@mechajutaro said:

I'm not a huge horror movie fan (haven't seen one since 1408

Glad to have encountered you, so that whenever I get the hankering to bemoan my own aging I can think; "Dude, you're still a piker compared to Chess over at TNDB, who predates Columbus's first voyage to the Americas". Must confess, prior to reading your post, I was unaware that movie theaters existed as early as the 15th Century.

Such a wonderful sense of humour!

In relation to the original post...

• The kid is a kid. They tend not to follow rules... Are usually not particularly self aware... If you can't feel for a dead child, just because he made a stupid mistake, I don't think horror movies will be able to get you to engagge...
• Survival of the species. Life goes on. We reproduce in the face of adversity. This is intrinsic to humans as a species. This is not a luxury situation in a metropolise of a young woman choosing lifestyle over having a child...
• The girl cannot hear. She would not be able to judge when the water was loud enough relative to her voice or any noises she'd want to make... Also, was father son time 😉
• Candles give a cinematic look and nice mood. Health and safety regulations and codes are the least of their concerns 😂
• You're overthinking the kid's knowledge and rationale...
• They didn't have the luxury of running various scenarios past the creatures to test out this hypothosis, nor do we actually know what the creatures rationale is, nor how and why they behave as they do...
• The old man is one scenario... Another is that by teaming up with people you jncrease the number of casualties for every mistake of sound... Suspense and tension is easier to build when you have a few characters to focus on... Also, this is not a huge budget movie where they can have that large a cast 😉
• Yes. Pictures and lanterns are hanging.... so? In real life people have risky situations their houses all the time..
• Maybe to show off Emily Blunt's feet? 😁

It must be very dissapointing for you to watch most horror movies, thrillers, romance and probably sci-fi movies given this level of nit-pickery...

I'd suggest allowing yourself to suspend disbelief a bit more... It is fiction and the real world is just as messy, idiotic and inexplicable...

@Renovatio said:

In relation to the original post...

• The kid is a kid. They tend not to follow rules... Are usually not particularly self aware... If you can't feel for a dead child, just because he made a stupid mistake, I don't think horror movies will be able to get you to engagge...
• Survival of the species. Life goes on. We reproduce in the face of adversity. This is intrinsic to humans as a species. This is not a luxury situation in a metropolise of a young woman choosing lifestyle over having a child...
• The girl cannot hear. She would not be able to judge when the water was loud enough relative to her voice or any noises she'd want to make... Also, was father son time 😉
• Candles give a cinematic look and nice mood. Health and safety regulations and codes are the least of their concerns 😂
• You're overthinking the kid's knowledge and rationale...
• They didn't have the luxury of running various scenarios past the creatures to test out this hypothosis, nor do we actually know what the creatures rationale is, nor how and why they behave as they do...
• The old man is one scenario... Another is that by teaming up with people you jncrease the number of casualties for every mistake of sound... Suspense and tension is easier to build when you have a few characters to focus on... Also, this is not a huge budget movie where they can have that large a cast 😉
• Yes. Pictures and lanterns are hanging.... so? In real life people have risky situations their houses all the time..
• Maybe to show off Emily Blunt's feet? 😁

It must be very dissapointing for you to watch most horror movies, thrillers, romance and probably sci-fi movies given this level of nit-pickery...

I'd suggest allowing yourself to suspend disbelief a bit more... It is fiction and the real world is just as messy, idiotic and inexplicable...

Great responses!! I felt terrible for the little boy in the beginning because he is just a kid and a very young kid that no matter how many times you tell him something is sooo serious he won't understand. I thought the girl being deaf was pretty obvious as to why she couldn't go lol 🤣

@Renovatio said:

It must be very dissapointing for you to watch most horror movies, thrillers, romance and probably sci-fi movies given this level of nit-pickery...

I love sci-fi (due to it's very off-set bacground), was a fan of romance but thrillers and especially horrors I can't bear - the sheer level of illogicality and stupid is simply too much (yes, I was forced to watch this 'production')

@chessu said:

I'm not a huge horror movie fan (haven't seen one since 1408), but this premise sounded interesting enough and having John and Emily in it sealed the deal. Sadly, it didn't live up to the expectations; the suspense just didn't hold for me. Here's a few things that annoyed me about it, maybe some of you agree:

• The kid in the beginning - I get that he is a kid and this situation is new, but surely if everything around you is still and silent and you have probably been told many times that you will die if you make a noise - and he still goes on to play with the toy? I found it hard to feel sorry for his death. And why wasn't he allowed the toy without the batteries in the first place. It was like day 9 or something and he is only little, the fact that there was little to no supervision on him in a possibly noisy shop just didn't make sense
• The wife getting pregnant - it's unlikely they ran out of condoms already, so the kid was probably somewhat planned to 'replace' the one who died. Yes, they took all the precautions they could, but how incredibly risky is it for the wife and the entire family to bring a child to this Earth!? As bad as it sounds, the greater good and more sensible thing would've been to terminate the pregnancy (there was a shop with pills, there would've been SOS there somewhere). I mean she will have to endure a lot pain, the kid will cry, there are no doctors around for if anything goes wrong etc.
• Why wasn't the girl allowed to go along? The mother didn't seem to miss her at all in her activities. And why would the husband go just two weeks before the due date in incredibly risky conditions.
• Candles in an underground room with no additional air supply?
• So apparently they can talk/make noise if something noisier is nearby - yet they decide to live and spend their days in the middle of nothingness rather than the waterfall. And this seemed news to the boy - how? The kid was aware of the fireworks plans aka what is louder takes precedence
• The creatures hate sound - surely it would be logical to assume that sound might be their weakness and that's why they hate it. In general, even after 1.5 years of living with them, there was no real precautions against them other than 'don't make noise'
  • There seemed to be no logic in their comings. They can't see yet they came for the kid after the sound had ended yet they specifically searched for Emily though she at that point made no sound
• Why didn't they try to team up with the other remaining people? Or was that what the old man screaming scene was supposed to be about?
• Even the plates are cloth, but then there are picture frames and lanterns hanging?
• I get the no shoes rule, but socks?

Everything you listed is only half of all the problems in this movie. There just isn’t any excuse for it either other than the movie was made for mindless entertainment.

I thought it was completely an irresponsible thing for the two adults of the film to do...try to have a crying baby in the midst of such a nightmare.

@NorthernLad said:

I thought it was completely an irresponsible thing for the two adults of the film to do...try to have a crying baby in the midst of such a nightmare.

Without such 'irresponsibility' we wouldn't have survived as a species as this was exactly ehat our anscestors had to deal with in the wild thousands of years ago...

@Damienracer said:

@Renovatio said:

@NorthernLad said:

I thought it was completely an irresponsible thing for the two adults of the film to do...try to have a crying baby in the midst of such a nightmare.

Without such 'irresponsibility' we wouldn't have survived as a species as this was exactly ehat our anscestors had to deal with in the wild thousands of years ago...

Yeah, I don't remember cavemen being hunted by sound addicted aliens I must've skipped that class.

This! All this...you can't compare what our ancestors went through to what the characters were facing in the movie.

@NorthernLad said: ...

This! All this...you can't compare what our ancestors went through to what the characters were facing in the movie.

Our ancestors had to face predatory animals in nature, most of which use thier superior sense of hearing and physicality to hunt.... Wolves, lions, etc... in the night... Anyone who has gone hunting or on Safari would recognise the dynamic...

Human life spans were short and we had to procreate more because of the hostile environment in order to ensure survival of the tribe... As is the case in the movie, jn a post society, post apocalypse world... It would be 'irresponsible' not to procreate...

I guess we have a different perspective on this...

@mechajutaro said:

I'm not a huge horror movie fan (haven't seen one since 1408

Glad to have encountered you, so that whenever I get the hankering to bemoan my own aging I can think; "Dude, you're still a piker compared to Chess over at TNDB, who predates Columbus's first voyage to the Americas". Must confess, prior to reading your post, I was unaware that movie theaters existed as early as the 15th Century.

"1408" is a movie, it is very well known. If you knew this and attempted humor, you failed. :)

@chessu said:

I'm not a huge horror movie fan (haven't seen one since 1408), but this premise sounded interesting enough and having John and Emily in it sealed the deal. Sadly, it didn't live up to the expectations; the suspense just didn't hold for me. Here's a few things that annoyed me about it, maybe some of you agree:

• Even the plates are cloth, but then there are picture frames and lanterns hanging?
• I get the no shoes rule, but socks?

Yeah, I had a lot of issues with this movie too... besides the first two-thirds being extremely boring.

But here is a factual mistake: That Ford Pickup's parking brake.

By seeing the hood and grille, that is a 1987 to 1991 Ford pickup. (And yes, it is a "grille" not a "grill" - I worked in a factory that molds and paints or chrome plates those things.) I knew of the hideous change to the front of the hood began in 1987 because my Dad had an 1986 F-150. And I did know that ugly front end ended in 91 or 92 and I checked, it ended with the 1991 model year. But that part doesn't really matter. I don't know about the really old ones, such as before 1978 or so, but none of them since have had a hand-operated parking brake in the middle of the floor on that transmission hump. Since the late 70s, and maybe earlier, the parking brake in a Ford pickup has been a foot-operated style with a hand operated release... both are way over to the left of all the other pedals. Anyway, I don't know why people make movies with such obvious mistakes. You don't have to be a Ford fan or a "car person" to not know this. It isn't like they didn't use one of the most common vehicles on the road.

Yeah, CinemaSins is going to have a field day with this one.

Oh, and the list you made isn't near complete...that said I enjoyed the film (and I don't agree that it's "mindless entertainment!" :)

@Daddie0 said:

Yeah, CinemaSins is going to have a field day with this one.

Nevermind...they already did! And only 72...not bad!

@tlm550 said:

But here is a factual mistake: That Ford Pickup's parking brake.

Congratulations! I believe you just won the internet with one of the most esoteric and tangential factual errors in movie history. Well done! :D

@chessu said:

I'm not a huge horror movie fan (haven't seen one since 1408), but this premise sounded interesting enough and having John and Emily in it sealed the deal. Sadly, it didn't live up to the expectations; the suspense just didn't hold for me. Here's a few things that annoyed me about it, maybe some of you agree:

• The kid in the beginning - I get that he is a kid and this situation is new, but surely if everything around you is still and silent and you have probably been told many times that you will die if you make a noise - and he still goes on to play with the toy? I found it hard to feel sorry for his death. And why wasn't he allowed the toy without the batteries in the first place. It was like day 9 or something and he is only little, the fact that there was little to no supervision on him in a possibly noisy shop just didn't make sense
• The wife getting pregnant - it's unlikely they ran out of condoms already, so the kid was probably somewhat planned to 'replace' the one who died. Yes, they took all the precautions they could, but how incredibly risky is it for the wife and the entire family to bring a child to this Earth!? As bad as it sounds, the greater good and more sensible thing would've been to terminate the pregnancy (there was a shop with pills, there would've been SOS there somewhere). I mean she will have to endure a lot pain, the kid will cry, there are no doctors around for if anything goes wrong etc.
• Why wasn't the girl allowed to go along? The mother didn't seem to miss her at all in her activities. And why would the husband go just two weeks before the due date in incredibly risky conditions.
• Candles in an underground room with no additional air supply?
• So apparently they can talk/make noise if something noisier is nearby - yet they decide to live and spend their days in the middle of nothingness rather than the waterfall. And this seemed news to the boy - how? The kid was aware of the fireworks plans aka what is louder takes precedence
• The creatures hate sound - surely it would be logical to assume that sound might be their weakness and that's why they hate it. In general, even after 1.5 years of living with them, there was no real precautions against them other than 'don't make noise'
  • There seemed to be no logic in their comings. They can't see yet they came for the kid after the sound had ended yet they specifically searched for Emily though she at that point made no sound
• Why didn't they try to team up with the other remaining people? Or was that what the old man screaming scene was supposed to be about?
• Even the plates are cloth, but then there are picture frames and lanterns hanging?
• I get the no shoes rule, but socks?

I agree with everything you stated. This movie was awful, yet it got a lot more praise than Bird Box which I thought was superior, since many compare the two movies.

I agree the kid getting killed in the beginning did nothing for me just showed me how stupid he was.

The old man screaming and getting killed was pointless. Did the old man not know he was supposed to be quiet? Or was it more suicidal since he no longer wanted to live? No one cared that he died either.

I'll even be so bold as to say I didn't even care when John Krasinski died either he's not a good actor at all, Emily Blunt is a powerful actress but John just doesn't sell me at all. So when he martyrs him self off to save his kids I was like so cliche and boring.

What gets me is they are already making part 2. Who the F wants to see part 2 when barely anything even happened in part 1????