1922
Performance & Direction: 1922 Review
Last updated: February 16, 2026
Quick Verdict: Hit or Flop?
Is 1922 (2017) worth watching? According to our cinematic analysis, the film stands as a ABOVE AVERAGE with a verified audience rating of 5.9/10. Whether you're looking for the box office collection, ending explained, or parents guide, our review covers everything you need to know about this Horror.
Cast Performances: A Masterclass
The success of any Horror is often anchored by its ensemble, and 1922 features a noteworthy lineup led by Thomas Jane . Supported by the likes of Molly Parker and Dylan Schmid , the performances bring a palpable realism to the scripted words.
Performance Analysis: While the cast delivers competent and professional performances, they are occasionally hampered by a script that leans into familiar archetypes.
Final Verdict: Is it Worth Watching?
Story & Plot Summary: 1922
Quick Plot Summary: Released in 2017, 1922 is a Horror, Crime, Drama film directed by Zak Hilditch. The narrative crafts an atmosphere of dread and suspense, using psychological terror and visual scares. This summary provides a scannable look at the movie's central conflict involving Thomas Jane.
Story Breakdown
The horror unfolds through carefully crafted atmosphere and escalating dread. A simple yet proud rancher conspires to murder his wife for financial gain, convincing his teenage son to participate. Director Zak Hilditch uses both psychological terror and visceral scares, building tension through what's unseen as much as what's shown. The pacing allows for breathing room between scares, making each frightening moment more effective.
Narrative Structure
- Opening Hook: An unsettling prologue sets the ominous tone, hinting at the terror to come while establishing the rules of this world.
- Character Arc: Character development is present but somewhat formulaic, following familiar patterns without adding fresh perspectives to the genre.
- Climax & Resolution: The final act escalates the terror to its peak, forcing characters to confront the source of horror directly.
Ending Explained: 1922
Ending Breakdown: Directed by Zak Hilditch, 1922 attempts to tie together its various plot elements. The finale presents its approach to horror resolution.
The emotional climax centers on character transformation involving Thomas Jane, offering viewers material for post-viewing discussion.
Ending Analysis:
- Narrative Resolution: The story concludes by addressing its primary narrative threads, providing closure while maintaining some ambiguity.
- Character Arcs: Character journeys reach their narrative endpoints, reflecting the film's thematic priorities.
- Thematic Payoff: The ending reinforces the horror themes established throughout the runtime.
The final moments of 1922 reflect the filmmakers' creative choices, offering an ending that aligns with the film's tone and style.
1922 Real vs. Reel: Is it Based on a True Story?
1922 incorporates elements from real criminal cases. As a horror, crime, drama film directed by Zak Hilditch, it navigates the space between factual accuracy and narrative engagement for Thomas Jane's character.
Historical Context
The film takes creative liberties to enhance dramatic impact. Core events maintain connection to source material while adapting for theatrical presentation.
Creative interpretation shapes the final narrative, focusing on emotional truth over strict chronology.
Accuracy Assessment: 1922 adapts its source material for dramatic purposes. The film prioritizes thematic resonance over documentary precision.
Who Should Watch 1922?
Consider Watching If:
- You're a completist for Horror films
- You're curious despite mixed reviews
- You have low expectations and want casual entertainment
Box Office Collection: 1922
| Metric / Region | Collection (Approx) |
|---|---|
| Production Budget | $5.0M |
| Worldwide Gross | $2.9M |
| Trade Verdict | FINANCIAL DISAPPOINTMENT |
1922 Budget
The estimated production budget for 1922 is $5.0M. This figure covers principal photography, talent acquisitions, and visual effects. When accounting for global marketing and distribution, the break-even point is typically 2x the base production cost.
Top Cast: 1922
All Cast & Crew →
Where to Watch 1922 Online?
Streaming Hub📺 Stream on
Netflix1922 Parents Guide & Age Rating
2017 AdvisoryWondering about 1922 age rating or if it's safe for kids? Here is our cinematic advisory:
⏱️ Runtime & Duration
The total runtime of 1922 is 102 minutes (1h 42m). Ensuring you have enough time for the full cinematic experience.
Verdict Summary
Analyzing the overall audience sentiment, verified rating of 5.9/10, and global performance metrics, 1922 is classified as a ABOVE AVERAGE. It remains an essential part of the 2017 cinematic calendar.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is 1922 worth watching?
1922 is definitely worth watching if you enjoy Horror movies. It has a verified rating of 5.9/10 and stands as a ABOVE AVERAGE in our box office analysis.
Where can I find 1922 parents guide and age rating?
The official parents guide for 1922 identifies it as Not Rated. Our detailed advisory section above covers all content warnings for families.
What is the total runtime of 1922?
The total duration of 1922 is 102 minutes, which is approximately 1h 42m long.
Best Movies to Watch if you liked 1922
How 1922 Compares & Where it Ranks
Critic Reviews for 1922
Thomas Jane's accent might be pretty hard to understand, and the story is just a just a plot you've already seen put through the Stephen King's _Children of the Corn_ wringer, but that doesn't stop 1922 from being another Stephen King adaptation we can put in 2017's "Good" column, alongside _It_ and _Gerald's Game_ (and decidedly not alongside _The Dark Tower_). _Final rating:★★★ - I liked it. Would personally recommend you give it a go._
***There’s always another way than murder*** Two members of a corn-farming family in 1922 Nebraska commit a crime and get away with it, but do they really? Thomas Jane and Molly Parker play the parents while Dylan Schmid is on hand as the son, who’s about 15. Released in 2017, “1922” is a haunting crime drama/period piece with elements of horror, unsurprisingly based on a Stephen King story of the same name. The confined farm location, tone and even genre are akin to films like “The Messengers” (2007), “Husk” (2011) and “Signs” (2002). There’s also a nod to “Bonnie and Clyde” (1967). Thomas Jane should’ve gotten an award for his performance, as he literally disappears in the role and is unrecognizable. His farm hick accent is so thick I strongly recommend using the subtitles. The themes revolve around disloyalty, the danger of allowing hostility (hatred) to fester, the abuse of authority/manipulation and the power of conscience. The film runs 1 hour, 42 minutes and was shot, believe it or not, in Western Australia. Additional cast: Kaitlyn Bernard appears as the kid’s neighbor girlfriend and Neal McDonough her father. GRADE: B
This isn't so much a movie, as a stark - almost biblical - lesson on the reap and ye shall sow principle. Thomas Jane is unhappily married to Molly Parker. When she decides it is time to sell up their small ranch (complete with fields of tall corn!), he hits on the idea of disposing of her. He ropes in his 14 year old son Dylan Schmid and what follows is a rather beautifully shot story of retribution (divine or man-made) on the pair. This is more of a cross-thread of what happens to the two men dealing with the consequences, than a story with a narrative, and that is where the film really slows down to a rather ponderous grind. It was only ever a short-ish story from Stephen King so it was always going to be tough to properly string it out for 100 minutes and though atmospheric, it is really just a rather procedural plod of a film with little about the two men to engage sympathy. At times the imagery is graphic, but not in an especially potent way, and the dialogue seems to take for ever to make the point we have long guessed for ourselves much earlier. More of a moral message than a movie...
movieMx Verified
This review has been verified for accuracy and editorial quality by our senior cinematic analysts.
This analysis is compiled by our editorial experts using multi-source verification and audience sentiment data for maximum accuracy.
