IMDb RATING
4.6/10
5.3K
YOUR RATING
A woman in her third trimester of pregnancy is stalked by a stranger who is obsessed with her unborn child.A woman in her third trimester of pregnancy is stalked by a stranger who is obsessed with her unborn child.A woman in her third trimester of pregnancy is stalked by a stranger who is obsessed with her unborn child.
Featured reviews
I won't sit here and give you the dramatics "worst film I've ever seen" or "a piece of trash", but I will tell you it is immensely bad. To give the film some credit, it does look nice, there are a few thrilling moments, and Laura Harring is incredible as the villain. However, that's about it. What we have here is a movie that is glossy, but shallow.
Our main character is played by Rachel Nichols, who is very uneven in her performance. There are moments I thought she was great, and others that I felt she didn't pull off. Her weaknesses are made more apparent by the stellar performance Harring gives. And, being honest, Harring is given a far more interesting character. The villain is a character that is selfish, psychotic, and violent, however, her actions at the end of the film show that there is still a glimpse of humanity in her. She is simply a very broken woman. Our main character briefly deals with grief in surface level fashion. You almost begin to root for the villain, because everything about her characterization and performance far outshines the protagonist's.
The supporting characters are utterly useless, and sometimes annoying. Issac is a likeable enough character, but remains utterly stupid, and never actually does anything to add any amount of tension to the film, and his partner is no different, only appearing on screen in a far away shot so we can see him get killed. Her mother, whom they stress is on her way, is only in the film for a few seconds, and also adds nothing to the film. And, we also have cops. One of which is a fine character, but isn't particularly interesting, and only drags the movie out further. The second cop mistakes our lead for the villain. And, even after she pleads that the real villain is upstairs, the cop forces her back upstairs in a truly idiotic move.
The main issue with this film is that there is positively no tension. The frantic banging on the bathroom door and the end climax in the swimming pool are somewhat tense, and their are a few cool thrills, but the movie absolutely lacks any kind of atmosphere. It is far too polished to offer any kind of visceral punch, and it fails as a glossy thriller through the use of comedy and a little bit too much stylization. It doesn't help that the film is entirely predictable. Every thrill or jump, or even plot twist can be called moments, or even minutes, before they happen. Had the film been entertaining or atmospheric, this would not have been an issue, but we've already discussed that.
And now, we get to the major elephant in the room. The film is a remake of a highly regarded French film. You only need to watch the first 30 minutes of the original to tell that it is far superior. With some truly effective moments, good performances, and a tense atmosphere, the film more than wipes the floor with this version. If you don't mind subtitles, the French film is a good watch. This version is half as effective and half as artistic and isn't worth a watch for any reason above curiosity. For fans of the original, it is an empty version of a better film, and for horror fans you have a relatively good looking home invasion film with little to offer.
Our main character is played by Rachel Nichols, who is very uneven in her performance. There are moments I thought she was great, and others that I felt she didn't pull off. Her weaknesses are made more apparent by the stellar performance Harring gives. And, being honest, Harring is given a far more interesting character. The villain is a character that is selfish, psychotic, and violent, however, her actions at the end of the film show that there is still a glimpse of humanity in her. She is simply a very broken woman. Our main character briefly deals with grief in surface level fashion. You almost begin to root for the villain, because everything about her characterization and performance far outshines the protagonist's.
The supporting characters are utterly useless, and sometimes annoying. Issac is a likeable enough character, but remains utterly stupid, and never actually does anything to add any amount of tension to the film, and his partner is no different, only appearing on screen in a far away shot so we can see him get killed. Her mother, whom they stress is on her way, is only in the film for a few seconds, and also adds nothing to the film. And, we also have cops. One of which is a fine character, but isn't particularly interesting, and only drags the movie out further. The second cop mistakes our lead for the villain. And, even after she pleads that the real villain is upstairs, the cop forces her back upstairs in a truly idiotic move.
The main issue with this film is that there is positively no tension. The frantic banging on the bathroom door and the end climax in the swimming pool are somewhat tense, and their are a few cool thrills, but the movie absolutely lacks any kind of atmosphere. It is far too polished to offer any kind of visceral punch, and it fails as a glossy thriller through the use of comedy and a little bit too much stylization. It doesn't help that the film is entirely predictable. Every thrill or jump, or even plot twist can be called moments, or even minutes, before they happen. Had the film been entertaining or atmospheric, this would not have been an issue, but we've already discussed that.
And now, we get to the major elephant in the room. The film is a remake of a highly regarded French film. You only need to watch the first 30 minutes of the original to tell that it is far superior. With some truly effective moments, good performances, and a tense atmosphere, the film more than wipes the floor with this version. If you don't mind subtitles, the French film is a good watch. This version is half as effective and half as artistic and isn't worth a watch for any reason above curiosity. For fans of the original, it is an empty version of a better film, and for horror fans you have a relatively good looking home invasion film with little to offer.
Yet again, the film industry shows it's lack of imagination and lack of quality scripts by re-making an already great horror film.
The original, L'interier, was a terrifying, bloody joyride from beginning to end. The roles were cast well. The story was tight. believable and scary as Hell. The direction was excellent as well. The movie was intense to the extreme yet it still felt like this could actually happen in real life! None of these components can be applied to this pitiful excuse of a re-make.
Although Rachel Nichols is an accomplished actress, she struggles through this film like a rookie. It's not her fault as her part has been watered down via faulty script and poor direction. Actress Laura Harring was a poor fit for the part of "The Woman" originally portrayed by the amazing Beatrice Dalle.
This film is yet more evidence that mainstream film markets have lost all originality and are increasingly dependent on re-making earlier, preferably foreign films or churning out low budget, poor replicas of successful ones.
When I learned that an American re-make of the incredible French horror film "Martyrs" was being made, I swore to myself to never watch it. I broke that promise to myself and watched it. The film, like the new version of "L'Interiour" is nothing more than a milquetoast, re-visioning insult to the original. Gone was the sheer gut-wrenching violence perpetrated on these girls, Gone was the insane logic which help the group together, It took a film that reached out and punched you repeatedly in the gut and turned it into little more than a made-for-TV movie filled with rejects from the O.C. that had far less talent than the roles required. In fact, like "Inside", the re-make of "Martyrs: seemed to have been created solely for the late teen audience due to the removal of many of the key violent and bloody scenes
Neither of these films needed to be re-made and the evidence is right in front of you. Forget these abortive attempts at capturing lighting and stick with the originals
This movie is not great. It's fine, because the premise was good to begin with, and the actors are reasonable. There are big logic holes, but to say this isn't a flaw of the original is not accurate. It had just as many inconsistencies. To say the police act stupidly in this version is a reasonable critique, but they also did in the original in different ways. The original is definitely gorier and more bleak, and probably better overall, but to say one was a 10 and the other is a 1 is a bit ridiculous. It's a passable time-waster, and for those not enamoured with gore, this would be the better choice of the two.
I get it. You want an American audience to see a great foreign film without bad dubbing or having to read subtitles. Sure, let's aim for that lowest common denominator. And they do! They aim right for the mouth breathers among us and hit a bullseye by taking out everything risky, terrifying, grisly, and intense about the original film, turning it into something that would play on Lifetime on a Sunday afternoon.
The makers of this movie try to take out everything edgy or visceral about it to make the film as palatable to a mainstream audience as possible, but this big twist is - this went straight to VOD and bypassed theaters altogether. It was released straight to horror fans who have mostly been appalled by how tame and neutered it feels in comparison to the original. You have to wonder who these people are making these remakes for.
Laura Herring and Rachel Nichols are good actresses. How did they end up in this mess? Was the script they read better?
The makers of this movie try to take out everything edgy or visceral about it to make the film as palatable to a mainstream audience as possible, but this big twist is - this went straight to VOD and bypassed theaters altogether. It was released straight to horror fans who have mostly been appalled by how tame and neutered it feels in comparison to the original. You have to wonder who these people are making these remakes for.
Laura Herring and Rachel Nichols are good actresses. How did they end up in this mess? Was the script they read better?
Acting terrible.
Cinematography may have been.
I'm getting really sick and tired of idiots who can't be bothered to turn a gd light on at night...
The woman who was having the baby was stupid from start to end.
From her first weapon of choice, a broken mirror shard, which she should have wrapped in a towel or face cloth, to when she was using the back of the toilet... the woman put her arm through the door, best option she chose was to give her a small slice, rather than shatter her arm with the toilet back. Made no sense at all.
Cops show up. The lady stabs one IN THE DOORWAY WITH the door open.. his partner is too stupid to be watching, despite him seeming real cagey about something 2 seconds prior.
The whole movie was just dumb. I can't imagine anyone who didn't work for it would actually rate it higher than a 2. It was that bad.
Did you know
- TriviaThis is a remake of the 2006 French home invasion horror Inside (2007).
- GoofsAround 58 min,. Madeleine has blood on her face from killing the police officer. After she climbs the stairs, there is no blood on her face at all.
- ConnectionsRemake of Inside (2007)
- How long is Inside?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Gross worldwide
- $824,414
- Runtime
- 1h 29m(89 min)
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 2.35 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content







