The Strangers: Prey at Night

Why do I listen to you, people? You are all wrong about this one and I didn't watch it before because I was stupid enough to believe in reviews and other people's tastes.

It's a completely different film than the first one and the set-up is a bit rough, I will give you that. Now...as soon as the family arrives at that camp, holy moly! I know I am a horror unapologetic fan, so I know that I got lots of references/homage that probably others didn't. However, even forgetting that, have you seen that camera movement? The music? The atmosphere? The fear? The acting? The jump scares? How does it play with darkness and light?

Tense as hell, this film never lets you breathe in the last 40 minutes, always playing with high stakes that make you believe that anyone can die. The pool scene and the police car scene alone are enough to recommend this movie every day of my life.

Girlfriend made me watch this with her... now im single,

Ten years ago as an impressionable teenager, I saw "The Strangers" at a midnight showing with one of my best friends. To date, it stands as the most taut moviegoing experience of my life. After nearly a decade of production hell, the sequel-"The Strangers: Prey at Night" has finally come out of the woodwork. This followup has the same trio of villains pursuing victims in cat-and-mouse games, but this time it's an entire family staying at a deserted resort who are the target.

Perhaps I'm biased because I truly love the original film, but I found "Prey at Night" to be a significant letdown as a followup to Bryan Bertino's 2008 film, which was a masterful exercise in tension. I was skeptical of a sequel even being possible given how well Bertino exercised his formula in the first film-what else could really be done? "Prey at Night" essentially takes the formula of the first film, dresses it in de rigeur '80s style (complete with an exclusive '80s soundtrack), and amplifies the gore. It's mostly in good fun-but it's also completely devoid of suspense, tension, and unease.

There are a few sequences that are masterfully-executed-including a protracted sequence in a neon-lit swimming pool, and a mother-daughter attack in a trailer- but the in-between that stitches these better scenes together is repetitive and predictable, and the cinematography often gives the feel of a made-for-TV movie. The characters are also an issue in that they feel too much like stock characters; the lead being a chain-smoking bratty teenage girl running around in a Ramones t-shirt, followed by her likable brother, and two hip parents who are in the process of carting little-miss-trouble off to boarding school. In spite of the contrived characters, the acting is fairly good from all involved, including the actors portraying the three strangers.

There are a few moments of true tragedy and true catharsis in the film which are well-orchestrated, but I cannot help but compare "Prey at Night" to its predecessor. This sequel is a very different film that has its hits, but it frankly has more misses. As a frivolous run-of-the-mill slasher, it's rather enjoyable, but it lacks the emotional gravitas that made the first film so arresting and nerve-shredding. 5/10.

Let me be clear I HATED The Strangers (2008) and certainly didn't expect them to make a sequel a full decade later.

I'm not entirely sure what it was about the first movie, but it just came across as entirely one sided devoid of purpose and basically plot torture porn and that did nothing for me.

This time around we see a family set up camp in a trailer park only to come under siege by the same three masked psychotics. Among them the stunning Christina Hendricks and former child star Bailee Madison.

Thankfully what we're presented with isn't so one sided and does have a plot. Sure the plot is the time honored generic slasher one but it's a plot all the same.

So what does it have going for it? Well for a start the soundtrack is great as is the score. It fits the movie perfectly and is refreshingly retro. Ontop of that we have some great cinematography, the movie certainly has style.

So it looks great, it sounds great and we have Hendricks on board. So what went wrong? Well other than it being generic, Hendricks isn't the big character you'd imagine so forget about her being the leading lady. To make matters worse it falls into many of the standard slasher pitfalls so we've seen the majority of it before.

This is a vast improvement over the first movie, but it's still just another slasher.

The Good:

Christina Hendricks

A few decent shots

Fitting soundtrack

The Bad:

Christina Hendricks is wasted

Generic stuff

Things I Learnt From This Movie:

I'm glad I'm not the only one who awkwardly laughs when in pain

If they keep up with the improvements they might have an average movie eventually

Definitely worth a watch. The direction, the soundtrack, the dread and twists all make this a very thrilling watch underrated for sure!