Shut In

Name: Shut In
Genre: Drama, Thriller
Released: November 11, 2016
Duration: 91 min
Rating: 25
Cast: Charlie Heaton, Jacob Tremblay, Naomi Watts, Oliver Platt

2016

METASCORE

Generally unfavorable reviews based on 14 Critic Reviews

See All

USER SCORE

Mixed or average reviews based on 39 Ratings

See All

4.0

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

4.0	Your Score
4.0	User Score Mixed or average reviews based on 39 Ratings

Would you like to write a review?

There is a 75 character minimum for reviews. If your review contains spoilers, please check the Spoiler box. Please do not use ALL CAPS. There is no linking or other HTML allowed. Your review may be edited for content. 0/5000

Check box if your review contains spoilers

Play Sound

Please enter your birth date to watch this video:

You are not allowed to view this material at this time.

Shut In

Now Playing: Shut In

Movie Details & Credits

EuropaCorp USA | Release Date: November 11, 2016 | PG-13

Starring: Charlie Heaton, Jacob Tremblay, Naomi Watts, Oliver Platt

Summary: A widowed child psychologist (Naomi Watts) lives an isolated existence in rural New England. Caught in a deadly winter storm, she must find a way to rescue a young boy before he disappears forever.

Director: Farren Blackburn

Genre(s): Drama, Thriller

Rating: PG-13

Runtime: 91 min

See All Details and Credits

Watch Now

Buy on

Stream On

Expand

Metascore

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Critic Reviews

The Guardian Peter Bradshaw

Feb 23, 2017

It’s low-key and modestly budgeted, but perfectly well made, and Watts maintains a cool and steady presence. Read full review

Zach Shevich

Nov 15, 2016

Watts does her usual commendable job with the flatly written character but ultimately, as the title would suggest, she runs into a wall. Read full review

Movie Nation Roger Moore

Nov 16, 2016

Naomi Watts deserves better than this. So does Oliver Platt. So do we. Read full review

Kimber Myers

Nov 11, 2016

Despite a strong effort from Naomi Watts, Shut In is more effective as a 90-minute commercial for the L.L. Bean aesthetic than as a pseudo-psychological thriller. Read full review

Frank Scheck

Nov 12, 2016

The lurid and unconvincing Shut In should have lived up to its title. Read full review

Joe Leydon

Nov 12, 2016

As thrillers go, Shut In is conspicuously short of thrills. It’s an undistinguished and predictable hodgepodge, so blandly generic as to suggest that it was cobbled together by filmmakers referencing a how-to handbook who picked spare parts from other, better thrillers. Read full review

Rex Reed

Nov 16, 2016

We’ve seen it all before in dozens of low-budget slasher movies. This one just has a better cast — dismally wasted and left to seek better employment elsewhere. Read full review

SEE ALL 14 REVIEWS

Write a Review

User Reviews

Cobthecrazed

Feb 12, 2022

A solid horror film with one really, really bad, over-the-top performance by Charlie Heaton.. Amazing how the lefties are hating on this movie, but not giving any reasons why. They just don't like Ben Shapiro. So brainwashed. Go enjoy the movie and make up your own mind!

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

BITESCREEN

Jun 21, 2017

Im ländlichen Maine kümmert sich die frisch verwitwete Kinderpsychologin Mary um ihren gelähmten Sohn Stephen. Der Druck ist riesig – und als auch noch Patientenkind Tom in einem Schneesturm verschwindet, dreht die schwer Angeknackste völlig am Kabel: In fast schlaflosen Nächten verschwimmenIm ländlichen Maine kümmert sich die frisch verwitwete Kinderpsychologin Mary um ihren gelähmten Sohn Stephen. Der Druck ist riesig – und als auch noch Patientenkind Tom in einem Schneesturm verschwindet, dreht die schwer Angeknackste völlig am Kabel: In fast schlaflosen Nächten verschwimmen Albtraum und Realität, unheimliche Schritte knarzen durchs Haus – und plötzlich liegt jemand mit im Bett. Ist das etwa Toms Geist? Der Grusler Shut In sorgt schon mit seinem eingeschneiten Setting für ordentlich Stimmung, die Kino-Neuling Farren Blackburn mit einer wandernden Kamera, tausend dunklen Ecken und einer panischen Naomi Watts in der zweiten Filmhälfte in Hochspannung verwandelt. Das mit The Shining-Zitaten und einem gut gelaunten Oliver Platt gespickte Ende ist zwar unglaubwürdig und übertrieben – aber unerwartet effektiv.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

GinaK

Nov 14, 2016

A solid horror film with one really, really bad, over-the-top performance by Charlie Heaton. His awful performance (perhaps more the director’s fault than Heaton’s) dragged down fine work by Naomi Watts and Oliver Platt and most of the rest of the cast. Another problem is that we have had aA solid horror film with one really, really bad, over-the-top performance by Charlie Heaton. His awful performance (perhaps more the director’s fault than Heaton’s) dragged down fine work by Naomi Watts and Oliver Platt and most of the rest of the cast. Another problem is that we have had a lot of inventive horror films ately, and this film was more traditional. Overall I enjoyed this film for the lead performances and the claustrophobic atmosphere, but I can’t say it wasn’t without faults.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

Compi24

Nov 25, 2016

It's disappointing that, in a year filled to the brim with horror feats, this movie is the one that has to cap it all off for us. Indeed, Naomi Watts may try as hard as she can with what she's been given here, but the simple fact remains; what she's been given is so devoid of any tension,It's disappointing that, in a year filled to the brim with horror feats, this movie is the one that has to cap it all off for us. Indeed, Naomi Watts may try as hard as she can with what she's been given here, but the simple fact remains; what she's been given is so devoid of any tension, intrigue, or character development that even an actress of her caliber can't save this hopelessly uneventful slog of a "horror film" with a third act so over-the-top and incredulous it ventures into "so bad it's funny" territory. Avoid if you can.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

KaptenVideo

Dec 9, 2016

People need to be working. It's not just about paying bills. More importantly, it's about keeping busy which is vital psychologically. It gives us the feeling that we have purpose or at least a direction – so we can feel that we belong somewhere and this big train called Life has not leftPeople need to be working. It's not just about paying bills. More importantly, it's about keeping busy which is vital psychologically. It gives us the feeling that we have purpose or at least a direction – so we can feel that we belong somewhere and this big train called Life has not left the station without us.

Movie people need to be working too, even more so than a regular joe with a regular steady job. Because movie biz can feel very hectic and random. You end one project, feel the threat of the great unknown and the only supporting thought may be: so what's next? It would be good to have couple of new offers already waiting.

This is the way, at least according to my hypothesis, that most genre movies are made. You know, the kind of movies that don't feel like they have anything to say really, and may not even show much passion for the story, topic or genre they represent. People just rehash whatever has done before countless times, sometimes with feeling (almost) fresh and becoming a cult classic, sometimes ending up just dull and ugly.

But somebody somewhere managed to get enough funding for it, using magic pitching words like "This is gonna be like X but with added Y and Z" and now it needs to be done. Hey – people need to be working anyway.

"Shut In" is that tedious genre movie that many probably feel the need to not watch til the end and some certainly even like, because they haven't seen this kind of thing too many times before, or they are in generous mood and the night was boring anyway, or they just did lots of drugs and now everything feels exciting, whatever.

It reshashes the cliches of even two cheap horror sub-genres. I will only name "hostile house" because otherwise I would spoil the fun for some lucky person. Child psychologist is living alone with her vegetable-state-son and then she discovers some disturbing activity in the house which seems like... Damn, I'm too good. Now it seems more interesting in writing than it really is.

The first part plays out like any other haunted house movie. It's a bit slow and tedious and workmanlike... you will probably check your clock during the first 30 minutes and think: "OK, it's not that bad..." That's mostly due to starring lady Naomi Watts who does convincing job as reclusive person who is slowly bowing down on the heavy load the life has put on her shoulders.

Then we reach the second part and the movie makers feel the need start adhering to the rule that any Any Self Respecting Low Budget Horror Must Have A Big Twist in the End or Second Half. The movie changes tone completely and turns to **** quickly. It was just harmless and tedious before, now it's just silly and makes you crawl your eyes and ask "Really?" a lot. It would probably be tolerable as a subplot in "90210"-style teen drama but not as a second half of a major movie. Having said that, I discovered that the director's body of work does include mainly episodes of different not-quite-A-list TV series.

If there's a single argument for watching "Shut In" and not any better thriller/horror that its copying, then it would be Naomi Watts. She totally justifies spending the big bucks (in case they didn't get her cheap for some reason). She's always believable, even in the last third when the onscreen events turn to kind of "I am not sure if I am able to continue watching this without laughing or instead checking Facebook in my phone" bad.

I would recommend re-watching "The Sixth Sense" or "The Others" instead. Watts has gotten her money for her good work, now let's let the nature take its course and bury this little movie under the rug of time. It will probably reach Netflix and/or other streaming services soon, so you can check it out and quit in 15 minutes or so.

Watts seems to believe she hasn't outstayed her welcome in horror genre although her better-received projects ("The Ring" 1-2 and Peter Jackson's "King Kong") are already at least ten years old. Of course there was also 2011's excremental "Dream House" but the less said about this colossal misfire, the better.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

sjulti

Dec 4, 2016

This is a terrible movie, going in you think this is a ghost movie but as it turns out its not that at all, a lot of stuff in this movie is bad the acting the pacing in wich things happen and the twist is so stupid, id save my money if i where you guys

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

Gresh854

Dec 5, 2016

I'm going to be honest here in defense of my own self righteous, that I went to see this movie cause my friends wanted to see it. I skipped my chance to see Arrival for this movie and I wish I had gone and seen that instead cause this film might just be the hugest disaster of 2016 I've seenI'm going to be honest here in defense of my own self righteous, that I went to see this movie cause my friends wanted to see it. I skipped my chance to see Arrival for this movie and I wish I had gone and seen that instead cause this film might just be the hugest disaster of 2016 I've seen this year so far. I'll also add, that all my friends after the movie ended, thought the film was a waste of time, boring, and overall immensely stupid. I guess the only positive I have for this movie is that Charlie Heaton's actually tried to act really well in this film but his character just came off as confusing due to an awful script. Also the cinematography in this film was alright and sometimes beautiful, but cinematography is one of those factors that really don't affect my opinion about a movie, if the overall film is layered with negative factors. Naomi Watts' character in this film was so bland and one dimensional. Her character made so many cliché, stupid, horror movie decisions in this movie and had emotions that were conveyed extremely poorly. The movie takes about an hour to actually get semi-interesting since the first hour is pretty much really bad exposition scenes that don't really have anything to do with the revealing plot at all. This movie also relies on something I hate a lot about certain horror movies: "jump scares." I can't stand them. Literally the only scares in this movies are mainly false scares that aren't even remotely scary. Another negative I just have to mention about this film is the twist ending. Of course I won't spoil it, but, it is a laughably bad twist. What I hate the most about this revealing twist is it has nothing to do with the events that have led up to it, it just came out of nowhere. Readers, if you feel like torturing yourself with a film that is extremely boring for the 1st two acts and has extremely bad script writing, go right ahead and watch this "movie", but if you want to save money and time, just skip this movie for sure. I'm going to give this movie a D- and a score of a 1.5/10.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

SEE ALL 12 REVIEWS