Get Out Review (Spoilers!)

→ in
Tools    





I thought it was great. It was genuinely creepy in places (Don't worry I'm not a fan of jumpscares) and the comic relief character was pretty ok. With all these Oscar-bait movies coming out lately about *The poor oppressed black people and the stinky white men*, this film definitely fells different. I'm very glad it didn't go with the direction of every new horror movie ever by removing the F-words to get a PG-13 rating.

A thing that annoyed me was a jumpscare that had *the soundtrack scream* noise. Very disappointing since the other jumpscares didn't have it.

Also how on earth did Chris get that cotton in his ears when his hands were stuck to the chair?!?!?!?!?!

Also how would Chris be in the Sunken Place if his brain was going to be removed from his body? He'd basically be dead.

Also how did Rod survive being with Rose. Did he not want to go to her parent's house, is it ever explained?

Also what was with the scene of them crashing into the deer? It was completely pointless and did nothing to advance the plot.

I'd love to hear your opinions about the film.

8/10.



You can't win an argument just by being right!
I want to read but need to know if it's spoilery?



You can't win an argument just by being right!
It IS spoilery. It's in the title of the thread lol.
LOL!!! I need to clean my glasses. Thanks.



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
I saw it and it was kind of good, kind of not for me. The main problem I have with the movie is I feel the director foreshadows too much, and it's almost in your face.

SPOILERS


Basically for the first half, whenever the main character, Chris sees a black person, the filmmakers decide to play this eerie suspense music, to suggest that something is dead wrong here. But we can already tell that from the acting and the behavior, and we do not need music to drive it home. It just feels overdone otherwise.

The director does this in other ways, by deciding certain camera shots that drive it home too much too. For example, when we see the maid talking to Chris in the bedroom, she is about 15 feet away from Chris, yet the filmmakers decide to shoot her in a close up shot with a really wide lens, like she's in your face, wanting to drive the point home that something is wrong with her, and feels like it's been shoved in your face, rather than from Chris's more natural perspective.

I mean in other suspense movies like Rear Window for example, they don't have lead up music most of the time, and they don't have over the top angles to foreshadow. They just allow the audience to figure it out on their own, and I thought that would have been better.

Also the movie's premise kind of feels behind the times. There have been so many movies about racism in a U.S. setting lately, such as Django Unchained, 12 Years A Slave, The Birth of a Nation (2016 one), and Moonlight, that it just feels like we have seen this theme dealt with so much before.

I mean it's dealt with in a more unique thriller plot, but it feels like The Stepford Wives, and they just replaced with the wives with African-American people.

Perhaps if this movie came out in the 90s, the racism themes would have felt more fresh compared to now. Or maybe if they wanted to make it more unique, they could have switched it around and had a town full of African-American people, who brainwash white people into being their slaves.

It would have gotten audiences talking a lot more in comparison for sure. I also thought it was kind of cheesy that the father gave that whole big villain speech about how we are all Gods in a cocoon, and all that. It just came off as a cheesy mustache twirly speech that came out of nowhere. The villain doesn't even need to talk at all, we still understand their motivations enough to make sense I think. Or at least come up with a better explanation than Gods in a cocoon.

I also though the third act was kind of frustrating, how Chris chooses to leave his enemies alive, just so they can come back and get him later, and he chooses not to leave when he should, like stopping to help saved one of the brainwashed people, which just make things worse.

I also question how the villain girlfriend character, was wearing headphones, and not able to hear her own brother being beaten to death with a blunt object downstairs, yet she totally heard a car crash outside, like 200 feet away from the house.

But all in all, there are a lot of moments in the movie as well, and genuine surprises that worked. So what do you think?



noticed it topped the sight and sound list http://www.slashfilm.com/sight-and-sound-twin-peaks/

kinda disgusting that a film like that resides at the top.
__________________
Oh my god. They're trying to claim another young victim with the foreign films.



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
But that's just Sight and Sound's 2017 list. I mean it wasn't the best year for movies to pick from, was it? Although I'm surprised it reached #1!



I enjoy the poll sight and sound does every 10 years and use it as a strong consensus of critical opinion therefore when I noticed Get Out of all things topping the 2017 list I was taken aback



As opposed to you, I disliked the first half and thought the film got better when it progressed. This is what I briefly wrote about it:

#117 - Get Out (2017) ~ December 1

During the first half of the picture I was totally unimpressed and even shrinked a few times because its attempts at "satire" were ridiculously obvious and not even remotely subtle. The film does get more interesting as it goes on, though, and ultimately even develops into a very capable horror film with some clever, nicely executed and cool ideas.
Ultimately I was left with mixed feelings. I wanted more of the second half (or even last third) and less of the rest. I'm glad I saw it, though.
__________________
Cobpyth's Movie Log ~ 2019



Welcome to the human race...
Also the movie's premise kind of feels behind the times. There have been so many movies about racism in a U.S. setting lately, such as Django Unchained, 12 Years A Slave, The Birth of a Nation (2016 one), and Moonlight, that it just feels like we have seen this theme dealt with so much before.

I mean it's dealt with in a more unique thriller plot, but it feels like The Stepford Wives, and they just replaced with the wives with African-American people.

Perhaps if this movie came out in the 90s, the racism themes would have felt more fresh compared to now. Or maybe if they wanted to make it more unique, they could have switched it around and had a town full of African-American people, who brainwash white people into being their slaves.

It would have gotten audiences talking a lot more in comparison for sure. I also thought it was kind of cheesy that the father gave that whole big villain speech about how we are all Gods in a cocoon, and all that. It just came off as a cheesy mustache twirly speech that came out of nowhere. The villain doesn't even need to talk at all, we still understand their motivations enough to make sense I think. Or at least come up with a better explanation than Gods in a cocoon.
Unfortunately, society isn't quite at the point where pointing out and criticising racism is "behind the times" because racism is still very much a thing. At the very least, Get Out has a different take on it to the other films you mentioned, which are mostly about slavery (while Moonlight isn't really a movie "about" racism to the same extent as the others clearly are). The key difference is that Get Out addresses a different kind of racism to the usual slavery/KKK kind - namely that of openly tolerant white liberals who end up mistreating black people in their own less obvious way (especially the backhanded compliments about how handsome and gifted black people are being a precursor to body-snatching). That's why it couldn't work if it was black people enslaving white people - that would just sound like a straight-up racist screed about how black people are secretly plotting to destroy White Purity or something as opposed to being a metaphor for how polite/progressive white people can still end up being secretly racist.

I also though the third act was kind of frustrating, how Chris chooses to leave his enemies alive, just so they can come back and get him later, and he chooses not to leave when he should, like stopping to help saved one of the brainwashed people, which just make things worse.

I also question how the villain girlfriend character, was wearing headphones, and not able to hear her own brother being beaten to death with a blunt object downstairs, yet she totally heard a car crash outside, like 200 feet away from the house.
I reckon it's just that he wants to, well, get out as quickly as possible rather than risk being overwhelmed if he sticks around too long to finish them off. I figure he tries to rescue one of the brainwashed people because the bit where he "wakes up" one of the guests with his camera implies that they could still be saved from the procedure, but that obviously doesn't stop said person from trying to attack him anyway.

noticed it topped the sight and sound list http://www.slashfilm.com/sight-and-sound-twin-peaks/

kinda disgusting that a film like that resides at the top.
It's one thing to disagree with their choice, but "kinda disgusting" seems too harsh.
__________________
I really just want you all angry and confused the whole time.
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
Unfortunately, society isn't quite at the point where pointing out and criticising racism is "behind the times" because racism is still very much a thing. At the very least, Get Out has a different take on it to the other films you mentioned, which are mostly about slavery (while Moonlight isn't really a movie "about" racism to the same extent as the others clearly are). The key difference is that Get Out addresses a different kind of racism to the usual slavery/KKK kind - namely that of openly tolerant white liberals who end up mistreating black people in their own less obvious way (especially the backhanded compliments about how handsome and gifted black people are being a precursor to body-snatching). That's why it couldn't work if it was black people enslaving white people - that would just sound like a straight-up racist screed about how black people are secretly plotting to destroy White Purity or something as opposed to being a metaphor for how polite/progressive white people can still end up being secretly racist.
But is a movie where a group of black people plotting to destroy White purity a bad idea for a movie? I think it could make for a very fascinating thriller, if done well.

I reckon it's just that he wants to, well, get out as quickly as possible rather than risk being overwhelmed if he sticks around too long to finish them off. I figure he tries to rescue one of the brainwashed people because the bit where he "wakes up" one of the guests with his camera implies that they could still be saved from the procedure, but that obviously doesn't stop said person from trying to attack him anyway.
I guess, but it seems to be that a few more blows to the head might not take that much time if you do it quickly.



Welcome to the human race...
But is a movie where a group of black people plotting to destroy White purity a bad idea for a movie? I think it could make for a very fascinating thriller, if done well.
In short, yes - even the odds of it being "done well" are extremely unlikely at best. The reason Get Out works is because of how it weaves a variety of race-based issues into its rather familiar horror premise, but a major plot-related one involves how there's a racist system in place that allows white people in general (even the "good" ones) to hold power over black people, so the concept of white people body-snatching black people is supposed to be a literal manifestation of that fear. If you reverse Get Out so that it's about black people body-snatching white people, then it's essentially sympathising with that same racist system.



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
I see what you mean, but I didn't mean for the system to be sympathized with, I just intended that by reversing it, you are turning the system on it's ear for the viewer to so speak. But the viewer would still overall sympathize more for the white protagonist, and not believe that he hasn't done anything himself to deserve being body snatched.



Welcome to the human race...
I see what you mean, but I didn't mean for the system to be sympathized with, I just intended that by reversing it, you are turning the system on it's ear for the viewer to so speak. But the viewer would still overall sympathize more for the white protagonist, and not believe that he hasn't done anything himself to deserve being body snatched.
Yeah, but it's that same system that favours white protagonists as the default in the first place so it wouldn't even work in that regard - it'd just be another generic body-snatcher movie where the subtext would either be bland or problematic instead of the intriguingly subversive stuff we did get with a black protagonist.

Wow thanks for reviving a dead thread guys.
Ironpony tried to start a new thread but someone went and merged it with this one. So it goes.



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
When you say the system, which system are we talking about? The social system? Cause if a white protagonist his held hostage in a house of black race extremists, he has to survive and get out, and the extremists will not care what the system thinks. So the villains would still be more powerful than the system.



Welcome to the human race...
The system I keep referring to is institutionalised racism, which is implicitly represented in the film by the villains themselves. Like I've stated already, that's part of the reason why swapping the races would not make this movie better or more interesting.