For those of you who want to be cheaply entertained, go see Iron Man or the Hulk. For those of you who want something deeper (see Shyamalan's deliver a message), you might enjoy it.
Really? In my opinion, Shyamalan uses all the cliche cheap tricks in his movies. The scripts almost always follow the same template. You have the vulnerable child, the unseen evil, the "big twist"...
He's good at a lot of things. I think he sets the moods well and has a keen sense cinematography, but his writing and scripting is poor.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
I think a lot of people don't understand how Shyamalan makes movies. He comes up with an message or idea he wants to deliver, and tries to make a movie around.
For those of you who want to be cheaply entertained, go see Iron Man or the Hulk. For those of you who want something deeper (see Shyamalan's deliver a message), you might enjoy it.
I really enjoyed it. 7/10
The best part about Shyamalan movies is how they make you think about it afterwards. I find myself often talking with people afterwards about the deeper meanings many tend to overlook. That's what makes his movies great.
The Hulk was not stupid fun or what I'd consider cheap entertainment. From everything I've heard about The Happening it is full of stupid horror movie cliches. I likely won't watch the Happening but if it is even 1/2 as stupid as Lady in the Water it deserves to be wiped from existence.
As for the Hulk see the Incredible Hulk thread. Great movie.
Yes, that's the whole premise of the movie.. it's stupider than that even, they speculate that the plants evolved this ability to combat humans, which is dumb on many levels.
And it's not even creative, it's not like the idea is very original.
Just wondering, do you consider The Hulk or Indiana Jones, or Sex in the City, or Iron Man original ideas? I am not defending Happening I already said I did not like it that much. It's just interesting to me to find out the current movies that people like, that throw out the "stupid" and "dumb" and "######ed" words.
I think it's pretty hard these days to find "original" or "creative" films.
I believe M Night missed the mark with this one, but was right on the money with creativity and originality with the Village, Lady In The Water, and all of his others.
I will stop now as I am already the resident Tootoo defender and that is enough for me!
Well, I saw it this afternoon and I agree it wasn't great but it wasn't the piece of crap that so many people are taking pleasure in labelling it (not necessarily in this thread).
One of the reviewes junky posted asked "Could this be the same guy that so skillfully creeped me out time after time....." Well, maybe that guy's problem is that he is waiting to be creeped out! Just because it has Shymalan's name on it doesn't mean it has to be creepy...and it also doesn't have to have a huge secretive twist.
I thought there were some great underlying themes in this movie...kind of like in The Village...that will be lost on most who are looking for the huge twist throughout the whole thing.
I thought it was a pretty great ending too.
My ranking goes...
1. Signs (people actually thought this was about aliens?)
2. The Sixth Sense (a classic, truly)
3. The Village (the movie didn't hinge on the twist, but if all you can take from it is your ability to figure it out before it is revealed I feel sorry for you)
4a. Unbreakable..not a comic book fan at all and that detracted from the movie for me
4b. The Happening (see above)
5. Lady In The Water....I actually fell asleep watching it. I'll have to do it again sometime to see if I missed anything.
__________________ I am in love with Montana. For other states I have admiration, respect, recognition, even some affection, but with Montana it is love." - John Steinbeck
Yes, that's the whole premise of the movie.. it's stupider than that even, they speculate that the plants evolved this ability to combat humans, which is dumb on many levels.
And it's not even creative, it's not like the idea is very original.
That's the premise? No, that is what the characters in the movie came up with as an explanation...and that was never confirmed in the film. The actual 'villain' remains unknown and given the evidence in the movie my guess is that there are enough holes there to let you know that it's not supposed to be plant vigilantism.
__________________ I am in love with Montana. For other states I have admiration, respect, recognition, even some affection, but with Montana it is love." - John Steinbeck
can anyone confirm that the secret villain is plants who are creating the toxic gas because they are mad at us for destroying the earth?? If so the Herald write up is right and this is a ######ed movie.
Quote:
Originally Posted by photon
SPOILER!!
Yes, that's the whole premise of the movie.. it's stupider than that even, they speculate that the plants evolved this ability to combat humans, which is dumb on many levels.
And it's not even creative, it's not like the idea is very original.
I'm just curious, what other movies had the premise of plants developing the ability to evolve and combat humans by releasing toxin into the air?
I'm not saying that's it's a brilliant idea, but I thought it was original if nothing else. I haven't seen a movie or TV show with the same premise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan
That's the premise? No, that is what the characters in the movie came up with as an explanation...and that was never confirmed in the film. The actual 'villain' remains unknown and given the evidence in the movie my guess is that there are enough holes there to let you know that it's not supposed to be plant vigilantism.
I think you're right, I believe I outlined in my post about some concepts that the evil plant conspiracy doesn't cover, even if true within the realm of the movie.
__________________ "Calgary Flames is the best team in all the land" - My Brainwashed Son
Really? In my opinion, Shyamalan uses all the cliche cheap tricks in his movies. The scripts almost always follow the same template. You have the vulnerable child, the unseen evil, the "big twist"...
He's good at a lot of things. I think he sets the moods well and has a keen sense cinematography, but his writing and scripting is poor.
???
Sixth Sense, sure. But who was the vulnerable child in the Village, or Lady in the Water, or Signs or The Happening or Unbreakable. Just because there's a kid in the movie, that doesn't make him/her vulnerable nor was there a kid in those movies that were as prominant in the movie as Haley Joel was in the Sixth Sense.
And for Christ's sakes, I'm sick and tired of hearing that Night's films are all about the ending. Sixth Sense had a twist. Maybe one of the best in movie history,(if you didnt know about the twist going in, there is no way you saw that coming)......Unbreakable had a twist. Village had a twist. Where was the twist in Lady in the Water?? How about a shocking twist in Signs or a surprise twist in the Happening?? THERE ISN"T!!!! Shyamalan has even said he doesn't want people thinking that he is gonna put a twist in everyone of his films.
So again back to your point, how does M Night follow the same formular in all his movies??
I'm an MNS fan, and my ranking is a little different than most:
1. The Sixth Sense - For the fact that it was his first major film and it was simply brilliant. Even knowing that there was a twist coming, I was awestruck by the end.
2. Unbreakable - I'm a fan of the comic book films (most times), and I thought that this picture was an excellent "response" from a very interesting director. There is no "superhero" movie like it.
3. Signs - As a man of faith and an "armchair" theologian, I see as many of these kinds of movies as I can: Signs ranks with Contact as one of my favourite cinematic quests of faith.
4. The Village - Beautiful.
* Because Lady in the Water was so poorly received, I've been reluctant to even see it, for fear that it will undermine my whole impression of Shyamalan.
I think I tend to really enjoy his movies because there are a couple of things unique to all of them. Some of them have already been noted in this thread: Shyamalan directs and frames things very well, but there are some specific elements that I tend to look for and am usually not disappointed:
• He makes exceptional use of colour: Many of his movies have a sort of drab appearance, but I think this is one of the ways in which he tends to highlight colour throughout. The way red was used in The Sixth Sense, and the varieties of purple and green in Unbreakable come most vividly to mind here.
• Shyamalan's characters all tend to be very understated, and I think his actors tend to get a bit of a bad rap for it. I think it is purposeful, and I wonder aloud if this is his way of preserving a sense of realism in his films.
• He doesn't depend on spectacle, even in those films that deal with the spectacular. One of my few criticisms of Shyamalan is that in Signs, we actually saw the alien in the final scene. I still loved the scene, but I think I would have loved it even more if the alien remained concealed. In Unbreakable, Bruce Willis's superhero and "Mr. Glass" were both spectacular beings in their own way, but without the rippling muscles, flaming eyes, capes, leather, tights and body armour that protagonists and villains in other superhero films need to drive the plot.
• Shyamalan has an atypical sense of "evil"—for lack of a better word. Who poisons her already sick child? Or what sort of person rings a doorbell before invading a home? I think Shyamalan has some strange phobias, and they intrigue me.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
The movie was destined to fail before it was ever put into production; the script was turned down by a number of studios before Fox gave the project the green light and it was speculated the only reason they did was because it had M’s name attached to it
I haven’t seen the movie, probably won’t but I have a question for those who have
The tagline for the move is “We've Sensed It. We've Seen The Signs. Now... It's Happening.” This led me to believe that it would tie some how into the Six Sense, and Signs does that theory have any merit at all? Or am I off base on that one?
The tagline for the move is “We've Sensed It. We've Seen The Signs. Now... It's Happening.” This led me to believe that it would tie some how into the Six Sense, and Signs does that theory have any merit at all? Or am I off base on that one?
No, that was more to market the movie as being a M Night flick. I really hope that his next movie isn't marketed with his name attached to it in the trailers like they always are. People see his name and either refuse to see it or go into it thinking it's gonna suck. M Night has complained before about the marketing of some of his flicks, and I don't blame him whatsoever.
I really like some of Nights films, Sixth Sense and Signs are some really great movies. I had no idea Signs was going to have aliens in it, and as people said thats not what the movie was about, but surprised me.
Saying that, The Village was just horrible, I've stayed away from Lady in the Water and I probably wont see The Happening until it comes to TV. And I know there are people out there going to say, you didn't like the village because you didn't get the subtle messages you were just looking for a twist, thats not true at all, I got the message, the message was boring IMO.
However I must say that even in the village I appreciate Nights ability to build suspense up just by setting a mood, reminds me of the mood setting in The Shinning. I really don't like most of the horror movies now, such as Hostel where they just try to gross you out. I prefer a mood built up where you are scared without even knowing what you are scared of and that is one thing Night keeps bringing.
I really like some of Nights films, Sixth Sense and Signs are some really great movies. I had no idea Signs was going to have aliens in it, and as people said thats not what the movie was about, but surprised me.
Saying that, The Village was just horrible, I've stayed away from Lady in the Water and I probably wont see The Happening until it comes to TV. And I know there are people out there going to say, you didn't like the village because you didn't get the subtle messages you were just looking for a twist, thats not true at all, I got the message, the message was boring IMO. However I must say that even in the village I appreciate Nights ability to build suspense up just by setting a mood, reminds me of the mood setting in The Shinning. I really don't like most of the horror movies now, such as Hostel where they just try to gross you out. I prefer a mood built up where you are scared without even knowing what you are scared of and that is one thing Night keeps bringing.
I agree.
He is a good director/artist. It's just that his story telling and scripting is so hit and miss. It's like he is trying too hard now to be different and it just ends up being cliche.
Signs and The Sixth Sense seemed to come by more honestly.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
I love his work, even when its awful. Never saw Lady in the Water, but I just love that he goes for broke. He doesn't pull the same old chicken-bleep cliches and vapid one-liners.
I'd rather he swing for the fences and strike out than make generic moneymaking tripe *cough Zohan cough*
There is speculation he is going to direct the movie adaptation of Yann Martel’s “Life of Pi” pure speculation though
As I understand it, he originally was planned to direct it, but later backed out. Here's what he had to say about it:
"I love that book. I mean, it's basically [the story of] a kid born in the same city as me [Pondicherry, India] — it almost felt predestined", Shyamalan said. "But I was hesitant because the book has kind of a twist ending. And I was concerned that as soon as you put my name on it, everybody would have a different experience. Whereas if someone else did it, it would be much more satisfying, I think. Expectations, you've got to be aware of them. I'm wishing them all great luck. I hope they make a beautiful movie".
I think it's pretty self-aware of him to realize that his reputation for twist endings may actually take away from the wonderful ending to the book.
edit: oops, should have mentioned, quote is taken from wikipedia, so, you know, grain of salt, etc. etc.
