Shut In Movie Review (Spoiler Free)

A flurry of boredom… Read on to figure out why this Naomi Watts thriller will leave you completely snowed under, wishing for the sweet release of rolling credits.

Genre: Drama / Horror / Thriller

Director: Farren Blackburn

Cast: Naomi Watts, Charlie Heaton, Jacob Tremblay, Oliver Platt, David Cubitt, Clémentine Poidatz, Crystal Balint, Tim Post & Peter Outerbridge.

Run Time: 90 min.

US Release: 11 November 2016

UK Release: 24 February 2017

German Release: 15 December 2016

And here I thought Visions would be the worst horror flick of the year. Well, toward the end, I keep getting surprised by a few stinkers. On top of the pile is this dramatic horror-thriller that simply doesn’t know how to engage its audience. I was actually looking forward to it because I am a fan of the lead actress, but even she couldn't turn this snooze-fest around. About halfway through, I fought my eyelids from shutting down, checking my phone every ten minutes to see if it was almost over. So let’s get into my review of why you should avoid this drag at all costs.

Mary Portman (Watts), a widowed child psychologist in rural New England, spends her days trapped in a gruelling routine, providing 24-hour care for her catatonic stepson Stephen (Heaton). Her monotonous life is shaken when young patient Tom (Tremblay) vanishes into the freezing winter outside her home. As a fierce blizzard cuts her off from the outside world, Mary begins to experience terrifying, inexplicable disturbances in her house.

Deep within its core, Shut In contains all the ingredients of an effective isolation thriller; however, its execution, especially the screenplay, turns it into a dreadful premise that lacks suspense or even intrigue. The remote setting is meant to create a dramatic outcome, as it reflects Mary’s emotional isolation, unfortunatley the pacing is so sluggish that it sucks out any feeling of conflict. Equally, the mystery of the missing child gets lost in confusing, unexplained segments of distress.

Most of the middle section repeats fake-out jump scares that turn out to be nothing more than dream scenarios. Most infuriating, is the third-act twist, which completely tanks the narrative. Without it, this would have been a below-average, monotonous cabin-fever flick, but adding this outrageous revelation robbed the plot of the little credibility it had left. It feels as if the writers forced an ending to hide the fact that they had none.

Though the dialogue conveys the lead’s heavy burden at the beginning, it becomes heavy-handed through repetition. Worse, it too often uses scenarios in which Mary is on the phone or on a video call to dump heavy expository explanations. The final twist is so ridiculously convoluted that it needs a full explanatory scene.

As for the characterisation of personas, these might be some of the worst developed I have ever seen in a horror-thriller. Not only are all thinly written, but the fact that they commit some of the worst, illogical decisions in the face of danger is absolutely baffling.

Naomi Watts’ character, Mary, is a widowed stepmother, taking care of her vegetative foster son, while running a child psychiatric clinic from her guest house. She is obviously in over her head, pressured by guilt to take care of her stepson. Watts has screen presence that locks viewers in. Unfortunately, the script didn’t leave her much to work with; aside from a few sincere scenes of doubt and despair over the missing boy, most of her segments come off as wooden. As for Mary, she also committed some questionable actions as a therapist, such as caressing the face of Tom, her young patient. 

Charlie Heaton as Stephen Portman, the stepson of Mary, is in a persistent vegetative state after an accident. That said, something more seems to be going on with him than at first glance, yet I won't go further into details to avoid spoilers. Heaton gives a nuanced performance in the chair, though the brief opening sequence before his accident paints him as whiny, as Heaton’s performance is ridiculously over-the-top.

Then there is Oliver Platt as Mary’s psychologist Dr. Wilson, who absolutely phones it in for the paycheck, and couldn’t give a more unnatural delivery. David Cubitt’s Doug Hart feels unnecessary and shoehorned in.

Finally, Jacob Tremblay, from Room fame, has a small role as Tom, Mary's deaf patient, who goes missing. He may give the best performance of all; however, it is hard to say, since his role is non-speaking.

As for cinematography, Yves Bélanger created a standard-looking film filled with tense opportunities, using partially obscured spaces, blocked doorways, etc. Sadly, too little of it is used, as most of the picture makes up for it with pretty standard close-ups, wide shots and panning movements, while the opening segment is weirdly cut. The few interesting angles taken are mostly undermined by segments of fake jump scares. 

Worse, though, is the lighting and squeaky-clean picture, which makes the movie feel completely synthetic. Nonetheless, I have to give props to the colour palette, as it successfully conveys the cold outside with whites and light blues, while the lead's home is warm, creating a clear divide between a welcoming home and the brutal environment outside.

---

Verdict:  Ultimately, Shut In is a painfully dull horror-thriller that squanders a promising premise through sluggish pacing, repetitive fake-out scares, thin characterisation, and clumsy exposition. Despite Naomi Watts’ best efforts, the screenplay gives her little to work with, while the uninspired cinematography fails to inject much-needed tension into the proceedings. The cold colour palette is one of the few technical aspects that works in the film’s favour, but it isn’t enough to salvage this tedious experience. What frustrates me most is how the third-act revelation completely undermines whatever credibility the story had left, turning an already mediocre thriller into an outright narrative disaster. If not for the stupid third-act revelation, it would have earned a higher score; as it stands, I will give it a 2.0 out of 10. 

Please, save your hard-earned money & skip this one. If you already saw it, leave a comment below to let me know what you thought. If you liked this review, leave a like & please share.