Customer Reviews: The Box (2009)
Amazon Vehicles Fall Reading 2016 Amazon Fashion Learn more Discover it $5 Albums Fire TV Stick Health, Household and Grocery Back to School Totes Amazon Cash Back Offer TheKicks TheKicks TheKicks  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 All-New Kindle Oasis Florida Georgia Line Shop Now STEM

Format: Amazon Video|Change
Your rating(Clear)Rate this item

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

on November 6, 2009
"The Box" is one of those films where a lot of adjectives are necessary. It's taut and suspenseful, but it's also metaphysical, ponderous, cerebral, unexplainable, and above all, preposterous. It goes in all different directions, sometimes caught up in circles, sometimes taking detours, sometimes going completely off course. It's a bizarre, unpredictable story of intrigue and paranoia, continuously twisting and turning, pushing the limits of comprehension with a slew of seemingly unrelated concepts; we begin with a button and a suitcase full of money, but this soon gives way to spiritual quandaries and sinister science fiction subplots, the latter of which involves radio signals from Mars, physical disfigurements, and hordes of mind-controlled drones with bleeding noses. There's even an ongoing social experiment, which could be indicative of a morality play.

Based on Richard Matheson's short story "Button, Button" and its 1986 "Twilight Zone" adaptation, "The Box" takes place in Richmond, Virginia in 1976, and I honestly don't know whether or not that's a significant plot point. We meet Norma and Arthur Lewis (Cameron Diaz and James Marsden), a cash-strapped suburban couple who awaken one morning to find a plainly wrapped package left at the front door. Inside is a black wooden box topped with an encased red button. Neither one knows what to make of it until receiving a visit from the mysterious Arlington Steward (Frank Langella), who, for as yet unknown reasons, is missing the left side of his face. If the Lewis' decide to unlock the box and push the button, he explains, two things will happen: They will be given $1 million dollars in cash, and someone they don't know will die.

Will one of them push the button? It's not as if they couldn't use the money. Norma, a literature professor, learned that her school will no longer provide free tuitions for children of the faculty, which doesn't bode well for her son, Walter (Sam Oz Stone). She also has a severely damaged foot in need of repair. Arthur, a NASA scientist involved in the creation of a Mars camera, is no longer being considered for the astronaut program because he failed the psychological exam. But the fact remains: Their financial security will come at the expense of ending someone else's life. Norma tries to reason that it may be a death row inmate. Arthur tries to reason that it may be their neighbor or a baby. Heck, it may even be himself or their son. How well does she know either one of them? How well do they know her?

I'm not going to reveal whether or not the button gets pushed. I will say that, from this point on, the story ventures into even stranger territory, befuddling itself with inexplicable paranormal occurrences, gateways that may or may not lead to salvation, deeply rooted scientific conspiracies, motel rooms with maps pinned to the walls, secret wind tunnels, and a brief discussion of Sartre's vision of hell. Who is Arlington Steward? Who are the people walking around with nosebleeds? If the box is capable of being programmed, then why are there no mechanisms inside it? What's the significance of a murder that has a man on the run? Does Arthur's Mars-related research have anything to do with what's going on? Does Norma's damaged foot?

As to whether or not all the above questions are answered, I'm not entirely sure. Writer/director Richard Kelly clearly has his own ideas about logical story patterns and how they should be followed. And yet, there is something to be said for creating a sense of apprehension out of nothing at all; if you can engage the audience in spite of a cumbersome plot, if you can keep them hooked by continuously building tension, then you've made a successful film. "The Box" may be a confusing mess, but it's also one of the most absorbing mysteries I've seen all year. The plot can be deconstructed any number of ways, but I suspect we're not supposed to learn so much as experience. And we do. For a film that's neither believable nor understandable, that's quite an achievement.

The ending unfolds in yet another display of twisted logic, and it culminates in a final shot that brings up an entirely new series of questions. What's the message "The Box"? That damnation can only be avoided by resisting temptation? That humanity must be willing to sacrifice for the greater good in order to survive? That existence as we know it is just a temporary state and death is a period of transition? Or is it that there isn't a message at all, that the whole thing is just an exercise in psychological thrills? I know Kelly is aiming for something here, but unfortunately, I have no idea what that might be. No matter - what I appreciated most was the film's ability to build suspense and maintain an air of mystery. That must count for something.
66 comments| 52 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on November 17, 2010
THE BOX is a masterpiece of ethical and moral dilemma masquerading as an ominous sci-fi suspense thriller. It may seem obscure and incomprehensible, but it's essentially just a story about the Golden Rule: What we do to others we do to ourselves.
The story is taken form an ironic little gem of a story by Richard Matheson (of TWILIGHT ZONE fame) called "Button, Button." The movie expands it into a Gordian Knot of obscure, seemingly unrelated events that inevitably, well... you'll see.
The central theme is altruism, which is basically the practical application of the Golden Rule (you know, do unto others as you would have them do unto you). The basic equation is that if enough people choose selfishness, eventually no one will be left. Yet I'm amazed by all the diverse interpretations and reviews, especially since the substance of the story is clearly stated at one point as the "altruism coefficient," that is, unless people learn to be altruistic they will either destroy each other or be destroyed by the mysterious extraterrestrials. A not uncommon sci-fi theme, but presented here as a brilliantly enigmatic and ominous fable that is never boring, but rather, perplexing and mesmerizing. It may have been more popular as a dark comedy, but then it would have lost much of its impact.
Unfortunately however, when a story is presented as enigmatically as this, people tend to see what they want to see, like the reviewer who totally misinterpreted it as a "scathing attack on altruism," quoting Ayn Rand's absurd, distorted definition of it. (Ayn Rand, the master of rationalization of the selfish and self-serving, nursed a lifelong disdain of altruism and empathy. Her books rationalize and justify selfishness, opportunism and exploitation, and still inspire those who exalt such traits.) But this movie is in fact a scathing indictment of selfishness.
Self-sacrifice and selflessness have been the most powerful themes in all of literature and art, including the ultimate story of self-sacrifice, that of Christ (though you'd hardly guess it judging by today's Christians).
Selfishness, on the other hand, is the primary characteristic of evil.
The quote by John Paul Sartre near the end of the movie sums it up beautifully.
77 comments| 33 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on December 27, 2009
My friend and I spent some considerable discussion time trying to find reasons for so many poor reviews for this film. There is one thing we both agree on: The Box is an auditory focused film. In fact, with only minor adjustments to the script, it would make a great radio play. So, unless you are committed to paying a great deal of attention to every word spoken, you are bound to get lost and confused by the complex plot. In these times of short attention spans, this is an obstacle the film makers may not have taken into consideration... Pity, as the film is actually quite original and the story intriguing.

The Box is based on a 1970 short story "Button, Button" by Richard Matheson (also the author of the celebrated "I Am Legend"). A financially overextended middle class couple receives a package containing a box with a button. A strange and grossly disfigured man later visits their house and explains should they choose to press the button, they will receive $1mil, tax free. The drawback? Someone they do not know will die. The couple's actions following the man's visit, as well as the consequences of their actions, constitute the meat of the story. The why's and the who's are mostly explained, though some questions are purposefully left for each viewer's imagination to tackle. The performance is satisfactory from all leads, except Cameron Diaz. She overacts in every scene, to the point of becoming a distraction. Her casting played a major part in my downgrading the rating to 3.5 stars.

If you feel you can ignore Diaz and focus on every word of dialogue, you will be rewarded with some original thinking and a somewhat creepy film. I was entertained.
1515 comments| 87 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
The Box is based on a 1970 short story called "Button Button" written by horror icon Richard Matheson. The story was adapted previously as an episode of the 1980's incarnation of the Twilight Zone. Now, the problem with turning a short story into a feature film is that the story is going to have to be heavily padded, and in the case of The Box, heavily padded. A horribly disfigured man named Arlington Steward (Langella) arrives one day at the suburban Virginia home of Arthur and Norma Lewis, having previously placed a mysterious box on the couple's doorstep. Inside the box is a large red button locked under a glass dome. Steward tells the couple if they push the button two things will happen. First, they will be given one million dollars, tax free. Second, someone in the world they don't know will die. This moral test is where the similarity between film and story end.

In the original story, Norma pushes the button and a few days later her husband is killed by a train. When she asks Steward why her husband died, he tells her that she never really knew her husband. Short, direct, and to the point. Unfortunately the film is anything but direct and to the point and Matheson's story is lost in an absurd haze of alien possession, dimensional gateways, and crackpot science. Steward, we learn, is controlled by an alien intelligence that is referred to merely as "those that control the lightning".

Norma becomes obsessed with the button, starting at it for hours while she and Arthur argue the moral issue that they will be playing God with someone else's life. The rest of the film deals with the consequences of the couple's actions.

Richard Kelly's screenplay is all over the map but not once does it land at a destination that involves any logic or coherency. We get the fact that some alien intelligence is testing mankind with this game of ethical choices but Kelly, also the Director, doesn't back it up with anything tangible. The only hints we get is the film being set in the 1970's at the time of the launch of the Viking Mars probes.
Diaz is overly melodramatic although you have a fondness for the innate goodness of her character. Langella is the best thing about the film. He is equal parts sinister and sensitive, villain and hero and the film is at its best when he is onscreen.

The simple lesson here is that a ten-page story does not a film make, at least not in unskilled hands.
22 comments| 12 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on September 26, 2011
Not too much to say. This was based on Richard Matheson's Short Story "Button, Button". The short story was also adapted to the 1980s "Twilight Zone" short episode starring Mare Winningham of the same name: "Button, Button"

The movie's late 1960s setting hearkens to the largest representation of Matheson's work on the screen, Rod Serling's "Twilight Zone". Cameron Diaz's, James Marsden's acting are fine. Worth a watch. Frank Langella as the tenebrous antagonist, on the other hand, delivers a great performance. The special effects aren't terribly shocking, but they aren't too overdone either. This isn't Batman after all.

The movie isn't a horror movie. It is science fiction...kinda. It lacks a clear pigeonhole to fit into. The events surrounding the story are not true, not based on science, so I guess it could be classified as fantasy. The movie manages to exude a creepy aura that gives you a "clanging" kind of scary movie. Something like "1408", but less dramatic.

So, this movie isn't the height of science fiction or movies in general.

I would say, however watch it once. Its well done. Given what I know now, after watching it, I don't want those two hours of my life back.

Good Movie. 8.2/10
0Comment| 5 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on February 18, 2013
We start the film with a typical 1970s Washington D.C. middle class family. The father works for NASA, the mother as a teacher, their kid goes to private school. Then, a mysterious man enters their life and presents them the title Box. The box is a large push button. The man says "If you press this button within the next 24 hours, I will give you one million dollars, tax free. But, someone you do not know will die. And, the box will be given to someone else...someone who you do not know."

Obviously, someone in the family pushes the button, setting off the main plot. The man reappears, gives them the million dollars, and leaves. But, they start having serious regrets, so the father goes to try to uncover the mystery behind the man, despite being told specifically not to do so. He starts to uncover evidence of a conspiracy, and finds the man is really not what he appears.

Some may find the movie becomes very surreal at certain points, but the movie itself raises a good question. How much are you willing to harm another human being for your own ends? In fact, we find the group sending out the boxes is running a test to find how many people are willing to do this.

If you want to watch a thought provoking sci-fi drama, this is worth watching.
0Comment| 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on November 8, 2009
I really didn't know what to expect from this movie considering the fact that Richard Kelly's last movie, "Southland Tales," kind of left a bad taste in my mouth. But upon the finished viewing of his latest film, "The Box," I think he has returned to the form that made me fall in love with "Donnie Darko." What a totally cerebral experience. A movie that jumps from a military experiment gone array to a noir thriller to a bout of existential looks at the causes and effects of free will and finally to a bit of theological looks at life after death. This movie completely and unequivocably held my attention throughout as any great director can do with a fantastic story. I've read quite a lot of reviews that just bomb this movie due to its confusing plot but I, for one, believe that this is highly enjoyable cinematic experience. I couldn't recommend this movie more.
11 comment| 45 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on May 15, 2011
Richard Kelly is one of the most underrated film makers working today. And The Box is arguably his finest work. I didn't see this film when it was in theaters, but when I finally saw it on DVD, I watched it twice in one evening. To anyone who didn't quite get it and thought it was a waste of time, I would suggest watching it again. What initially seems like random odd tidbits with no purpose, are actually very essential to the story. A second viewing reveals just how expertly constructed this film really is. I would highly recommend this film to anyone who enjoys actually using their brain from time to time.
11 comment| 7 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on February 24, 2013
Wonderfully weird and imaginative. This is a sci-fi cult classic that fell under the radar, but it is a really great film. I heard a lot of people bash this thing, but this movie is about much more than a box and a button. If you're not a sci-fi fan and not used to this type of film, it might be a bit confusing, but stay with it. I think it's well worth it.
0Comment| 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on February 22, 2011
An "alien" group is bound to test the souls of
the unsuspecting through the tried-and-true method
of greed further placating their twisted need
for corrupted souls.

Their power is omnipotent through the system,
easily enabling them to manipulate their targets
into financial hardship, thus making their offer
all the more appealing.

Rationalization sadly outweighs logic and Eve
presses the button, falling prey like so many
others before her. The blood sacrifice is made
and the vicious cycle continues. Drones are sent
out by the hordes gravitating to their victims,
prodding them along the predestined path, ultimately
leading to a choice of visiting the wrath upon oneself
or on one's child; a choice coinciding with another's
whose hand is near the button. A collective or
individual choice?

The mastermind/puppet claims that it's for the
betterment of mankind. It's evil in the guise of
humanitarianism with the aim of weeding out the
spiritually weak.
0Comment| 4 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse

Customers also viewed these items

Need customer service? Click here