I've been blindly trusting RT scores for a long time now, but I think I need to find another source. Their scoring system seems flawed anyways (a critic review counts as "fresh" as long as they don't think the film was a total bomb).
I wouldn't necessarily characterize this as a bomb, but it was so empty and felt so incomplete. Like I had just watched a few snippets of a movie.
I am a fan of psychological thrillers, and I don't need to "see the monster" to be scared. But what you DO see still needs to scare you or make you feel something, and I just found what was onscreen so incredibly hollow. I lost count of all the "it was just a dream" scenes and jump scares.
If you're going to make a movie about an apocalyptic world where there's a strange virus, you better actually have something to say, because it's been done before a million times in way more interesting ways.
Un film, une émission télévisée ou un artiste est introuvable ? Connectez-vous afin de créer une nouvelle fiche.
Vous souhaitez évaluer ou ajouter cet élément à une liste ?
Pas encore membre ?
Réponse de J
le 16 juin 2017 à 20h15
It seemed like the most thrilling moments of the film turned out to be dream sequences. There was maybe one other scene where they go to get food and the strangers family but it was over so quick. There was a brief standoff at the very end.
Réponse de tmdb43737777
le 16 juin 2017 à 20h17
Thanks for the details. My excitement is fading and I won't waste my time on it.
Réponse de theburbs
le 16 juin 2017 à 22h02
Maybe watch it if it ends up on Netflix or rent it. Some people seem to really love it. I just wish I hadn't paid $14 to see it!
What I don't appreciate is the people who enjoyed it saying things like "You just didn't understand it" etc. No, I understood it just fine. I still thought it was boring and stupid.
I didn't read up on it much before going into it, and I don't think I even saw a trailer. I chose to go in blind and decide for myself, and I guess that doesn't always work out.
Réponse de theburbs
le 17 juin 2017 à 18h27
Exactly.
Réponse de tuffysmom
le 18 juin 2017 à 13h26
I agree; tremendously overrated. Talk about a movie without a pulse . . .
Réponse de thebarnman
le 21 juin 2017 à 03h58
I think you decided just fine. You saw it and decided you didn't like it. I too never saw a trailer for it, checked it out and decided I liked it a lot better than "47 Meters Down" (2017.)
Réponse de gilknut
le 30 août 2017 à 09h30
Rotten Tomatoes has been broken for years. No reason to use anything but Metacritic; a much more reliable tool.
That being said; this movie actually has fairly high praise from a large number of media outlets. Why, I can't figure out for the life of me. Yes, it's very well acted. It seems very convincing and authentic. But at the end, nothing at all has really happened apart from aimless, miserable, slow-moving tragedy. One review that actually said it all for me, was the San Francisco Chronicle:
"As a portrait of what it might be like after the whole thing collapses, after systems carefully designed over centuries give way to bad luck or colossal stupidity, “It Comes at Night” is pretty convincing. (...) There’s just one big problem here: 'It Comes at Night' is about as enjoyable for the audience as it is for the people in the movie. On both sides of the screen, misery reigns."
A true waste of time, IMO.
Réponse de DEzzNutz1001
le 4 septembre 2017 à 03h21
Not enough gore for your taste?
I guess a tale of what survival would actually be like after an apocalyptic event, it to boring for you.
The rest of you probably couldnt stomach seeing how you might act in such a situation, was this movie too real for you?
or was it the fact everything they did was for naught, and their was no traditional happy ending.
This was a decent flick, a nice slow burn, not some Hollywood shlockfest
Réponse de tmdb13060682
le 7 septembre 2017 à 21h10
Let me explain it again:
An 87% Rotten Tomatoes score means 87% of the reviews were positive. It doesn't mean the average rating from all critics is 8.7 out of 10.
This means 87% of critics posted on the site may agree that this is an incredibly flawed movie, but would still recommend people see it.
Réponse de thebarnman
le 7 septembre 2017 à 21h36
I understand from what you say 87% of the reviews (on Rotten Tomatoes) was positive. I don't understand why 87% of the critics would agree that the movie is incredibly flawed. But then again I didn't read the Rotten Tomatoes reviews.
Réponse de Tyler-A-Arse
le 19 février 2018 à 18h19
The movie sucked.
Réponse de JustinJackFlash
le 21 février 2018 à 22h46
Whoa, this film is getting some hate.
Calm down. Yeah, it's not the greatest film ever made. I do think the critics were going a little overboard. But I definitely didn't think it was a bad film. It's reasonably well made.
Réponse de Tyler-A-Arse
le 22 février 2018 à 10h41
The movie sucked.
Réponse de thebarnman
le 22 février 2018 à 13h50
Not only was this film well made; it put the viewer in a situation I feel is a much more realistic setting as to what could happen when compared to situations as portrayed in the Walking Dead. At the same time; nothing could prepare us for what might really happen if something like this was to really occur, and that's where the real horror lies.
Réponse de JustinJackFlash
le 22 février 2018 à 14h55
It certainly does. But I think that the reason I was a little underwhelmed was that because the film was such well worn territory it needed to be on to something truly incredible to stand out. After Walking Dead, The Last of Us, etc, etc I am quite tired of this scenario. What the film was on to was pretty good and reasonably tense and had it been released about ten years ago I would probably have liked it a lot more.