Five years after an ominous unseen presence drives most of society to suicide, a survivor and her two children make a desperate bid to reach safety.
"Never lose sight of survival"
Popularity
28.4
Famous
User score
6.8 / 10
10,131 votes
A FEW PICS
3 USER REVIEWS
Gimly
1/20/2019
7 / 10
Kind of a _The Happening_ meets _A Quiet Place_, but better than the latter and **way** better than the former. Maybe I didn't get eeeeeeverything I wanted out of _Bird Box_ but I'm still on board. I know that I opened this up by saying the movie is very much like two other movies, but what I liked most about is honestly that it's unlike 99.99% of the horror genre, and that little variation was just what I needed today.
_Final rating:★★★½ - I really liked it. Would strongly recommend you give it your time._
***Well, at least it doesn’t have zombies***
A mass epidemic strikes Earth which makes people go crazy and commit suicide, but only IF they are not blindfolded and SEE the mysterious phenomena. A group of Californians find succor in an abode with covered windows. One woman (Sandra Bullock) and two children try to make it down a remote river to find sanctuary, blindfolded. Trevante Rhodes and John Malkovich costar.
“Bird Box” (2018) is a post-apocalyptic survival adventure/horror with an original concept and elements of flicks like “The Book of Eli” (2010), “The Mist” (2007), “Carriers” (2009) and “Stake Land” (2010). The reason for the apocalypse is what makes “Bird Box” standout and, thankfully, there are no zombies, yet it’s the least of these for a couple of reasons.
For one, I didn’t find the dramatic dynamics of the group all that captivating, but it was okay. If you’re a fan of Bullock you’ll probably like this movie more than me. I appreciated Rosa Salazar as Lucy, but her role isn’t that significant. Meanwhile Rhodes and Malkovich are effective.
The concept behind the mass crisis is where the movie fails. It’s sort of explained and yet it isn’t. There are too many inconsistencies and what appears to be plot holes. It’s basically a bunch of malarkey and reflects lazy writing. People on message boards debate back-and-forth ad nauseam, but the movie’s too nonsensical and meh to make it worth the effort.
The film runs 2 hours and 4 minutes and was shot in Southern Cal (Monrovia, La Puente, Santa Clarita, Smith River, Scripps College and Los Angeles).
GRACE: C
Decent watch, might watch again, and can recommend, at least as a one-off.
I have technical frustrations with this movie, but it's premise alone is interesting enough that anyone interested in survival style movies should watch it, though I'm not sure how many people are re-watching this.
The movie is cast very well: Sandra Bullock and Jon Malkovich, both wonderfully portray jerk characters in completely different lights, along side several supporting actors who all deliver adequately or better.
As most of the movie takes place inside a single house, they manage to keep things interesting there and vary up a few select locations, to include a city that is amazingly detailed in all the chaos unfurling and a river that is somehow both expanse enough you could feel lost and also claustrophobic in its restriction: it's a movie that presents very well.
My big qualm is the structure of the writing: not the writing itself. All the dialogue and story arcs are great, but the RIDICULOUS insistence on re-ordering a story and not benefiting from it is just annoying.
The second half of the story is interspersed with the first half of the story so you alternate back and forth. Really, who tells a story and jumps ahead 3/5 of the way, then back, then when you get to the 3/5 mark, not reiterate what is happening there.
I might watch this again, but I know I won't truly enjoy it until I finally take the time to edit into the correct order.
