyone. As she turns her back, someone then knocks very loudly on her door, rattling her even more. This is when she sees her car painted with “witch” on it.

But who was the one who rang her doorbell and knocked on her door? We do find out later it was Archer, Josh Brolin‘s character, who painted “witch” on her car. At the very least, it’s very heavily implied. But I can’t imagine him being the one pulling those kinds of pranks on Justine. He seems like a very straight and narrow kind of guy.

He’s someone who’s not really afraid of confronting people, which he does several times in the film. I can see him painting the word on the car. Like I said, it was strongly implied at the very least. Even so, I cannot picture him sneaking up to Justine’s house, ringing the doorbell and then sneaking behind the bushes, giggling to himself as what a glorious gag he pulled. Then, when that doesn’t work, he then knocks loudly on her door, diving into the bushes just so he can see Justine’s reaction on her face when she reads what he wrote on her car. It just doesn’t work for me so it couldn’t be him.

Speaking of Archer…

#3 Why was there an AR-15 with a clock in Archer’s dream?

Archer, Josh Brolin’s character, is really determined in finding out what happened to his son. In fact, he’s been examining the Ring^tm camera video of that night for a month. He eventually gets the bright idea of using his footage to determine his kid’s path. He also tries to get the footage of the other Ring^tm camara videos from other parents in the hopes of finding out their travel path. Can’t really imagine why the police didn’t think of this but, whatever. Anyway, before all of that, Josh Brolin’s character has a dream about that fateful night. He chases after his son and sees a gun with a clock during this dream.

But what was that all about? I get the clock. I’m guessing that time has been burned in his brain ever since that night. But the AR-15? There was never a hint that a gun, much less an AR-15 was used that time. Archer doesn’t even seem to be a gun nut as well. I mean, he was never shown carrying even a pistol. So, why would he be dreaming of a big gun?

I guess the simplest explanation is his brain went there because of the situation reminds him of school shootings. And in these school shootings, it usually involves this kind of weapon. I’m no fancy psychologist but that’s the best explanations I can come up with. Besides, it’s a dream and they don’t usually make a whole lot of sense anyway. Heck, writer/director Zach Cregger himself explains he himself has no idea what it’s supposed to mean. If the guy who penned the story doesn’t know what it’s supposed to symbolize, what hope do I have of figuring it out?

Speaking of Ring^tm cameras…

#4 There weren’t any other footages of the kids running across town?

As I mentioned, Archer managed to figure out the general direction where the kids ran. Justine then noticed that the two paths converge in Alex’s house, the kid from her class who didn’t vanish. That’s very simple detective work but it was effective as the two of them eventually find the kids. And they did it using only two Ring^tm cameras.

But why just two? I get Josh Brolin’s character didn’t have access to every camera. He had to persuade another family to watch other footage. But wouldn’t the police be able to get access to the Ring^tm camera footage? Heck, wouldn’t they be able to get all of the camera footage from all the places? Let’s even assume the small town didn’t have street cameras. There would be other places with cameras from things like ATMs, convenience stores, liquor stores, etc. Other homes with camera should have filmed a bunch of kids running down the street. Yet, the police were never able to determine the massive coincidence all of the missing kids were running towards Alex’s home?

The only explanation for this would be there weren’t other cameras that captured the kids running on that night. How the heck would that be possible? Like I said, even if you eliminate any street cameras as this is a small town, other homes should still have been recording through their own security cameras. I can’t think of any other explanation why the police would’ve overlook this!

Speaking of Julia Garner and Josh Brolin’s finding out about Alex’s home…

#5 How was Aunt Gladys able to cast her bewitching spell on John Brolin’s character so quickly?

I will give credit to Zach Cregger as he did a good job of detailing how Aunt Gladys’ bewitching spell is done. First, you need a magical branch from a magic tree. Then you get an object from the person you want to take control of and wrap it around said branch. You then use the thorns of the branch to cut yourself with it. Afterwards, wrap a strand of hair of your intended target around the same branch. You then ring a bell to activate the bewitching spell. When you want the “weaponized” person to attack, simply break the branch in two. To deactivate the “weaponized” person, drop the broken branch in a bowl of water. Don’t worry; you can reuse it as long as you have a strand of hair of another person.

So, it’s definitely a process and not really something you can do very quickly. I mean, that assuming you have to follow the directions. And I would think the order of these directions is important or else the spell could backfire.

So how was Aunt Gladys able to “weaponize” Josh Brolin’s character so quickly?

I get she was able to grab Josh Brolin’s dog tags so she does have an object of his. But are you telling me she was able to wrap it around the branch, cut herself with it, tie Julia Garner’s hair around the branch and then ring a bell without Josh Brolin’s character stopping her? This is a guy who should have his adrenaline pumping after escaping a battle to the death! Getting surprised by an old lady is fine. But him not able to subdue her before she did all of that seems ludicrous!

Speaking of the “weaponized” people…

BONUS: Why didn’t Josh Brolin’s character and the kids not do the Naruto run?

The ending has Aunt Gladys getting her just desserts. In a sequence I (and many others apparently) found positively hilarious, Alex manages to do a spell of his own. He essentially “weaponizes” the captured kids to hunt down and literally tear apart Aunt Gladys.

But why weren’t they running all Naruto style like they did when they were initially bewitched? Heck, why didn’t Josh Brolin’s character run towards Julia Garner’s character with his arms behind him? I mean, when Aunt Gladys “weaponized” Marcus, he ran all Naruto like?

I guess it can depend on who casts the spell. The kids didn’t do the Naruto run because it was Alex that bewitched them. Still, this doesn’t explain why Josh Brolin’s character just casually strolled upstairs to try to strangle Julia Garner’s character. He should’ve ran after her like a bat out of hell. The only explanation I can think of is Zach Cregger explained to Josh Brolin how he wanted him to run after her. Then Josh Brolin said, “Are you crazy? That looks stupid!” and promptly shut him down.

Still, I would’ve loved to see Josh Brolin do a Naruto run, wouldn’t you?

What other inconsequential questions popped into your head after watching Weapons? Let me know in the comments section below!