SHUT IN (2016)

A variation on Wait Until Dark in which all the characters appear to have undergone lobotomies, Shut In manages a colossal waste of considerable acting talent in a very short (though painfully long) running time. With better writing, it could have been a triumphant return to form for Naomi Watts, who was brilliant in Mulholland Drive and even in Children of the Corn IV, and who might have soared in this kind of role. The movie’s second lead, Charlie Heaton, is fresh off a star-making turn on Netflix’s “Stranger Things.” Featured is Jacob Tremblay, so heartwrenching as the young Jack in Room. And then there's Oliver Platt, one of the quirkiest character actors there is.

These top actors wander through the film like unfortunate Beckett characters who know they must go, but cannot. They're hamstrung by a screenplay that never ventures beyond the bounds of the expected. As good an actress as Watts is, she never convinces us her character is dumb enough to stay locked in a closet when deadly forces (the nature of which, like a good film citizen, I will not reveal) pursue her in her own house. As good an actor as Platt is, he never convinces us he's dumb enough to try to rescue her himself before the police arrive. Assuming that Shut In takes place in a world where The Shining exists, he should think, "I know what happened to Scatman Crothers. I'll wait for some backup."

Mary Portman (Watts) is a child psychologist who has been caring for her catatonic stepson Stephen (Heaton) for six months since an accident left him completely paralyzed. Suddenly she begins to suspect a presence in her house that might be threatening her and the defenseless Stephen. It may have something to do with the deaf patient of hers (Tremblay) who has recently gone missing. With an ice storm coming, she finds herself trapped in her house with Stephen, and possibly with something malevolent.

I won't reveal anything more, not because I don't want to spoil the surprise but because the movie leaves me with nothing else to reveal, really. There's essentially only one more piece to the puzzle, and it's so thuddingly obvious that I kept expecting screenwriter Christina Hodson to have one more rug to pull out. Surely this can't be the climactic twist, I thought. It is. Compare it to M. Night Shyamalan's twist near the end of The Visit, in which the reveal was a genuine surprise, built naturally from what came before it, and framed the climactic third act grippingly. In Shut In the surprise is revealed only because the movie is almost over, and gives no explanation for the odd behavior of certain characters early in the film.

Shut In is reminiscent of The House at the End of the Street, another slapped-together thriller hinged on an underwhelming twist and wielding a lead actress it doesn't deserve (Jennifer Lawrence). It is not as dumb as that movie, but it is almost as dumb, which is dumb enough. Ouija: Origin of Evil, still in theaters, has a sillier name but is a much more inventive and fun thriller. Those looking for a good scare should seek that film instead.

1/2 out of ****