Review's Review: 'Bird Box'

Now, I've enjoyed Bird Box; I thought the movie was at least a 4/5, I liked the intensity of the character of Sandra Bullock, her protection of the children, I hate jump-scares in general, not because they are scary but just because in most of the situations, jump scares are not needed, and this movie does not follow that scheme.

However, like all the time, critics are probably going to disagree with the public and hate on this movie by picking the minuscule of things, and The Guardian is no different.

Just take a look the review that The Guardian did on the Netflix movie:

"Kicking off with Mallory’s brutal river babysitter mission is bold and bone-headed. That opening lecture lets Bier establish 'Bird Box’s' rules, not that the two tykes listening are any more obedient than puppies. But when the film then jumps back five years to the first day of the attack, where most of the film takes place, there’s zero suspense in watching the rest of the cast get picked off. The what, why, and how of the crisis never gets answered."~ Amy Nicholson

Firstly, some points are understandable, and you could get an idea of what the author's taste is in horror movies. Simply-put: cliched horror movies with phantom noises and jump scares with the audiences' hearts palpitating at the sight of the next inevitable murder.

Secondly, the last part of the quote which states "the what, why, and how of the crisis never gets answered." Well, just in case, has anybody has ever heard of sequels? The primary goal of sequels is not only to be a continuation of the movies but also to touch upon things that were not shown in the first installation. Considering the massive interest the movie had gotten, as it broke the streaming record for Netflix, a sequel would be greenlit to be made sooner or later.

But was it worth giving the movie 2/5 just because of some questions that you had weren't answered, and the anticipated sequel could explain it just as quickly? No, and the author has other reason for the rating.

"However, the back of the audience’s brain is stuck trying to figure out things like: are the monsters hunting their prey, or is it just impersonal? How do the roommates get rid of the corpses?"~Amy Nicholson

Frankly, I'm not even sure if this part of the review was a satirically sarcastic comment or not? Because was it that hard for the writer to figure out whether the monsters were carefully choosing their victims or being "impersonal."

Just in case, you've got short-term memory; I'm going to remind you of a scene where the outbreak just started massacring the entire crowd when the pregnant lead character is in the car with her unfortunate sister. That doesn't look like the monster is calculative-ly hunting their preys to me or the ordinary public. That's an apocalypse, which defines the destruction of the world (in this case, the blind people are not destructed, they are immune), so I'm going to take a huge gamble and say that the feelings that the 'monster' had were impersonal.

Secondly, how do the roommates hide the body? Well, it is an apocalyptic movie so everyone would be a bit selfish and think about themselves, so hiding dead bodies won't be on their mind because get this, dead bodies are standard (weird, I know) in movies where they are meant to die and especially in apocalyptic-based movies.

Bird Box isn't a movie where the "roommates" killed the dead, so they don't necessarily need to bury it, even if they would've done so, how would they have done it when they would be wearing blindfolds whenever they go outside. They might as well dig themselves a grave.

"Within minutes, the strangers solve the basic concept of what’s killing the globe, voices overlapping like this horror film could, with one butler tuxedo, suddenly spin into a British farce with people barging in and out of the kitchen in high-pitched crisis announcing things such as: “We need toilet paper!” and “Don’t answer the door!” No one gets a backstory."~Amy Nicholson.

Firstly, they are humans so needing daily necessities are quite normal, I'm not sure of how you live and I'm in no place to criticize or judge your way of living, so asking for toilet papers is pretty normal, and not only toilet papers were needed, they needed food alongside other important materials.

Secondly, "no one gets a backstory," that part is understandable, but from the beginning of the movie to the middle of the movie, it should've been solidly clear that the movie was oriented and revolved around one character with some sequences that were primarily from the perspective of other characters.

If everyone had gotten a backstory, the movie could've easily crossed the three and a half hour mark, which I wouldn't complain but some people might. Secondly, that's another reason why sequels exist.

If one is ever greenlit, then I would really want to know what happened to those two that drove off with the car, perhaps into the supermarket that was loaded with supplies, maybe they became a little too ambitious and decided to go on a road trip to Vegas for reasons unknown.

In conclusion, I would give this review of Bird Box a 1.5/5 because of all the reasons mentioned above.