Movie Review: ‘Heretic’ Challenges Our Faith

Directors: Scott Beck, Bryan Woods
Writers: Scott Beck, Bryan Woods
Stars: Hugh Grant, Sophie Thatcher, Chloe East

Synopsis: Two religious women are drawn into a game of cat-and-mouse in the house of a strange man

Finally, a mainstream movie about religion that dares challenge viewers on their preconceived beliefs, religious or otherwise. In Heretic, writing/directing duo Scott Beck and Bryan Woods use Mormonism as a framing device to criticize not only religion but how we have deluded ourselves that ‘believing’ in a figure designed to control every aspect of our lives will reward us in any way. I say this as someone who is a confirmed catholic (this was accomplished after following a three-year program at the Church) who progressively rejected religion when beginning to study how spirituality is frequently misinterpreted for personal and monetary gain. One could say I’m a lapsed catholic. However, truth be told, I remain fascinated by the relationship religion has in art and cinema as an experience of pure enlightenment when directors imbue their films with spiritual imagery as signifiers or embellish a miraculous moment on screen. 

Oscar-hopeful Conclave looks to be the religious film of the year. However, it does absolutely nothing in exploring why religion, and in this case, Catholicism, corrupts the soul when scripture is perverted for one person to be fully rewarded by controlling others in making them ‘believe’ in things that don’t exist. Director Edward Berger takes a rather incurious stance on electing a new Pope and the conspiracies that arise when Cardinal Lawrence (Ralph Fiennes) begins to be far more involved than he should, ultimately sinking what could’ve been an incredible film. Add a baffling, soap opera-lite final twist in the movie, and you’ve got a movie that people who have never stepped foot in a Church will laud, while others more critical of the religion and have experienced time inside will have a disparate opinion on. 

With Heretic, Beck and Woods see the traps Edward Berger deliberately fell into with Conclave and transcend their religious discussion into a confrontation on society’s position on Earth and their innate beliefs of their place in this world. It’s in that vein where we discover Sisters Barnes (Sophie Thatcher) and Paxton (Chloe East), Mormon missionaries of the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-day Saints on their way to convert Mr. Reed (Hugh Grant) to their religion. Immediately, one knows Mr. Reed isn’t to be trusted – his house door has a timed lock, and his wife is noticeably absent even if the missionaries have rules to follow for the conversion to be enacted. Even worse, the host has made several uncomfortable comments that challenged them on the nature of belief and Mormon faith.

One such comment occurs at the top of the movie, where Mr. Reed discusses polygamy, which was practiced by leaders of LDS in the 1800s as, according to one of its fundamentalist leaders, Joseph W. Musser in Celestial or Plural Marriage, “a proper marriage system” that “leads towards God’s plan and disavows that of Satan.” This belief is still perpetuated – and practiced – today by many adherents of the Mormon faith. 

The details of Reed’s explanations are accurately illustrated, showcasing the fundamentally broken belief in which religion is based on: control. You can ‘believe’ all you want, but when a ‘prophet’ of God tells you to do something, you must obey His commands. If someone like Musser states (and by deliberately misinterpreting spiritual texts) that polygamy is supported, then adherents of the faith must follow suit and control the lives of themselves and others through this practice that the Bible itself has properly condemned. This isn’t belief, and it’s what Reed attempts to expose to the two followers of Jesus Christ who blindly follow the teachings of their leader without question. He does it sickeningly, sure, but they will likely have a far different perception of what religion does to people when they are done interacting with Mr. Reed. 

Deliberately paced, Beck and Woods spend the first half of Heretic assuredly building tension through a three-handed conversation between Mr. Reed and the two missionaries. What’s most impressive about these scenes isn’t necessarily Grant’s incredibly chilling turn as a man who wants to ‘test’ ideals of belief or Grant and East’s palpable chemistry as two innocent devotees wrestling with what their ‘belief’ means but in Chung-hoon Chung’s indelible photography.

Known for his collaborations with Park Chan-wook, Chung’s juice has unfortunately lost itself in making a sea of corporate gunk for a cheap buck (i.e., the supremely ugly-looking Obi-Wan Kenobi, Uncharted, and, most recently, Wonka, among others). But in Heretic, he’s in complete control of how his camera guides the story and characters and reveals crucial parts of the frame that immediately posit a different atmosphere than the conversations were leading into. It begins with symmetrical images worthy of his contributions to Park Chan-wook (think specifically of The Handmaiden) until it gets more elaborate.

One such instance occurs when Sister Barnes learns that the ‘blueberry pie’ Reed’s wife is cooking is actually just a scented candle. The camera swifts around the candle, never revealing what it says as Barnes turns the label to her face until it cuts to an extreme close-up of her reacting to what she’s now learned. Such an approach maximizes dread and pulls us further into the drama that, sadly, becomes less theological as it goes along. However, Chung always remains in control of its visual style, giving us enough to sustain our excitement, but never the complete picture until it is shockingly revealed.

It’s in that section, though, that Heretic began to lose me. The otherwise compelling conversation on what religion is and why the people who support it don’t realize what they’re enabling gets diluted in favor of cheap thrills that, while compellingly shot, aren’t as horrifying as the directors think they are. It’s one of those “bold swings” that, on paper, sounds tantalizing but is far more confounding than its initial proposition set up the movie. It does have its fair share of unexpected moments, especially in its conclusion, but it doesn’t delve deep into its horrific images the way it should execute it. 

And if its central message is on how religion controls, its final section seems to forego this altogether until it’s haphazardly brought back to twist the miracle of resurrection and the belief that there is life after death. The final scene certainly gives us hope that this could be attainable, but never in a spiritually-charged fashion. The best movies that challenge viewers on religion utilize images of spiritual power to vehemently reject what they convey. John Woo did so in The Killer by having its climax set in a Church (the place where hope and miracles are attainable), only for its protagonists to suffer the most cruel, crucifying fates.

Beck and Woods utilize plenty of religious paintings and references to how pop culture movies can be interpreted in a theological light but don’t have the courage to surpass this discussion further than what they introduce. However, they don’t fall into the traps of Conclave because they meaningfully give enough information for the audience to interpret what they are seeing on their own. It may lead to similar conclusions, but it at least deepens its study enough to have material that will make all of us think of our place in society amidst cults that basically perpetuate the same ideals that will never make its followers achieve something real from a spiritual, and personal perspective (Scientology is, of course, its worst offender).

As such, Heretic miraculously (pun intended) does what Conclave doesn’t and, in turn, becomes the defining religious film of 2024. It may not offer profound meditations on the questions it raises. Still, in an era of incurious filmmaking and criticism, it may be one that will turn the tide in favor of more religiously challenging films to hit our big screens. Plus, no generative AI was used in the making of this film (as bluntly stated in the film’s end credits), so this is a movie everyone needs to support. As a result, Beck and Woods should be thanked for championing human-made art. Here’s hoping for more of them in our theatrical ecosystem than any machine-made junk.

Grade: B+