- Very creative and slick ideas throughout the entire flick
- Quite investing story despite its admittedly limited scope
- Offers an interesting mix of various genres and tones (for better and for worse)
- Daniel Radcliffe's performance is varied and very well acted
- Extremely inconsistent tone (for better and for worse)
- Some sudden explanations in the final act seem kind of forced
- Quite a few surprisingly weak performances by some of the supporting actors
- When (at a very specific moment) the movie suddenly decides to get very gory out of nowhere.
Despite not being consistent enough in its quality to completely call it a "good" movie, Horns is without any doubt one if not THE most interesting and bizarre movie that has come out this year.
Based on Joe Hill's acclaimed novel of the same name, what notably makes this movie so interesting and yet so flawed at the same time are most notably its tonal shifts. And though this leads to Horns often feeling like it has trouble deciding for a specific tone, this simultaneously results in the movie offering a vast variety of genres that it partially actually very well mixes together. From a fantastical teenager romance flick with a badass edge, over a depressing study about the human nature and character, to a full-on gory detective story, Horns somehow manages to include them all. And while many viewers might easily be off-put by this weird mix, this "flaw" is ultimately what makes Horns so unique.
What definitely is a "no-go" however, are the sub-standard performances by quite a few of the supporting actors, which become only the more obvious when they are put against Daniel Radcliffe's powerhouse performance as the protagonist Ig.
In the end, even if you ultimately won't be a fan of Horns, its creatively bizarre ideas and atmosphere alone will be enough to at least make it a very interesting experience for you.
Final Verdict: 6 out of 10