“I believe there’s another man inside every man – a stranger, a conniving man”. This early line of dialogue in Zak Hilditch’s “1922” sets the table for this simmering psychological horror-thriller. It taps into the mentality of the film’s fascinating lead character and lays the parameters for the mental chaos that follows.
You could call 2017 the year of the Stephen King adaptations. “It” stands as one of the top grossing movies of the year. “The Dark Tower” not so much. Then came the Netflix originals – “Gerald’s Game” and now “1922” which is based on 117 page short story published by King in 2010.
The story begins with a grizzled man writing what he calls his confession. The man’s name is Wilfred James (played by Thomas Jane in an eye-opening performance). He is a farmer from Hemingford Home, Nebraska and as he writes it becomes clear he is mentally frail and devoured by guilt. The bulk of the story is framed by his confession which takes us back via flashback to the events which led to his current state.
Wilfred’s farm consists of 80 acres passed down to him by his family. (In one very telling line he writes “In 1922 a man’s pride was his land”). His wife Arlette (Molly Parker) owns 100 acres of adjacent land willed to her by her father. She’s grown dissatisfied with farm life and wants Wilfred to sell their land and move to Omaha where she can pursue her dream of opening a big city dress shop. The tension between their perspectives becomes obvious and their teenaged son Henry (Dylan Schmid) finds himself caught in the middle.
“The conniving man” within Wilfred devises a plan to kill Arlette and manipulates Henry into helping by exploiting his son’s affections for a neighbor’s young daughter. In Wilfred’s mind he can cover every angle to keep his crime hidden. In another revealing line he writes “In those days a man’s wife was a man’s business”. But Wilfred can’t perceive every consequence of his actions much less how they will effect both him and Henry. And he certainly doesn’t anticipate the weight of guilt that pushes him closer to his breaking point.
Hilditch’s direction is a wonderful compliment to King’s biggest storytelling strengths – developing slow-burning tension and eerie, uneasy moods. “1922” leans heavily on atmosphere which is captured through Ben Richardson’s crafty camera and Mike Patton’s haunting score. Hilditch shrewdly utilizes both to suck us into this twisted nightmare of Wilfred’s own making.
But the biggest strength of the film lies in Thomas Jane’s standout performance. His stunning portrayal seems yanked right out of early 20th century middle America. Jane’s weathered, tanned face reveals a man who works the earth. But several other touches help give this character life. It could be something as simply as a squint of his eye or a draw of his mouth. It’s seen in his handling of small town period vernacular and his distinctive enunciations. It’s mesmerizing work that shouldn’t go unseen.
“1922” is a movie that gets under your skin. It maintains a menacing vibe from start to finish without ever relying on overused gimmicks or formulas. It may be a tad too slow for some, but its steady sense of discomfort and dread had me hooked. And then you have Jane who loses himself in the lead role and delivers a transformative authenticity that results in a character who is both disturbing and spellbinding. He’s very good as is this movie which nicely blends classic King with a nice touch of Hitchcock. That’s a really good recipe.
VERDICT – 4.5 STARS
Keith & the Movies 
Nice review Keith. I’m a big Stephen King fan but admittedly I have not yet read 1922 yet. Was meaning to do so before I watch the film, but it’s good to hear it’s solid.
How is the score? Mike Patton did the music, and Faith No More is one of my favorites bands. The soundtrack he did for The Place Beyond the Pines was astounding, so I’m sure it’s excellent.
It’s fantastic. As mentioned it’s utilized so well. It’s subtly haunting and bit devilish. It really fits well.
Nice one, man! This caught my eye the other day and I wondered if it’s worth the time. 4.5 from your good self has me very interested now.
Man I loved this thing and hope more people will check it out. It’s a slow boil but I found that to be a strength. And Jane, The guy is hypnotic. Talk about losing yourself in a character! I would love to hear what you think of it.
This blew me away how good it was. I think it was by far Thomas Jane’s best film and a top tier King adaptation. Great review
YES! So glad to hear from someone else who is seen this film. I feel it necessary to get the word out. I’m with you, I wasn’t expecting to be blown away. I’ve watched it twice now and Jane’s performance is mesmerizing.
I’m glad you liked it! I didn’t, I liked the story, just not the execution. Pretty disappointed about that.
Interesting. I’m curious, what did you not like about the execution? I loved it. I thought the slow burn worked well in a story of guilt and madness, sin and its consequences. Loved the way the camera and the score is used. It just worked really well for me.
Glad Thomas Jane got a role he deserved. He is just like Guy Pearce…
Oh man! He really gets a good role here. As for Guy, he may be the best actor to get such little respect. I think he is incredible but rarely does he get the attention he deserves.
Both were unlucky in casting, mostly. Have a look at Pearce’s role in Lockout (“Die Hard” is space, produced by Besson) – a classic example of how he alone can make it something exciting instead a mediocre B-movie. But that still makes me wonder who he does roles like that with his talent…
Oh yes. I’m pretty sure I reviewed Lockout. I enjoyed that one even though I realize I’m in the minority. It is goofy and cheesy but I think it’s intentionally over the top. So much so that I felt it was spoofing some of the old action movies and heroes. But to your point, you’re exactly right. It’s Guy who makes that thing work better than it had any right to.
I enjoyed Lockout too, so you are not in minority anymore! 😍
I had seen this pop up on Netflix and wondered whether to add it to my queue. Thanks for helping me make that decision. It’s definitely on the list now. Haven’t seen Thomas Jane in something in a long, long time
Oh man. I loved it. I’m hearing some say it didn’t work for them. They mainly point to it being slow and not necessarily scary. It isn’t a traditional horror flick. There is an eerie psychological edge to it. That’s what it focuses on and Jane kills it!
Great review! You liked this a lot more than I did… I think I was just disappointed after loving It & Gerald’s Game. 1922 was okay, though. 🙂
Oh I adored it. Didn’t find it particularly terrifying but I loved the psychological edge to it. And Jane blew me away.
I do love Jane… 🙂 Love The Mist!