**A horror film that manages only a few startling moments.** Throughout the history of scary movies, many have explored the unsettling nature of loneliness. As social creatures, humans find confinement—something we’ve experienced during recent events—can be a slow form of torment, and this feeling intensifies when combined with isolation. While some might enjoy being alone in an isolated setting like a cabin or country home, most people don't adjust well to that kind of lifestyle. Of course, there are exceptions... but they aren’t the rule. The script for this film attempts to use solitude and isolation to create a deeply frightening experience (though that wasn't entirely achieved). It centers on a child psychologist who has had to put her career on hold to care for a teenage stepson left quadriplegic after a car accident, an incident he caused during an argument in which his father died. She still sees one patient: a deaf boy who appears at her house late at night during a blizzard and then vanishes into the woods. After several searches, authorities conclude that the boy likely didn't survive. Simultaneously, she begins to see him around the house and suspects she’s being haunted. Even from this brief description, it’s clear that the film isn't particularly original; much of this has been done before, and often better, in productions with more significant resources. Despite never truly being frightening, the movie does engage with the central theme and utilizes the familiar “jump scares” common in American horror movies. Director Farren Blackburn falters because she doesn’t build enough suspense by investing more time in establishing the film's atmosphere and developing its characters before introducing the scary elements. Some films suffer from directors spending too much time on introductions, but this one makes the opposite mistake—it doesn’t allow viewers to connect with any of the people involved. There is a lot of material dealing with dreams or nightmares, but it isn’t developed effectively. Naomi Watts is the film's biggest star, and I honestly can’t understand why she accepted the role. Did she read the script beforehand? Is she going through a less successful period in her career? Regardless, she’s one of the few things that prevent this movie from being a complete loss. The actress is a skilled professional who always commits to her work, but even she can't overcome the lack of quality material or a more capable director and supporting cast. Steven Portman and Oliver Platt are similarly underserved by the story. Technically, the film isn’t flawed, but it also lacks any distinctive qualities. It’s like eating plain white rice—you eat it, but it isn’t satisfying, and you certainly don't enjoy it, no matter how well it is prepared.

Source on TMDB