Hush combines the familiarities of the home-invasion sub-genre with the unpredictability of its interesting premise. Kate Siegel plays deaf author Maddie with persisting conviction and aids in mining the story's nailbiting potential. It doesn't surpass every trope there is within its category, but it sprinkles plenty of "oh, how will this turn out?" questions across its short runtime to keep you on your toes.
Add a Review
-
MR_Heraclius14 February 2020
-
markgorman17 December 2016A chess game of suspense involving a deaf girl and a serial killer locked outside her home in the woods.
It sounds like a cliché with a twist, and it is, but it's a really good cliché with a twist.
For a start the premise that the lead character Maddie, the deaf writer, who is home alone after a relationship break up, opens up a box of plot twists and devices that are unfamiliar in their familiarity.
Second, Maddie, (Kate Siegel) dominates the movie, even though it's essentially a double hander, with a superbly sympathetic performance that never gets you shouting "don't do that", as is common in this genre.
The tension does not let up from start to finish (and it's only 82 minutes so doesn't outstay its welcome) as the masked invader tries to outwit Maddie and vice versa.
The temptation might have been to take Maddie's disability and, like with Audrey Hepburn's blindness in Wait Until Dark, use it to her advantage somehow; but that does not transpire. It's actually her skills as a writer (she is completing her latest crime novel when the would be assassin strikes) that gives her some traction in what should be a one-sided battle.
This is an intelligent, well paced and well shot, low budget slasher movie, but on a higher plane. -
'Hush' is a lot like 'The Strangers', except instead of strangers plural it's only one man, and instead of a husband and wife being terrorized it's a deaf and mute recluse. It's very tense and cleverly written bar a few cliché tropes that come with this kind of movie. It also has a minimal synth score, something I notice more and more horror movies are utilizing - 'You're Next', 'It Follows' - to give it an '80s classic slasher atmosphere. It's hard to even call it horror though as it offers far more thrills than actual scares. I was thoroughly satisfied watching this movie. It's constantly engaging, and that has a lot to do with the terrific performances of both the man and Maggie, and there are a few scenes that are genuinely depraved and chilling. It doesn't break any new ground, but following 'The Babadook' and 'It Follows', 'Hush' continues to reinspire the subtle, quiet corner of the genre and bodes well for the future of psychological thrillers. Highly recommended.
-
The slasher genre was at it's peak in the 80's, when the 90's came it began to struggle and in this guys opinion it's never fully recovered. Sure every once in a while a high profile slasher movie pops up but the interest never seems to last.
I'd say a primary reason is that they're all the same but that could be said about a lot of horror sub-genres.
Here we have the story of a mute/deaf author who lives out secluded in the forest and you guessed it she falls foul of a masked killer.
The fact she's deaf actually adds more of an element to the movie than you'd imagine and though Hush suffers from the same Slasher tropes as every other it manages to stay fresh regardless.
Well shot, well written and well acted by both little known leads I came away from Hush very satisfied. Sure it's nothing revolutionary but it didn't need to be, it's a demonstration that slashers still have life left in them.
The Good:
The pets role in the film
Some well crafted moments
Both leads were excellent
The Bad:
Slasher tropes -
jay_lanza23 June 2016Great idea that unfortunately fell short of what I expected. Both lead characters are made to purposefully fall short in their ability to outsmart one another by simply being mediocre at being the killer and the obvious survivor. So you're not so much glued in anticipation to the outcome, but more so find yourself waiting for the inevitable. The film loses its ability to scare you as the killer reveals himself too early, and when he does his face lessens what was already a non threatening mask. I didn't see any twists or turns and nothing made me feel surprised or shocked. Which was a shame as I felt the core of this movie was a fantastic idea.
-
tanpurepiyush9 April 2016Rating a 9 because it cant be any less!! I remember watching the trailer of the movie and I thought maybe its just the trailer thats good, until....i Saw this movie today!!
The actress who played the lead is so amazing as an actress and i hope to see more of her in the future!! Unlike other movies from this genre, it did not appear anything extra anywhere at all and felt more real.
The serial killer as well was amazing played by the actor!
I held on to my breath till the credits started rolling and I am still in that mood of the film created by it.
The lighting, the cinematography, the acting, direction is just so right up to the mark!
These kinda gems come only once in a while! I hope the team is reading this review someday :)
Guys you did an AMAZING job and this has been one of the most perfect horror/thrillers I have recently watched! The kinda film that will always be remembered once you watch it. -
arungeorge135 June 2017'Hush' is a fast-paced modern slasher flick with a twisted take on the genre. Well, the twist here is that the lead protagonist is deaf and mute from her teens and the director-writer combo of Mike Flanagan and Kate Siegel (who also happen to be husband-wife in real life), places this character in a stuck-up situation where a killer is on the prowl and all odds are stacked against her. Questions start piling up but a good thirty minutes into the film, the viewer is given enough leads to estimate where the film is headed.
A film such as this, where the entire scenario revolves around a minimalist location, one feels inclined to applaud director Flanagan's knack for not making the film look like yet another typical home-invasion flick. The protagonist Maddie's inability to speak or hear is put to good effect in the screenplay. I won't spoil those brilliantly written and choreographed scenes in this review, because that is exactly what puts this flick a few notches above the rest in the genre. Equally inventive and enthralling are those scenes where Maddie's imaginative capability is put to test.
The cast (that comprises of just four characters, out of which the film revolves majorly around two!) is adequate as well, and lends ample support to the overall mainstay of the flick. Flanagan's directorial skills, which looked rather unimpressive in Absentia (2011), after which he made a notable Oculus (2013), has considerably improved over the years, all the while sticking to modest production expenditure. Aided in writing by his wife Kate Siegel, the couple seem poised to astonish us yet again this year in the sequel to the strictly sub- par Ouija (2014).
Hush is a pleasant surprise amongst the shitload of low-budget slasher garbage that is handed out to us every now and then. It is by all means worth a watch for thriller buffs. -
shadowtree8 June 2019Found this on Netflix and decided to give it a shot. I had tried to make it through The Blackcoat's Daughter earlier in the evening, but I bailed on that and went over to Hush; by comparison, this one is much better.
The movie starts well enough by establishing Maddie's background and new situation. There is the element of Craig, her ex, who we feel may become prominent to the storyline but never does.
Once the murderer arrives, it is clear he does not want to simply murder her, he wants to toy with her for a while. He's already murdered her friend and gained access to the house, but he opts to scare her first. This is the basis of the movie and where it starts to grow.
The murderer is okay, not particularly smart, but sufficient. His assault on Sarah, followed by using her as a prop, was rather brutal. Other than that, I did not find his character notable.
Maddie is a likable character. Despite her faults, we want her to win and take that guy out. She has at least two solid opportunities to end it, and they are both in the same scene. John, Sarah's boyfriend, is moments away from knocking the murderer out with a rock when Maddie inadvertently alerts the murderer by banging on the window. As a result, John gets stabbed and his plan is foiled. All is not lost, however, as he is able to recover enough to pin the murderer and choke him out. This is all happening about 20 ft. away from Maddie outside the house. Maddie has an ideal opportunity to walk up and deliver the final blow while John has the murderer pinned, but she blows it by staying in the house. This is somewhat confusing as we later see Maddie calculating all the possible outcomes depending on what she decides to do next. She is clearly logical enough to have known to make a move when John had the murderer down, yet that forethought was not put to her advantage. That, to me, is the weakest point of the movie.
That aside, Maddie makes a good heroine. She keeps fighting and figures out how to use her lack of hearing to help her (fire alarm). Despite being put on the verge of death, she is able to hang on and turn the tide. I was cheering for her in those closing moments. -
pennypham-8425221 March 2020Something i learned after see this movie: If you cant defend yourself, DONT stupidly isolate you from the world. If director want me to hate the movie, he won. I have more depression after seeing this film. I have seen a lot of bad movies but this is worst!
-
Matt_Layden14 April 2016Mike Flanagan is one for two in my books. His first big film was Absentia, which was a slow boring mess of a film. Interesting ideas, but nothing much else was going on in the film. His second output was a vast improvement, Oculus. Flanagan showed promise and improvement, which made me interested in seeing what else he had for future projects. Well, he has two films coming out in 2016 and I want to talk about Hush, his take on the home invasion sub-genre.
Home invasion films have been done to death. Some are great (You're Next), some are tolerable (The Strangers) and some are downright terrible (When A Stranger Calls, 2006). So how does one make their home invasion film stand out from the rest? There has to be some twist on the story to make it memorable. You're Next was a great deconstruction of the genre itself and had the heroine be a survival specialist. The twist Hush brings us lies in the fact that our protagonist if completely deaf.
The key element that makes or breaks this film is the sound design. I felt like the crew pulled it off and we have a solid thriller on our hands here. Maddie is a deaf author and she has secluded herself in a house in the woods to write her next book. Problems arise when someone outside her house decides to play a deadly game with Maddie and know she has to keep him out and escape alive. Again, this is a simple premise that is only made interesting by the fact that she is deaf and how the filmmakers decide to handle that aspect of the story.
While the film does inevitably go down routine routes with the story, Flanagan does so with skill and finesse. Multiple times throughout the film we are in Maddie's shoes as Flanagan completely mutes the audio. We see the terror happening behind her, but we cannot hear it. He can be entering the house at any point and we will not know. Flanagan manages to seep the viewer in suspense throughout the whole film and while there are some gory and squeamish scenes, he doesn't rely on them. They feel real and earned. Looking back at the film there are multiple sequences where I was taken back or had a huge grin on my face with the ingenuity of it all.
People will ultimately try to find inconsistencies with how the film handles the deaf aspect. I had maybe one issue myself, but can look past it for the benefit of the enjoyment I ultimately had because of the film. With a small cast of only four people and hardly any dialogue (maybe 15 minutes total?) Hush is a well crafted film that earns a viewing from anyone who likes this genre. -
nasserskr27 April 2020The movie has many holes Who is the killer? What is the relation between him and the deaf and her friend? How can the guy believes him as a cop and no police car or anything belongs to police !! I wasted my time
-
mrvanin6 January 2018No spoilers, because this movie may appeal to mouth-breathers who identify with the similarly-afflicted villain in this mess. (I can't call him the antagonist, with a clear conscience).
Briefly, this is a story of an evident imbecile who decides to murder an apparent moron. Since the unfortunate leading actors play similarly unintentionally slow-witted roles, there is absolutely no incentive for the viewer to become invested in the outcome. Some reviewers hoped that the damsel in distress would just get snuffed out already and gotten over with - but I can't pretend to be that concerned for the success of either party.
But that's not all. It gets worse.
The majority of the activity is filmed in the dark. Not just "Hollywood dark", as in a filter placed over the camera lens to indicate that it's dark, but actual darkness. So, congratulations to anyone with the ability to absorb photons more efficiently than the ordinary humans among us. Since many psycho-thrillers are completely dependent on the protagonists making stupid decisions, it may be some sort of a mixed blessing that this one makes no departure from that trusty, rusty, old plot device - and stupid decisions pop up with tedious regularity. Accordingly, the vague movements that are dimly noticeable on the dark screen eventually become unimportant enough for us to give up caring about whatever the heck is supposed to be happening.
I watched this dreck virtually for free on Netflix. In my experience, one has to watch a lot of terrible movies in order to appreciate the better ones, so the time lost on this poorly-written and badly-directed pap is just another lesson. Also, I could easily afford the risk of paying less than one hundred percent of my attention to the frequent, boring interludes, to read up about the movie so that I could put the visible fragments together. Without IMDB and Wikipedia to literally spell it out for me, I would still be in the dark. 'Hush' gets two stars because I watched the entire thing. Single stars are reserved for the unwatchable, thus causing the artificially higher rating that I attribute to this one.
A stupid story and and a poorly made flick. -
MikesIDhasbeentaken9 July 2016I like films where masked attack people stranded in a house, and this movie started of quiet well, the same as others like it but with the added twist that the woman is deaf,
however very quickly the mask is removed and the woman, in between her apple adverts she does through the movie, makes some strange decisions, but the 'killer' guy is so awful, he's not scary or clever, which would be fine but the movie tries so hard to make him both.
I thought the movie would use the fact that the main woman is deaf, to tighten suspense and tension, apart from the opening twenty minutes, they don't really make as much of this as they could of, and most the movie is just a man outside a house, and then trying to break in. -
LiamCullen629 April 2016Selecting this movie on Netflix this evening the only thing I knew about it was the genre, which wasn't a very promising start. But in the first few moments - as Maddie is cooking herself dinner, overloading our senses with profound audio and visuals - I knew this was going to be something special.
I'd go as far as saying that this is a genre re-defining movie.
You'd think a trait as simple as deafness would have a relatively minor impact on the movie, but you'd be wrong: totally wrong. Maddie's deafness is what makes this movie totally unique in its genre as it adds an element which many of us likely have never considered having to worry about.
The perspective changes throughout the movie to heighten tension and add to the already ominous atmosphere. Just when Maddie turns her back or closes the door, all of a sudden you go deaf too. You're drawn into the house and trapped alongside Maddie in sheer terror as you both struggle to ascertain where the assailant is; it's honestly petrifying.
Of course, there are the regular genre clichés present: an unsuspecting friend shows up, several attempts at escaping are tried and failed, and there are many close-calls where the man almost gets in yet she just manages to close the door/window in time. But those clichés are often turned on their heads, such as when her escape attempt fails and her head is brutally smashed in, and then it's revealed to have only been a premonition.
In the end, Maddie is able to use her weakness to her advantage as she disables the man by using her unbelievably powerful fire alarm to deafen him. I was glad to see her get the better of him, but I can't help but feel as though the ending would've been more fitting if she died on the floor with him then and there. I'm not sure where she found the energy to stand up, walk outside, and sit on the front porch for help to arrive - but that's one of very few gripes in an otherwise excellent movie.
In short, if you enjoy horrors, yet - like me - you're tired of the same old crap: watch Hush. Frankly, it's great, and shows that there is still hope for the horror/thriller genre. -
komradekontroll22 October 2016Maybe it says something about me, that I was able to figure out that she was deaf before the movie told me (over and over again). While that might seem insignificant at first, it sets the stage for an overly predictable movie to come.
Not even coming in at 90 minutes long, Hush (2016) still manages to move at a crawl, while offering little to chew on.
I guess I'll start with the good things. The acting is actually decent from our lead, Kate Siegel. Everyone else falls flat. This is less their fault, and more the fault of poor direction, and bad writing. The sound design is also good, but it doesn't make a movie good...
The acting from everyone else is a flat line. Our killer in question, John Gallagher Jr., could have been given more to work with, but instead he's just a killer. At times it seems he wants to be more "psychotic" but isn't given the chance.
The other actors, what few there are, are a flat line as well, with our other two actresses serving as exposition dumps (albeit, very little exposition).
The gimmick, and yes that's what it is, could have been done well in the hands of a good director. The movie wants us to believe that she can feel vibrations to sense things around her (one of the many things the movie sets up in the "first act" before our killer shows up), but we're supposed to believe that it only works some of the time? I guess she has selective feeling.
Additionally, it seems that her sense of sight is useless as well, since her peripheral vision never catches anything. Same goes for the killer at times. It's like everyone can only see directly in front of them.
As for the logic of the movie, I'm willing to give the killer a pass for not just breaking in before. He's clearly crazy to some degree, though the way he acts never truly translates just how crazy he is... Where the logic in the movie fails is how our characters deal with the situation. Maddie (Kate Siegel) makes SEVERAL errors throughout the entire movie, yet we're suppose to believe she can fight off an insane man. The killer also makes several mistakes as well. After being attacked the first time by Maddie, he should have just finished the job. After all, he's just some killer, with no connection to her whatsoever. He's killed plenty before, so why take the punches with this one? He actually acts as if he's trying to get inside at times. His motivation is simply random.
Maddie on the other hand could be written off as her being in a "panicked state". However, much like the killer being a crazy person, this is a cop out used by bad writers. Especially when you consider that she had plenty of time to think and assess the situation. Instead she keeps putting herself in situations where there is suppose to be suspense, but since you already know what's coming, there is none.
The best part of the movie is how both characters had plenty of opportunity to kill each other, but just don't do it whatsoever. The part that stuck out the most is when John (Michael Trucco), is using what life he has left, to strangle and hold down the killer. This offers plenty of opportunity for Maddie to finish the killer, but she doesn't do so.
In the end, Maddie leaves us with a smile, either because her cat decided to be dependent for once, or because she didn't care for her neighbors that much. Hmm, maybe that's the twist ending I was waiting for...Maddie planned it all along as a way to rid herself of her neighbors, legally!
Actually that might be more interesting than this movie. Anyways, avoid if you're looking for a home invasion movie with any kind of originality. -
Let us start with the fact that this is not a horror movie. It's a thriller, with some interesting unusual aspects, as well as a few cringe-worthy flaws (in character logic, as the case always seems to be).
So what makes this movie stand out and feel almost fresh? The obvious first is that our protagonist is deaf-mute. Not being an expert on deaf people, I still believe this was played quite consistently to the movie's credit. It is interesting to occupy the head space of someone missing such an important sense in a frightful situation.
Another thing I noticed is the total lack of jump scares. There isn't a single jump-scare in the movie, which only further distances Hush from being a horror movie. In fact the usual creep factor as a whole is kept to a minimum. It quickly becomes a cat-and-mouse kind of battle of wits more than anything else, which I found a pleasant surprise, despite being more of a horror fanatic.
The third curious thing is that from the get go it's made clear that the killer is very much human. We don't know what his motivations are, he's just out to kill and doesn't give much of a s*** about anything else but his upper hand. He doesn't have much of a plan and has to improvise, as does our protagonist to survive.
I found the thrill in this movie to be more intellectual than primal. The gore is neither profuse nor lacking, it's there when it's needed. It's well shot, acted, directed and edited, considering the modest budget, and doesn't overstay its welcome. I'd recommend it for a rainy evening if you want to see the thriller genre try something new. -
drownnnsoda4 January 2017"Hush" focuses on Maddie, a deaf-mute writer living alone in a remote house, where she is accosted one evening by a psychopath hellbent on terrorizing and murdering her.
Co-written and directed by Mike Flanagan, who many have cited as a contemporary horror maestro, "Hush" is a straightforward thriller that cuts to the chase. There's not a lot of plot; most of the film plays on the gimmick of the protagonist being unable to hear anything around her (including the noise she makes), which is a clever setup for a horror-thriller film (I'm actually surprised it wasn't done earlier).
Comparisons to "The Strangers" are abundant and probably well-deserved, as that film pioneered the post-millennial home invasion film as we know it. "Hush" reduces the equation a bit, stripping it down to a one-on-one cat-and-mouse game, so in some regard it's a much more intense film; on the other hand, it's also remarkably less scary—but that's not really what Flanagan seems to be going for here anyway. It's not a film that intends to scare or get under the skin so much as it is a sparring match between two very different people.
The film is nicely shot and there are some fantastic scenes that play on a collective home invasion paranoia that I think we all have. The gore is kept to a minimum, but what is there is extremely visceral. The performances are solid, which is vital for a film that virtually revolves around two characters; Kate Siegel (who co-wrote the film with Flanagan) stars as the deaf Maddie, and is extremely believable, while John Gallagher Jr. plays the anonymous nutjob who is more despicable than he is scary. Where the film does falter a bit is in its last act, where the gimmick begins to wear off a bit as Maddie's situation grows more and more helpless. There is an amicable payoff in the end, albeit a drawn-out one.
Overall, I found "Hush" to be a relatively well-made film, and an enjoyable riff on the home invasion setup. That said, the film does grow dull in areas, and it also offers little in the way of new ideas, but what it does do, it does with class. All in all an entertaining and fairly intense thriller for what it's worth. 7/10. -
To make this short and sweet, all I need to say is watch this movie. Watch it with a big group of people.
It takes a very simple plot and makes it into a very well-thought out horror movie.
The opening scenes effectively establish Maddie's story to allow the audience to get to know and care for the character.
Once the masked killer arrives, it begins as your typical cat-and-mouse game seen in every home invasion movie. The main character being deaf does allow a fresh spin on this game though. And without giving much away, the movie slowly begins to evolve into a very tense, fun ride.
Not to mention the superb acting from Kate Siegel, given the fact that she was only able to use sign language and other resources as a form of communication. You wonder throughout the film what you would do in her shoes, and you may be surprised by the logic and resourcefulness of some of her decisions.
There are several moments that would likely get an audience riled up, so grab a big group of friends and enjoy. -
tnishiadia11 April 2016Why was he killing? Where did he come from? Does she know him in passing? Was her friend involved with him? The story had a lot of holes. Plus, I noticed how the lead star had a disability and lived in that nice fancy house but didn't try to put the code for the police in the house alarm? Do they expect us to believe she didn't have a house alarm? Also, when she ran outside and tried to get away, that was crazy because she couldn't hear his foot steps which was obvious of course.. She ended up running back in the house because he was standing right there.
The friends boyfriend gave all her personal information to a stranger. The guy didn't even look like a cop. Where was the cop car? Why couldn't he use his walkie talkie like all police have. He claimed someone called the cops and that is why he was there. How did he get there?
It was so many questions. So yeah I gave it a 4. -
robertmapes15 April 2016After reading the reviews I think I watched a different movie. This movie was so bad that I had to join IMDb to leave this review. I know the home invasion movies require the characters to make stupid decisions but there has to be a limit to the stupidity. Also, crossbows aren't that hard to load, but if she can't load it she could always just stab the guy with a bolt during any one of the many opportunities she was given. Her boyfriend believed some guy with no badge and no uniform with a neck tattoo was a cop? Give me a break! She finally stabs him in the leg and runs away because why not leave the crazed maniac alive to come after you some more? She made so many bad decisions I was rooting for the douchiest home invading killer in movie history. I couldn't let other people get fooled by these reviews into thinking this was a good movie the way that I did.Avoid at all cost.
-
HellbillyDeluxe15 May 2016The movie has an intriguing idea and the acting by Kate Siegel is great. However, this doesn't save it from the typical Genre clichés and bad writing. Needless to say some of the most obvious movie flaws ever made. Here is one example:
We see Maddie trying to load a crossbow several times during the movie, but she is just too weak and we see her fail multiple times. But then - all of a sudden - the crossbow is loaded and she is able to shoot it. And of course she hits the killer from a fair distant. And no, she is no crossbow expert and from what the movie is telling us, Maddie has never shot a weapon in her whole life before. Come on, this is just lazy writing!
All in all, this movie is just your typical, hide-and-seek, cabin- in-the-woods, serial-killer movie with the exception that our heroine is deaf and can't speak.
It is not worth it. Luckily, it's quite a short movie. I only rated it five stars because of Kate Siegel's great acting. I hope she gets to star in better movies in the future. -
Pat10023 January 2021I only lasted half way through. The situation was very improbable. The bad guy's actions seemed silly. How would you break into a glass house? Tap on the window a lot to intimidate the deaf person inside? The heroine's actions seemed silly: Madman outside. Go outside? And it was boring. (Can you set off a car alarm using the key remote? I can't.)
-
cbonner-0054129 November 2020In the preview the viewer sees a writer weighing options like in chess , forecasting moves & countermoves... anyway after an hour she finally has a minute and a half of thought and makes a choice.
Choose wisely , skip this trash -
alexander-glantz26 November 2020Oh wait. The lead actress is also the writer (the only time Siegel has written at all) and the wife of the director/writer. Have fun connecting the dots.
-
El_Ninooo18 November 2020**Spoilers** I can't imagine why anyone would think this movie was any good. It's ridiculous with a story full of plot holes, in fact it has so many that you'll be left wondering where do you even begin. The protagonist, Maddie, is deaf and mute and lives in the middle of nowhere. It's very unrealistic given anyone in that situation would know how dangerous it would be to be on their own in that kind of environment. Despite this she doesn't lock her doors, giving the killer a chance to sneak in and steal her phone. She also doesn't keep a gun, again highly unrealistic and absurd when you consider people buy guns in America like they're buying toys. She doesn't keep a back up phone and her house is full of glass doors and windows making it ridiculously easy for anyone to break in. The killer seems to be some sort of superhuman, his hand is impaled with a hammer, he gets shot with a crossbow bolt but none of that seems to have any effect on him. When John, Maddie's neighbour, shows up to her house searching for his girlfriend and see's the writing on the glass door he proceeds to act normally despite the fact his girlfriend is missing and there's something very suspicious about the writing on the door. When the psychopath confronts John pretending to be a cop, he easily believes him even when it's obvious that the guy pretending to be the cop looked very sketchy. Then there's the scene towards the end where Maddie locks herself in a room ready to stab the killer and he sneaks in behind her through the window, again the scenes absolutely moronic. She has her back towards him and then like a scene straight out of a B grade Matrix movie she turns and stabs him just before he could stab her. This movie is utterly stupid, save yourself the trouble and watch something better.