Within the horror/thriller genre there is the well-known, often-made subtype of the "undetected psychopath living in your house". "Within" is an example of this subtype.
As is de rigueur within this subtype, the psychopath in "Within" can move perfectly silently throughout the house, floating about within the walls as easy as you or I could move through the regular living space. The villain has nearly superhuman strength and is a very capable fighter and seeks to psych us out with terrible hair and animalistic snarls and growls. His warrior skills with various household accoutrement (knives, hammers, ropes, cords, etc.) easily qualify as an advanced martial art of its own.
As is my habit, I rate movies on a scale relative to what they tried to be, and this accounts for the 3 stars I gave "Within"; it's not even a decent example of its genre subtype. Being a Warner Bros. product, the production values are characteristically excellent. But that's the only positive thing you can say about it. It's quite possible for a movie that invents nothing new to get a very high score with me by simply being a very well done example of what it tried to be. As for "Within", not only is it not original in any way, it's a simply god-awful example of its genre and subtype. The "twist" at the end is taken wholesale from "The Silence of the Lambs".
The movie is excessively lazy to the extreme. All of the characters are tropes of their stereotypes and nothing else. Every plot movement depends upon stupid characters acting stupidly to the situation at hand in order for the story to move forward. Two examples out of the endless list:
1. The family in the movie has been victimized by not one but two completely separate sociopaths, and yet still takes no special pains to protect themselves by either careful behavior or the acquisition of any weapons they could use to protect themselves.
2. In the climactic scene at the very end of the picture where the primary sociopath is attacking the family, obligatorily every member of the family goes out of their way to behave like a complete moron. Every move they make occurs within a complete situational vacuum and in utter ignorance of the LEAST situational awareness. They focus their attention fixedly in some direction and patiently wait for the psychopath to pop out of the dark behind them and poke them with some sharp object. EEK I'm dead.
Literally EVERYTHING the family does during the climax battle scene simply serves to infuriate and frustrate the viewer. Where we're supposed to be amped-up and terrified, the psychopath has lost our interest. We're preocupied being angry at the movie for troping and stereotyping us viewers to death. As if it's NOT POSSIBLE to write a good story that DOESN'T consist of an endless chain of clichés fired at the audience like machine-gun bullets.
The only way anyone could possibly enjoy this movie is if you were 12 and had never previously even heard of the "undetected psychopath living in your house" movie type.
As is de rigueur within this subtype, the psychopath in "Within" can move perfectly silently throughout the house, floating about within the walls as easy as you or I could move through the regular living space. The villain has nearly superhuman strength and is a very capable fighter and seeks to psych us out with terrible hair and animalistic snarls and growls. His warrior skills with various household accoutrement (knives, hammers, ropes, cords, etc.) easily qualify as an advanced martial art of its own.
As is my habit, I rate movies on a scale relative to what they tried to be, and this accounts for the 3 stars I gave "Within"; it's not even a decent example of its genre subtype. Being a Warner Bros. product, the production values are characteristically excellent. But that's the only positive thing you can say about it. It's quite possible for a movie that invents nothing new to get a very high score with me by simply being a very well done example of what it tried to be. As for "Within", not only is it not original in any way, it's a simply god-awful example of its genre and subtype. The "twist" at the end is taken wholesale from "The Silence of the Lambs".
The movie is excessively lazy to the extreme. All of the characters are tropes of their stereotypes and nothing else. Every plot movement depends upon stupid characters acting stupidly to the situation at hand in order for the story to move forward. Two examples out of the endless list:
1. The family in the movie has been victimized by not one but two completely separate sociopaths, and yet still takes no special pains to protect themselves by either careful behavior or the acquisition of any weapons they could use to protect themselves.
2. In the climactic scene at the very end of the picture where the primary sociopath is attacking the family, obligatorily every member of the family goes out of their way to behave like a complete moron. Every move they make occurs within a complete situational vacuum and in utter ignorance of the LEAST situational awareness. They focus their attention fixedly in some direction and patiently wait for the psychopath to pop out of the dark behind them and poke them with some sharp object. EEK I'm dead.
Literally EVERYTHING the family does during the climax battle scene simply serves to infuriate and frustrate the viewer. Where we're supposed to be amped-up and terrified, the psychopath has lost our interest. We're preocupied being angry at the movie for troping and stereotyping us viewers to death. As if it's NOT POSSIBLE to write a good story that DOESN'T consist of an endless chain of clichés fired at the audience like machine-gun bullets.
The only way anyone could possibly enjoy this movie is if you were 12 and had never previously even heard of the "undetected psychopath living in your house" movie type.