Quantcast
Connect with us

Editorials

In Defense Of ‘Jennifer’s Body’

Published

on

Jennifer's Body

It’s been a while since I’ve defended a movie I’m passionate about so I thought it was high time I did it again. This time it’s the much-maligned Jennifer’s Bodystarring Amanda Seyfried and Megan Fox. Released in 2009, Jennifer’s Body was stripper-turned-screenwriter Diablo Cody’s much-anticipated follow-up to Juno, the movie that won her a Best Original Screenplay Oscar. On top of that, it was directed by Karyn Kusama, whose breakthrough film Girlfight won her nationwide acclaim (then Aeon Flux happened). The pedigree behind the film pretty much assured the film would be a success, both critically and commercially. Sadly, that was not the case. Jennifer’s Body was received poorly by critics (it stands at a 42% on Rotten Tomatoes and a 47 on Metacritic) and had a lukewarm domestic box office take of $31.5 million. I actually really like Jennifer’s Body. I don’t love it, but I’ve noticed myself liking it a little bit more every time I watch it. I don’t believe it deserves all of the hate it gets, and I’m here to tell you why.

I won’t go over the plot in detail since most of you reading this have probably already seen it, but in case you haven’t: the film centers around Jennifer Check (Megan Fox) and Anita “Needy” Lesnicky (Amanda Seyfried), two best friends (since their sandbox days) from completely different sides of the social spectrum. Jennifer is sacrificed by emo rock band Low Shoulder (led by Adam Brody) so that they can become famous. The catch is that they were supposed to sacrifice a virgin, which Jennifer most definitely is not (she’s not even a backdoor virgin!). Rather than killing her, she becomes possessed by a demon and must feed on young boys to stay alive. Needless to say, this tests her relationship with Needy, who is also working on her relationship with her boyfriend Chip (Johnny Simmons).

A major complaint with Jennifer’s Body is Diablo Cody’s script. Ultimately, I think this was because people were still experiencing Juno fatigue at the time of its release. Re-watching it this week I really didn’t find the dialogue that bothersome. For the dialogue, Cody-isms like referring to a vagina as a “front butt” or using the word “salty” to describe a hot boy aren’t particularly annoying to me, and the more I watch the film the more natural I find it. I remember seeing Jennifer’s Body for the first time in theaters and thinking that all of the dialogue felt awkward and forced (and a wannabe Heathers/Jawbreaker/Mean Girls), but I didn’t feel that way upon re-watching it. My what a difference 6 years can make! There are pop culture references aplenty in Jennifer’s Body, and most of them are completely random (Aquamarine, anyone?) so they definitely make the film feel a little dated, but overall I don’t think it hurts the film. Also, I’m completely ashamed to say that I refer to people as “lime green Jell-O” every now and then. Don’t judge.

Jennifer's Body

“She’s just hovering! It’s not that impressive!”

Critics claimed that it Jennifer’s Body was neither scary, funny nor gory enough. I don’t really agree with any of those statements. It has gore, but it’s not overtly gory. I don’t think it needs to be though. It has some scary moments, with the flashback to Jennifer’s sacrifice being one of them. The humor is subjective. I think Jennifer’s Body has several laugh out loud moments. But obviously, if you don’t like Cody’s writing, you aren’t going to find it funny. To give you an idea of my sense of humor: the Boston Market reference when Jennifer is devouring the rotisserie chicken cracks me up. I think “Do you know what this is for? It’s for cutting boxes!” is an ingenious line. I don’t care what anyone says. And I can’t deny that I laugh out loud every time I hear Fox scream “I am going to eat your soul and SHIT IT OUT Lesnicky!” in the pool scene. Not to mention the bit about needing a tampon when she gets impaled on a metal pole. These are things that I didn’t find that funny when I first saw the film, but I found myself  laughing uncontrollably this time around.

I need to get this out of the way before I continue: I don’t hate Megan Fox. I don’t necessarily think she’s a good actress, but I think she’s perfectly suited for this role. Essentially, she is playing a character that most people assume she is in real life (which may be the case, but I’ve never met her so I can’t comment on that). She plays a vapid bitch and it works here. I also think she handles Cody’s dialogue relatively well. It doesn’t come across any more forced than Heathers did in the 80s. She also has a really creepy grin. I think she was taking lessons from this guy:

Jennifer's Body

Amanda Seyfried took me by surprise in this movie. Her first scene is a bit jarring (especially if you are only used to seeing her in Mean Girls and Mamma Mia!). Her badass-ness comes across forced in the first scene of the film, but as the movie progresses she grows on you. By the end of the film I totally bought her switch in character. This is the movie that actually sold me on Seyfried’s abilities as an actress, though I think she is great in everything she’s been in.

The rest of the cast for this movie is insane. I can’t believe they got so many cameos but they did. Chris Pratt pops up for a hot second in the beginning, JK Simmons has two funny scenes (which he steals, obviously), Amy Sedaris and Cynthia Stevenson have thankless roles as concerned mothers. Kyle Gallner has a small role as a goth kid who decides to ask Jennifer out on a date at the wrong time (and I still think it was a missed opportunity not to play Cobra Starship’s “Chew Me Up and Spit Me Out” during his death scene. It was on the soundtrack for God’s sake!).

Jennifer's Body

What IS this?

I don’t have any problem with the plot or the direction it goes, other than the fact that the origin of Jennifer and Needy’s friendship isn’t really explained all that well. It is a very well-made film (there’s a great Carrie homage when the local bar burns down in which Needy follows a trail of fire on one of the beams on the ceiling) and doesn’t take itself too seriously. There are a few too-convenient plot developments, like how Needy can hear Chip screaming in the pool house when she is clearly too far away to hear him (and the pool house looks like a painted-on backdrop in the shot when she begins running to it), Needy finds out how to kill a demon a little too easily and for some reason she can telepathically detect when Jennifer kisses Chip.

Another thing to note that I think has been overlooked is that this is a horror film starring women that was also written and directed by women. With the exception of The Babadook, I can’t think of a recent film that can say that about itself. Jennifer’s Body has a lot to say about female relationships and friendships. The fact that Jennifer is actually the one who is jealous of Needy may be a bit on the nose, but it doesn’t stop it from being a reality of so many girls’ friendships. Of course the hot girl is actually deeply insecure and unsatisfied with her life. Of course she would want to steal (and kill) her only friend’s boyfriend just to feel better about herself. The moment at the end of the film when Jennifer actually gives up the fight once Needy rips the BFF necklace off of her neck is a really nice touch that I think gives a beautiful sentimentality to the film.

I realize my thoughts on this movie have been long-winded, so please excuse me (and my run-on sentences), but I’m very curious to know what all of you think. Have any of you found that, like me Jennifer’s Body grows on you the more you watch it? Or do you still loathe it and find it incredibly annoying? Let me know in the comments below!

A journalist for Bloody Disgusting since 2015, Trace writes film reviews and editorials, as well as co-hosts Bloody Disgusting's Horror Queers podcast, which looks at horror films through a queer lens. He has since become dedicated to amplifying queer voices in the horror community, while also injecting his own personal flair into film discourse. Trace lives in Denver, CO with his husband and their two dogs. Find him on Twitter @TracedThurman

71 Comments

Editorials

How ‘Weapons’, ‘Hokum’, and ‘Widow’s Bay’ Continue Stephen King’s Horror Legacy

Published

on

Unofficial Stephen King adaptations Weapons, Hokum, and Widow's Bay

After fifty years of continuous writing, Stephen King has become a genre unto himself.

The unrivaled Master of Horror made a splash in 1974 with his debut novel Carrie and has been terrifying readers ever since. Two years later, Brian De Palma brought this shocking story to the screen with an equally electrifying horror film that remains a genre classic and a prototypical example of “Good For Her” horror. This dual debut seemed to open the floodgates, unleashing endless waves of Stephen King films.

From the highs of Misery, Cujo, and The Shawshank Redemption to the schlocky fun of Cat’s Eye, Creepshow, and Children of the Corn, the last five decades have seen just about every notable horror creator take a stab at the author’s massive collection. 

In recent years, this singular subgenre has begun to burst at the seams, expanding to include Stephen King-esque fare. In 2016, brothers Matt and Ross Duffer debuted Stranger Things, a sci-fi series heavily inspired by two of King’s most famous books. The Netflix series remixes Firestarter and It by following a little girl with psychic powers and an intrepid group of kids on bikes who must battle an otherworldly foe and a sinister government agency. With its clever blend of modern effects and comforting nostalgia, this gateway horror series paved the way for Andy Muschietti’s It adaptation which remains the highest grossing horror film of all time. 

Four years later, Mike Flanagan would create Midnight Mass, a spiritual adaptation of King’s second novel Salem’s Lot. Published in 1975, the book sees a tiny New England town torn apart by a centuries-old vampire. Though Flanagan’s story is perhaps more tender, both iterations of the classic horror tale follow close-knit communities shaken to their core by the presence of an  ancient evil. 

In addition to these recent hits, 2025 was a banner year for the Master of Horror. Audiences delighted in six mainstream adaptations, including the massively popular It: Welcome to Derry which chronicles earlier cycles of the titular clown’s reign. With this boost to King’s cultural cache, it’s no surprise that we’ve begun to see more unofficial adaptations of the author’s work and horror creators who build their own unique castles in King’s creative sandbox. 

So what defines a Stephen King-esque story?

For the past fifty years, the prolific author has dipped his toes in nearly every subgenre from supernatural stories and grisly gore to western fantasy and science fiction. Including his vast catalogue of short fiction, King has tackled ghosts, demons, werewolves, zombies, aliens, mutants, and self-driving cars, not to mention bizarre monsters of his own creation. But what truly unites this vast array of horror is King’s focus on relatable characters. In his 2000 memoir/instructional text On Writing, the prolific author describes the amusement he finds in writing disparate characters, placing them in horrific scenarios, then exploring the ways they try to survive.

An unofficial Stephen King adaptation may take place in the author’s native New England — bonus points if it’s set in Maine — and reference his well-known heroes and villains. But what makes the King connection unbreakable is a character-driven story about average people who band together in the face of abject terror. 

Weapons Captures Small Town Stephen King

Creepy kid in nightmare vision from Weapons; Zach Cregger reteams with Roy Lee on Little One

Following his 2022 shocker Barbarian, Zach Cregger returned with Weapons, a sprawling story that begins in a doomed elementary school. On an otherwise ordinary day, Justine (Julia Garner) arrives at her desk to find that all but one of her students have disappeared. As the mystery grows increasingly violent, Justine and Archer (Josh Brolin), the father of a missing boy, find their way to the home of Alex (Cary Christopher), the class’ only surviving student. In some ways reminiscent of Salem’s Lot, Weapons swings wildly through the unfortunate town, introducing us to its flawed inhabitants as we watch their lives fall apart.  

Cregger’s setup nods to a pair of King short stories. Both “Suffer the Little Children” and “Here There Be Tygers” tackle monstrous presences in elementary schools, but as Weapons reaches its final act, Constant Readers may remember another Stephen King tale. Featured in his 1985 collection Skeleton Crew, “Gramma” introduces us to George, a little boy tormented by an aging witch. On an afternoon alone with his sickly grandmother, the frightened child gradually realizes that the imposing old woman has been waiting for an opportunity to cast a spell that will extend her own life by possessing his body.  

Alex finds himself similarly tortured by his aunt Gladys (Amy Madigan), a garish witch who orchestrates a desperate plot to sustain her own strength. Transforming humans into mindless weapons, Gladys has taken over Alex’s family home and lured his classmates to the basement. Holding them in a comatose state, she syphons off their energy to extend her own supernatural life.

Vastly different in many ways, both “Gramma” and Weapons hinge on a sinister witch who uses horrific magical spells to sacrifice the bodies of her vulnerable prey. 

Hokum Echoes The Shining and 1408

Hokum first scare is a doozy in exclusive clip

It’s nearly impossible to watch a film about a haunted hotel without thinking of King’s third novel, The Shining. This icy story follows Jack Torrance, an angry writer struggling with his sobriety and a shameful incident haunting his past. Accompanied by his wife and young son, Jack has taken a job as the winter caretaker for the Overlook, a haunted hotel situated high in the Rocky Mountains. Snowed in, Jack finds himself tormented by dangerous ghosts who amplify his greatest fears. 

Damian McCarthy’s Hokum follows a similarly troubled figure. Ohm Bauman (Adam Scott) is a surly writer who travels to the Bilberry Woods Hotel in rural Ireland to spread his parents’ ashes. Haunted by his own tragic past, Ohm finds himself trapped in the honeymoon suite, a decaying room that’s been permanently closed to protect visitors from a dangerous witch trapped within its walls. Visual nods to King’s text abound with woodcut figurines and an animated clock, mirroring ominous descriptions found in King’s text. 

Another terrifying sequence sees Ohm staring with horror at a closed door, the only thing separating him from the approaching witch. As the door knob slowly turns, Constant Readers remember Jack’s narrow escape from the ghostly woman in room 217. And Ohm’s popular Conquistador books directly reference King’s long-running fantasy series The Dark Tower which follows a gunslinger named Roland Deschain tasked with protecting the nexus of the universe. 

In addition to these thematic comparisons, Hokum bears striking resemblance to King’s terrifying short story “1408.” Collected in 2002’s Everything’s Eventual, the terrifying story follows Mike Enslin, a dejected writer who’s risen to fame penning essays about his adventures in haunted locations. Mike arrives at the Hotel Dolphin and bullies his way into the titular room, despite the manager’s dire warnings. McCarthy nods to this story with an ominously misplaced hotel room door, reminiscent of King’s entry to 1408, an unsuspecting portal that appears to move each time Mike looks away. 

However, McCarthy’s most direct reference lies in a minicorder Ohm uses to capture notes. Trapped inside the dreaded honeymoon suite, this device offers well-timed messages while sitting next to a decomposing corpse. Mike records his time in 1408 with his own trusty minicorder. Described for the reader, his tape has captured the man’s slow descent into madness as the room prepares to swallow him whole. With conclusions that differ wildly in tone, both Ohm and Mike find their lives irrevocably changed by encounters with the supernatural realm. 

Widow’s Bay Builds Its Own Version of Castle Rock

Betty Gilpin and Hamish Linklater in "Widow’s Bay," now streaming on Apple TV.

Katie Dippold’s Widow’s Bay has taken the idea of an unofficial King adaptation and turned it into an art form. The Apple TV series sees the residents of the titular island plagued by a curse that dates back centuries. Not only does the picturesque hamlet not accommodate wifi connections, those born on the island face certain death should they ever try to leave. Desperate to modernize the tiny town, Mayor Tom Loftis (Matthew Rhys) draws in waves of tourists just as a new cycle of terror begins. 

Blending horror with deft comedy, Dippold makes cheeky references to King’s body of work. Tom warns that, “there’s something in the fog,” reminding readers of King’s 1980 novella The Mist. And Loftis’ own stay in the town’s haunted hotel sees him tormented by the ghost of a murderous clown. We even spy a vintage King hardback peeking out of a local book trade box.

In many ways Widow’s Bay feels like a new iteration of the author’s Little Tall Island, a tiny village off the coast of Maine. In addition to the 1992 novel Dolores Claiborne and a handful of harrowing short stories, this quaint fishing village is also the setting for King’s 1999 teleplay Storm of the Century. Premiering on ABC primetime, this tragic tale follows a terrified group of islanders who batten down the hatches for a dangerous Nor’easter only to find a more sinister threat lurking within. 

Constant Readers may also be reminded of Castle Rock, the author’s favorite fictional town.

First introduced in the 1981 novel Cujo, the charming village becomes the star of Needful Things, King’s satire about consumerism. After several Castle Rock stories, we’re reintroduced to its residents as they gossip about the arrival of Leland Gaunt and the grand opening of his curio shop. Anything their hearts desire can be found in his varied inventory, so long as they’re willing to pay the price. Pitting cantankerous neighbors against each other, Gaunt ignites a wave of grisly violence by exploiting long-held resentments and feuds. 

The town’s only defense against this supernatural threat is beleaguered sheriff Alan Pangborn. Still grieving the deaths of his wife and younger son, Alan struggles to connect with his older child and pick up the pieces of his shattered life. Also a widower, Loftis struggles to raise his own restless son and explain the strange details of his wife’s tragic death. Attempting to unravel the island’s dark secrets, Tom is aided by quirky residents including a surly fisherman named Wyck (Stephen Root) and Patricia (Kate O’Flynn), an earnest Town Hall employee. King’s own novels feature many of these proactive alliances with disparate characters combining their strengths to overcome insurmountable odds. 

With Widow’s Bay renewed for a second season and Mike Flanagan’s Carrie series on the horizon, the future seems bright for new King adaptations, both spiritual and directly pulled from his catalogue. The prolific author also shows no signs of slowing down with two publications nearing release. His upcoming novel, Other Worlds Than These, is the long-awaited third Talisman book which teases direct ties to his Dark Tower world. Holly Forever will be a new installment of his crime series, offering a different kind of genre fare.

This embarrassment of riches spawning multiple worlds seems ripe for spiritual adaptation and will likely inspire horror creators for decades to come.

Kate O’Flynn, Stephen Root and Matthew Rhys in “Widow’s Bay,” now streaming on Apple TV.

Continue Reading