It Comes at Night | June 9, 2017 | A24 | Teaser in First Post

[WrathOfHan]

7 minutes ago, Kingp0va said:

Wide Opening Weekend:	$3,811,052
(#5 rank, 1,218 theaters, $3,129

 

This is a flop to me, especially given the big hype it had as the best horror in a while. I dont care if the budget was 2.

Saw movies, the visit, Split, get out etc had VERY small budgets and did amazing

Uh, it had an OW just under 6M, and that TC and rank are incorrect.

Edited June 13, 2017 by WrathOfHan

[Jayhawk the Hutt]

2 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said:

Uh, it had an OW just under 6M, and that TC and rank are incorrect.

That link leads to It Follows wide opening chart. Not really following the guy, but yeah it's not for this weekend.

Edited June 13, 2017 by Jayhawk

[aabattery]

2 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said:

Uh, it had an OW just under 6M, and that TC and rank are incorrect.

 

He's linking to It Follows.

 

He's still wrong though. Don't see how you can paint 20M WW for a 2M budget as anything but a nice little success.

[Kingp0va]

17 minutes ago, aabattery said:

 

He's linking to It Follows.

 

He's still wrong though. Don't see how you can paint 20M WW for a 2M budget as anything but a nice little success.

2 million budget yeah plus all the ww promo which probably was at least 15m, i saw ads on tv (spain)

[Jake Gittes]

I don't think It Follows was even supposed to go wide until it overperformed in limited release.

[aabattery]

2 minutes ago, Jake Gittes said:

I don't think It Follows was even supposed to go wide until it overperformed in limited release.

 

But it didn't beat Split.

[WrathOfHan]

3 hours ago, aabattery said:

 

But it didn't beat Split.

Nearly all horror movies haven't  

 

Spoiler

FUCK ALLISON WILLIAMS

Spoiler

Actually, can Allison Williams fuck me?  

 

 

[That One Girl]

47 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said:

Nearly all horror movies haven't  

 

  Hide contents

FUCK ALLISON WILLIAMS

  Hide contents

Actually, can Allison Williams fuck me?  

 

 

 

SEX SLAVE! OH SHIT, HAN YOU GOTTA GET THE FUCK OUTTA THERE

[JohnnyGossamer]

http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2017/06/13/it-comes-at-night-critics

 

There are some spoilers in there but that article's relevant to discussion we've engaged in here regarding the marketing. There's also a nice running debate in the comments after the article as well.

Edited June 13, 2017 by JohnnyGossamer

[Blankments]

Final predicts:

 

DOM: 10M

[Xillix]

I know I'm late to the party but.

 

Yyyyyyyyyyyyeah. Here's the thing. I didn't watch the trailers or pay attention to the marketing, so I wasn't deceived in any way. I knew it was going to be an arthouse kinda thing. I liked The Witch and It Follows. And The Blair Witch Project for that matter. But this crossed a line for me that separates "an ambiguous movie that lets you fill in the gaps with your mind to create your own fear" and "a movie the writing of which never went past the initial concept and yet was produced to feature length anyway." There's maybe 10-20 minutes worth of actual relevant events in this movie, tops, and the rest is padded out with lots of long, ponderous takes and completely inconsequential nightmares. There is no mystery because not only are answers not provided, they're not even hinted at. There are no clues as to any sort of real backstory, and major, important plot elements are left completely unaddressed, supposedly in the name of "art." Seems to me like it's just lazy filmmaking. If you can avoid actually writing a story for your movie, yet convince a certain audience that the absence of any story or substance is somehow a laudable virtue, then why the hell wouldn't you, right?

 

I can appreciate the idea of making it an exercise in atmosphere and tension but, for me at least (and evidently the majority of audiences), there needs to be some SHRED of substance to sustain fear. Fear of the unknown is a real thing but it only goes so far. Once you realize the movie doesn't actually HAVE anything for you to be afraid of, it stops working. The events - because again, I hesitate to gratify this film by calling it a "story" - are completely predictable and thus un-engaging, and there's nothing to spice it up. I don't need a movie to be really scary; I'm fine with psychological thrillers in the event there's an actual plot and/or mystery and compelling, fleshed out characters. This has none of that. It was either an experiment in minimalism that went too far or an impressively lazy piece of work. Either way, I think the general audience hatred for this film is more than deserved regardless of the marketing controversy.

 

But hey, the cinematography was nice.

Edited June 16, 2017 by Xillix

[antovolk]

Ok, wow. It's beautiful visually, surprisingly affecting and emotional, incredible performances and yet....it feels incomplete. It's just a snapshot. Maybe that's all it's meant to be. Can't really say more without spoilers. Definitely a must watch though, and I cannot stress this more - leave expectations at the door.

[The Futurist]

This movie seems the typical auteur-indie filmmaker mindset circa mid 2010's :

 

" Me, doing genre ? 

Please, I am above all this crap. I won't demean my art with cheap scares :.

My movie is a metaphor so powerful & transcendent  your brains will hurt."

 

The A24 formula strikes again.

 

 

Edited June 17, 2017 by The Futurist

[Kalo]

This was honestly one of the worst movies I've ever seen in theaters, the worst movie I've seen in a few years actually, it's dumpster garbage trash. 

[Arlborn]

Well, at least this movie is eliciting strong emotions!

[Blankments]

Dug the atmosphere, but overall I wanted more from it. Kinda disappointed

[The Futurist]

This thing was so amateurish and student-like, like a year-end film you have to present to your teachers to graduate in a random film school.

You know it s terrible but you show it anyway, even if your talent and skills are very questionnalbe to say the least.

Mediocrity sells these days in some social circles.

Leave filmmaking to professionals thank you very much.

 

Edited June 25, 2017 by The Futurist

[Mockingjay Raphael]

What a conceptual movie. I don't understand the whole hate that it received, the trailers sold it like an atmospheric horror with the inclusion of paranoia and the film brought what it sold. The whole atmosphere of paranoia is built with excellence, you watch the whole movie fearing for something that lives in the shadows, is there anything scarier than a virus? It can be anywhere without you even noticing, paranoia at maximum level. The cast is fabulous with highlight to Joel who create a tridimensional and likable character. The metaphor alluding to the way (most of) population has been living in these day of terrorism is brilliant, the family present in the film is nothing more than a typical family, living in fear of everything and trusting no one but themselves. The disease that consumed them was nothing but their own fears. The red door is nothing more than the representation of death itself (red colors usually represent death in Horror movies), so the fact that they always heard noises coming from behind it, was nothing but the own death trying to enter into their life. The relation between the two families was phenomenal, the director did the right choice by not choosing sides, there are no good or bad people; Only humans doing everything possible to stay alive for another day. The dead family was nothing more than a reflection of their own family.

 

Solid movie, not so good as TW/B/IF, but it does a good job with it's metaphors.

 

A-

[Mockingjay Raphael]

@Arlborn I think you may enjoy it. 

[The Stingray]

I thought it was quite good. Strong atmosphere and good acting/character development.

 

Also, some of you need to broaden your definition of horror. It doesn't always have to involve crazed killers with goalie masks or pale girls crawling out of television sets.