Zach Cregger’s Resident Evil Movie: What He Must Avoid March 2026
What mistakes should Zach Cregger avoid in his Resident Evil movie? Based on my analysis of past failures and Cregger’s proven horror expertise, here are the five critical mistakes he must avoid:
- Don’t over-explain the virus
- Avoid the superhero trap
- Don’t try to set up a cinematic universe
- Resist fan service for its own sake
- Don’t forget the puzzle-solving element
When I heard that Zach Cregger, the mastermind behind 2022’s terrifying Barbarian, was taking on the Resident Evil franchise for a September 18, 2026 release, my reaction was a mix of genuine excitement and deep-rooted concern. As someone who’s been playing Resident Evil games since the original PlayStation era, I’ve watched Hollywood butcher this beloved franchise for over two decades. But Cregger’s approach—promising a horror-focused wilderness survival thriller that respects the games while telling an original story—gives me real hope. That said, there’s a minefield of potential mistakes he needs to avoid if this reboot is going to finally give fans the adaptation we deserve.
In my years of gaming and watching countless video game adaptations crash and burn, I’ve learned exactly what separates the successes from the failures. And with Resident Evil’s cinematic track record being what it is—six Paul W.S. Anderson films that progressively strayed further from the source material and 2021’s disappointing Welcome to Raccoon City—Cregger has both a low bar to clear and impossibly high expectations to meet.
| Critical Factor | Previous Failures | Cregger’s Opportunity |
|---|---|---|
| Horror vs Action Balance | Anderson films became generic action | Return to survival horror roots |
| Character Development | Alice overshadowed game characters | Original character with depth |
| Atmosphere & Pacing | Lost the games’ tension | Barbarian proved his mastery |
| Fan Respect | Ignored game lore repeatedly | Promises to honor source material |
Learning From Two Decades of Resident Evil Movie Failures
Let me be clear: I don’t hate the Paul W.S. Anderson Resident Evil films. I’ve watched them all, some multiple times, and they have their moments of B-movie charm. But as adaptations of one of gaming’s most iconic horror franchises? They failed spectacularly, and understanding why is crucial for Cregger’s success.
The Anderson Era: When Action Killed Horror
The first major mistake of the Anderson films was abandoning horror for action. I remember watching the 2002 original in theaters, and while it had some decent scares in the laser hallway and zombie encounters, it quickly devolved into a generic action film with zombies as window dressing. By the time we reached The Final Chapter in 2017, the franchise had become unrecognizable—all quick cuts, explosions, and superhuman stunts that bore no resemblance to the best Resident Evil games that defined survival horror.
Anderson’s biggest sin wasn’t just the action focus—it was creating Alice, an original protagonist who increasingly overshadowed every game character that appeared. Jill Valentine, Claire Redfield, Leon Kennedy, Ada Wong, and even Albert Wesker all showed up eventually, but they were reduced to supporting players in Alice’s story. As someone who spent hundreds of hours with these characters in the games, watching them play second fiddle to a Mary Sue protagonist was painful.
The Anderson films also completely abandoned the games’ carefully crafted lore. The Umbrella Corporation went from a pharmaceutical company with a dark secret to a cartoonishly evil organization trying to end the world. The T-Virus evolved from a bioweapon accident to… whatever convoluted plot each sequel needed. By the sixth film, the mythology was so tangled that even die-hard fans couldn’t explain what was happening.
Welcome to Raccoon City: Good Intentions, Poor Execution
When Johannes Roberts’ Welcome to Raccoon City was announced as a more faithful adaptation combining the first two games, I was genuinely excited. Finally, someone was going back to the source material! The film promised to capture the atmosphere of those classic horror games that defined my teenage years.
Unfortunately, while Roberts got some visual elements right—the Spencer Mansion looked great, and there were genuine attempts at recreating iconic game moments—the execution was deeply flawed. The character portrayals were inconsistent (Leon as a bumbling rookie was particularly jarring), the pacing felt rushed as it tried to cram two games into one film, and most critically, it wasn’t scary. Despite having all the right ingredients, it failed to capture the dread and tension that makes Resident Evil special.
The film’s biggest mistake was trying to please everyone while satisfying no one. It was too faithful for general audiences who found it confusing, but not faithful enough for hardcore fans who noticed every deviation. The result was a box office bomb that seemed to kill the franchise’s cinematic future—until Cregger came along.
Why Barbarian Proves Cregger Understands Horror?
If you haven’t seen Barbarian, stop reading this and watch it immediately. I went in completely blind based on word-of-mouth, and it was one of the best horror experiences I’ve had in years. The film demonstrates exactly why Cregger might be the perfect director for Resident Evil.
Master of Atmosphere and Pacing
What struck me most about Barbarian was Cregger’s command of pacing—something he specifically mentions appreciating about the Resident Evil games. The film builds tension masterfully, knowing exactly when to release it and when to twist the knife deeper. This mirrors the best moments in RE games, where you’re creeping through a hallway, low on ammo, health in the red, knowing something horrible is coming but not when or how.
Cregger also showed he understands how to shift perspectives and play with structure without losing the audience. Barbarian‘s three-act structure, each with a different protagonist and timeline, could have been a mess. Instead, it enhanced the horror by constantly recontextualizing what we thought we knew. This approach could work brilliantly for Resident Evil, where shifting perspectives and unreliable narrators are franchise staples.
Practical Effects and Creature Design
One thing that made me optimistic about Cregger’s RE film was Barbarian‘s creature design. Without spoiling anything, the film’s monster is genuinely disturbing—not through CGI excess but through practical effects and smart filmmaking that makes you fill in the worst parts with your imagination. This is exactly what Resident Evil needs: monsters that feel real, tangible, and horrifying rather than the CGI soup that plagued the later Anderson films.
Cregger also understands that horror works best when grounded in recognizable reality. Barbarian starts as a simple Airbnb mix-up before descending into nightmare territory. This gradual escalation—from normal to uncanny to terrifying—is pure Resident Evil. The games always started in seemingly normal locations (a mansion, a police station, a city) before revealing the horror beneath.
Five Critical Mistakes Cregger Must Avoid
Based on my experience with the franchise and analysis of what’s gone wrong before, here are the landmines Cregger needs to sidestep for his 2026 reboot to succeed.
1. Don’t Over-Explain the Virus
Every failed Resident Evil adaptation has fallen into the trap of over-explaining the T-Virus, G-Virus, or whatever biological MacGuffin drives the plot. The games work because the virus is mysterious and horrifying—we see its effects, not its molecular structure. Cregger needs to resist the Hollywood urge to have a scientist character deliver exposition about viral loads and mutation rates. Keep it simple: there’s an outbreak, people become monsters, survival is paramount.
In my experience playing through the entire franchise, the best RE moments come when you’re too busy surviving to care about why this is happening. The lore should enhance the horror, not replace it with pseudo-scientific technobabble.
2. Avoid the Superhero Trap
Alice’s evolution from security officer to psychic superhero killed the Anderson films’ horror potential. When your protagonist can punch through walls and dodge bullets in slow motion, zombies stop being threatening. Cregger’s wilderness survival approach suggests he understands this—Austin Abrams isn’t known for action hero roles, which is perfect.
The protagonist needs to be vulnerable, resourceful but not superhuman. Think about how terrifying Mr. X or Nemesis were in the games because you couldn’t really fight them—only run, hide, and survive. That power imbalance is essential to horror, and the moment your hero becomes too capable, you’ve lost it.
3. Don’t Try to Set Up a Cinematic Universe
One of modern Hollywood’s worst habits is treating every film as a launching pad for a franchise. The Anderson films increasingly focused on sequel setup rather than telling complete stories. Welcome to Raccoon City‘s post-credits scene teasing Ada Wong felt especially unearned given the film’s poor reception.
Cregger needs to tell one complete, satisfying story. If it’s successful, sequels will follow naturally. But trying to establish a broader universe before earning audience investment is putting the cart before the horse. Focus on making one great Resident Evil movie first.
4. Resist Fan Service for Its Own Sake
This might be controversial, but I’m glad Cregger isn’t using established game characters. Every previous adaptation has fumbled these portrayals because they’re trying to serve two masters: the character fans know and the story the film needs to tell. By creating original characters in the RE universe, Cregger can focus on telling the best possible story without worrying about whether Leon’s hair is right or if Jill would really say that.
That doesn’t mean ignoring the games entirely. Smart references—a typewriter save room, the right sound effects, familiar creature designs—can satisfy fans without derailing the narrative. Think about how authentic video game adaptations succeed by capturing the spirit rather than slavishly recreating every detail.
5. Don’t Forget the Puzzle-Solving Element
Something every RE movie has ignored is the games’ puzzle-solving DNA. Finding keys, combining items, and solving environmental puzzles aren’t just gameplay mechanics—they’re part of what makes Resident Evil unique. The satisfaction of figuring out how to progress adds to the tension and makes locations feel like real places with history and purpose.
Cregger’s wilderness setting offers perfect opportunities for this. Maybe the protagonist needs to restore power to call for help, or navigate using environmental clues, or improvise weapons from found objects. These problem-solving moments provide breathing room between scares while maintaining engagement—something Barbarian did brilliantly with its protagonist making increasingly desperate decisions.
What Success Looks Like: Learning From Recent Wins
The path to a successful video game adaptation has been clearly marked by recent successes. HBO’s The Last of Us proved that respecting source material while making necessary changes for a different medium can work brilliantly. The Sonic films showed that listening to fan feedback (remember that first trailer?) and course-correcting builds goodwill. Even Detective Pikachu demonstrated that embracing what makes games special rather than trying to “ground” them unnecessarily resonates with audiences.
The PlayStation Productions Advantage
One factor that gives me genuine hope is PlayStation Productions’ involvement. They’ve shown with The Last of Us and Uncharted (which, despite mixed reviews, understood its source material’s tone) that they protect their properties. Having them as producers means someone in the room actually understands what makes Resident Evil franchise decisions work or fail.
PlayStation Productions also brings credibility with fans. When I see their logo, I know the adaptation won’t completely abandon what makes the games special. They’re not perfect—Uncharted had issues—but they’ve shown more respect for gaming properties than traditional Hollywood producers.
The Horror Renaissance Factor
We’re living in a horror renaissance, and Cregger is part of that movement. Films like Hereditary, The Witch, X, and yes, Barbarian have proven that audiences want smart, atmospheric horror that doesn’t talk down to them. This cultural moment is perfect for a Resident Evil film that takes itself seriously as horror rather than action spectacle.
Modern horror audiences are sophisticated. They understand slow burns, appreciate practical effects, and reward originality. Cregger doesn’t need to dumb down Resident Evil for mass appeal—the mass appeal is already there for quality horror. The box office success of recent horror films proves that R-rated, uncompromising scares can be profitable.
My Personal Hopes and Predictions
After spending countless hours in the Spencer Mansion, Raccoon City Police Department, and every other iconic RE location, I have specific hopes for Cregger’s film beyond just “don’t mess it up.”
I want to feel that same dread I felt as a teenager, playing RE2 late at night with the lights off, jumping at every sound. I want resource management to matter—not just as plot convenience but as genuine source of tension. When the protagonist has three bullets and five zombies between them and safety, I want to feel that desperation in my bones.
I’m hoping Cregger’s “wilderness survival” angle means we’re getting something like the village section of RE4 or the forest areas of RE7—isolated, hostile, and utterly terrifying. The idea of being stalked through woods by bio-organic weapons, far from help, with limited resources? That’s pure Resident Evil DNA filtered through a fresh perspective.
The casting of Austin Abrams intrigues me because he’s not an obvious choice. He’s got an everyman quality that could work perfectly for survival horror. I don’t need another grizzled action hero or wise-cracking protagonist. Give me someone who’s genuinely terrified, making mistakes, barely surviving. That’s what made the early RE protagonists relatable despite their official “elite force” backgrounds.
The Nonlinear Structure Possibility
Cregger mentioned his love for nonlinear storytelling, and I’m fascinated by how this could apply to Resident Evil. Maybe we’ll see the outbreak from multiple perspectives, each revealing new information about what’s really happening. Or perhaps the film will play with time like Barbarian did, showing us the catastrophe’s aftermath before revealing how it began.
This approach could solve one of RE adaptations’ persistent problems: exposition. Instead of characters explaining the plot, we could discover it organically through shifted perspectives and timeline manipulation. Imagine starting with a survivor deep in the nightmare, then flashing back to show how they got there, with each revelation recontextualizing what we’ve seen.
The Bottom Line: Cautious Optimism for March 2026 and Beyond
As I write this in March 2026, we’re still over a year away from Cregger’s Resident Evil film hitting theaters. That’s plenty of time for things to go wrong—studio interference, reshoots, poor marketing decisions. But it’s also time for Cregger to craft something special, especially with the backing of Constantin Film (who’ve produced every RE movie) and PlayStation Productions.
What gives me the most hope is Cregger’s stated philosophy: he’s not trying to retell game stories because we already have those. He’s creating something new that honors what makes Resident Evil special. That’s exactly the right approach. We don’t need another failed attempt to cram game cutscenes into a film. We need someone who understands why those games scared us and can translate that feeling to cinema.
The fact that Cregger specifically mentions being “the biggest worshiper of the games” while also understanding he needs to do something different shows a maturity previous RE filmmakers lacked. Anderson thought making his wife a superhero was respecting the games. Roberts thought recreating iconic moments was enough. Cregger seems to understand it’s about capturing the essence—the pacing, the dread, the desperate survival—rather than the surface details.
If Cregger can avoid the pitfalls I’ve outlined—the over-explanation, the superhero protagonist, the franchise building, the empty fan service, and the puzzle neglect—while leveraging his proven horror skills and the current horror renaissance, we might finally get the Resident Evil movie the franchise deserves. After two decades of disappointments, I’m choosing to be cautiously optimistic. Because if anyone can crack this code, it’s the filmmaker who turned an Airbnb mishap into one of the decade’s best horror films.
The September 18, 2026 release date can’t come soon enough. Until then, I’ll be replaying the games, rewatching Barbarian, and hoping that this time, finally, someone gets Resident Evil right on the big screen. And if Cregger pulls it off? Well, that would be worth all the years of terrible adaptations we’ve endured. Sometimes you have to go through hell to reach paradise—a lesson every Resident Evil protagonist knows all too well.