When it comes to religious horror films, most stick to familiar themes. These films often feature demon possession, evil antichrist babies, and the devil influencing actions. However, few films address the actual fear of having faith in a religion, the uncertainty of believing in something possibly false, or the inner struggle of a crisis of faith.
“Heretic,” the latest film by Scott Beck and Bryan Woods, stands out by focusing more on religious aspects than traditional horror. This approach makes it unique within the genre.
Mr. Reed seems interested in their message. He welcomes them into his home, introduces them to his wife, who is baking a blueberry pie, and talks about his search for the true religion. However, once Mr. Reed leaves them alone, the two women begin to question their presence there.
They find no sign of Mrs. Reed, discover they are locked in the house, and realize that Mr. Reed seems to know more about their religion than they do. As they search for a way out, they must confront their faith and decide if they will leave with the same beliefs they had when they arrived.
Beck and Woods choose to focus on the religious questions in “Heretic” rather than on horror elements. At times, the film can feel like a basic introduction to religious issues, but it effectively addresses the hypocrisies within strict beliefs.
Still from the movie (YouTube)
The film seems more interested in challenging those with narrow viewpoints on “one true religion” rather than using jump scares or gruesome imagery. Beck and Woods also critique organized religion and those who believe they hold ultimate truths that others cannot understand. Mr. Reed presents his views from a position of authority, making it clear that he feels Barnes and Paxton cannot understand his perspective, though his own beliefs have flaws.
Hugh Grant, as Mr. Reed, gives a dynamic and unusual performance. He has recently excelled in villainous roles in “Paddington 2” and “Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves,” and his role in “Heretic” is a strong addition. The film knows that with Grant’s talent, it just needs to let him perform.
Grant enjoys tearing down the beliefs of the two missionaries, pointing out logical flaws, and engaging in a lively dialogue about faith. The film shines when Grant delivers long monologues, uses Monopoly as a metaphor for religion, sings Radiohead songs, and does a Jar Jar Binks impression. This role showcases everything one would want from a villainous Grant performance.
Thatcher and East provide a good balance to Grant’s performance. Thatcher’s Sister Barnes joined the church later, while East’s Sister Paxton is more deeply invested in what she has learned. Thatcher effectively counters Grant’s criticisms, while East’s character shows an interesting development. The film initially focuses on Sister Barnes, but as it progresses, East’s character becomes more surprising and interesting in how she maintains her belief.
Unfortunately, as the film continues into Mr. Reed’s house, the narrative begins to weaken. Initially, “Heretic” centers on a conflict of faith, with Grant’s performance and the film’s direction being effective. However, as the film delves deeper into the house, it becomes less compelling.
Grant’s role diminishes, and the screenplay begins to find more concrete answers and possible miracles. What started as a thought-provoking discussion shifts to less engaging ideas and presentations of faith. The film’s appearance also loses some appeal, as the warm, welcoming feel of Mr. Reed’s home turns into dark, barely lit rooms. Cinematographer Chung Chung-hoon films these later scenes like a typical horror movie, which diminishes the story’s impact.
Still from the film (Catchlight Studios)
“Heretic” offers a clever twist on religious horror with strong performances, especially from Grant. Although the film loses some of its impact in the final third, Beck and Woods’ approach to the genre is refreshing, finding the hypocrisies of organized religion in a way that is rare in mainstream cinema. And yes, Grant’s Jar Jar Binks impression is a highlight.
In the end, “Heretic” presents a thought-provoking look at the complexities of faith and belief. It stands apart from traditional religious horror by focusing on the tension between doubt and faith, rather than relying solely on jump scares or supernatural elements.
Beck and Woods have crafted a film that challenges viewers to think about the nature of belief, the contradictions in organized religion, and the dangers of rigid thinking. The film shines in its early moments, particularly with Hugh Grant’s impressive performance as Mr. Reed, where his eccentric and charismatic character steals the show. His dialogue, full of witty observations and sharp criticisms, highlights the film’s exploration of faith in a unique and entertaining way.
However, as “Heretic” transitions into more standard horror territory, it loses some of its initial appeal. The deeper the narrative ventures into Mr. Reed’s house, the more it becomes a typical horror film, leaving behind the intriguing discussions about religion and faith that made it stand out in the first place.
Despite its weaker final act, “Heretic” is a refreshing addition to the religious horror genre. It raises questions that go beyond the usual scares, and its willingness to tackle these issues makes it worth watching for those seeking a different kind of horror experience.
Television often features unrealistic elements, and one of the most noticeable is when characters with regular jobs live lavish lives. A prime example is how the characters in Friends manage their expensive New York City apartments and frequent coffee outings at Central Perk. How do the Friends characters afford such lifestyles? Let’s break down how they might have done it.
How Did Monica and Rachel Afford Their ‘Friends’ Apartment?
Monica (Courteney Cox) and Rachel (Jennifer Aniston) lived in a spacious Greenwich Village apartment, which was much larger than most apartments in that area. In reality, apartments in Greenwich Village are typically about 687 square feet, but Monica and Rachel’s apartment appeared to be around 1100 square feet on the show.
It had several bedrooms, a large living room, a good-sized kitchen, and a nice balcony. During the show’s run from 1994 to 2004, such an apartment would have cost about $2,000 to $3,000 per month in rent. Today, the cost would be around $5,000 to $8,500 per month.
So, how did Monica and Rachel manage to pay such a low rent? Monica explained in Season 4 that her grandmother was the original tenant and that the building was rent-controlled. Monica inherited the lease, which allowed them to pay only $200 a month.
Monica worked as a waitress and a chef, with an average salary of around $27,000 a year. Rachel, before becoming a fashion executive, worked as a waitress at Central Perk, earning about $12,000 a year. With their combined income, covering the low $200 rent was easily manageable.
Joey and Chandler’s Smaller Apartment on ‘Friends’
Joey (Matt LeBlanc) played Dr. Drake Ramoray but did not always have consistent acting jobs. Chandler (Matthew Perry) worked in statistical analysis and data reconfiguration, with an estimated salary of around $60,000 a year. Their apartment, though smaller than Monica and Rachel’s, still had a good amount of space.
It did not feature a large balcony, making it less expensive. The rent for their apartment was likely under $2,000 per month. With Chandler’s steady job and Joey’s occasional contributions, their combined incomes would have made the rent manageable.
Ross and Phoebe’s Rent on ‘Friends’
Ross (David Schwimmer) had a two-bedroom apartment. Despite having to pay child support, he managed to live comfortably due to his successful career as a paleontologist, earning about $134,000 a year. Ross was unique among the friends because he didn’t constantly have a roommate, making him somewhat more financially stable.
Phoebe (Lisa Kudrow) had a more challenging financial situation. She worked as a massage therapist and held various odd jobs, likely making around $10,000 a year. She mentioned splitting costs with her roommate, Denise, who was never shown on the show. Phoebe’s lifestyle seemed the least realistic, given her lower salary.
Still from Friends (Credit: Netflix)
In the 1990s, both rents and salaries were lower compared to today. This made it somewhat feasible for the characters to manage their expenses on smaller paychecks. Without the benefit of a rent-controlled apartment and the help of roommates, the Friends cast could not realistically afford their New York City lifestyles.
Although the show did not focus on financial realism, it created an aspirational image that resonated with viewers. Watching the show now may feel like stepping into a different, idealized era, but fans continue to cherish the characters and their stories.
The Friends characters’ luxurious New York City lives seem unrealistic due to their regular jobs. Monica and Rachel benefitted from a rent-controlled apartment, paying just $200 monthly. Joey and Chandler managed a smaller apartment, while Ross had a high salary, and Phoebe’s lower income made her lifestyle seem least believable.
Seasons 1-10 of Friends are available to stream on Max in the U.S.
