Review: The Last House (dir. by Louis Leterrier)


“The day the rains came, we learned we were not alone.” — Ruth Delgado

The Last House has the kind of premise that is immediately effective: a family wakes up to find that their home has become an inescapable prison. Doors refuse to open, windows cannot be broken, and the outside world is suddenly as unreachable as it is threatening. Directed by Louis Leterrier, the Netflix thriller gets plenty of mileage out of that simple idea. It turns a comfortable suburban house into a claustrophobic survival space, pushes a family toward desperation, and gives its familiar setting a creeping sense of hostility. Still, while the movie is often tense and well-acted, it eventually becomes too crowded with ideas to make any one of them land as strongly as it should.

Wagner Moura and Greta Lee play Jason and Ann Delgado, parents trying to keep their two children calm while they figure out why they have been sealed inside their own home. The film wisely does not waste much time getting to the central crisis. Once the family realizes that no amount of force can open a door or shatter a window, the atmosphere shifts quickly from confusion to panic. At first, there is still a practical logic to their reactions. They test the house’s boundaries, look for tools, try to contact the outside world, and ration what they have. But as each option fails, the family begins to understand that this is not a temporary inconvenience. It is a situation that may outlast their food, water, patience, and ability to trust one another.

That is where The Last House is at its strongest. The film understands how quickly a normal home can become frightening once its basic purpose changes. Kitchens, bedrooms, closets, and hallways are not inherently scary spaces, but the movie makes them feel smaller and more oppressive as the Delgados lose their sense of control. A stocked pantry becomes a countdown. A closed bedroom door no longer offers privacy. The family’s routines and minor annoyances, which initially make the house feel lived-in, become sources of friction when nobody has the option to leave. The production design effectively captures that deterioration, gradually turning an ordinary family home into a cramped, stale environment defined by empty shelves, dim rooms, and blocked exits.

Moura is the film’s standout. Jason begins as someone who wants to solve the problem through force of will and practical action, but that confidence wears down as he realizes that the situation is beyond him. Moura gives the character a believable mix of frustration, fear, and stubbornness. He is not simply an action-thriller father trying to save the day; he is a man whose sense of usefulness begins to collapse when he cannot protect his family or even provide a way out. Greta Lee is also good as Ann, particularly when the film allows her to show the exhaustion of having to steady everyone else while quietly processing the danger herself. However, Ann is not written with quite as much specificity as Jason, and Lee is sometimes left carrying scenes that ask her to reassure or react rather than reveal more about who she is.

The children help maintain the emotional stakes, though their roles are less developed. Their fear and frustration make sense, and the film does a decent job of showing how confinement affects them differently than it affects their parents. But they often function more as pressure points for Jason and Ann than as characters with their own fully formed perspectives. The family dynamic is convincing enough to keep the story grounded, yet the screenplay never digs quite deeply enough into their shared history or unresolved tensions. There are signs of financial strain, parental guilt, and marital distance, but the movie tends to introduce these ideas without fully following through on them.

The film also brushes against an interesting nature-versus-civilization theme. The Delgados’ home represents the ordinary comforts that make modern life feel secure: stocked food, electricity, sturdy walls, private rooms, and the assumption that help is available when something goes wrong. Once the house becomes sealed, those comforts lose their meaning. The family is forced to focus on the basics—food, water, shelter, sleep, and cooperation. Their home no longer separates them from danger; it contains them inside it. The movie’s best thematic moments come from that reversal, as it suggests that civilization is much more fragile than people like to believe.

Unfortunately, The Last House complicates this solid foundation by adding another mysterious danger from the depths. The threat remains vague for much of the story, and that uncertainty creates an unnatural, ominous feeling around the family’s confinement. It gives the film an extra layer of dread, making the Delgados’ problem feel bigger than a sealed house or an isolated storm. But it also pulls attention away from the more compelling material already in place. The family’s struggle to survive, their conflict over dwindling resources, and their gradual loss of trust are strong enough to sustain the movie without needing such an elaborate additional mystery.

That is ultimately the film’s main weakness: it keeps expanding its scope when it should be tightening its focus. The intimate story of a family stuck together under impossible conditions is more powerful than the larger explanation the movie slowly reaches for. As the plot adds more questions about the source of the danger, it risks making the situation feel less immediate. The best scenes are not necessarily the ones that hint at what is happening beyond the walls. They are the ones where the Delgados must decide who gets the last resources, whether to take a reckless chance, or how much truth the parents should tell their children. Those moments make the house feel like a real emotional battleground rather than simply the setting for a mystery.

Leterrier keeps the pacing moving well enough, especially in the first half, and the rainy exterior, muted lighting, and increasingly worn-down interiors give the film a consistently uneasy mood. Even when the screenplay starts to overreach, the movie remains watchable because it knows how to frame the house as a hostile space. It is not a deeply original visual concept, but it is effective. The sense of enclosure becomes almost physical as the family’s world shrinks to a few rooms and the possibility of escape starts to feel less real with every failed attempt.

In the end, The Last House is a decent, occasionally gripping survival thriller that does not fully live up to the potential of its premise. Moura and Lee give it enough emotional weight, and the movie’s domestic setting gives the tension a relatable edge. Yet the script does not always trust its strongest idea: that being trapped with the people you love can become frightening when there is no exit, no help, and no certainty that normal life will return. By piling a mysterious external danger onto its family drama and survival story, The Last House becomes more ambitious without becoming more meaningful. It is worth watching for its atmosphere, performances, and early suspense, but it would have been stronger as a leaner, more focused film about a family discovering how quickly safety can turn into confinement.

Catching Up With The Films Of 2023: May December (dir by Todd Haynes)


What comes after a life of tabloid infamy?

That’s one of the many questions posed by Todd Haynes’s latest film, May December.

Elizabeth Berry (Natalie Portman) is an actress who comes to Savannah, Georgia in order to research her next role.  We don’t learn much about Elizabeth’s career as an actress but it appears that, while it has brought her a certain amount of fame, it hasn’t exactly been full of acclaimed work.  One person mentions seeing a picture from a film that she did in which she was involved in a blood sacrifice.  (“I googled ‘naked Elizabeth Berry,'” he explains.)  Several other people mention how much they love her TV show, Norah’s Ark, in which Elizabeth plays a veterinarian.  Elizabeth’s latest film features her playing a real person, someone who was at the center of a scandal 20 years previously and who has since faded from the public view.  Elizabeth seems to believe that this role could redefine her career.

(Hey, it worked for Margot Robbie in I, Tonya.)

Elizabeth is going to play Gracie Atherton-Woo in an upcoming indie film.  Way back in 1992, the real-life Gracie (Julianne Moore) was 36 years old and married when she was caught having sex with a 13 year-old named Joe in the back of a pet store.  Joe was a classmate of Gracie’s son and Gracie was the one who was responsible for him getting hired at the pet store in the first place.  Gracie was sent to prison, where she gave birth to Joe’s daughter.  During her trial, Gracie and Joe were both tabloid mainstays.  The nation was transfixed by their affair before eventually moving on to the next scandal.  When Gracie was eventually released from prison, she married Joe.  Now, decades after appearing on the front of every trashy magazine, Gracie and Joe (Charles Melton) are still married and they now have three children.  They live in a big house in Savannah, Gracie has a career as a pastry maker, and, from the outside, they would appear to have a perfect domestic life together.

Wearily, Gracie and Joe allow Elizabeth to spend time with the family so that she can research her role.  Elizabeth interviews other people who were effected by Gracie’s actions.  Gracie’s ex-husband (D.W. Moffett) is surprisingly forgiving.  Gracie’s children are considerably less forgiving.  Georgie (Cory Michael Smith), who was Gracie’s son from her first marriage and a schoolmate of Joe’s, is bitter and describes his mother as being mentally unbalanced while, at the same time, trying to leverage his knowledge of Gracie’s past into a job on the film.  As for Gracie and Joe’s first daughter (Piper Churda), she states that she doesn’t want the film to be made.

Cracks start to appear in the perfect image that Gracie and Joe present to the world.  Gracie can be rigid and controlling while insisting that Joe was the one who initiated the encounter in the pet store.  Gracie talks about growing up with four brothers, two of whom were older and two were younger.  Gracie mentions that one of her brothers is an admiral and it’s implied that she grew up in an atmosphere where failure was not an option.  Gracie’s daughter talks about how, when she graduated, her mother gave her a scale as a graduation gift.  When someone cancels an order for a cake, Gracie takes it as a personal rejection and breaks down into tears.  Gracie is friendly towards Elizabeth but never totally lets down her guard.

As for Joe, he emerges as well-meaning but confused, someone who is still often treated like a child by bother his wife and, eventually, the woman who is studying his wife.  Whenever we see Joe with any other adults, he’s awkward as if he’s not sure how to behave.  (When he tells his elderly father that he can hardly believe that all of his children will soon be in college, the old man’s silence tells us everything that we need to know about their relationship.)  Joe is nearly forty but it’s clear that a good deal of his emotional development stopped when he was thirteen, leaving him desperate for approval.  When he catches his teenage son smoking a joint, Joe isn’t angry as much as he’s curious.  Smoking weed is one of the many things that Joe never did when he was younger.  When Joe get high, he becomes a paranoid and emotional mess as all the feelings that he’s repressed for 23 years come spilling out.  At the same time, when Gracie has a breakdown, Joe knows exactly what to say to help her through it.

Do Gracie and Joe truly love each other or is their marriage just their way of denying the reality of what happened?  Did Gracie groom Joe or, as Gracie insists, was their affair consensual?  At first, the audience’s natural tendency is to sympathize with Elizabeth and to expect her to play some sort of role in clarifying what actually happened in that pet store.  But Elizabeth soon proves herself to be a rather detached observer, a mimic who copies the emotions of others but who, even after she gets to know Gracie and Joe as human beings, still views them as just being characters in a story.  In the end, Elizabeth can’t help us understand what happened in the pet shop because, the film suggests, not even the people who were actually there understand what happened.  All Elizabeth can do, as an actress and an observer, is try to recreate what she imagines happened.

It’s a well-made film, with Haynes deftly mixing scenes of high drama with the awkward comedy of people trying to rationally discuss the irrational.  It can also be a frustrating viewing experience, if just because Haynes often does not seem to be sure what he’s trying to say about the characters or why we should even care about either Gracie or Elizabeth.  Fortunately, the film is lucky enough to have a wonderful cast.  While Moore and Melton gets the big, dramatic scene, it’s Portman who takes the audience by surprise, giving a performance that goes from being likable to being rather chilling as Elizabeth transforms herself more and more into Gracie.  For all the film’s themes about conformity, morality, and tabloid culture, it’s main message may very well be to never trust a method actor.

May December sticks with you, even if it’s not up to the level of Haynes’s Carol.  It’s a film about what happens after the infamy, with Gracie, Joe, and Elizabeth destined to be forever defined by what happened over the course of a few minutes in the backroom of a pet store.