The Davisons, an upper-class family, are extremely wealthy -- but also estranged. In an attempt to mend their broken family ties, Aubrey (Barbara Crampton) and Paul (Rob Moran) Davison decide to celebrate their wedding anniversary by inviting their four children and their children's significant others to their weekend estate. The celebration gets off to a rocky start, but when crossbow-wielding assailants in animal masks suddenly attack, the Davisons must pull together or die.
Release Date: August 23, 2013
Welcome to the ok.com Rating Widget
Share what age you think this movie is appropriate for by clicking one of the bars on our age-rating chart below.
Then, tell us if you think the movie was worth your time by clicking either the thumbs up or thumbs down button.
After you leave at least one rating (either age or worth your time), you can optionally leave a review for others to read.
What Do Your Friends Think?
Login to see what your friends think.
Normally, I would give a film of this ilk zero stars, but, there was something in Sharni Vinson‚Äôs performance that causes me to be very generous and bestow 1 whole star on ‚ÄúYou‚Äôre Next,‚Äù which is rated R... See Full ReviewOctober 30th, 2013 · Details
I really had to think before writing this review. The film appealed to me on many levels, received surprisingly favorable reviews, & after seeing the brilliantly terrifying trailer I was, quite frankly, excited! I thought I had learned NOT to go into a movie with any big expectations as I am let down in the end usually ("Star Wars" prequels, anyone?). As it turns out, "You're Next" is no exception--a massive dud filled with cliches, ripoffs, and a storyline so implausible you could drive a truck through it. Why then, did I really have to think before writing this?? Because I will admit I was slightly intrigued, but for all the wrong reasons. After viewing the film, tolerating all its unoriginal and ignorant ripoffs, I had to wonder: Did the writer & director do this deliberately to "spoof" the genre? Let me explain... First off, the wooden dialogue is written so out of place that it truly is hilarious at times. The poor amateurish cast does its best with what it has been given, but every actor either overreacts or implausibly under reacts after the Davison family reunite (in the story) to celebrate the parents' 35th anniversary (in their inexplicably located new mansion that is, of course, out in the middle of nowhere). Animal-masked murderers descend, seemingly without motive, upon the reunion and then the preposterousness really takes flight. The film borrows ideas DIRECTLY from such classics as "The Shining", "A Nightmare on Elm Street", and others. Deliberate? I think not...then again--the score for the entire movie seems to be pulled straight from the 1980's horror genre? At times I really thought I was hearing the score from "The Shining"! If we delve deeper, I noticed that the bloody, gory scenes (GALORE!) were handled in typical garish, in-your-face, 1980's-style fashion. The blood is not "quite" the right shade of red, & every violent act perpetrated is over-the-top, implausible, and pure shock schlock (for instance, an empty blender placed over somebody's head doing just as you imagine it would, avoiding spoilers). So was the 80's vibe I had gotten done intentionally, or was the writer just out of ideas? What I decided was this---> Whether the movie is trying to be a tongue-in-cheek, ode to the 1980's genre or not, it DOES NOT WORK, so it DOES NOT matter. Was I scared? Not even once. Any horror movie that tries to pass itself off as scary without result is a failure. This movie is really terrible. Terrible acting, terrible writing, terribly filmed, and terribly directed. I saw the predictable "twist" at the end coming halfway through the movie. These characters are so awful & clueless that we don't care one bit when they die. As a matter of fact, we are relieved when they die, knowing that we don't have to see them anymore! The only scary thing about this film is its nonsensical attempt to be anything more than it truly is. I must end by saying that I was entertained. Don't get me wrong when I say "entertained". Only in the way that we are entertained by watching a train about to hit a brick wall...just wanting to see the mess it makes, even though it's so ugly. If anyone reads this, agrees with me, disagrees with me...I don't care. I would like to save anybody the time & money they may put out. Having already been "next", heed my warning, & avoid hearing that it's your time, and now-- "You're Next"...September 3rd, 2013 · Details
YOU‚ÄôRE NEXT has a unique story with many chances for some suspenseful, exciting moments. However, there‚Äôs too much gruesome violence. The violence goes way over the top when the heroine takes a blender to the head of one would-be killer and accidentally kills another person. YOU‚ÄôRE NEXT also has plenty of strong foul language and brief nudity. Ultimately, it makes for a distasteful, abhorrent time at the movie house... See Full Review
The film contains pervasive gruesome violence, including torture and mutilation, brief graphic sexual activity, upper female nudity, a perversion theme, premarital and nonmarital situations and much rough and crude language... See Full Review
With its anonymous cast, shoestring budget and jouncy camera work, this is a movie likely to lure a sizable crowd of horror junkies and dupes. That doesn't mean you have to be next... See Full Review
‚ÄúYou‚Äôre Next‚Äù, which co-stars a couple of filmmakers (Swanberg and West), was shelved for a couple of years. But not because it is damaged goods. The frights are passable, the foreshadowing (extreme close-ups of nails being pounded through boards, etc.) telling and the humor ‚Äî sick as it is ‚Äî quite funny.August 20th, 2013 · Details