With plot holes.
I don't know where to begin nor where to end - so I won't even start.
Needless to say, if you value your intelligence - stay away from this film, because this film makes Trump's twits seem ingenious.
Cheerios.
Who cares as long as it delivers in suspense, tension and thrills? π
People don't watch horror movies in order to be enlightened or have their intellect developed π
Right, but well... clearly many people were able to suspend their disbelief - as for me, I was perpetually in the WTF state.
The extremely dumb premise of the film, as well as numerous logic inconsistencies were a bit too much for my fragile brain.
Many of the plot holes could have been fixed (perhaps if this was a small scale scenario?), but in its current form, this film really does rape one's intelligence again and again and again. I felt violated after the film was done.
there are no ''plot holes or logical inconsistencies'' name just one? I'll wait.
shareFrom the initial post I had a feeling the OP was a troll who had never seen the film. The responses and observations seem to have borne that out. Unfortunately the OP can just read plot holes posted by others to give the appearance of having viewed the film.
shareLogical inconsistencies - having a baby in a world where a mouse making sound gets killed.
Then may i suggest you simply was the wrong horror movies?
shareLol this post is so ironic...
a) Grand sweeping statement.
b) Excuse for not having evidence.
c) Suggests others follow a course of action based on a + b....
...and then compares the movie to Trump's ... tweets or wits? either way, still ironic.
Evidence? Half of the threads here comprise of 'evidence'. If you need evidence, read the other threads with 'plot holes' in the subject heading. Most of the reviews of this film point out that the premise of this film was seriously dumb, and then carry on by praising the acting. Good acting does not and should not excuse logic inconsistencies and dumb premises.
Trump - I suppose I shouldn't have gone there, but alas...
No, how about YOU tell us. You made the topic. Man up and put in the work behind your argument.
shareWhen I first read this thread with it's vague, over broad, nonspecific evidence in support of it's conclusion, I had the feeling that the OP had not actually seen the film. And I am no supporter of TRump.
shareWell,
all you have to do is read the other posts.. There's no need for the OP to have repeat what people are saying quite frequently.
Their statements are not grand, sweeping, nor broad. They're just summing up what everyone has already posted. There's no need to spoon feed you for "evidence".
I'm getting so sick of the production company's marketers/employees/fanatics/debaters/script writers coming onto these boards.. If you don't like what the OP stated, or what others have stated - just keep scrolling to something that suits your tastes..
(cheap porn, girlie picks and monster trucks are on the other websites)..
WOW, so everyone who posts a thought or opinion that shocks your sensibilities is a studio whore. Well speaking of overbroad....
I don't think the OP ever saw the film on which he/she based his/her opinion.
I never wrote "their" statements were overbroad. The op's statement was. I do not require spoon fed evidence. I would've liked to know on which plot holes the OP based an opinion.
I'm not a supporter of this film. I would give it a 6/10. I simply feel if you are going to criticize or praise a film...provide a reason.
Have a nice weekend!
*all you have to do is read the other posts.. There's no need for the OP to have repeat what people are saying quite frequently.*
If there is no point in the op to have to repeat other posts... then perhaps the op post is pointless to you. I actually enjoy reading others opinions on material I am interested in and would be nice if people backed up what they said.
*Their statements are not grand, sweeping, nor broad. They're just summing up what everyone has already posted. There's no need to spoon feed you for "evidence".*
"This movie rapes your intelligence" and "plot holes".... that is grand sweeping and broad...
*I'm getting so sick of the production company's marketers/employees/fanatics/debaters/script writers coming onto these boards.. If you don't like what the OP stated, or what others have stated - just keep scrolling to something that suits your tastes..*
I am not in any way affiliated with the production company not that it should matter in a public discussion forum. I and many others enjoy discussions of films, especially with people who have different perspectives and tastes so I will continue to do that. If you don't like discussions where posters have differing opinions, then this is concerning attitude on a discussion forum.
No clue what you are insinuating with the "cheap porn..." comment. Seems to be an attempt at an insult though... seem unnecessary and inappropriate.
I'd say it's worse than that. I googled if there were any reviews or just bloggers who would destroy this film. Yet, all that google shows are praises.
Angry Joe praised it, even though he should have been the one to pick up on the utter stupidity of this film's premise.
Metacritic shows the average score as being near 8 for reviewers and audience alike. Meanwhile, I think the premise of this film, as well as the actions of the main characters here are dumber than anything that we've seen in the latest SW film, which was panned by audience (which I agree with, but then again, to me most of the SW sequels/prequels are crap).
So, I dunno anymore - either I am completely out of sync with the vast majority of reviewers/viewers (very possible), or some people are being paid.
So you critique the movie with a vague, nonsensical attack and then end with an attack on Trump and his "twits"? I don't think his "twits" are what you should be worried about..........
shareWell, this movie builds tension with stupidity upon stupidity after stupidity in order to get any action going. Safe to say the family itself is stupid and hence why poor daddy lost his life as well as one of the sons.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azFsk42kb5E
And the woman GAVE BIRTH to a baby.
There are stupid films where characters should rightfully die within the first 30 minutes. This film featured a family which should have been offed within the first 2 minutes and every 2 minutes thereafter - if the created world had any logical consistency.
Too many plot wholeys?
sharewith no offense intended to the op & his raped intelligence or anyone else, i haven't found many of the many plothole comments on this board too compelling. i think most of them are actually explainable, & in other cases they are just things we don't know because we aren't given information. i do find the whole thing with the nail a bit weird, the mattress too, but none of those things are showstoppers for me, & they certainly didn't stop me from enjoying what i thought was a pretty tense, perfectly paced film.
but a friend did point out a possible inconsistency to me that i don't think i've seen anyone else mention: why couldn't the monsters just find everyone through their heartbeats?
these things can apparently hear smashed objects from pretty great distances. & the family takes pains to never speak, make no noise when they walk, so it's implied that they can hear footsteps & whispers. if their hearing is sensitive enough to pick up those sounds, it ought to be sensitive enough to hone in on heartbeats, no?
obviously, one answer is that if the monsters could hear heartbeats, everyone would be dead & we wouldn't have a movie, and i'm a-ok with that answer. i just thought my pal made a fairly good point, one that i don't think i've seen others bring up.
Heartbeats aren't that loud. You can assume that the noise made through walking and other activities is negligible to the larger sounds in the atmosphere.
Why they'd be able to hear a knocked over object from afar is what I'm most gripey about. Movie should have explained how distance plays into it. Also, why are they able to stay so well hidden when they're so damn huge.