The 2018 Netflix movie, Bird Box, based off the novel written by Josh Malerman, has sparked criticism, curiosity, and concern among many of it viewers. But what is Bird Box really?
Directed by Susanne Bier and written by Eric Hassler, the film is set in a post-apocalyptic United States, which is ravaged by a unknown supernatural entity that causes people to either commit suicide or force other people to take their blindfolds off when the creature is looked at. The film follows a woman, played by Sandra Bullock, who, with two other children dubbed Boy and Girl, try to survive and escape to safety from the entity and other forces of nature.

Now if you haven’t been sleeping under a rock, you’ve probably heard the name ‘Bird Box’ thrown around frequently, and for good reason. It’s been one of Netflix’s most popular releases and can be seen as a major step for Netflix to have a foothold in the movie industry. Bird Box popularity also stems from online memes and ‘challenges’ that have caused some injuries and thousands of dollars in damages. I’m not kidding, someone actually blindfolded themselves and drove in the streets to only crash later! So with all this high talk of the movie, how good is it?
I really like Post-Apocalyptic movies and stories. Being thrown into a world where everything and anything can kill you and being forced to make hard decisions, not out of morals, but out of survival is a fascinating concept. Watching these characters interact with each other and their environment is also fascinating to watch. The overall social condition has shaped us to be more sensitive and naive, so to see everyday people thrown into a world of death and destruction is a sight in itself.

I really enjoyed the character dynamics in the movie. Sandra Bullock, who acted as the main character, did a very good job. However, some of her performances felt wrong and wonky. The rest of cast did alright as they all had very different roles to play, however some of the characters come off as too naive and and optimistic, and some of them felt out of place and too dependent on hope rather than survival. Granted, that’s the only thing you can grasp when thrust into a situation, but something about it felt wrong. For example, there is a scene where a character lets a random stranger in without any warning, but where it’s nice to sympathize with a stranger, because you had similar predicaments, you need to tell everyone else first, so you don’t get killed or infected.

The story in itself was written well and keeps the viewer interested every second but however the ending just felt wrong, because it needed to be a happy ending or everyone would be depressed and dislike the movie. Personally, I don’t subscribe to the belief of writing a story that has a forced happy ending. The story should end where the story is pointing at as it goes on, and for a second I thought it wouldn’t end predictably, but they miraculously get out alive. Other than the ending, the story was written really well with extreme thought put into its environment and setting.
The film work was great. I liked the cinematography of the river scenes and the fog surrounding the forest really gave the eerie feeling of isolation and survival. Another thing that I thought was really cool, was the deterioration of the outside over the course of a few days. Seeing the outside slowly getting grittier, really added to the post apocalypse film theme.

Overall I feel this movie, despite its forced ending and some poor character development, was good. It’s not anything special, but it’s not bland enough to be forgotten, and I’m giving this a 6.5/10.