Movies

Resident Evil finally feels like the game — because its star had never played it

Zach Cregger's reboot is the best-reviewed video-game film ever made. Its secret is a lead who came to Raccoon City as a stranger.
Camille Lefèvre
Add us on Google

The comforting myth about video-game cinema is that it takes a believer to break the curse — that only a director who has bled through the games can carry their dread onto a screen. Resident Evil, the first adaptation almost everyone agrees actually works, seems to confirm the fairy tale: its director is a devotee, and the reviews have crowned it the finest translation of the survival-horror form yet attempted. But the reason the film feels like the game sits somewhere the consensus keeps walking past — in the casting of a lead who, until the cameras rolled, had never held the controller at all.

Austin Abrams did not come to Raccoon City as a fan. He plays Bryan, a medical courier, and by his own account he had never played a minute of Resident Evil before the role found him. On paper that reads like a liability, the sort of detail a marketing department buries. In practice it is the film’s hidden architecture — and, read as a directorial decision rather than an accident, its sharpest one.

YouTube video

Zach Cregger has been open about what he was chasing: the slow, encroaching dread the games perfected, and a camera that behaves less like a witness than a player. Critics who have seen it describe exactly that grammar at work — a lens that sits behind Bryan and swings to look at what he looks at, shots that hold on a room until its full geometry resolves, as if a hand off-screen were nudging a joystick to survey the space. The arsenal escalates the way a save-file does, pistol giving way to shotgun giving way to something louder. This is authorship expressed as interface: Cregger builds the film’s form out of the game’s verbs, not merely its iconography.

And that interface needs a body that does not already know the map. Abrams gives it one. Variety’s Owen Gleiberman calls him “a winningly ordinary hero, not macho at all” — an actor who lets Bryan squeal in terror — and notes that he “seems a different actor” here; Consequence writes that he “owns it entirely,” his openness enlisting our sympathy before the monsters arrive. A lifelong player might have brought the swagger of someone who has already beaten the game. Abrams brings the opposite, which is precisely the sensation survival horror sells. The non-gamer becomes the ideal stand-in for the first-time gamer.

It fits the arc Cregger has been drawing since Barbarian and Weapons — a filmmaker who treats genre architecture as a trap to spring on the audience, and who trusts an ordinary face to absorb the horror on our behalf rather than a hardened one to shrug it off. Measured against the franchise’s earlier screen life, all glossed action and invincible heroines, the modesty of the gesture is the whole argument.

Released this autumn through Sony at a mid-size budget, the film has drawn the warmest notices any game-to-film has managed — better than nine in ten critics on the aggregators, the highest score the form has ever posted. That consensus usually rewards spectacle. Here it has been handed to restraint, and to a courier who is scared out of his wits.

The lesson the industry takes from it will probably be the wrong one: more games optioned, more fans installed behind the camera. The film quietly argues the reverse. To make the player feel the fear, cast someone who has never once been safe inside the game.

Tags: , , , ,

Add us on Google

Discussion

There are 0 comments.