By I remember watching the trailer for Drop back at New York Comic Con last year, then seeing Jason Blum, Christopher Landon (the film’s director), and Meghann Fahy (the film’s star) discuss what made the movie so interesting. I don’t remember much about that panel, but I remember the trio talking about the capabilities that technology has in establishing unique hooks for horror movies. In the case of Drop, the elevator pitch is pretty simple: what if there was a thriller where the villain is using air drops to hide in plain sight and screw with their victim?
It’s an interesting premise, and one that you can tell had a fair amount of effort put into it. Christopher Landon clearly put thought into finding a way to justify the whole thing, like setting Drop almost entirely in a restaurant to create a bottle movie, i.e., a movie set almost entirely in one environment. However, for each genuinely creative bit of planning the film has, there is also at least one moment that breaks your suspension of disbelief, leaving us with a movie that could have been a classic, but is instead more disappointing than not.
Drop
Director: Christopher Landon
Release Date: April 11, 2025 (Theatrical)
Rating: R
Meghann Fahy plays Violet, a single mother who is trying to put herself back into the dating scene. She’s a little bit nervous about it, to say the least, especially since her previous relationship was extremely abusive. Nevertheless, she’s been talking to a photographer named Henry (Brandon Sklenar), and the pair agrees to go on a date to a fancy restaurant. Upon arrival, Violet begins to receive air drops from a mysterious person inside the restaurant, who reveals to Violet that her son is being held hostage and that unless she does exactly what the person says and doesn’t draw too much attention to herself, her son will be killed. So begins a game of cat-and-mouse where Violet has to do whatever this person says while finding a way to get help and hopefully uncover their identity.
I’m always a fan of a good thriller, and at least at first, Drop satisfies. The premise is pretty simple, and setting the film almost entirely within a restaurant does help to limit things. We suddenly become hyper aware of every detail within the restaurant and immediately become suspicious of everyone inside of it as we try to determine who’s sending the drops. It does lay it on pretty thick about who the red herrings are, even at some points trying to paint her date as a suspect, even though it makes absolutely no sense to do so, but when it isn’t trying to think it’s more clever than it is, I found myself enjoying things.
I think one of the strongest elements of the film has to be Meghann Fahy. Most people may not be aware of her acting abilities outside of the second season of White Lotus or in last year’s highly underrated Your Monster, but she’s a solid actress who is able to take control of every scene she’s in. She does a great job of being able to hide the panic and fear on her face and masks it well through personal anecdotes that all sound believable. I wouldn’t call it a revelatory performance, but for a movie like Drop, it gets the job done.
Copyright: Blumhouse
That’s how I felt a lot about Drop for most of its early runtime – it’s getting the job done. It’s not creating a masterpiece, but it’s providing a simple little thriller with very few bells and whistles. The supporting cast is all fine and seems to be aware that they’re in a low-budget Blumhouse movie, so they’re having a bit of fun. Jeffrey Self hams it up playing a waiter in the restaurant on his first day. Reed Diamond plays a nervous man on a blind date that isn’t going well. It’s all very efficient at getting to the thrills of the situation as we watch Violet try to suss out who the culprit is.
While most of the film is very workmanlike, outside of Fahy’s performance, there are two other standout areas of the film. Whenever Violet reads the messages from her phone, the words appear as large text projected onto the environment. I can see how it can be distracting for some, with some viewers probably annoyed at how the text will pop up in different corners of the screen, but it’s a stylish move that’s at least better than constantly cutting to Violet looking at her phone. Then there’s the fact that the cinematography will suddenly get really good and artistic every couple of minutes. The majority of the shots will all be very standard and straightforward, but then there’ll be a single shot that has an unneeded amount of effort put into it that stands out not really because of how great of a shot it is, but moreso because of the effort that went into lighting and framing said shot.
All of the goodwill that Drop has going for it begins to disappear as the film goes on. Why? While the film does a good job of establishing its premise, it doesn’t really know how to sustain itself. We know Violet is being watched, so the film will alternate between two settings. Violet will either attempt to figure out who her tormentor is (and fail) or Violet will do what they say. It’s clear that Drop doesn’t want to reveal who its antagonist is, so it doesn’t really bother to lay out any clues for viewers to follow. A good thriller at the very least lays some bread crumbs for audiences to pick apart and determine the identity of its villain, but Drop doesn’t. Its focus is solely on seeing how Violet can escape from this situation, but with little variation from scene to scene, it just makes most of the film’s runtime boring.
Copyright: Blumhouse
And then there’s the revelation of who the villain is. A thriller, or mystery in general, lives and dies by this moment. Sometimes it’s a great twist that makes you eager to rewatch the film to see all of the clues you missed. Other times, it’s so glaringly obvious that it ruins the fun. Then there’s Drop, where the reveal makes sense on the surface, but falls apart under further examination. Sure, the film tries to explain why the person it decided to be its antagonist is the villain and what their motivations are, but then you start to question all of the little details surrounding it. How were they able to bug the restaurant? How were they able to accomplish what they did without detection? How do they have access to the security cameras to see what Violet’s doing?
There are just so many questions that are raised that the film handwaves away and the mental gymnastics that are used to try and explain why Violet was chosen to be this person’s target make a ton of leaps in logic that rely on information that the film didn’t relay to us, like the ultimate fate of her abusive ex-husband. If there were other lines of dialogue or reactions from certain characters that helped depict what the antagonist is talking about, then it probably would have resonated more, but because it’s so underutilized, none of what they said registered with me. Add in a dramatic final reveal that completely falls flat, and you have an ending that doesn’t quite ruin Drop, but it certainly makes it disappointing.
Drop is clearly a movie where Christopher Landon came up with the premise first, then wrote a movie around it. Again, as far as concepts go, Drop has a decent gimmick, but in trying to flesh the story out, logic becomes Drop’s biggest downfall. It’s still an okay thriller – I personally didn’t hate my time spent with it – but it’s a film that never manages to go beyond its premise. It delivers exactly what you expect from a thriller, so if you turn your brain off, you’ll probably enjoy yourself, but the more you think about Drop, the more you’ll probably dislike it.
