This movie is yet another allegorical piece about intolerance and paranoia and/or the issue of terrorism. In itself, that's not a terribly original movie/book/comic book/TV concept. What makes this one stand out, however, is that plays out as a slowburn horror/thriller rather than an action movie or broad sociological drama. For the first half of the movie, the plot could go in so many directions that the intriguing possibilities keep the viewer's attention. Is there something off about the outside world? About the father? About the daughter? Is the surrealism of the initial 50s-ish suburbia viewed through the window going to play out in some unexpected manner? It's a genuine mystery made intriguing by the canny traversing of the line between suggestion and reality made possible by dialogue that is straightforward in its application but ambiguous in its actual meaning.
As noted above, the first half of this movie plays out as a slowburn mystery; the second half becomes a more traditional action sci-fi, and while I don't mind a decent action sci-fi (Terminator, Total Recall, other movies that may or may not star Arnie), it is the weaker and less compelling part of the movie. It's not bad by any means. It's just less interesting than the original mystery.
One last thing, regarding the child in the main role: The odds overwhelmingly favor the likelihood that the "OMG KID SO ANNOYING!" crowd barely in their teens themselves. It's astounding that so many people expect a 7 year old not to act like a 7 year old. Kids get angry, kids get scared, kids act out, kids have trouble understand the deeper issues (especially when the only adult in the given kid's life never tells her what's going on or why things are the way they are. We can, however, question the severity of the dad's approach.) Most mature adults, even ones without kids themselves, grasp this. There was nothing about Chloe's behavior that wasn't perfectly normal for a seven year old kid. And, yes, the premise of the movie require a younger child; it doesn't quite work if the lead is a 40 year old virgin.
And the young actress handled the role phenomenally, incidentally.
As noted above, the first half of this movie plays out as a slowburn mystery; the second half becomes a more traditional action sci-fi, and while I don't mind a decent action sci-fi (Terminator, Total Recall, other movies that may or may not star Arnie), it is the weaker and less compelling part of the movie. It's not bad by any means. It's just less interesting than the original mystery.
One last thing, regarding the child in the main role: The odds overwhelmingly favor the likelihood that the "OMG KID SO ANNOYING!" crowd barely in their teens themselves. It's astounding that so many people expect a 7 year old not to act like a 7 year old. Kids get angry, kids get scared, kids act out, kids have trouble understand the deeper issues (especially when the only adult in the given kid's life never tells her what's going on or why things are the way they are. We can, however, question the severity of the dad's approach.) Most mature adults, even ones without kids themselves, grasp this. There was nothing about Chloe's behavior that wasn't perfectly normal for a seven year old kid. And, yes, the premise of the movie require a younger child; it doesn't quite work if the lead is a 40 year old virgin.
And the young actress handled the role phenomenally, incidentally.