🔗 Share this article

The acclaimed actor may be the ideal choice for a bold horror film focused on the biblical figure, but not for the causes many viewers might assume. Truthfully, Cage does not actually act as the central religious figure in The Carpenter’s Son: his character is listed merely as The Carpenter. He is positioned as a father figure within this story, striving to maintain his faith as The Boy (portrayed by Noah Jupe), his now-teenage foster child, commences to display divine powers. The explanation it's challenging to envision any other major actor playing this part is that while the figure is weighed down with multiple trials, Nicolas Cage seems almost emotionally certain that the gloomy, grim small film is worth his time.

The Actor's Current Projects

Cage has been allocating those years more judiciously lately. He still stars in additional projects than most regular audiences could possibly view — as an illustration, were you informed that the actor has completed several separate frontier films recently? — yet he also adds high-profile A24/Neon gigs like Dream Scenario, another notable movie, and a further title. The Carpenter’s Son sounds like in that category, in that it’s genre-adjacent, potentially provocative, and handles a exaggerated description quite seriously.

Movie's Premise and Execution

Unfortunately, filmmaker Lotfy Nathan does not reward viewer engagement. The Carpenter’s Son opens in a interestingly wandering context, presented as inspired by an obscure religious text regarding the early years of Jesus. Cage's character, The Mother, and their child move from place to place, afraid of religious persecution or distrust about their son's strange powers. “Calamity follows us,” Cage sadly observes. It goes on as evil influences focus on the household where they currently live, initiating on that familiar Biblical temptation for the son.

At times, this production mirrors an demonic possession-type supernatural thriller, except that not one of the lead characters are clearly inhabited. Instead, they become progressively isolated from each other, as these powers infect a resident female (Isla Johnston, named “The Stranger”) who The Boy connects to, and presents everyone troubling visions of a bleak destiny. The Carpenter in particular struggles with his position within the plot, occasionally chastising his child he doesn't completely grasp.

Debate and Care

This material is prone to stir disagreement, and the director approaches it with much sensitivity — excessive, possibly. The concept of a teenage boy dealing with his eventual sacrifice and tempted by mysterious forces is certainly scary, but the filmmaker could be cautious about looking exploitative and eager to telegraph his goals, so he often withdraws to dimly foreboding cinematography. The roles constantly ponder — the singer-actress, who demonstrated genuine potential in another movie, surprisingly — cedes her acting to her character's costume, sometimes broken up by some gruesome scary visuals.

The Star's Performance and Film's Weaknesses

At the same time, Cage dabbles in exactly the kind of melodramatic acting that his ironic fans could be expecting. There is a moment (shown) in promotional material where Cage loses control and screams “My belief is broken!” If that kind of theatrical release is part of your Jesus-themed horror movie, possibly a more openly absurd style would make better use of Cage’s willingness to be extreme if needed. On the other hand, the film more closely resembles the poorer straight-to-DVD productions the actor filmed over that period — apart from the B-movies but rather the narrative films and supernatural thrillers that always sound promising, and usually have a few choice actor's highlights, but ultimately feel like, indeed, cheap home video fare.

Honestly, several of these, although simpler, were more entertaining in general. This is when I must violate my own dogma, not faith-based but professional: Long ago, a beloved editor persuaded me to banish words like “tedious” or “uninteresting” from my film-criticism vocabulary. Such terms convey little other than a individual and broadly stated restlessness, withdrawing from the job of vividly conveying the intellectual and feeling of viewing an individual production. It's hard to communicate tedium without seeming uninteresting personally. It’s no more expressive as labeling a movie “engaging.” “Elaborate,” essentially.

But I must confess, I felt uninterested for a large part of the film. On the positive side, it’s a churchy kind of dullness, not due to this movie is lecturing, but since it takes a kind of patient acceptance to watch it. At some point early on, the movie settles into a cyclic tempo of simmering distress, and never really