If “A Quiet Place,” the screenplay that put writers Scott Beck and Bryan Woods on the map, was a rather tight-lipped, high-concept monster movie in which characters rarely got to talk, their latest film, “Heretic,” which he wrote and directed, is quite the opposite. It’s a talky chamber piece of philosophical confrontations, sparring duels and wars of words, but the results remain just as harrowing.

But the danger of the “Infidel” is not something extraterrestrial – an alien from another planet – but rather the most common and mundane of earthly predators: a human.

The kind of man Beck and Woods are cast in the religious horror film effectively weaponizes the bemused British charm of Mr. Hugh Grant, who grins as he clumsily recites rom-com classics like “Notting Hill” and “Bridget Jones’s Diary.” and much more. The genius of his performance in “Heretic” is that his attitude in this horror movie is no different than other romantic comedies, just the nature of the conversation and what he wants to do with women is different.

The story begins with two young Mormon women on a mission to baptize converts. Savvy, street-smart and black-clad, Sister Barnes (Sophie Thatcher) is visually opposite the cheerful, outgoing Sister Paxton (Chloe East) in her demure pink cardigan. The two arrive at Mr. Reed’s (Grant) doorstep in remote Colorado one rainy afternoon because he has expressed his interest in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and even though they’ve done everything right, kept their wits about them, they still be in danger.

They only enter this strange and claustrophobic house when Mr. Reed promises that his wife will bake pies in the other room, but Mr. Reed draws them into his labyrinth using false promises and rhetorical exercises. At first, the girls are in danger of having to listen to one man’s wildly ambitious ideas about religion, philosophy, culture and, yes, pop music, which is terrifying in itself. For some women, everything that follows such torture pales in comparison. But since this is a horror movie, there are of course more pressing existential threats lurking behind doors one and two. The funny thing is that the designs Mr. Reed has in mind for these ladies are as derivative and unoriginal as his monologues, which is the point.

As his questions transcend taboos and boundaries, increasing Sister Barnes’ anger, cinematographer Chung-hoon Chung’s camera breaks free from stasis, switching between various degrees of close-up as the conversation progresses. The camera glides around the room like an invisible spider, circling and weaving the trio into a demonic web.

The scary part isn’t what Reed has in store for them, it’s that these young women already know how to calm and redirect the Bad Guy, how to “finish it off politely.” It’s nothing new, just more harmful. Although he believes that what he is explaining is radical and even insightful, his arguments are banal, his methods primitive, and explanations of his intentions even too predictable. Beck and Woods don’t need to imagine something alien when a wide variety of such predators are all so sneaky.

Moreover, although Mr. Reed presents himself as an intellectually superior theologian, embellishing his carefully choreographed arguments with props and theatrical flourishes, the script itself fails to capture him in the same sense. This is by no means a disdain for Sisters Barnes and Paxton, and the girls always have solid rebuttals at the ready; They are also careful, smart and cunning. First of all, they will have to outsmart him and prove that they can do it.

“Heretic” stands out on the strength of its performances: Grant’s charming aggression, Thatcher’s wary knowingness and East’s ability to show off the surprising powers of Sister Paxton under her girlish demeanor (a more complex version of her fiery Jesus freak in “The Fabelmans”). is a repetition). ). That Mr. Reed finds his match in these people-pleasing Mormon girls who are the victims he tries to manipulate, coerce, and dominate—that’s a satisfaction.

But since this is also a genre film, there are over-the-top visual metaphors, implausible twists, and an unfortunate dependence on coincidence. The mechanics of the plot don’t hold up well under scrutiny; it’s a shame that the dialogue, performances, and filmmaking artistry are so tightly woven and move in perfect harmony. The tension and the characters allow us to consider the flaws and weaknesses in the script, especially when the fight for resolution is so uphill.

A lesson in faith and morality gone awry, “Heretics” is a story of faith versus disbelief. If there is anything we can take away from this story, it is that faith is not bad or good, but is in the eye of the beholder. The only thing worth believing in is yourself.

‘Infidel’

• 3 stars (out of 4)
• MPA degree: R (for some bloody violence)
• Running time: 1:50
• How to watch: In cinemas on November 8