Films that divide the public are always interesting to study. Usually, these are films that deviate from the norm and do something unexpected. The risk makes people either really love it or really hate it, with not a whole lot of middle ground. These films can serve as great conversation starters and are intriguing as viewers are curious as to which camp they will fall in.
Highly divisive mainstream films come around at least once every couple of years and are usually talked about all over social media. They tend to be on the artistic side, a little weird and offbeat. Often they will play with story structure or have some kind of "alternative" element that appeals to some and turns off others. Because there's so much that can be done with darker stories, a lot of these films fall under the dark drama or horror category.
The world of film is so expansive that more and more movies are falling into this divisive category, where whether they're well-received or not falls a lot more on personal taste. What's maybe a little surprising is that horror's most mainstream director of the 2000s is responsible for this year's most divisive horror film. James Wan is responsible for huge franchises like Saw and The Conjuring Universe, and big-budget movies like Aquaman. His latest movie is his first non-franchised film since the first The Conjuring, and it's making waves.
Malignant was released in early September in cinemas and on HBO Max. It tells the story of a woman named Madison who has visions of people being horribly murdered, and soon realizes that these crimes are actually taking place in real life. There are still a lot of signature James Wan traits in this movie, but it's definitely a departure from the more serious and mainstream horror films he's normally tied to. While some are absolutely loving how different it is, others are finding it to be one of the worst films of the year.
Criticism of Malignant completely makes sense, because it is so campy and cheesy. It's not really scary at all, though there is some extensive gore and serious topics touched on. The movie is, to be honest, pretty stupid. The story is weird, the camerawork is odd, the score is jarring, and the dialogue is beyond strange. But what makes that appealing to a lot of people, is that it knows that it's dumb and it doesn't take itself all that seriously. It's not "so bad it's good" in the way that films like Sharknado are, but it's asking viewers to just have a good time in the same kind of way.
Many who like Malignant have pointed out that it's supposed to be the way it is because it is an ode to the Giallo genre. Giallo films are an Italian genre of horror mostly popular in the 1970s. They're typically a whodunnit crime thriller, with a lot of gratuitous violence and a distinct-looking villain. There are other characteristics of a Giallo that are kind of hard to put into words because they just have a really specific tone and vibe. The characters in these kinds of films always feel kind of strange and unnatural and the score generally confuses the audience as well. They're often weird and cheesy, and a lot of fun in a bit of a gruesome way. Malignant might not be a straightforward Giallo film, but it has a lot of characteristics of one and certainly succeeds as an homage. However, just because it nails its intent, doesn't mean everyone is going to love it.
Many of those in the hating Malignant camp in part blame false advertising. The trailer did not portray a campy, cheesy, and silly Giallo flick. It portrayed a very serious and very scary horror movie, similar to other James Wan works. When the movie turned out to be completely different from what was advertised, it was confusing and disappointing. There are a lot of reasons why it might have been advertised that way, whether it was to look more mainstream in hopes of making more money or perhaps it was to surprise everyone with what the film was really like. Either way, it didn't seem to work out well because a lot of people who saw the trailer hated the movie, and a lot of people who loved the movie never watched the trailer. If it was advertised as what it actually was, the people who didn't want to see that kind of movie probably just wouldn't have watched it.
What's interesting about this film is that the public can agree on what it is, but some really love it and some really hate it. It's a great example of how subjective the world of film really is, and also raises an important question: Are any movies actually good or actually bad? Even the world's most praised work of cinema has haters, and the most widely hated movie has fans. Film is a form of art and, just like all other forms of art, beauty is completely in the eye of the beholder.