Daniel Goldhaber’s haunting, New Orleans filmed, “Faces of Death” is less a remake of the original movie from 1978, a pseudo-snuff documentary that plagued the curtained off rooms of video stores for decades, than it is a wholly immediate interpretation of a modern mechanized world gone mad with algorithmic zeal, where videos of murder are as commonplace as TikTok dances and just as popular. Growing up in the twenty-first century, death on our screens is not only a regular occurrence but expected, and manifests an emotional distance between us and the inhumanity of real violence. You see, Millennials didn’t need a “Faces of Death” to fascinate us; all we had to do was flip up our laptop screens and fall headfirst into a wonderland of blood, exploitation, and degradation. Videos of murders, fatal car accidents, suicides, and self-mutilations were shared for sport, hosted along the fringes of a wild west internet on websites like rotten.com or 4chan. Free from the context of who was being killed or why, literal children were daring themselves to grow desensitized to the horrors of their world, merely glimpsed on the nightly news, one click at a time. I remember distinctly being shown by a classmate Saddam Hussein’s execution, taken off a blotchy cell phone video, during an ordinary American History lecture. This was the internet, unregulated and unbound by the guide rails of good taste or sensitivity. Just as generations before us flocked to “Faces of Death”, so did we huddle around school-issued laptops to watch live decapitations. And while the impact of these unholy .mov files on the emotional state of entire generation can be debated, their effect on not just the making of “Faces of Death (2026)” but our modern media-obsessed culture is undeniable, where you are just as apt to find the video of a dead child half a world away as you are an ad for Old Navy.
“In my head, there’s a chart of graphic violence from growing up on the internet,” says Co-Writer Isa Mazzei, “For me, it starts with the 9/11 jumpers. I was really little but saw them on TV, and it was my first experience with this type of digital graphic death, the first person I watched die. Then from there it was these graphic beheading videos, these assassinations. And I think now, if you almost chart it, there’s this curve that starts exploding exponentially to where now, even if you’re not seeking it out, you’re going to see that content.”
“Faces of Death (2026)” follows a young woman named Margot (a fantastic Barbie Ferreira) who works a monotonous, mind-numbing day job at a social media start-up as a content moderator. Her job is to scroll through video after video, flagging content deemed inappropriate, ranging from violent threats to advice on how to put on a condom, and moving on to the next one without much thought. Her place is not to judge but to keep the content flowing and engagement up, feeding the gluttonous maw that is the social media industrial complex. But one day, she sees something that she can’t quite shake. A video of a decapitation, or what looks like one, with mannequins standing around a man shaking on his knees as ominous narration says that this is some sort of ritual from a far-off land, narration we learn was from “The Faces of Death”. Soon after, the man weeps as his head is summarily lopped off. If these are special effects, they’re damn good ones. Margot ultimately lets it slide, probably some student film looking for clicks. But the videos keep coming, over and over again, until she is certain that she is watching something monstrous. That monster, a lone wolf killer stuck behind a cellular store desk named Arthur, is in fact recreating sequences from “Faces of Death”, yet whereas the original film staged its beheadings, monkey brain feasts, and electrocutions with actors, he’s doing them for real and reaping the rewards of a gore-hungry public in the process.
“When we were approached for the movie, our first question was, what is ‘Faces of Death’ in 2026, and we realized it was everywhere,” says Director and Co-writer Daniel Goldhaber. “I think the thing we wanted to say is that this used to be this kind of cursed object that you couldn’t even get your hands on, and now it’s in your pocket anytime you want it to be. That says a tremendous amount about not just the way we live, but the things we accept and the ways that we are actually trying to connect, which I think is very dark.”
Holding the center of the film is Barbie Ferreira as a woman haunted by her own tragic past on the internet and desperate to unplug herself from a subculture that nearly ruined her life. Known mostly from her role in “Euphoria”, Barbie captivates from the opening frame of the movie as a character that it is not only easy to care for but also to understand. Her choices throughout, her desperation to find someone who might believe her story of an internet killer, are often counterproductive and actively place her in danger, yet are never misunderstood. This is a caring person looking to perhaps redeem some blood on her hands by any means necessary, whether that be risking her job by sneaking files that are off limits or blindly seeking the assistance of the internet to find the source of the “Faces of Death” killings. Throughout, Barbie’s performance never wavers in its commitment to the tears and the blood, the screaming and the righteous vengeance; crafting a hero that it’s easy to cheer and be concerned for, a potent combination and a key reason for the film’s effectiveness.
“One of the early things Barbie said to us was, ‘Oh, I was a weird kid on the internet. I get it.’, says Mazzei. “So all of those sequences where she’s using Reddit, and typing really fast, is because she understands this culture in a way that I think feels really true to our experience. She grew up in this world, and I think Barbie brought a lot of that to life in a way that feels very immersive and engaging, where the internet is a hyper-stimulating and engaging environment.”
On the flip side of the cosmic coin is Arthur, his eyes demonic behind red contact lenses hidden by a silk stocking and white mask, as he stalks and trusses up his performers for their blood-drenched finales. I was struck with similarities between his sadism and that of other cinematic killers; Dollarhyde from “Manhunter”, Frank Zito in “Maniac, or even Karlheinz Böhm’s voyeuristic camera killer in “Peeping Tom”. There seems to be an artistry to what Arthur is doing, and intent of purpose through his use of “Face of Death”, a diving board for his crimes and expression. He is essentially remaking the film in his own image, recasting the falsities of the original for a modern audience who respects authenticity. But, while the psychotic fandom common to the killers of, say, “Scream (2022) might draw apt comparisons, Arthur is far more complex and more vain than most killers of his ilk. In that way, keeping with the harsh reality of Goldhaber and Mazzei’s fantastic screenplay, he is most like internet killers from not too distant past; Elliot Rogers, The Dnepropetrovsk Maniacs hammer killers, or even the original school shooters of Columbine. Clout is their nectar, fame is their catalyst, and they will be granted the attention they so desperately require, no matter how many people have to be slaughtered in the process. And slaughter he indeed does, with a brutality that, much like the original “Faces of Death,” does not shy away from the emotional weight that death brings along with it. While many modern horror films have begun to shy away from killing off their casts, Goldhaber and Mazzei embrace the impersonal death of innocents as textually imperative and foundational to the whole point of the movie itself.
“Ultimately, what we wanted to talk about is the dehumanization of the internet, the way that we see people die on screens and forget that they’re real people,” says Mazzei. “So a really nice way to juxtapose that is to have characters that you genuinely care about, that you don’t want to die. Then you see that in contrast to how Arthur is treating them, which is, as a casting choice for algorithmic engagement.”
Filmed largely in New Orleans, “Faces of Death” proudly wears its Crescent City bona fides on its sleeve; as eager to show a company crawfish boil as it is a NOLA Brewing can of beer. Filmed right as industry-wide layoffs were shuttering soundstages across Louisiana, Goldhaber and Mazzei knew that they needed a decidedly American city to set their story and could not have been more delighted with the reception from the people, and specifically the crews, of New Orleans.
“New Orleans presented itself as a place that was advantageous for production, and it was an extraordinary experience,” says Goldhaber. “We loved our crew there so much. What’s really sad is that there are a lot of people that we worked with who are not working right now, and production has really dried up there. It’s so tragic because it’s the best crew I’ve ever worked with. They’re unbelievable, just such pros, such hard workers, and just so kind and fun. It’s just the best time. If we did a sequel to “Faces of Death,” it would be to go back to New Orleans, that’s for sure.”
“Faces of Death (2026)” is a film that has only grown in my estimation since its credits rolled; a hyper-interpretive, highly thrilling, social media blood fest that somehow sidesteps all the tropes you might come to expect from a similar premise. This is not especially surprising, as Goldhaber and Mazzei’s previous films (“Cam” and “How To Blow Up A Pipeline”) are equally as effective in their own introspective ways. For my part, “Faces” is their finest film yet, a slasher born from the empathy of good people and the inherent fascination of school children ignoring class to watch murder videos. Death’s face is ever changing, kaleidoscopic and legion; though I imagine its visage is far more reflective than we might care to admit, our own damnation regurgitated back upon us by our inherent need to gain dominion over our impending demise. It’s human nature, truly the most deadly face of all.
“Faces of Death” is playing at The Overlook Film Festival and The Broad Theater.
