I thought it was mostly good but the story, as has been said,was rather predictable. So telling it in flashback really didn't help and I felt that was a pretty odd choice to have made, because it weakened the existing suspenseful elements of the narrative (such as they were) even further.
And again it was obvious that the parts of the movie that many viewers would have had a problem with (ie they didn't work with the concept) were ridiculously glossed over and so alot of story logic was cheerfully tossed way out of the window (along with the odd character) . Even then I found myself wondering how they loaded up the car, got out of the house to the one way , way out in the wilds, why didn't they just bring everyone to the supermarket, why they couldn't have just looked at their feet etc, etc, etc. In the end I just gave up and went with the flow, which was just as well.
The "lack" of the visualization of "creatures" (sketches aside) didn't much bother me , I figured either somebody had rediscovered and then left the lid off the Ark of the Covenant for too long or that the monster from the island in "Lost" was taking a bus mans holiday, along with all the merry demons from Hell. I'd definitely have preffered something a bit weirder than simply a bunch of leaves being blown about with a bit of low menacing growling though.
Compared to "A Quiet Place" ,a movie that truely often had me gripped, this on the whole didn't and its unfortunate that "Bird Box" shared rather too many similar elements to it ( as it did with M. Night Shayamalan's misfire "The Happpening" ). I also cared a great deal more about that small family in AQP than I did to most of the characters in this, though, despite the very obvious direction the story arc took with all them, I was still rather moved by the end of it.
Oh and will the people in charge of casting stop hiring people because they "look" exactly like the characters they are supposed to play, it kinds of ruins the film even further.
