John and the Hole (2021) User Reviews

It builds and builds...to nothing.

[benjaminskylerhill · 5/10 · 15 August 2021]

John and the Hole is elevated by its methodical pacing, pretty cinematography, and engaging performances from the entire cast; but the film is ambiguous to the point of frustration, and all these aforementioned strengths can't make up for the fact that it tests the audience's patience over and over again and never rewards them for it.

There are several scenes in the movie in which a VERY intriguing character motivation or plot element will be introduced, and every single one of these moments is immediately forgotten and never mentioned again.

I was never bored because I kept wondering where the story was going to go next and why John was doing the things he did; what role did his family play in driving him to his breaking point, if any? But my intrigue never payed off.

I won't spoil anything because there isn't anything to spoil. There are no revelations, twists, or anything of the sort. The movie just plods along introducing a bunch of red herrings, and then it ends.

This ends this film and my memory of its existence.

The end.

I got nothing from this

[Draysan-Jennings · 5/10 · 14 September 2021]

Right from the get go I didn't like the main character. He has this dumb irritating look on his face that makes you wanna back hand him. What was the point of this movie? And what was up with that horrible ending. This kid literally dumps his family into a hole for a week and faced no consequences. Life just went back to normal. I would of put that little weirdo in a mental hospital.

My shot at an unpretentious explanation

[terrencepatrix · 4/10 · 7 August 2021]

These glowing reviews are written by a buncha people who sniff their own farts and love it. They're more concerned with trying to look cultured than being honest. Well I think I have a pretty good read on this movie myself...and it's still not that great. There's not much dialogue or story here, it really is some kid that traps his family in a hole, but there is a meaning to it. At least I think there is.

So you have this kid John. He's quiet and shows basically no emotion or interest in really connecting with anyone, including his own family. He's prone to either just saying "Okay" or "Why" in response to instruction. So it's easy to think that the kid is either just a jerk, on the spectrum, or soulless. But I think what he's symbolizing what it's like to be a child on the verge of young adulthood while understanding next to nothing about the world. Growing up we're given instructions and told to do things simply because it's "normal" or "what people do". You ask why and are told to stop asking questions and just do it. Many people are fine with this, they grow up to be adults who are great at being told what to do without the need to think for themselves. As a kid who irritated everyone by asking "Why?" constantly I actually understand John.

So my belief is that as a way to communicate this to his parents, because he clearly can't use words properly, he puts them in the position he sees himself in. He puts them in a hole where they're constantly asking him to talk to them, to tell them "why?", why are they in the hole, why doesn't he just answer? That is John's perspective of the world, trapped in a hole that no one will explain to him.

Now here's why it's not that good of a movie. For one, no it's not a dark comedy whatsoever, that's nonsense. It's also not a thriller. It IS psychological, but so slow and with no exposition at all it leaves too many questions. There is a plot point that touches on John trying to drown himself a few times to see what's there at the verge of death. It's just him floating face down in a pool, nothing else happens, but when he does let his family out of the hole they come across him face down in a pond and panic in a rush to save him. I think this made a connection as to the "why" in John's mind...that even after what he did they still loved him and wanted him to live. So I suppose that's a reason to continue on into adulthood. But who can be sure, it's not explained. There is also a completely random plot point of a mother talking to her young daughter about things like needing to abandon her and then the movie ends with scenes of the young daughter wandering around the woods alone. No clue who they were or what that was about, I definitely didn't understand that.

So I think I might have understood parts of this movie, but it was really boring and I wouldn't watch it again. Not the absolute worst but it definitely isn't anything above maybe a 5-6 depending on the individual. These people acting like it's art house magic are hacks.

Slow and annoying

[Gordon-11 · 6 August 2021]

I find the film very very slow. Nothing much ever happens. What John put into the gardener's pocket isn't explained, which bugs me. Characters keep answering "I don't know" to questions, which is annoying too. The ending is one big confusion, and doesn't answer anything. So I'm left with a huge I don't know.

This is what this movie is about

[cobo-3 · 1/10 · 7 August 2021]

I'm going to go into specifics here because this movie can hide its mediocrity in an aura of vagueness of what it is about. So, here is the plot:

• An adolescent with monosyllabic response to everything and annoying face mono-expression, decides to put his family without any reason into a deep hole. Exactly how a 80 pound 14 year old is capable of lowering them down is not explained.

• The family spends inside the hole about a week.

• During said week the boy withdraws money from an ATM, plays tennis, video games and cooks.

• He visits the family that is almost starving and gives them some food.

• A ladder is lowered into the hole, and the family comes out.

• The family and the boy eat dinner together as if nothing happened.

If you can find any deep meaning or entertainment value in this movie, congratulations. You must really be on in a billion.

The Meaning Of The Film Explained

[MogwaiMovieReviews · 7/10 · 7 January 2022]

This is a beautifully made film, with powerfully eloquent photography and an amazing central performance that together work hypnotically upon the viewer and build up a relentless mood of tension and disquiet.

As we approached the ending, I realized it was likely going to just peter out, and it did, which was a disappointment. Some kind of larger payoff, the clear result and culmination of everything that had been introduced before, would have been far more satisfying than life going back to normal and the family just eating dinner all over again.

So I'm not really at all happy with the ending, but here's what I think it's trying to say (badly):

The side story of Gloria and Lilly is set in the future: we know this because they refer back to two of the events we observe - "Charlie (the gardener) and The Spider" and "John and The Hole" - as bedtime stories to retell again and again. Either this means the events actually happened in the past or else the entire story of John we're watching is simply a fiction being told by Gloria to her daughter.

In both time periods, none of these people seem to have any great feeling: the father even says while down the hole, "I've never been hungry before", and when John gives the pile of money to his gaming friend, he cannot understand that he doesn't want to buy anything with it: that's all he knows anyone do. John is prepared to drown himself just to experience something real.

John is the forerunner of the coming generation, blank, selfish, soulless, coddled and emotionless children growing up into blank, selfish, soulless, coddled and emotionless adults, with no natural insticts remaining, who will think nothing of abandoning their 12 year old child to die on a passing whim if they can tell themselves to do so is "empowering" or "liberating". We can tell that this is the mother Gloria's primary internal narrative by the fact she makes a point of repeatedly telling her daughter "my daughter is nobody's ASSISTANT" even as she abandons her forever. She has been taught since birth that oneself is all that matters.

Right now John is increasingly becoming accepted as only mildly abnormal (hence no punishment or repercussions for his actions at the end), but in the future, EVERYONE is like John, and that's why Gloria and Lilly behave the way they do, which still seems frighteningly alien to us at present.

So yes, that's what I think it's getting at, though it could have done so much better and clearer, or else just followed a more traditional thriller storyline and given us some entertainment instead. It's still a very engrossing tale, because of the aforementioned cinematography and the fantastic young actor playing John, but its inability to wrap all its loose ends up satisfactorily leaves it feeling a little anticlimactic, amateurish and underwhelming.

Slow and intensely boring.

[paul-ayres-60784 · 1/10 · 6 August 2021]

I don't know how I made it through til the end?

In an attempt to create mood and atmosphere the creators decided to minimise dialogue, add dreadful music with sombre characters who nobody would care about.

Avoid this movie is my recommendation.

growing up

[ferguson-6 · 7/10 · 5 August 2021]

Oak Cliff Film Festival 2021 Greetings again from the darkness. Why would anyone be surprised that the actions of a teenager make no logical sense? Thirteen year old John (an excellent Charlie Shotwell, CAPTAIN FANTASTIC, 2014) comes across as a shy kid, and a curious one as well. He's a talented tennis player, enjoys going head-to-head in video games with his online friend, and even plays piano. Despite his upper class family life, we sense there is something a bit off about John - although his busy parents are supportive and his banter with his older sister is pretty normal. But his emotionless demeanor sends our mind to dark, uncertain places ... places we hope John doesn't go, although we kind of expect him to.

This is the first feature film directed by Pascual Sisto, and the script comes from Oscar winner Nicolas Giacobone (BIRDMAN, 2014). You should know it's not the typical narrative arc. One day John, with the help of his shiny new drone, locates a long-forgotten unfinished bunker in the nearby woods. The next thing we know, John has drugged his family and dumped them in that hole. That's not a spoiler, as it's shown in the trailer. When Mom (Jennifer Ehle, SAINT MAUD, 2020), Dad (Michael C Hall, "Dexter"), and sis (Taissa Farmiga, "American Horror Story") awaken in the mucky pit, they are frightened and confused. When John appears to deliver food and blankets, he offers nothing in the way of an explanation.

As movie watchers, we have been conditioned to expect this type of situation will lead to significant violence. Instead, we watch as John steps into his newfound freedom. His image of adulting is what he's observed from his parents: classical music, wine, cooking, milking the ATM, and driving the car. He has bypassed the coming-of-age stage, passed "go", and moved directly into his version of adulthood. We know this can't end well, but John is thirteen and isn't mature enough, regardless of this manufactured freedom, to plan ahead.

This is a wealthy family living in a glass house ... an unmistakable metaphor. A sense of entitlement and pursuit of money has distracted the parents from focusing on the importance of teenage years. Whether they realize this looking up at him from the bunker is debatable. John's story is told by a mother to her daughter, an unusual sequence that acts as an awkward framing device. Cinematographer Paul Ozgur delivers terrific camera work with the house, the bunker in the woods, and John's odd demeanor. This is an unsettling film that is more psychological drama than thriller or character study. It clearly borrows from two masters, Michael Haneke and Yorgos Lanthimos, but falls short of their best work (as you'd expect). Still, the film has a certain style, and reminds us that the moral to the story of a teenager's actions often boils down to "don't do that".

Opens in select theaters and On Demand August 6, 2021.

The ending made no sense

[mxbgwzkr · 3/10 · 6 August 2021]

Anyone please explain who the girl was ? And why was it half a movie.

Fascinating...but a little too hollow for its own good.

[JasonMcFiggins · 6/10 · 30 January 2021]

JOHN AND THE HOLE is a fascinating look into the feeling of nothingness, and existence without empathy. "What does it feel like to be an adult," asks John, because he just can't imagine living that long. A strange tale of swapping power dynamics and unexpected connection, when the film is good, it's great. It's hard not to feel held at arm's length, however, wanting to embrace what's happening but not being fully able to. It's the small, almost missable, moments that are the most chilling. But it's a little too hollow at its core. Charlie Shotwell impressively intimidates, while Taissa Farmiga shines in a limited role.

Stupid, made no sense, beloved by the pretentious

[segdirbj · 1/10 · 3 July 2022]

Let me start with a spoiler: the movie's long, boring, and makes no sense. Skinny, 13 year-old John finds a the opening to concrete bunker that goes deep into his parent's property. He decides to drug his family (mom, dad, older sister) and lower them to the bottom of the bunker. (No explanation is given for how a scrawny 13 year-old got them all, one by one, from the house, thru the woods to the hole, then lowered them all to the bottom of it without killing them). The movie meanders on showing the family lying at the bottom of the hole from time to time, but mostly scenes of John doing boring things around the house, after a few days he lowers a ladder down the hole, the family climbs out, next scene they're all dressed for dinner and eating as though nothing ever happened, THE END.

Shame on all those rating this movie higher than two stars. Especially those that gave it five or more and tried to give some pretentious explanation for why the movie was good and for what it was "really" about. Rather than admit it was really too long, really boring, and really made no sense.

Allegory of the powerlessness of childhood

[hellocrocodile · 8/10 · 22 August 2021]

I feel like this movie isn't so much of a statement as much as it is an exploration.

Although the titular Character is John, there is sort of a secondary protagonist who appears at different moments thoughout the film. We aren't told directly what the relationship is between 13 year old John and this 12 year old girl, but it is implied that she is John's mother (in flashbacks).

The film explores and contrasts two different scenarios:

Being a child who feels completely oppressed by childhood, and is completely unable to alter the fixed way adults see him even as inside his own mind he is convinced of his own maturity. The desire to escape his childhood is so powerful it causes him to invent pathological schemes to seize control on his own terms. Because adults will not readily concede power and control to children, children usually submit and take their place until the reach a certain age and begin to question this hierarchy.

John seems to want more than anything not to be alone, but to be heard. Scenes throughout the film depict adults cutting him off or discounting what he has to say, and it only when John takes control by force that his family will actually sit and listen to him.

The female protagonist on the other hand is forced unwillingly out of the comforts that childhood affords and is thrust into the frightening world of adulthood when her single parent makes the sudden announcement that she is leaving. Faced with the fact that she will no longer have protection and advocacy from a fully grown adult, the terror of having to contend with the world on her own is the last thing she wants.

There is a bit of "the grass is always greener" effect, and while John seems to have gained control and liberty by displacing the other members of his family, he begins to feel the burden of responsibility and self sufficiency that adulthood eventually thrusts on all of us.

I think in effect the film was a reminder that children really do at heart desire to be children, protected and loved and heard, but not at the expense of being treated as a possession. There are times when John reveals himself to be exceptionally intelligent and adults continually refuse to acknowledge him, driving him further into isolation and resentment of the world around him.

While it is fortunate that MOST children never enact such elaborate and dangerous schemes to feel a sense of control, I'd be lying if I said no child ever fantasizes about things like this. I'm in my thirties but can still remember the awful fantasies I had to have as a child in order to soothe my way out of familial anxiety.

What some viewers might not realize is the movie is not so much to be taken literally. At least I don't think so. Viewers might wonder what did the family do that was SOOOOOO bad to deserve what John does to them? Is John simply a sociopath? I think the implication is that childhood can be like a death by a thousand cuts and even though it's usually not enough to push us over the edge, this film dares to depict the brutal fantasies that even the most innocent children can have when they feel powerless.

Intriguing Dark Comedy

[sweidman-28016 · 7/10 · 30 January 2021]

John and the Hole is a coming of age psychological thriller that plays out the unsettling reality of a kid who holds his family captive in a hole in the ground. From my knowledge this was one of the most anticipated Sundance entries this year, and my most anticipated. I will say that I'm not disappointed. This is an experience; one that will either click with you or just be too much. Oscar-winner Nicolás Giacobone writes a great screenplay with such natural and unsettling dialogue. The comedic tone landed well with me, but I just really like a dark comedy. John is my favorite part of the whole thing. His character is so far from normalcy, but I felt a connection with him throughout. He's struggling with the concept of adulthood and responsibility that he resorts to a sociopathic nature. I loved the acting from everyone. A family that is so far from being close feels close in these strange times. At the end of the first act we're introduced to a new character and storyline that does feel a little off. I understand where it's going, but it wasn't exactly needed. I still didn't have a huge issue with it. This is definitely a slow burn, especially in the second half of it. At some points it feels like it doesn't have a structure, and that's fine with me. The absurdness just makes the watch more interesting. The cinematography is great, the score is really fitting, and the hole feels like a second home after a little bit. Not everyone is going to like Pascual Sisto's direction and what this film has to say. To me it has strong A24 vibes that will gain a cult following. Go and watch John and the Hole upon its release.

WTH?? Seriously??? :O

[midnitepantera · 5/10 · 7 August 2021]

I wish I could have given this a higher score. It was well acted, interesting, great cinematography, interesting story idea and crap ending as far as I'm concerned. Sadly, society is breeding more and more of these soul less VOIDs that look like children, but there must be a POD in the back yard where something alien made this Creepy, empty, inhuman copy left with this family. And in this case, I totally do not get what was supposed to be his end game. His family are nice, educated and caring people, he wants for nothing and if some answers had come I could have rated this higher. I can't say more without spoilers, but I'm Pissed off. I've met kids like this and see more and more of them with each passing year and it frightens me. But that ending??? Seriously, Come on.. just Ridiculous and Senseless. Worth a one time watch if you don't mind being disappointed at the end and left with 1,000 questions and feeling Pissed off. Or if your a soul less human Void too, then you may enjoy this. But if your a caring person with a heart, this movie will leave you feeling angry and dumbfounded.

Empty art house film

[gothix99 · 1/10 · 22 November 2021]

Despite its lack of plot, this film isn't that difficult to understand. However, that it tries to be a pretentious art house film is laughable. It's just bad. I get that the kid is trying to demonstrate how he feels trapped, maybe inside himself, I don't know. It borders on pointless or maybe it's just pointless. It certainly does not deserve more than one star. The idiotic inclusion of the a scene with an abandoned girl is likewise pointless. Honestly, there's no reason to watch this film; it's among the worst I've watched.

Pointless

[engattaya · 18 September 2021]

I have said this review doesn't contain spoilers but I guess by me saying it's absolute tripe I may have lied.

Utter garbage and totally pointless.

VIEWS ON FILM review of John and the Hole

[burlesonjesse5 · 6/10 · 10 May 2022]

"I'm just tired". So says the main character of John in 2021's John and the Hole. Obviously John isn't too tired to somehow get his sister, mother, and father down in a 50-foot bunker while keeping them there for days. The flick doesn't really show you the aptitude of it all. Implausible? Yeah you could say that.

Anyway, John and the Hole is based on a short story called El Pozo. And no, this isn't a sub-genre you would find playing at the AMC. "Hole" is obviously an art film that wants to terrify while showing that it can be artsy-fartsy and niche market at the same time. "Hole's" director (Pascual Sisto) silently turns the psychological screws but those screws aren't completely screwed in and are somewhat ill-defined.

So yeah, John and the Hole did at times disturb me. And the musical score by Caterina Barbieri (which shows up randomly) has a numbing awareness that evokes synth-like despair. But what is the paradox surrounding this weird little pic that has young John (played by Charlie Shotwell) doing pseudo nasty things to his well-off family? I mean it's not like he has it that bad.

I suppose John is just an insane teen that needs to be surrounded by a SWAT team and/or put in a mental institution. Helmer Sisto never defines John or his actions, at least not to the viewer. It also doesn't help that John's family is so blase about the brute situation (I'd be screaming mad if I was stuck in that bunker).

All in all, you'd probably need another viewing just to take in Sisto's almost completely pensive vision. But hey, John and the Hole is not that kind of movie. It's a one-and-done that wipes away any thriller, box office clout. Sure Pascual's film looks clean and his direction is apt. But with an added subplot about a mother and daughter (I suppose they were John's neighbors), John and the Hole has well, "holes". Big ones.

Sooooo Sloooooow.......

[gjonesxero · 1/10 · 14 January 2022]

I had to fast forward through some parts just to get through it...and in the end I was sorry I finished it. One review said it was " Slow and Annoying", that is true. Another said it was "Absolute Garbage", which is also true. DO NOT waste your time.

An oblique attempt at parable or allegory with too much room for interpretation for most viewers

[pacocharte · 6/10 · 7 August 2021]

I'm all for films that make the viewer think and draw their own conclusions or apply whatever the story is trying to say to their own interpretations of life and the world. This is a Haneke-esque parable consisting of two parallel but inverted storylines, one of which obviously consumes the majority of the run-time (hint: the one in the title).

Ahhhkay....so here we go. This one has excellent production value, a pretty decent cast (Dexter lol!), and good direction and cinematography. I really appreciated the soundtrack/score as this type of modern synth creepiness is often way overdone, but not in "John and the Hole."

Sorry to those who totally panned it with 1-Star reviews because "nobody would let their kid do that, he'd be in therapy" or "the ending made no sense" It's just not possible to draw those conclusions from this movie if you know anyone with kids that age in, well, this day and age - or if you remember being that age yourself. Perhaps that's one of the film's lessons anyway - Maybe parents *should* be more keenly observant of behaviors such as John's. Clearly this was a family of means, and they - unlike the vast majority of Americans - could afford psychotherapy or medical observation of their son. But sessions cost anywhere from $100-$300/hr and aren't covered by most insurance, IF you're lucky enough to have insurance in this country. But that's also part of the film's point and perspective: that of upper-middle class bourgeoise detachment from the real worries and experiences of life.

Sorry to get bogged down in that. On with the review...I'm glad I didn't have to shell out the dough for a theater experience (including drinks, popcorn, parking, etc.) to see this film. In fact I'm not even sure what format its theatrical release happens to be ("art house", major chain, small release, etc.) but I can tell you that it belongs in "art house" theaters. It's just too oblique for many viewers.

Overall, I appreciated it and found "John and the Hole" thought-provoking and scary at the same time. It wasn't intended to be "realistic" in terms of real world potentialities, actions or outcomes. It was a vague dive into the mentality of modern juveniles and what exactly defines "adulthood." For that reason, and that I wasn't ever tempted to get up or turn it off, I give it 6 Stars. Just know you're not signing up for a typical movie viewing experience and keep your expectations low. On the other hand, if you're a fan of "art house" cinema, you'll probably find many aspects of this film enjoyable as I did.

As for the ending, since so many seem to be completely unable to free themselves from their own frame of reference (see: the same people who reflexively give Haneke movies terrible reviews because they don't take the time to digest them in the context of contemporary American cinema), I feel compelled to defend it here. This wasn't supposed to be a realistic outcome; it was intended to be absurd, as was the rest of the film. That it's hidden behind a veil of upper middle class normalcy, excellent film-making and a languid, sometimes boring story arc is exactly the point of the exercise. It's also demonstrated in the parallel story that attempts to frame the ridiculousness of the main plot, at least from the point of view of an adult with a well-formed intellect and in-check id. In that sense it's a fantasy of adolescence in which "adulthood" consists only of going through a few boring and repetitive motions every day with no real moral , ethical or well-defined desired outcome - and - in the modern bourgeoise existence, little to no consequence to the outcome of those motions.

Dreadfully slow and left with questions

[nicole-studebaker · 1/10 · 8 August 2021]

There is nothing I despise more cinimatically than when questions are left unanswered. Why did the main character give the gardener money? Where is his friend from? Why did the ms friend find it completely normal for a kid to be left alone and the family to suddenly be out of town with zero confirmation? What was his motivation? Who the hell were the little girl and mom? Why did that mom suddenly abandon her? What happened after the family got let out of the hole? There is no way they just went back 5o a normal life. And why was the little girl walking in the woods at the end?

Looks familiar from 2016 to 2020

[gregpenny-01970 · 6/10 · 22 August 2021]

A person who cant understand human feelings, treats everyone horribly, and has no consequences, should be called Trump and the Hole.

Vapid vignettes in search of a movie

[just_in_case · 1/10 · 7 August 2021]

I hate doling out 1/10 because it's generally kind of childish, but I have to here because I would actively tell people to avoid this one.

This isn't really a movie in the traditional sense. It's an allegory trying to convey or explore the experience becoming an adult. As the premise states a sociopathic or perhaps overly coddled rich kid dumps his family in a hole for the purpose of exploring the freedom of adulthood.

That's fine, but there's no real payoff here, nothing is learned in any meaningful way. It, almost insultingly, includes a side story which also doesn't payoff, but instead vapidly goes "look look isn't adulthood scary!?"

Yes it's scary. Duh. The problem here is there's nothing after it throws the allegory in the audiences face. I can't help but feel the writer had a half-baked idea and couldn't come up with the punchline. Instead the movie meanders along with drawn out scenes of people eating and robot dialog until it ends out of sheer boredom.

This one is strictly for those that can enjoy films that are pure atmosphere and do not need substance.

Filling the ... hole

[kosmasp · 8/10 · 23 October 2021]

I am a bit surprised. I would have thought that this movie would resonate better with viewers. Having said that, I think some of the low scores actually speak of the quality of the movie in general and the lead performance specifically. You are not supposed to like the kid ... you really are not. You are not even really supposed to understand him. He doesn't understand himself. He is looking for something ... will he find it? Now that is the main course ... there is a side dish .. something that you may not understand or unable to connect to the main theme/story/arc.

That is sort of on purpose. I say sort of, because you can see a connection - but it is left up to you to decide if it actually means something. I would argue that it does ... but it also leaves a lot of things open ... you won't find too many answers here. Which to get back to my original point is frustrating - and therefor I reckon I understand the low rating overall.

The actors are really good and the pacing may be slow, but really works like a charm here. Remember the fact you do not understand and do not like the main character, does not mean the movie is bad ... of course it is understandable, if that means you just don't like it ...

Charlie Shotwell

[yusufpiskin · 7/10 · 19 August 2021]

An acting talent that can stand out even in a movie with an actor like Michael C. Hall makes Charlie Shotwell special. He previously showed a similar talent in the Netflix movie "Eli". Captain Fantastic, The Nest, The Nightingale, The Glass Castle etc... Whoever makes the scenario choices should continue to trust that person. Director Pascual Sisco achieved the Cannes Official Selection success in his first film. I hope more to come. The movie has a very simple and clean narration.

A movie without a spine

[koofasa · 1/10 · 22 October 2021]

When I saw what a great cast this movie has I could not understand how it received such low ratings and then I watched the entire thing. There wasn't a boomer within the entire production as the values the movie portrays are new and part of the woke world. There's a 13 year-old boy who puts his family in a deep bunker. No reason is ever given why a spoiled child would do this. He starves his family while spending the parents money, driving the car and making a general mess. The kid is a sociopath without the slightest doubt but the parents promise to do nothing if only the kid would let them out. Maybe the filmmakers were trying to portray evil but instead one feels it is the filmmakers who are evil and the cast are idiots for reading those lines. These people only care how they look to the outside world and care not to even look at the problems within the family. In the end, I felt the parents deserved what they got and I wouldn't feel empathy for them if their kid grows into a full blown serial killer and then kills the family. This type of people, the world can do without. I can forgive the cast for taking these roles because there is so little content of substance anymore.