Wat.
Everyone I've spoken to hated this film but I really enjoyed it, best "horror" I've seen recently.
dishonest filmmaking
dirty tricksy marketing
rip off of so many movies like cloverfield lane and 28 days later
absolutely atrocious no wonder the dog fucker loves it, just because there's a dog in the poster
>>87256532
hello mr plebb
>>87256532
>dishonest filmmaking
>>87256559
I bet you love it because is le underground
suck my cock bitch
>watching post-2009 movies
what the fuck was the point of that red door?
>>87256497
>horror
Why did Paul have to shoot at Kim and Andrew?
>>87256532
>THE TITLE IS "IT COMES AT NIGHT" BUT NOTHING COMES AT NIGHT???? OMG SUM1 SUE THEM FAKE NEW OMG
American education at its finest. Such fine, cultured tastes.
Nothing ruins a good story more than intentionally leaving out important parts for the sake of being "deep."
>>87256497
Sounds like you spoke to a bunch of dumb normies desu. From the trailers I expected there would be no monsters and nothing supernatural of any kind. I hoped that wouldn't be the case but it turned out to be true, and the movie was great anyway.
What happened to tha dog?
Who opened the door?!?
>>87257473
dog death is a mystery, black kid opened the door while he was sleepwalking and dragged the dog back into that front room
>>87256497
>>87257330
Yeah, I was surprised when I found out audience reception was negative after watching it. I thought it was one of the best movies I saw this year and an example of perfect filmmaking and use of film language. I'll admit the trailer might have seemed a little deceptive, but I never trust a film's marketing anyway.
So is there an actual monster or did someone just randomly kill an annoying dog which made everyone think there's a monster?