Single mother-to-be Sarah (Rachel Nichols) is spending Christmas Eve alone, still mourning the death of her husband in a car accident several months prior. As night falls and a storm moves in, a stranger knocks at her door insisting to be let in. The unknown woman (Laura Harring) knows Sarah’s name and that her excuse of a sleeping husband is a lie. Rattled, Sarah calls the police, who find no one during their initial search but promise to return later on a wellness check. When the stranger reappears she manages to break into the house, terrorizing Sarah and a succession of concerned visitors as she fixates not on the mother, but the child she’s carrying.
Rachel Nichols as Sarah in Inside |
For the first two-thirds of its runtime, Inside reproduces the story beats of the original film with moderate success. Running 15 minutes longer than its French counterpart, that excess time gets filled by needless exposition and some unsubtle foreshadowing. Nichols moves across the screen with the desperation of a woman both hampered and motivated by her full-term belly, while Harring channels the severity of an impatient nurse saddled with an unruly patient. Both women play off one another well and tension is at its highest when the two are allowed to tussle.
What amounted to a competent remake falls apart, however, in the final act. Intermediate victims stumble through the story like so much cannon fodder. There is a difference between a character dying because their adversary is superior in some way and dying simply because the script demands a staggering level of stupidity from them. Most (but not all) of the kills in Inside can be credited to the latter, with victims so outlandishly dim-witted you’re almost grateful when they’re finally dispatched. Thankfully that doesn’t extend to our heroine Sarah, although her labor pains do conveniently come and go depending on how agile she needs to be.
Maurey and Bustillo had the nerve to go “There”, that vaguely defined region in storytelling most likely to shock even the most jaded consumers. It was that boldness of conclusion and the brutality leading up to it that earned À l'intérieur such praise, and Vivas abandons it all for a cookie-cutter final confrontation. Maybe it’s a calculation that will pay off. Horror had a bumper year in 2017, and these familiar conventions may be exactly what a wider audience prefers. For fans of the original, though, there isn’t any reason to trade in for the slicker—and simpler—model.
RATING: ★
Watch the trailer:
Great review! That seems to be how remakes go, isn't it? Especially in the horror genre. And even more so when its a remake of a foreign film. You nailed it with this: "There is a difference between a character dying because their adversary is superior in some way and dying simply because the script demands a staggering level of stupidity from them". Too many times does a character die in a horror movie and I'm shaking my head because its just such a pointless death that does absolutely nothing for the plot. In some cases, especially 90s slashers, these types of deaths are part of the fun. But when its a horror film on the more serious side I don't think it's asking too much for characters to be given a bit more of a brain. Foreign film remakes always tend to get so watered down which is always such a shame! I'll have to check the original out :)
ReplyDeleteOh yeah. I don't mind slashers where the point is a high body count, but at least the good entries in that genre make up for it with creative kills. Sarah and the Woman were just so much smarter in the first part of the movie, it was disappointing that they went for a more stereotypical American horror ending.
DeleteI would highly recommend the original though! It's quite violent and dark, as a warning, but well-made all around :)