how so?
The couple were both infected and they'll both die soon as their son did.
No interpretation needed.
How were they infected - was it Andrew the kid or Travis.
shareI think the little kid had the disease. He gave it to Travis.
The dog - I have no idea how he died.
Yup.
shareI think it's likely that Travis was infected all along. Therefore any interaction / paranoia / worry and anguish that the family had, plus the unneccesary killing of anyone else was actually all in vain. 'We're all going to die some day' basically.
I'm pretty sure that in the final scene, Joel Edgerton's eyes are black, instead of the bright blue we've seen them all movie.
Very good movie
Andrew, sleep walked and opened the door, and interacted with the infected dog before going to sleep on the rug/floor (FWIW children are very prone to sleep walking).
Travis gets infected by helping the boy back to bed, the boy in turn infects mummy and daddy. Travis hasn't yet infected his mum and dad yet, but when he goes down stairs to discover the door open and then runs upstairs to wake his mum and dad thus he starts spreading the disease. After the dog is dealt with there is way too much contact between the infected Andrew and Travis (Travis's mum even kisses him), all their fates are sealed.
Travis and his parents are not yet showing symptoms (stronger immune systems) but the boy is, therefore the mum and dad are also extremely likely to become sick as well. They plan to leave and they can't be trusted not to return with bad intentions, it all gets tense and people die.
Ironically they could all of just chilled out and played a game of monopoly and died peacefully cuz they all got sick anyway.
Sickness 1 - Them 0
did you like it or not ??
shareI did.
I have thought about it some more and believe there is a lot more to this movie than at first glance. I actually feel there are some strong supernatural undertones going on that explain certain things like the door being opened.
Ok, here's what I think;
1) The movie title is the first clue, It Comes At Night, it has no meaning or relevance to a film about survivors staying alive during a plague, unless that plague is not your normal run of the mill plague but something more sinister... the title suggests something 'evil', at least to me it does.
2) The infected are infected in a pretty dark 'black magic' kinda way. Puking up blackstuff instead of blood, black eyes and almost 'tree stump' like sores poking through.
3) We see Travis have a lot of nightmares about getting this sickness, is it more than nightmares? Not saying sleepwalking, but rather premonitions or the black magic 'calling' to him?
4) Think about that time in Travis's dream when he goes out into the woods to look for his dog, he see's something, what does he see? It horrifies him completely.
5) We see a moment where Travis is drawing something sinister in the woods with charcoal.
6) The door is opened, and we can agree that the child is too small to do it (doesn't have the key either), and none of the parties in the house want to sabotage the good life they have, no one opened the door... it just... opened (with the possessed/demonic/diseased dog on the other side which to infect the household...).
7) The boy sleeping on the rug on the floor is also a bit creepy.
So yeh.. I like it, I think this is what the director was aiming at, definitely an 'apocalyptic plague survival' type affair, but with a subtle supernatural twist element to it that's not obviously picked up on. It's original, well paced and intense. If the supernatural element is not to peoples liking well then I guess there are heaps of other 'plague-like' films that are available (Contagion). I enjoy seeing something new.
some people claim to have seen humanoid figures in the woods - I went back and watched it twice and I didn't see anything - your supernatural theory is interesting.
shareI thought at one point I saw a tree stump look like a humanoid figure, I may go back and freeze frame.
shareIt really speaks volumes if you have to nit-pick through a film to see if you can get anything from it. There are no supernatural elements to this film, there is no hidden depth to this film, you're trying to find something that simply isn't there. Because the whole initial experience is so vastly underwhelming your brain is telling you to continually pick away at it in order to be satisfied with what you've just experienced.
VERY poor movie.
Well... there are no humanoid figures in the woods lol.
Um, well... that's like your opinion man... :)
I don't think I'm nit-picking here, I genuinely believe this is the correct interpretation of the movie, I'd wager a bet! Quick someone find the Director! hehe.
I think though that so many movies are made badly with huge gaping plot holes that the public are just used to ignoring the plot hole and carrying on still trying to derive some kind of satisfaction from the dribble. When a film comes along that has subtler cues the public are brainwashed into jumping into plothole world before hashing out the rest.
I come from IMDB forum world, and I used to jump many times onto the forums to query plotholes or need help with explanations etc, I will be the first to admit I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, but this time I think my analysis is spot on. However, even if you accept that there could be a supernatural element to all of this it doesn't mean it 'saves' it, it's still a different style paced film that I can understand how many would struggle to cope with, me I'm ok with it.
When Edgerton is driving his car, right before the encounter with the two strangers, you can clearly see a human figure in the woods. It's just a treestump. It looks like a man sitting.
At the 29:10 mark.
And I agree. The ending took a crap on the whole movie.
Nothing came and nothing comes at night. Just nightmares.
It felt like a cop out.
I enjoyed it but it was no Temps du Loup.
More recently, Here Alone and - especially - The Survivalist ran circles around It comes at Night.
(Those movies shot first and asked questions later.)
I searched and freeze framed at the 29:10 mark, there are no figures in the woods, just a fluke tree stump looking a tad like one.
I think this film is underrated because the supernatural element is subtle and not dumb in your face. But whatever, because of this I think it's at least original? (name one other apocalyptic disease style film where the disease is more alluded to a curse?)
Not seen Here Alone, but have seen The Survivalist (which was decent yeh). Hard to compare the Survivalist with this tho, as one is clearly a horror and the other not so much, but yeh I know what yer getting at.