PLEASE

Horror is so bad that anything good looks genius by comparison

You just didn't get it :^)

>>83789598
Imagine being this stupid

The "it" that comes at night was fear. That was the whole point of the film

>>83789598
You're not being objective.
You went into it thinking it was a horror film and came out disappointed because it wasn't.
It was extremely mismarketed to cash in on normie money.
However, it is a solid post-apocalyptic family drama.

File: IMG_5571.jpg (96KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 1000x1000px

>>83789756
I literally couldn't find anything horror about this. It was a suspenseful drama. People talking in a fucking house the entire movie and then ends with dumb people shooting each other.

File: 1496976367647.jpg (165KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 640x480px

>>83789598

> $8

Tfw $15 for me

>>83789831
Okay you seem smart.

What did the dog see?

Also who were those two guys that shot at main guys truck and then beard guy told him to wait before main guy killed him? Also why did beard guy lie about having a brother?

>>83789907
Do you really need everything laid out for you? Can you not think for yourself and come to your own conclusions?

Stick to capeshit

>>83789949
Do you not have the answers then?

Okay guess not, anyone else explain this shit movie?

>there is no 'it'
Oh, but there was.
>dog gets snatched up in the woods
>kid later draws what he saw, some hinderfolk/machine elf looking things
>other kid has a drawing in his parents' room, a plant spirit looking thing
>door opens and dog dragged in without anyone else knowing or doing anything

>>83790028
There aren't supposed to be concrete answers. It's a horror movie, and the unknown is a huge part in making horror effective. You don't know any of these answers because the characters don't either. That way, you can feel the same tension and dread they feel. And in the end, it was completely irrelevant what the dog was barking at.

>How old are you?
>...17
>...
Wow this film sure got uncomfortable fast.

>>83790038
#dreams

>>83789837
>However, it is a solid post-apocalyptic family drama.

I'd honestly say it doesn't really succeed there. Really let down by the movie but I did enjoy the tracking shot following the truck as they drove on the road and a lot of the lighting work that they did.

Ive never even heard of this
is it a horror or a drama??

>>83790456
"psychological thriller"

>>83790028
I missed like the first 15 - 30 minutes, but from what I can gather:
>Family is living in country
>Virus breaks out in cities
>People start dying off
>Family barricade themselves in the house (though honestly it looks more like some sort of apartment complex)

>>83790295
The door is fucking unexplainable tho.
And the majority of the story is up to interpretatoon anyways, let me dream.
There was for sure a virus tho, not sure why people say there wasn't one.

Good movie, shit ending. Could have stood to be a bit longer and have more stuff happen. There were things hinting at something actually being around the house like >>83790038 said but if you want to argue that it was subtle, it was way too subtle to the point where it felt just like an extra thing that didn't add anything to the movie. And besides killing the dog it didn't do anything unless the movie was hinting at it being the cause of the illness.

On the ending though I think I missed some stuff but even with the stuff I've read so far it wouldn't have made the ending that much better.

The movie establishes the narrower aspect ratio as either dreams or I've read some people saying it represents the illness in some way. The last like 15 minutes is in the narrower aspect ratio and I initially thought that it wasn't real because of this but if it represents the illness then it would mean that everyone is infected and there were apparently signs of the illness on the parents that I didn't catch. Even with that stuff though the ending was way too sudden, and this is one of the only times I've ever thought that.

>>83789598
It wasn't that bad, the resolution was just not satisfying. It ended and was just like "What did we learn here?"

>>83790837
Well, that the average person is absolutely terrible at proper quarintine.
Also don't let your fee-fees get in the way of logic when you're trying to survive during Armageddon.

Anyone upset about the ending is an absolute fucking moron that has no sense of actual horror. They're just pissed they didn't get some gay monster reveal, or twist, or 'splosions. I know this board is full of plebs but these people are truly fucking moronic.

>>83789598
anyone know where I can find it?

File: 1495998847309.gif (2MB, 288x288px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 288x288px

>>83789831
>>83789907
>>83790820
im thinking it was going/trying to be a ""film"" so what we see is basically only used to convey further whatever message it wanted to make.

from my understanding im guessing it was something about becoming a man/adulthood??
these are something that stuck out to me in the movie that might help findout wtf its about
>only men die the whole time including the dog, the white mom only died bc of her refusal to accept the son was ill
>the whole movie seems to rely on the son and his relationship with his father
even the bandits that shot at them in the truck scene were seemingly father and son
>also large focus on the sons dreams and his desire "were da white womanz at" bc he was alone with his parents
was the whole movie maybe about becoming a man and not to lust/be lonely/jealous? which those type of feelings come at night to young and old men, and the little boy dies too bc his parents were young and just fucking(not married) and fooling around all the time?

>>83791209
this so much, the mom let her husband ger pistol punhced like 6 times before she did anything

>>83791257
>horror
There's that word again. The ending isn't bad because there wasn't a twist. The ending was bad because it felt like it ended in the middle of the movie and there wasn't really any reason that I could see to have that happen.

Also you're saying people are pissed that they didn't get monsters or whatever but this is another movie that has a bait and switch trailer. If you're just going to have a straight post apocalyptic survival movie don't make a trailer and name your movie implying that that's what your movie is about. People would be less angry if you didn't basically trick them into seeing something they wouldn't have otherwise.

>>83791392
some people wouldn't recognize good kino if it bit them, im okay with this particular bait and switch

The best assessments I've seen about it so far have been this:

It's not a horror, it's an arthouse psychological thriller (see >>83790490).

It comes across as vague for the sake of being vague, which is why even people who usually like subtle horror movies are underwhelmed by it. It's been done before, so the movie doesn't bring anything new to the table.

It also focuses on fear/paranoia and how people behave under these stresses, which is also nothing new.

And yes, the marketing was very misleading (>>83789837). I do like going into movies blind, so really I just saw the poster and said "yep, I want to see that."

The worst part is the people trashing on others for wanting a shitty, shallow horror movie. I think the most reasonable criticism of the film is from people who didn't want a shitty, shallow horror movie but wanted something new and interesting from A24. The Witch was a unique and intense horror flick, but I've seen a lot of people who loved the Witch who were let down by ICAN.

It's just generic "meme artsy horror movie" #4
>The Babadook
>It Follows
>The VVitch
>It Comes at Night
Yawn. Come we please get another, campy Friday the 13th please? Jason is uber comfy horror Kino.

>>83791288
Your local cinema, my friend.

>>83791530
Babadook was actually pretty disturbing, to me at least. And I was interested the entire way through and the ending wasn't offensively premature.

The Witch was a good movie the entire way through and had a satisfying ending.

Haven't watched It Follows.

It Comes At Night is a good movie for what it is. What it isn't is a horror movie though, or at least the kind it advertised itself as. And the ending is extremely unsatisfying, and this is coming from someone that generally can accept why movies that are accused of doing this do it, but this movie didn't really have any excuse for it other than unsatisfying endings being "kino".

>>83791392
>ended in the middle
No it didn't. How dumb are you? You have zero sense of what makes a horror movie good.

>>83791631
Agree 100%.

It Follows was just okay btw. Spooky theater experience but I can't believe it's aged well.

>>83791832
Horror movies aren't good because they have unsatisfying endings. And I'm saying the middle but I don't mean the movie should be 3 hours long. What I mean is that it feels like there could be stuff that was filmed after what we got and the director cut to the credits prematurely. What other good horror movies can you think of that end in a similar way? Off the top of my head the only one I can think of is the Blair Witch Project, which everyone when I saw it in theatres also felt like a premature ending, though it does make sense and there's a reason for it. There's no reason here. It's a cop out.

File: 1496795799247.jpg (41KB, 640x616px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 640x616px

>midway through movie start to hear lots of shifting around and exaggerated sighing
>fervent whispered complaints the whole time
>"what a dumb bitch"-tier commentary
>"STANLEY" when the dog fucks off
>someone's desperate cry of attention to get laughs from everyone at end of movie: "LOL WHAT COMES AT NIGHT THOUGH?"
I wish I wasn't poor so I could just watch movies of any quality, shit or not, in peace.

I felt traumatised by this movie. As I walked out of the theater I think I looked like I had shell shock

>>83791963
When I saw it the audio was way too quiet. You could barely make out what they were saying in the beginning with the gas masks on. Someone got them to turn it up a bit, which made it better but it still could have been louder.

And I had someone sitting a few rows behind me that would be like breathing heavily anytime the dream sequences happened. Like they were going to have a panic attack. They were also talking kind of loudly at points.

>>83791963
almost all of the people in my theater started laughing when the credits rolled, but at least they were quiet throughout the actual movie.

can somebody attack me please>>83791353

File: 1493384651605.jpg (8KB, 236x236px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 236x236px

>>83791963
>Go to see the Mummy
>Group of black girls come in and sit down
>They spend the whole movie talking and laughing

This movies ending is absolute pleb filter

If you didnt like this movie, you dont know SHIT about kinó

>>83792168
>make 2 hour movie
>cut out last 20 minutes and have the movie end there
KINO

>>83789831
jesus christ

>>83791539
except it isn't

>>83791353
>>83792100
according to interviews with the director, the movie is about his shitty dad getting cancer and dying so there you go, you're right.

>>83789831
doesn't save the movie from being a snorefest
just because your movie has a subtle message it doesn't automatically make it a good movie

>>83792243
hey well cool beans then.

File: IMG_20170607_132421.jpg (148KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 1280x960px

I liked it better than The Witch and It Follows, but as far as the director goes I thought Krisha was way more effective and entertaining overall.

>>83790837
The resolution is everyone dies not due to viruses or monsters, but because of themselves. The end.

>>83790783
I was thinking about who opened the door a bunch, and I think I came up with a solid answer. There were two doors between the inside of the house and the forest, and Stanley was inside of the first one. Stanley is a dog and can't open doors (especially not when dead), so someone must have either a. seen Stanely's dead body outside and brought him inside or b. Seen/heard Stanley outside (Paul did say Stanley "knew the woods" so he could have come back, even if injured), killed him, and put him inside of the first door. I think Paul either saw Stanley through a window or heard him barking or something, went outside, and decided that the risk of him being "sick" was too high, and decided to kill him. He was probably emotional about this and left the inner door open by accident after bringing Stanley inside the outer door, or possibly wanted someone to find it so they could bury and burn his body. Or he left it closed and Andrew opened it later. There's a decent amount of evidence that Paul would be willing to kill Stanley since he said to Travis "I'm not going to lose you over your grandfather's dog" after Travis went running after Stanley into the woods. Also, this would explain why Paul didn't want to let Paul see Stanley's body despite letting Stanley be there while Paul kills, buries, and burns Stanley's grandfather. Basically, my "timeline" of the door events would be this:
1. Stanley finds his way back to the house, and is maybe injured.
2. Paul hears Stanley barking, goes outside and either decides that the risk of Stanley being infected is too high to let him live or sees that Stanley is heavily injured and decides to put him out of his misery.
3. Paul brings Stanley inside the outer door and kills him
4. Paul either leaves the inner door open by accident because of how distraught he is or leaves it open so that someone will find the body and help him bury and burn it. OR he closes the door and Andrew later opens it.
Cont. in next reply

>>83792478
5. Paul goes back to sleep, but Andrew hears the commotion.
6. Andrew opens the inner door if it isn't already open, sees the dog, gets terrified, and runs to the grandfather's room where he goes to sleep and has nightmares.
7. The situation is so terrifying that it, when coupled with Andrew's nightmares, makes it difficult for Andrew to distinguish nightmare from reality (he's like 4), which would explain why he "couldn't remember" what happened.
8. Travis finds Andrew, who is now maybe sick from being in contact with Stanley and carries him back to his room (which would explain how Travis got sick later in the movie)
9. Travis sees the open door and wakes everyone up.

>>83789598
It comes at night had great acting, great camerawork, great shots, artsy shit, and a solid soundtrack. It has a shit story, but it hit all the other technical benchmarks and "enjoyment" is a social construct anyway so fuck it.

>>83792478
>>83792510
The issue with all of this is that you're assuming the director even had a reason for these things to happen. I don't think there's an answer. I think he just did it.

Vague for vague's sake.

>>83792535
this is probably the right answer. these movies usually don't try to actually be deep, they just try to appear deep.

THERE WAS SOMETHING IN THE WOODS

Me and my friend distinctly remember, just before Paul and Will get attacked by the two bandits that we both saw something in the woods sitting down

>>83792535
Yeah it's possible that it's meant to be vague/unexplainable, but I still think that this is a good explanation, and it is further supported by the fact that Paul was the only one who had a key to the doors, and that the outer door wasn't busted which it would have been if someone (maybe a monster) broke in and left the dog there. I will definitely admit that Paul's motives for leaving Stanley inside the door are pretty sketchy, and it would probably have made more sense for him to just kill it and bury it outside. The only real things that I can think of are that either he didn't want his son to find the body and thus he needed a second person to help bury it, or that he wanted to give his son closure on Stanley without taking responsibility for it.

>>83792646
This?
http://imgur.com/cOYYEfo

>>83792646
Yeah, it was a pretty obvious silhouette. Side-view while they were driving.

>>83792646
I thought I saw something when they drove past too but then it was never addressed.

>>83792395
That would've been the message if the little boy hadn't been infected. Everything the main parents did was logical and necessary. It would've been more tragic and interesting if Travis didn't get the infection, his nightmares just made him paranoid and he got the family killed for nothing.

Travis was such a terrible character.

>>83792697
Yes!!! exactly that

>>83792706
>>83792698
>>83792653
>>83792697
i saw the same thing and its just a dead try guys

>>83792724
tree*

>>83792724
I guess it could be a tree

>>83792646
That was the best part of the movie, apart from the fact that he didn't have a round already loaded. Made me wish the rest of it was an action thriller, not this artsy dream-within-a-dream melodrama.

File: 1497061945207.webm (2MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x720px

more like It Bores At Night amirite

>>83789831
this
>>83789907
The ambiguity in the film is done on purpose to make the whole experience seem more realistic and like you were there, you really only know exactly what our protagonists know, there's no dramatic irony in it whatsoever, so it makes you really feel there and makes it more suspenseful and eerie at times. Obviously though lots of people weren't satisfied with this and didn't like it because of this and that there's so many shallow people with the cognitive power of a spoon that can't figure out the story and it's symbolism (ex: "it" is the fear/paranoia and the feelings you get at night like the other anon said)

>>83793138
the word you're looking for is 'immersive', not 'realistic'

>>83793082
maybe it's just because I don't see a ton of movies, but I really loved it. It kept me on the edge of my seat the entire time and had an ending that wasn't really "satisfying" but I thought made sense. I think it would have been a lot worse if they did some deus ex machina "cure" asspull, or an ending that was too happy for the rest of the movie. The characters were in a supremely shitty situation, and I thought the ending having most characters dying but leaving Paul and his wife to deal with their decisions to trust no one. I don't know whether or not they got "sick," but I suspect at least the wife did because she hugged and kissed Travis after his contact with Andrew.

>>83793249
They are both infected

>>83793249
I kind of assumed their sullen, reserved reactions at the end kind of implied that they were infected and were just waiting out their final days.

>>83793428
that last shot was shadowy but to me it looked like they both had lesions on their arms and faces

>>83793399
>>83793428
Yeah makes sense

>>83793428
>>83793479
Paul should've offed them all and then himself, Mist-style

>>83792713
It would have been more interesting if the dad got sick and Travis was forced into the position of having to face the real world.

This movie is the best in theaters pleb filter in a looong time.

>>83792478
>>83792510
The biggest issue with your theory is the part where Paul brings in the dog just to kill him. Wasn't the dog still weeping when they found it? Like it was cut open or whatever but wasn't it still kind of alive? Also, why would Paul just plant him in that room, he's not some kind of sick twisted fuck, he knew how much Travis cared about Stanley, I seriously doubt this theory just because of that part.

>>83790837
Could you have worst taste? Good fuck. It was a perfect, realistic ending.

>>83793192
Well sure, but also realistic in the sense that if you were actually there, you would know just as much as them in that situation.

>>83791631
Ending is perfect, get a brain. A film can be less than two hours.

>>83791945
Pleb. Fucking idiotic pleb. It's like the entire film went right over your head. Jesus.

File: 1297538788362.png (107KB, 245x256px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 245x256px

>>83793975
>>83794025

>>83792535
How bout this: It doesn't fucking matter who then door opened. There a million logical ways it could have happened. Hell up spic

>>83793962
These theories are laughable. This board is fucked

>>83794134
I agree

File: IMG_4305.jpg (70KB, 673x604px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 673x604px

You guys seriously didn't see the monster when the black kid chases the dog into the woods? Me and my buddy laughed because of the shit CGI. The were hanging off the tree near the very top of the screen, almost getting cut off.

>>83794388
That's definitely not in the movie

>>83791989

If that movie gave you shell shock, your constitution is shit.

Surf /b/. After the first coma and panic attack you'll actually grow a spine.

>>83794388
Nice trying to get me to see the movie again. It won't work.

>>83794634
We were probably seeing something that wasn't there probably

>>83794388
kek le ebin bait

The monster was them all along :-)

>Going back to the cinema this monday
>Can't decide between rewatching The Mummy or It Came In the Night
On one hand, the Mummy has a qt villain. On the other, this film is kino.
Fuck,

>>83794828
Mummy would be garbage too but at least entertaining garbage

Shit was absolutely trash

Look I won't blame the normies for getting fooled by the marketing

but if you consider yourself interested in movies enough to browse /tv/ and you couldn't tell what this movie was going to be from the A24 logo, or the viral marketing, or the cast, you're fuckin retarded and will lose far more than $11 in your lifetime

>>83794025
>A film can be less than two hours
It can, if paced properly and the story fits in that time span. The way it ended felt like there was more after it and the director just decided to cut there rather than keep the rest of the footage.

>>83794057
>You just didn't get it, man. The shitty ending is symbolic of our place in the universe and the meaning of life.

>>83795516
>t. the horse that needs to be beaten to understand

>>83795574
>t. Trey Edward Shults

>>83794828
I watched both the night before they came out and it depends on what you're in the mood for.

The Mummy was fucking hilarious, for intentional and unintentional reasons in the film.

It Comes At Night is just really creepy and suspenseful and is kino af

File: 1497069699767.png (458KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

458KB, 640x360px

>>83797032
If it weren't for the qt mummy, It Comes At Night would win hands down.

how the fuck did the dog open the door

>>83789831
So OP was right. Why are you under the impression that you're countering what he said, I wonder?

The recent wave of pseudo-genre movies that are actually vehicles for SJW pretension must be opposed.

>>83794807
Yeah, it's bullshit isn't it. The kind of thing Homer Simpson would find "ironic".

>>83792535
>>83792612
This.

>>83792519
>"enjoyment" is a social construct anyway
No it isn't, you liberal piece of fucking shit, people like you who try to deny the plain truths by which men live need to have your loved ones raped in front of you, then get your hamstrings cut, then get blinded, then get castrated, then get allowed to live with the wreckage of your life. Forever, there is only one lie, there is only one truth.

>>83797297
dang, a little extreme, but relativism is vile.

>>83791963
>I wish I wasn't poor so I could just watch movies of any quality, shit or not, in peace.

I don't really understand why you say this, poor people can see any movie in peace. Just torrent them. You had that experience because you had the money to waste on a ticket.

>>83797331
Indeed, and I think we need to oppose it in the strongest possible terms.

>>83797174
No you dumbass the baby stood on the dog to open the door for the dog. That's how he got the black kid sick.

>>83797151

I liked the Braden Mummy movie more. It felt more campy.

>>83789831
are you aware that fear is an emotion/feeling, and therefore can come at any time of day?

The directors knows his movie is shit. The studio knows its shit. They know if they marketed their film honestly nobody would fucking see it, so they lied. The title is intentionally misleading but whats worse is that the trailers HEAVILY imply that this is a very different film than what it is.
However, they know that because of the reputation of other films this studio has released like Under the Skin and The Witch, their idiot reddit fanbase will love it anyway while general audiences will absolutely despise it.
Check out the ratings, its doing even worse with audiences than The Witch did. Thats incredible. The film sucks, and it was marketed as something its not to cover up that its fucking stupid and has nothing to say. Stop pretending otherwise.

>>83797356
>MORALS R REAL ILL KILL U FAGGOT
t. A moral person.

>>83797550
>its doing even worse with audiences than The Witch did

Its a damn shame the witch did so poorly because that was actually a good film with a good payoff and no prometheus-tier mental gymnastics that need to be done to determine what actually happened unlike this movie

>>83797580
>implying it is moral for one to allow truth and morality to be devalued to the point of equality with deception and immorality

>>83797603
How is this movie so puzzling to people? It seemed pretty straightforward to me.

>>83790028
There are no answers
This is a typical "babbys first arthouse" film
It tries to be subtle, but ends up being vague to a frustratingly excessive degree
There are no answers because the film is so unfocused, so vague, and frankly, so poorly written, that almost any question you have about the film can be answered with "fuck it, it could have been anything"
Example
>who opened the door
could have been literally anyone. Narrative is never clear enough to form concrete educational guesses (they probably want you to think its Travis though. Or not. Who fucking knows? certainly not the filmmakers)
>What did the dog see?
Literally anything is possible because that whole scene was utterly pointless
>was Andrew infected?
It doesnt even matter. It comes at Night pretends its not a shallow film but like all shallow films it resorted to a completely out of the blue "revelation" to kickstart the tragedy.

>>83797550
damn right, why don't they just release feel good marvel movies for the people? the fans LOVE them

>>83797648

>what was the dog barking at?
>who opened the door?
>was andrew sick or were his parents just trying to protect him?
>are the nightmares and hallucinations a product of being sick? if so then travis was sick the entire time due to his nightmare at the start before they met the other group
>if the nightmares are a product of being sick then shouldn't everyone else be experiencing them before they show symptoms like travis?
>are the nightmares supposed to be taken as literal or metaphorical? what is travis seeing during the dog nightmare? is he seeing what actually happened to the dog or just something he is fearing happened?
>what hurt the dog if the nightmare wasn't real to help explain it? was he just sick or did something attack him or both?

probably a lot of other stuff but that is just off the top of my head

Every lynched negro, burned jew, and lion-mauled Christian was murdered by men who felt that they were defending truth and morality.

>>83797766
>Ancient Roman bread and circus gladiator games were defending turth and morality
O-Okay anon, if you say so.

>>83797735
One thing that I think helps answer the nightmares/hallucinations point, I don't think Travis could of been sick the entire time. Sure we don't know the exact length of the events in the movie, but I would say at LEAST two weeks. Based off of Paul's statement early in the movie that the grandpa "saw signs of infection" in as little as a day or two, I don't think that Travis could be sick. It's also never really mentioned how the grandpa gets sick, or "what" gets him sick, which would definitely make that aspect a lot easier to narrow down.

>>83797766
>defending relativism with a relativistic argument.
hilarious. The point of a non-relativistic viewpoint is that a person can be wrong. Every non-relativist concedes that a person can be mistaken in their pursuit of good, as these Romans were.

>>83797674
>>was Andrew infected?
Are you fucking kidding me? In one of the final scene they show him covered in boil from the sickness.
Jesus christ, at least pay attention to what happens in the film before sticking your nose up in the air at it.

>>83797735
Well yeah, the movie intentionally gives us the information that the characters have.

We can pretty easily infer that Andrew was sick, why else would his Dad have made him cover his eyes as he led the father out of their bedroom? Why else would they suddenly decide to leave?

The nightmares are happening consistently from the beginning of the film, and the disease takes less than a day of exposure before you are gravely ill, so he wasnt infected until he held Andrews hand.

We don't know how the dog got hurt, It ran out into the night and it could have been anything. Other people, a wild animal, or anything else. The characters don't know how the dog is hurt, they just know he is and he has to be put down.

File: tackfast.jpg (70KB, 960x952px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 960x952px

>>83797827
One of the things that would help narrow down a lot of theories is if we knew the incubation period. At the beginning of the movie, Paul mentions that it only took Grandpa a day to "show signs". Did he mean the obvious, only took a day after contracting it to show signs? Or did he mean it only took Grandpa a day to go from perfectly normal, to fully infected?

>>83797860
How do you know that your conception of morality is any more right than they were? Clearly you don't consider threatening people you don't agree with to be immoral.

>>83797720
Lets pretend we're talking about food for a second.
The typical horror film is a huge turd served in a dog bowl. Obviously you dont like being treated like that so you demand a higher standard for your horror.
What It Comes at Night provides to you as an alternative isnt actually different at all. Its still shit. Just this time its delivered from an asshole directly onto your grinning face. You laugh at everyone who is wondering why you enjoyed getting shit on your face so much, blissfully unaware that you are consuming something no less stupid than what you were tired of.

Its like the director saw the Witch and wanted his film to be like that, but wasnt even remotely close talent wise to pull it off, and tried anyway.

But no. Just bring capeshit into it like a child.

>>83797901
>Grandpa dies
>"It took less than a day for him to show signs"
>Andrew touches the dog
>Andrew is heavily infected the next day
>Travis touches Andrew
>Travis is infected the next day.

Seems safe to say that the incubation period is less than one day.

>>83797939
What a logical progression. Boy howdy you sure have changed my mind with that impeccable rhetoric.

>>83797882
It never showed Andrew, the person you're thinking of is Travis, the wife's son. How about you fucking learn the name of the characters you're trying to talk about before telling someone else to pay attention?

>>83797882
you're retarded
Andrew was the other families kid. Travis is who you're thinking of

>>83798006
you're still the guy laughing at everyone else for not having shit on their face.
you still havent really defended the film at all by the way.
Keep pretending like you have though. Its hysterical watching someone metaphorically ingest shit and loudly proclaim it to be caviar

>>83797973
We never SEE Andrew touch the dog - unless I missed something - so we can't infer that progression. But if he did, then yes, I think it makes since that the incubation period would be a day or less.

>>83798044
see thats an example of being too vague.
Just one second. One fucking tiny tiny bit of effort the director could have put forth to make his film a more compelling narrative by having something you can work off of. But he couldnt be arsed.

>>83797929
You are making the same argument. Again, from a relativistic worldview, violence is violence, and the motive for it is irrelevant because their is no objective truth in terms of morality. Each instance is essentially the same. If you do concede that their is an objective morality, then committing a violent action with truth at your back cannot be the same as committing it without it there.

>>83798081
if there was an objective morality regarding violence than the truth doesnt matter.
Violence is either wrong or not wrong. Introducing circumstances like who is "in the right" is not an example of objective morality you dolt.

File: ranboi.jpg (31KB, 574x726px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 574x726px

>>83797973
Don't know for certain if Andrew touched the dog.

The dog may have been infected the entire time.
In fact, if we can play with the idea that incubation time may vary between species, this becomes more likely.

What if the reason the dog runs into the woods after seemingly "nothing" is because he is infected and is hallucinating.

Hell, Travis might have been infected the whole time too. Notice that when he chases after the dog, he has to explain what he heard to Will who is only slightly behind him?

>>83798125
>there is no limit to the possibilities
jesus christ what is even the point of the film if its so god damn vague that you have to write 99% of it yourself?
Its like fucking prometheus all over again.

>>83798113
>if there was an objective morality regarding violence than the truth doesnt matter.
What? Morality is truth.
>Violence is either wrong or not wrong.
Hardly. Myriad of situations in which one can be justified, its a giant subject. The point is whether killing an individual for proclaiming a falsehood is the same as killing an individual for proclaiming the truth. It intrinsically isn't, unless you believe that truth and lies have no effect on the world

>>83798044
>>83798074

The movie is from the perspective of Travis and his family. We only get the information that Travis and his family gets. Travis didnt see Andrew touch the dog, but its heavily inferred that he did. Andrew was the only one who could have done it, We see Travis get out of bed, so he didnt do it. We see when Travis puts him back in his parents room that they are both asleep in bed, so they didn't do it. When Travis runs to his parents room the door is already open, and both of his parents are asleep. Andrew is clearly sick, because his parents are freaking out about having to leave.

>>83798213
Travis is an unreliable narrator.
The film tries to establish when he is and isnt dreaming based on aspect ration but that clearly goes out the window at the end, so it was never reliable at all.
We cant trust literally anything that we see Travis do because the director knows that if he played his story straight it would be fucking stupid.
He's lucky that there are people like you who are so determined to enjoy this film that they fill in all the gaps better than he ever could.

>>83795263
Agreed
Going to an A24 movie expecting it to be like every other horror movie is pretty stupid

>>83798213
Well, look at it this way: Andrew is too short to open the red door, considering the lock is very high up, even if he could reach the door knob. So, the problem is the dog still got in to the one room, which doesn't make sense unless Travis' dad was the one who opened the doors, left the dog in the room - but that makes no sense - and also forgot to close the doors. So in that instance, if Andrew did wake up and went there, touched the dying dog, then went up to the grandpa's room to sleep where Travis found him, then yes, that makes sense.
It's also incredibly possible that Will could just see how the situation was deteriorating very quickly, what with the isolation of the two families from one another, and wanted to get the heck out safely.
....Also, it's "inferred" Paul isn't Travis' real father, right?

>>83798323
>....Also, it's "inferred" Paul isn't Travis' real father, right?
perhaps the photos were only of him solo as a baby then the no smile one with him and his mom and paul hugging for the picture.

>>83798008
>>83798015
No, if you paid attention, there was a scene where you could see that he had blisters too.

what comes at night???

>>83798323
>paul isnt travis's real father
I dont think thats true. I think its just bad casting and the Travis was too black to convincing as biracial. I think the implication was that Paul was just a shitty dad because we see he gets sort of jealous of Will interacting with Travis.

I still dont buy this about the door. You mention two possible scenarios but is there any reason to believe it wasnt someone else? Not really. We are shown so little and so much of what we are shown is proven to be unreliable. So at this point its shooting in the dark about fucking everything. Its so frustrating because this is a problem that most film school students would be able to fix.

>>83798323
They specifically mention Andrew is "barely" able to open the doors

>>83798411
depends on what you pay attention to.
Depending on what you focus on you can come up with 30 different theories all of which are equally impossible to prove. What a fucking mess
>>83798436
its dreams. Take a moment and think about how fucking stupid that is.

>>83798436

Me.

Don't bother locking the doors bitch.

>it's a shitty drama disguises as a horror episode
I hate this hipster shit.

File: 1495593318663.gif (348KB, 850x846px) Image search: [Google]

348KB, 850x846px

>>83797550
>fear is an emotion/feeling
Wrong

>>83798405
I didn't pay super close attention earlier on to pictures, wasn't expecting to have to piece so much together.
>>83798411
Only saw it a few hours ago and I wasn't paying attention to every detail, so I'll take your word for it.
>>83798437
Yeah, I myself think Paul is the real father, and thought similarly to you about the casting. One of my friend's thought it was "obviously heavily implied" he wasn't the father, due to the race difference.
But right, I think the opened door is probably the biggest plot hole. I don't remember seeing the doors broken open, so presumably it was done from the inside.
Another thing I thought was blatantly missing for no reason was a bit of a more thorough following of Paul and Will's journey back to Will's family. They travel ten miles out, get ambushed by some "strangers", and then the next scene we see they're coming home. I think it would've been good to see Paul meet the wife and son, interact with them, and maybe get a better idea as to why he thought they were safe to bring home in the first place.

>>83798515
what is it then?
explain to me how fear is actually something that can only be experienced at night.

>>83798534
It could be because Paul was actually infected the whole time and was having similar hallucinations like Travis and couldnt see the danger.
We will never know.

>>83798437
These questions are the entire point of the movie. Ultimately nobody knows for sure who opened the door. Just like we never know who the men in the woods were, or what the dog was barking at, or why Will lied about having a brother. The tension in the movie is based around the fragility of trust when all you have to go on is the word of a stranger whos goals are not the same as yours.

>>83798534
>>83798566

Holy shit, its right there in the movie, hell, its even heavily implied in the dialogue.
"Who could have opened the door?"
"It could have been Andrew"
"Hes barely tall enough to reach it."

Andrew obviously opened the fucking door. Maybe he stood on tippy toes and unlocked it, or maybe in the emotional state Paul was in after chasing Travis down after Stanley ran off he forgot to lock the door behind him. Ultimately how these actions occurred is never spelled out, because none of the characters saw it happen and things go very wrong very quickly after they find out the door was open.

File: 1489131214171.jpg (9KB, 256x256px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 256x256px

>>83798545
>being this retarded
>begging to be spoon fed extremely basic concepts
Looks like more than just this movie went over your head sweetie. What's your IQ? Let me guess it's in the 60-70 range, isn't it?

>>83798921
>what's your IQ?

Lol what a faggot