Watch the amazing first two-thirds, then go home and read the synopsis.

Rating: 6/10 (19 October 2016)

I watched this movie because Chris Stuckmann reviewed it so enthusiastically, and I generally like his horror recommendations. Short version: I left the screening disappointed.
The movie starts out great. The premise alone is very interesting: Burglars break into a blind man's house, but he's not as easy a target as they thought. It's a brilliant and promising idea that is handled exceptionally during the first two-thirds of the movie.
The movie is exceptional up to that point. The acting is perfect, the directing is precise and adds to the tension, the music is very good and avoids most of the horror clichés, pretty much everything works. So where did it go wrong?
Well, there is a part that feels a lot like the climax of the movie that comes in a bit too early. It's also a great climax. But then the movie kind of restarts, for no reason whatsoever, no explanation, and it gets boring, repetitive, and almost laughable (many audience members were groaning from a point on, although they were loud and annoying throughout the entire movie).
The last half hour feels like a mediocre (but not too cliché, to be fair) horror movie. Like they run out of ideas and just tried to fill in a proper runtime. The movie clocks in at just 88 minutes, so it seems very probable to me. And then there's an extra sequence after a cut to black, right at the end, that also feels unnecessary.
So, to sum up, my recommendation is to leave when you start getting annoyed (no spoilers but, trust me, you'll know what I'm talking about), then leave and read the synopsis if you want closure. Or make up your own ending. But spare your time and don't bother with the last half hour. It ruins the rest of the movie, which is easily a 9/10.