You're Next

2013 "Did You Remember To Lock Your Door?"
6.6| 1h34m| R| en
Details

When the Davison family comes under attack during their wedding anniversary getaway, the gang of mysterious killers soon learns that one of their victims harbors a secret talent for fighting back.

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 30-day free trial Watch Now

Trailers & Clips

Reviews

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.
InformationRap This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.
Gary The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.
Raymond Sierra The film may be flawed, but its message is not.
johnwiltshireauthor I've had a number of people recommend this movie to me because they reckoned it would just the sort of thing I enjoy. On paper, they were right. Home invasion fought off with persistence--what's not to like? This was my second time of attempting to actually get through it because I told myself I'd not given it enough of a chance the first time around (I'd gotten to the dinner party and just curled up in a ball and died of disbelief). So, I tried it again. Got to the dinner party, ignored the stop button calling to me and stuck with it.... for another minute then watched the rest on fast forward (actually just jumping to the next bit of action). Why did I hate it so much? Firstly, where did they get these people? I won't call them actors because they weren't. My God. Wooden doesn't even begin to describe it. Then the writers. Sheesh. Have these writers actually heard anyone speak? For real? The dialogue was awful, just awful. Then there was the stereotypes. So, large family around the dinner table. One sibling is a lefty documentary maker. What was he wearing? A sort of Hezbollah scarf. One brother was a banker or something else evil, so he was in a cashmere roll neck and his wife in a frilly blouse even Mrs Thatcher would have vomited on, but the audience had to get that they were capitalists, so evil. The father made all his money... (remember wealth = greed and evil) in the arms trade. Wow. Juvenile writing. If you're going to do a home invasion movie, should you ensure that the audience actually cares about the home and the family that inhabits it? Fail.
ClassicHorror Its a really good movie, great soundtrack, decent writing, decent acting. The "animals" are some of the best modern day horror killers created recently. The only thing that brings the movie down is that the killers are just regular lowlives that got paid to kill the family. It turns it more into a murder mystery drama instead of a horror movie like i was hoping for.Don't get me wrong, its still horror, but i wish it was MORE horror and not just greedy kids.
mikoraud My rating is given in context. Shawshank Redemption or Citizen Kane it is not, but the makers are keenly aware of what they are filming. I am not a fan of scary/horror or gore (to put it mildly) and after the first killing I was on the verge of just giving up. I am glad I didn't. The twist is nicely implemented and the lead is a smart strong (literally) female not very common in films and would make Joss Whedon and Sarah Connor proud af.I agree that the first act is a drag, and to be fair, you would't miss much if you skipped it altogether. I do not agree with the label "low budget" or rather its connotation. It may well be low budget but it does not show. All in all, a very solid addition to the genre and one that would please anyone looking for more than a simple blood fest. Couldn't propose an improvement.
cmovies-99674 PROS: Something that YOU'RE NEXT did very well was set up an environment that was unique. You could really appreciate the way the characters interacted in this particular setting. For example, if you saw the same characters with the same plot in a different setting everything would have changed. This is cool because it shows the characters are dynamic and that this setting was the right choice because other settings would have given different endings that might not have been as interesting as this ones. To add on, the actors in this film were good in some aspects, and poor in others, like the way the characters interacted was genuine. This allows for the plot to become more seamless. With actors that feel real it allows for miss ups in the plot to be looked over because real people make mistakes.CONS: Lets continue with the acting. The downfall with some of the acting was with specific actors. I would say one in every three actors were not too good. Another thing that was frustrating was the ending of this movie. It had a good ending with a good connection to the rest of the film, however, it was very long and began to get boring. The audience understood what was happening within the first thirty seconds of dialogue, the finale lasted roughly 5 minutes and that took away from the suspense factor of the resolution. The rising action was great in this movie, but the movie needed either a climax that was less comedic, or a falling action to be more condensed. Other than that I recommend this film, and thanks for reading.www.chorror.com