🔗 Share this article

Nicolas Cage may be the optimal choice for a audacious horror film centered on Jesus Christ, though not for the causes many fans could guess. In reality, the star does not actually portray Jesus in the new film: his role is credited only as The Carpenter. Cage is positioned as a father figure within this tale, striving to maintain his faith as the teenage character (played by Noah Jupe), their teenage foster child, begins to display divine powers. The explanation it’s difficult to picture a different prominent performer playing this part is that while his character grows stricken with numerous challenges, Nicolas Cage appears practically moving convinced that this murky, grim little movie is a valuable project.

Cage's Recent Projects

Cage was using those years more judiciously in recent years. He yet stars in more films than the majority of regular audiences may ever watch — for instance, did you know that the man has made a trio of different cowboy movies recently? — but he also mixes in prestige critically acclaimed roles like Dream Scenario, Pig, and Longlegs. This new film appears to be in that category, because it’s genre-adjacent, likely to stir debate, and takes a campy-sounding premise with gravity.

The Film's Storyline and Direction

Regrettably, filmmaker Lotfy Nathan does not justify the audience's focus. The Carpenter’s Son begins with a engagingly rootless setting, positioned as drawing from an unknown scripture concerning Christ’s childhood. Cage's character, The Mother, and their child relocate from place to place, afraid of doctrinal intolerance or distrust regarding their son's mysterious gifts. “Trouble pursues us,” Cage sadly observes. It goes on as evil influences focus on them at their new home, getting a jump-start on that familiar Biblical temptation for the youth.

At times, the film resembles an Exorcist-style supernatural thriller, though none of the central roles are clearly inhabited. On the contrary, they become more and more distant from one another, as these entities affect a nearby girl (the actress, named “The Stranger”) that The Boy connects to, and provides all unsettling premonitions of a bleak destiny. Cage's role notably grapples with his position in this story, at times scolding the boy who mystifies him.

Discussion and Caution

This material is prone to invite debate, and the director approaches it with much delicacy — too much, maybe. The idea of a teenage boy facing his future martyrdom and tempted by unknown powers is truly scary, but Nathan may be cautious about seeming gratuitous and anxious to indicate his aims, therefore he regularly retreats into darkly ominous cinematography. The roles brood incessantly — the singer-actress, who demonstrated genuine potential in a recent film update, surprisingly — cedes her acting to her Mother Mary cloak, sometimes broken up by several gruesome scary visuals.

The Star's Acting and Movie's Weaknesses

Meanwhile, Cage toy with just the sort of exaggerated performance that his ironic fans might be looking for. An instance (also included) in the trailer where Cage flips out and yells “I’ve lost my faith!” Should such of florid outburst is part of a biblical thriller, maybe a more brazenly silly method would take better advantage of Cage’s willingness to exaggerate when necessary. On the other hand, the film is closer to the poorer low-budget productions he starred in over the last decade — excluding the campy action films but rather the serious stories and ghost stories that typically appear interesting, and frequently include several notable Cage moments, but finally come across like, indeed, low-budget DTV material.

Honestly, a number of those, while less ambitious, were more entertaining in general. At this point I need to break my usual practice, not religious but work-oriented: Long ago, an admired senior convinced me to remove adjectives like “tedious” or “uninteresting” from my analytical lexicon. Such terms express scant except a individual and vaguely expressed lack of patience, avoiding the duty of clearly expressing the intellectual and sensation of watching an individual production. It's hard to express monotony without appearing dull personally. It’s no more expressive as labeling a movie “interesting.” “Explain further,” that is.

But I must confess, I grew weary for a large part of the film. To the movie’s non-exploitative credit, it is a churchy kind of boredom, not due to The Carpenter’s Son is moralizing, but because it demands a sort of obedient endurance to view it. At some point in the beginning, the film locks into a cyclic tempo of ongoing suffering, and does not