Blu-ray + Digital HD

It Comes at Night Blu-ray Review

Plague 2.

Reviewed by Jeffrey Kauffman, September 11, 2017

Chances are you've never even heard of, let alone seen, a micro budgeted indie Australian feature from 2015 called, but if youseen it, you may have a definite sense ofas you watch, since both films share more than a few similar if not absolutely identical plot points. Both films offer a post-apocalyptic landscape altered by some sort of hideous disease which has taken out large swaths of the population, with one family trying to survive in an isolated outpost, only to ultimately be joined by another group, with simmering internecine tensions threatening to erupt at any moment.came and went without much of a theatrical life (that I've been able to document, anyway), matriculating to streaming services to Netflix (which is where I saw it, if memory serves), whilehas become something of a critical darling, and if not a box office blockbuster, enough of a success that its own micro budget was easily recouped during its theatrical exhibition. Much liketends to suggest horror more than depict it outright, and in factis probably even more discreet thanis in that regard.is a bit discursive about what exactly is going on, though it begins with a riveting sequence showing an elderly man with some kind of disease being coached to relax by his daughter  who is wearing a hazmat getup replete with a gas mask. The woman's husband and son transport the old guy outside (in a wheelbarrow) where the husband summarily shoots his father-in-law and then burns the corpse as the victim's grandson looks on, obviously agonized. It's a completely visceral opening to a film that otherwise tends to keep its horror proclivities played pretty close to its vest, tending to deal more in interior psychological issues than things that go bump in the night (though, as the title of the film may suggest,tendency also shows up).The trio of survivors turns out to be Paul (Joel Edgerton), Sarah (Carmen Ejogo) and their son Travis (Kelvin Harrison, Jr.) and the first "post killing grandpa" scene finds Sarah conflicted about having let Paul take Travis to witness the execution. It's a quiet scene, one which finds Travis attempting to listen to his parents through the floorboards, but it immediately establishes the kind of intimate, anxiety filled, approachtakes with what is otherwise a pretty rote horror film foundation. A kind of cheap scare comes when it turns out a supposed intruder Travis finds in the house is in fact the kid having a nightmare, but that immediately gives way to aintruder trying to break through a locked door. Paul and Sarah aim guns at the door, and when it burst open, Paul fires a shot, stunning a guy who is later identified as Will (Christopher Abbott). Paul's first order of business is determining whether Will has "the disease" or not, which he evidently doesn't. Paul is nonetheless unwilling to take any chances, buffeting Will's head with the butt of Paul's rifle and then tethering the unconscious man outside with a bag over his head.This opening skirmish amply details what becomes the roiling subtext of much of, as Paul has an on again, off again level of trust with regard to Will. Sarah encourages Will, who it turns out isinfected but who has a young family of his own, to come stay with the original trio in order to achieve something akin to safety in numbers, but Paul's reticence comes back to haunt the story at several key junctures.The bulk of the central part ofdocuments the matriculation of Will's family, which includes wife Kim (Riley Keough) and son Andrew (Griffin Robert Faulkner), into the workaday world of Paul and his family, all while distrustful tensions lurk just beneath the surface. While the film would seem to be about Paul and his suspicions, it might be more emotionally relevant to consider Travis the focal character, especially since much of the film's shattering climax concerns his reactions to events spiraling out of control.The interplay between two sets of people in desperate circumstances after the devastating effects of some kind of, well, plague links this film tomost securely, but unlike the Australian film, there's surprisingly little blood and other gore on display, and in fact several ostensibly violent scenes are either simply implied or not really detailed fully within the frame. That "power of suggestion" actually works to the film's benefit, letting the viewer's imagination create even more visceral nightmares than some more traditional horror opuses can conjure.Performances are top notch throughout this effort, albeit in a near mumblecore, tamped down way that may not appeal to those who like their horror outings hyperbolic 100% of the time. This is, despite some traditional horror trappings, more of a slow burn, with an emphasis on inner turmoil and shifting power centers rather than a litany of gross out effects.is kind of relentlessly bleak any way you look at it, though, with a kind of hopeless feeling that becomes almost suffocating as the film moves to a decidedly barren ending.