एक अप्राकृतिक खतरे के रूप में एक उजाड़ घर के भीतर सुरक्षित दुनिया को आतंकित करता है।एक अप्राकृतिक खतरे के रूप में एक उजाड़ घर के भीतर सुरक्षित दुनिया को आतंकित करता है।एक अप्राकृतिक खतरे के रूप में एक उजाड़ घर के भीतर सुरक्षित दुनिया को आतंकित करता है।
- पुरस्कार
- 1 जीत और कुल 13 नामांकन
6.1109.6K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
vagueness disguised as mystery
An incredibly poor attempt at being mysterious that leaves questions unanswered and answers vague. A movie that leads viewers to form their own ending does not give me the idea of effort and creativity but a lack there of. Any sort of plotline or point of interest was mentioned once and then never again. They didn't follow through on anything. There was nothing to be afraid of because we were never told what to be afraid of. What comes at night? What is the disease and how do you get it? The characters got no development, the story got no development, it was all very surface level.
Cinematography was good though.
Cinematography was good though.
It doesn't come at night, or any time of the day for that matter
This movie doesn't fail to scare; worse, it blatantly doesn't even try.
I don't know if I'm more disappointed by movies that you can tell will be crap just by looking at the lighting and camera-work, or a movie that's actually pretty decent in terms of techy stuff and casting and acting and atmosphere and yet miserably fails to deliver. Yeah I think it's the latter. At least with cheap looking movies you know the risk.
If you look at this as a movie that explores "the human condition" or something like that, you might find some merit in it. However, it's advertised as a horror movie, which, by definition, needs to at least TRY to scare audiences. Such a disappointment.
All in all I'm just left wondering what the critics must have watched to give this such high scores. I'll think twice in the future before I watch something trusting Joel Edgerton's name.
I don't know if I'm more disappointed by movies that you can tell will be crap just by looking at the lighting and camera-work, or a movie that's actually pretty decent in terms of techy stuff and casting and acting and atmosphere and yet miserably fails to deliver. Yeah I think it's the latter. At least with cheap looking movies you know the risk.
If you look at this as a movie that explores "the human condition" or something like that, you might find some merit in it. However, it's advertised as a horror movie, which, by definition, needs to at least TRY to scare audiences. Such a disappointment.
All in all I'm just left wondering what the critics must have watched to give this such high scores. I'll think twice in the future before I watch something trusting Joel Edgerton's name.
Disjointed, confusing and unresolved.
I am a fan of post-apocalyptic movies and for the first 20 minutes this film shows promise, good visuals and mood. But then it crawls repeating the same shots and mild shocks until after the hour mark. At this stage you are left wondering when the real story is going to start. Plot elements are started but then abandoned. A little mystery is a good idea in this genre, it heightens the fear but at some point you need an actual narrative to draw it all together.
The ending did force a climax but it seemed botched somewhat by the director so you are left wondering exactly what happened.
The biggest failing is I didn't feel interested enough in the characters to care enough about them during the attempted resolution.
I understand that the budget would have been small but that is no excuse. The camera work was fine. The frights were well done and the tension was well maintained but it gets boring when repeated. The actors did a good job though some were miscast. It was the writing and direction that let the story down.
For a better example of a post apocalyptic movie with a similar setting look at One Hundred Mornings.
The ending did force a climax but it seemed botched somewhat by the director so you are left wondering exactly what happened.
The biggest failing is I didn't feel interested enough in the characters to care enough about them during the attempted resolution.
I understand that the budget would have been small but that is no excuse. The camera work was fine. The frights were well done and the tension was well maintained but it gets boring when repeated. The actors did a good job though some were miscast. It was the writing and direction that let the story down.
For a better example of a post apocalyptic movie with a similar setting look at One Hundred Mornings.
Disappointing
This was beautifully created and a suspenseful setting but was deeply lacking in storyline. So little actually occurred that I was already confused 40 mins in. If it weren't for Joel Edgerton I would have shut this down 1/3 of the way in. It was confusing, incongruent and frankly a little boring. I patiently waited though and saw it through. Alas the climax was so disappointing I was in shock... and it didn't even happen at night!!! What the hell was coming at night??? Nothing came... even during the day. Not cool... not a horror film, barely a thriller, just a shame.
Feel-Bad Movie of the Year
Good grief, is this the feel-bad movie of the year or what?
A family of survivalists have holed themselves up in an isolated house in the wake of some biological incident, the details of which are left vague, but which has resulted in a virus that kills anyone who contracts it. When another survivor with a family stumbles upon them, they must then decide whether or not to turn their backs or extend a helping hand. It's a parable that examines where the instinct to protect oneself and those he loves ends and the impulse for basic human decency begins.
I guess I'd have to say that "It Comes at Night" was effectively done, because it left me feeling absolutely awful, and I had trouble shaking it. But I would also have trouble shaking the image of someone getting run over by a car -- no one would have to present it artistically for it to get to me. The final moments of "It Comes at Night" go places few movies dare to go, but it might make a viewer have to decide whether it's dramatically satisfying or cheaply manipulative.
Grade: C
A family of survivalists have holed themselves up in an isolated house in the wake of some biological incident, the details of which are left vague, but which has resulted in a virus that kills anyone who contracts it. When another survivor with a family stumbles upon them, they must then decide whether or not to turn their backs or extend a helping hand. It's a parable that examines where the instinct to protect oneself and those he loves ends and the impulse for basic human decency begins.
I guess I'd have to say that "It Comes at Night" was effectively done, because it left me feeling absolutely awful, and I had trouble shaking it. But I would also have trouble shaking the image of someone getting run over by a car -- no one would have to present it artistically for it to get to me. The final moments of "It Comes at Night" go places few movies dare to go, but it might make a viewer have to decide whether it's dramatically satisfying or cheaply manipulative.
Grade: C
Every A24 Horror Movie, Ranked by IMDb Rating
Every A24 Horror Movie, Ranked by IMDb Rating
A24 has produced some of the most memorable horror films of the 21st century. See which films ranked highest on IMDb.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाThe painting featured in the movie at the beginning is titled, "The Triumph of Death". It was painted by Pieter Brueghel the Elder, c. 1562, and is currently in the Museo del Prado in Madrid.
- गूफ़In one of the first few cutaways of Stanley barking into the woods you can see a person's arm slightly appear and then hide behind a tree again. This was more than likely a member of the crew there to enable Stanley's barking for the shot.
- साउंडट्रैकMake Total Destroy
Written by Misha "Bulb" Mansoor, Mark Holcomb & Spencer Sotelo
Performed by Periphery
Courtesy of Sumerian Records
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is It Comes at Night?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $50,00,000(अनुमानित)
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $1,39,85,117
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $59,88,370
- 11 जून 2017
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $1,97,35,344
- चलने की अवधि
- 1 घं 31 मि(91 min)
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.39 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें







