Birdbox - Disjointed narrative discussion

The following was an un-assessed piece of writing, written for a seminar during a module titled Storytelling and Convergent Media in my third year of University.

Spoilers for 'Birdbox' in this post.

I mentioned Bird Box during Mondays seminar due to the fact I found it interesting that this type of narrative was so successful with a wide audience. For those of you who have managed to avoid the hype, Bird Box is a Netflix Original starring Sandra Bullock and revolves around a the idea of a monster/disaster that kills people simply by them looking at it.

The film seems to be riding off of the success of this years A Quiet Place which is also a very similar concept. The film has been an astounding success, according to Netflix 45 Million users watched the film in the first week alone. Netflix has always been incredibly secretive over its viewer stats so take this with a grain of salt but none the less the film has managed to be all the rage across social media as well.

What I find curious about the film is the way in which the narrative is being told, the story is presented in two paths. The first path (which i will refer to as the 'A' path) is the first one we are shown as a viewer, it follows Sandra Bullocks character and two children fiver years after the disaster has occurred as they try to make their way down a river for an unknown reason. All we are shown here is that they have to wear blindfolds to hide from the unknown disaster. We are then shown the B narrative, this takes place five years earlier when we first see the outbreak. What follows is a typical survival film similar to many zombie/disaster films. 

The glaring issue with the film being structured in this way is the complete diffusion of any tension the film has, as the B narrative has around 8 characters trying to survive in a house, however we know already know what the outcome of this situation is going to be. What makes this worse is that the film finds itself constantly cutting back and fourth between these two narratives which as a result allows the viewer to work out what is going to happen in every tense situation.

For example, towards the start of the film we are made aware that Bullocks character is pregnant with one child, yet in the scene before this we are shown that in five years  she will be with two children. Then, around the half way point a woman is let into the house who is also pregnant and is due to give birth not only around the same time as Bullock but also the exact same day and time. So, right away we can work out that this new character is going do die and give away her child, which is indeed what happens. 

'Birdbox' isn't the first film to show a scene from the films ending at the beginning, Moulin Rouge comes to mind and even the most classic example is Romeo and Juliet. Obviously the only point of a narrative is not to wait and hope to be surprised by the ending but surely in a film that classes itself as a "thriller" you would want the audience to be unaware of the films conclusion.

Here is a link to one of my favorite YouTube channels (Red Letter Media) discussion over the film, they go into the films scructure a bit more and explain why the film doesn't work for them, and also discuss the Netflix marketing of the film.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YUAu0aP4DA