James Wan explains why Malignant will be a divisive horror movie. Wan's directorial debut in 2004, the ultra-gory Saw, acted as an early breakthrough for the filmmaker. After that, he helmed horror films Insidious and The Conjuring, both of which went on to spawn lucrative franchises for Wan. In between some of these installments, Wan directed other franchise films like Furious 7 for Universal and the DCEU's Aquaman, both of which grossed over a billion dollars at the box office. Wan is now hard at work on the sequel, officially titled Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom.
For his next film releasing in theaters and on HBO Max September 10, Wan returns to his indie horror roots for a "hard-R thriller" made with old-school practical effects. Based on a script from Wan, Ingrid Bisu, and Akela Cooper, Malignant follows a young woman (Annabelle Wallis) tormented by visions of gruesome murders, which only worsens when she discovers what she is experiencing is, in fact, real. To maintain the film's indie aesthetic, Wan opted for a largely unknown cast in Maddie Hasson, George Young, Michole Briana White, Jake Abel, Jacqueline McKenzie, and McKenna Grace.
During a recent Q&A attended by Screen Rant and other outlets, Malignant director James Wan explained why his upcoming film might be divisive amongst audiences, comparing it to his previous horror works like Saw, Insidious, and The Conjuring films. Wan says Malignant is easily his "most violent and most gory film," which he thinks "is going to turn some people off," especially fans of his more mainstream horror movies. Read his full response below:
In a really weird way, when I made the first Saw film, they started labeling us with that torture porn label. And I became the guru of blood and gore and toruture, and all that stuff. And at the time, I felt it was very unwarranted, because I didn’t think Saw was that hardcore as everyone thought it was. So coming into Malignant, I actually think Malignant is easily my most violent and most gory film, so I know that part of it is going to turn some people off - the people that love my Insidious and Conjuring films, especially the more mainstream public and mainstream critics that like the more lower key and not so blood-and-guts-in-your-face horror filmmaking. But that wasn’t the movie I wanted to make Malignant. I’ve done that version; I’ve done Conjuring, I’ve done Insidious, and I didn’t want to repeat myself, and I wanted to do something that wasn’t a jump-scare horror film, but at the same time, also had a lot of visceral shock to it. And really, the whole movie is a buildup to this big revelation at the end. It’s not just “this person,” it’s more of how I showcase it. So people can either go along with how outrageous it can get or people can be turned off by it - at least that’s how I feel.
Since it was announced, Malignant has been highly anticipated as Wan's return to the horror genre for the first time since 2016's Conjuring 2. This excitement amongst horror fans was ratcheted up a notch when Wan began teasing the film as a "hard-R thriller" and it subsequently received such a rating from the MPPA. Wan also began billing the film early on as an old-fashioned, original horror film made practically, without the use of giant green screens.
Based on the trailers for Malignant, it seemed more like a psychological thriller given the main character's visions, but according to Wan, it won't skimp on the gore during these dream sequences, which eventually become reality for Wallis' unnamed protagonist. During its promotional campaign, Wan has made sure to differentiate Malignant from his previous horror movies and the claim that it's the most violent is the latest distinction he's made. If it holds up, Malignant will likely be another hit for the acclaimed horror director.
