PDA

View Full Version : I can't believe this is Happening...



The Vorpal Tribble
2008-06-13, 09:24 AM
...I actually watched a Shymalan film and was disappointed :smallfrown:

I love about every film he's put out and wanted to applaud at the end of each. The Happening... didn't even have the Shymalan feel to it. From Sixth Sense, to Unbreakable, to even Lady in the Water there was this atmosphere that only he can produce. This didn't have it.

The premise was interesting, but it wasn't done well, and personally I found the acting to be inutterably horrible, which is another thing I've never said about a Shymalan movie, whose characters, though often quirky, are almost always very well done.

It really wasn't even scary either. It had the shock factor here and there throughout I suppose, but except for a part in the beginning there was no emotion to it. You didn't really feel connected with anyone at any point.

All in all it seemed rushed, haphazard and just all around lacking. The fact that it was by M. Night Shymalan made it all the more heartbreaking in it's mediocrity.

Tom_Violence
2008-06-13, 10:45 AM
I didn't even know it was possible to be disappointed at a Shymalan movie. But then, I do think he is impressively rubbish in his movie-making. His movies have always been a bit too 'gimicky' for my tastes.

Sounds like he has once again demonstrated that a premise doth not a film make.

Innis Cabal
2008-06-13, 01:51 PM
i'll try to contain my shock and amazment.....whew.......that was rough....Not only am i not surprised to hear this movie was awful(not that i couldnt have told you that from the premise like every other of his other so called movies, in other words diaherra for the eyes) but i once again get to feel rightous vindication when everyone i know who went and saw it coems back dissapointed and upset at the loss of cash.

Khalle
2008-06-13, 01:53 PM
Funny, I didn't think it was possible to not be disappointed in a Shyamalan movie. I find them uniformly dull and predictable.

FoE
2008-06-13, 01:55 PM
BLARGH! You have betrayed the Shyamalan, Vorpal Tribble! His army of evil suicide plants will make you suffer for your treachery! THE SHYAMALAN IS INFALLIBLE, DO YOU HEAR ME?! INFALLIBLE!!!

Tirian
2008-06-13, 02:12 PM
Funny, I didn't think it was possible to not be disappointed in a Shyamalan movie. I find them uniformly dull and predictable.

My brother is in the middle. He is a big cheerleader for The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, and because of that he winds up heartbroken every time he sees a new Shamalama Dingdong movie and lightning doesn't strike a third time.

Me, I think of him as M. Night Shamalama Dingdong. He's like Agatha Christie; all of his works are groundbreaking in exactly the same way and it isn't so much fun to watch a poorly-paced movie and trying to guess what the BIG! TWIST! at the end will be. But T6S is an amazing movie, no doubt about that.

The Vorpal Tribble
2008-06-13, 02:36 PM
Now c'mon guys, I'm not understanding this hate of his other stuff. Sometimes his stuff is just an interesting story, like Lady in the Water. Sure, he tends not to have huge explosions, sex or big special effects, but if the story is good, you don't need them.

Personally I thought The Village was one of the most romantic movies I've ever seen, and none of the rest even approached 'romance'. So how exactly is he doing the exact same thing?

Anteros
2008-06-13, 02:40 PM
There's such a huge quality drop between the Sixth Sense and movies like Signs or this last load of garbage that it's hard to believe they are made by the same person.

Water kills them? Really? They didn't check to see if 70% of the fricking planet was deadly to them before invading? That's almost as bad as war of the world's dues ex machina.

M. Night was good back when you didn't know there was a twist coming. It would happen and people were shocked. Now, when you hear of an M. Night movie, you spend the entire time trying to figure out what the twist is...and it's ussually terrible when it does come.

Innis Cabal
2008-06-13, 02:56 PM
Now c'mon guys, I'm not understanding this hate of his other stuff. Sometimes his stuff is just an interesting story, like Lady in the Water. Sure, he tends not to have huge explosions, sex or big special effects, but if the story is good, you don't need them.

Personally I thought The Village was one of the most romantic movies I've ever seen, and none of the rest even approached 'romance'. So how exactly is he doing the exact same thing?

I have yet to find any of his movies to be interesting. I dont need sex or explosions to make a movie interesting, but i do want a movie to be at least partialy good in the first 20 minutes or...well...i feel ripped off.

Sixth Sense- Figured it out after Bruce got shot.....whole movie just sorta floundered after that. One of the few movies i refuse to watch with the Bruce in it.

Unbreakable- Haven't(and wont) see it.

The Village- Uninteresting, boring, and the "romance" was so mind numbingly boring that i watched two people make out at the theater then continue watching what i spent 10 bucks on.

Signs- The aliens big weakness is....water? They are invading a world.....which is primarily made up.....by water? WHY?! What point is there in taking over a planet whose very ATMOSPHERE can be lethal to you(Or should, they seem to have ignored the whole humidity thing). A prison planet? Then why kill all humans? Its not like they would -logicaly- survive

Lady in the Water- Looking through the whole movie....i want my time back. It was...boring.....acting made me squirm...and i wont start with the plot....

FoE
2008-06-13, 03:02 PM
Water kills them? Really? They didn't check to see if 70% of the fricking planet was deadly to them before invading? That's almost as bad as war of the world's deus ex machina.

It was worse, in my opinion. War of the Worlds is at least plausible; we know that from our own history about the dangers of introducing new diseases into a populace not equipped to handle them. And it fits in with my theory about the reason for the alien invasion: it had always been their plan to return one day when the human population had reached a level where our numbers would be sufficient for "harvesting." It was our blood, after all, that they needed in order to grow the red weed; that's why the aliens didn't simply bomb us all from space. But our species has advanced so quickly in the past few hundred years, far beyond the aliens' expectations; perhaps they feared the "terraforming" project wouldn't be possible if they delayed any further, and the aliens pushed ahead without making sure they would still be immune to the viruses and bacteria of Earth. Maybe they were even a rogue element within the alien society, or the last desperate survivors of a ruined civilization.

But the "vulnerable to water" thing was just dumb. It would be like us invading an acid-planet. And it wasn't as though the aliens didn't know it was a hostile environment; they'd been visiting the planet for years, after all, forming crop circles and whatnot.

Closet_Skeleton
2008-06-13, 03:25 PM
Water kills them? Really? They didn't check to see if 70% of the fricking planet was deadly to them before invading? That's almost as bad as war of the world's dues ex machina.

It's also Day of the Triffids' Deus Ex Machina.

Eita
2008-06-13, 04:41 PM
As South Park said:


Mr. Shamalom-whatever, we don't need a twist, we need a solution!

comicshorse
2008-06-13, 08:43 PM
It's also Day of the Triffids' Deus Ex Machina

Er no its not. How did they take over England when the first rain kills them.

What I think you're thinking of was that in one of the movies I think SEA-WATER kills them.

In the book the survivors gather on the Isle of Man ( I think) because the Triffids couldn't cross water. So again defeated (kinda) by water

Finn Solomon
2008-06-13, 09:33 PM
Eh, I wasn't too disappointed because I watched it purely out of obsessional love for Zooey Deschanel. Zooey is the reason the sun rises each morning. Zooey is the Alpha and the Omega. Zooey is all. And she's just so darn cute.

Thought the suicides were pretty cool, but is it just me, or was anyone else reminded of Ultimate Galactus? The same thing happened in the comic. Maybe Night's a Marvel fan.

Fri
2008-06-13, 09:47 PM
Hey, Unbreakable is AMAZING. The best realistic super hero movie ever produced. The only problem is that it ended in its climax. If only they'd make the sequel....

CannibalHymn
2008-06-13, 10:29 PM
Now c'mon guys, I'm not understanding this hate of his other stuff. Sometimes his stuff is just an interesting story, like Lady in the Water. Sure, he tends not to have huge explosions, sex or big special effects, but if the story is good, you don't need them.

So what you're saying is that all Lady in the Water really needed was huge explosions, sex, and/or big special effects?

Dervag
2008-06-13, 10:44 PM
It was worse, in my opinion. War of the Worlds is at least plausible; we know that from our own history about the dangers of introducing new diseases into a populace not equipped to handle them. And it fits in with my theory about the reason for the alien invasion: it had always been their plan to return one day when the human population had reached a level where our numbers would be sufficient for "harvesting."In the original, the Martians weren't returning at all. They were invading, for the first time. And their motive was that Mars was drying up and dying and they needed a newer, younger planet. According to 19th-century theories of planet formation, the outermost planets formed first and would therefore be the oldest.

My interpretation was that they knew Earth was a planet that might very well harbor lethal diseases, hostile natives, and all sorts of other hazards that could kill their entire invasion force. But the Martians were desperate, and their world was undergoing ecological collapse right before their eyes. So even though their technology wasn't really adequate (sort of advanced steampunk) to the task of building safe interplanetary spacecraft, they had to try. They knew Earth had an atmosphere they could breathe and gravity they could (barely) survive in, so they sent their first wave of colonist/conquerors with the best equipment they could devise.

I rather imagine that if humanity had had to do something similar in, say, the 1950s or 1960s, the results would have been similar.

Mr. Scaly
2008-06-13, 11:02 PM
Only ones that I've seen are Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, and both were great for me. So far I'm not disappointed.

turkishproverb
2008-06-14, 12:43 AM
Now c'mon guys, I'm not understanding this hate of his other stuff. Sometimes his stuff is just an interesting story, like Lady in the Water. Sure, he tends not to have huge explosions, sex or big special effects, but if the story is good, you don't need them.

Personally I thought The Village was one of the most romantic movies I've ever seen, and none of the rest even approached 'romance'. So how exactly is he doing the exact same thing?

Its "cool" to hate Shymalan's work. Not that all of hit has been great, mind you, but the bashing he gets is mildly disgusting.


I have yet to find any of his movies to be interesting. I dont need sex or explosions to make a movie interesting, but i do want a movie to be at least partialy good in the first 20 minutes or...well...i feel ripped off.

Not sure I understand whats wrong with the first 20 minutes of ALL his movies that isn't wrong with about a hundred classics, but they don't start of fast, so I'll assume that was your hurdle.


Sixth Sense- Figured it out after Bruce got shot.....whole movie just sorta floundered after that. One of the few movies i refuse to watch with the Bruce in it.

Yea, a little weak, but worth one watch even if you've figured it out.


Unbreakable- Haven't(and wont) see it.

Cute. So, your opinion is already pointless on this one, if not mildly insulting based upon the fact you refused see a movie but still deem to list it as one of his unworthy films.


The Village- Uninteresting, boring, and the "romance" was so mind numbingly boring that i watched two people make out at the theater then continue watching what i spent 10 bucks on.

So, your saying you wanted sex? Thats certainly what your "make out at the theater" comment hinted at.


Signs- The aliens big weakness is....water? They are invading a world.....which is primarily made up.....by water? WHY?! What point is there in taking over a planet whose very ATMOSPHERE can be lethal to you(Or should, they seem to have ignored the whole humidity thing). A prison planet? Then why kill all humans? Its not like they would -logicaly- survive

Yea, its kind've corny, but before that the movies not badly done, even if the ending is weak (although he did a VERY good job of foreshadowing it, all things considered.)


Lady in the Water- Looking through the whole movie....i want my time back. It was...boring.....acting made me squirm...and i wont start with the plot....

Haven't seen it. I don't go out of my way to see his movies, honestly, (or most movies) so I'm not going to touch it.


Hey, Unbreakable is AMAZING. The best realistic super hero movie ever produced. The only problem is that it ended in its climax. If only they'd make the sequel....

But the ending really fit the whole way the movie was structured. I liked it.


Only ones that I've seen are Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, and both were great for me. So far I'm not disappointed.

Yea, those are some of his better work.

Anteros
2008-06-14, 01:00 AM
I haven't read my war of the worlds novel in years...and I don't know where it is...but I think I remember that he specifies quite clearly in it that the aliens had been watching Earth and planning their invasion for quite some time. I could be wrong, as I was 10 or so when I read it...but I don't think I am.

WalkingTarget
2008-06-14, 09:16 AM
I haven't read my war of the worlds novel in years...and I don't know where it is...but I think I remember that he specifies quite clearly in it that the aliens had been watching Earth and planning their invasion for quite some time. I could be wrong, as I was 10 or so when I read it...but I don't think I am.

Indeed, the opening paragraph:

"No one would have believed in the last years of the nineteenth century that this world was being watched keenly and closely by intelligences greater than man's and yet as mortal as his own; that as men busied themselves about their various concerns they were scrutinised and studied, perhaps almost as narrowly as a man with a microscope might scrutinise the transient creatures that swarm and multiply in a drop of water. With infinite complacency men went to and fro over this globe about their little affairs, serene in their assurance of their empire over matter. It is possible that the infusoria under the microscope do the same. No one gave a thought to the older worlds of space as sources of human danger, or thought of them only to dismiss the idea of life upon them as impossible or improbable. It is curious to recall some of the mental habits of those departed days. At most terrestrial men fancied there might be other men upon Mars, perhaps inferior to themselves and ready to welcome a missionary enterprise. Yet across the gulf of space, minds that are to our minds as ours are to those of the beasts that perish, intellects vast and cool and unsympathetic, regarded this earth with envious eyes, and slowly and surely drew their plans against us. And early in the twentieth century came the great disillusionment."

DementedFellow
2008-06-14, 11:12 PM
Personally, I vowed never to watch another one of his movies after the Village. If it wasn't for the fact I was on a date, I would have walked out. You do not market a monster movie to a horror-movie starved audience then shaft them with a fake monster.

Here's how much I hate the man. If he needed a kidney and I was the only donor match in the world, I'd tell you, "Where do I send the flowers?"

Anteros
2008-06-14, 11:48 PM
That's not a very good indicator. I don't hate him at all, but he still aint getting my kidneys. You either for that matter.

Revlid
2008-06-15, 10:00 AM
Personally, I vowed never to watch another one of his movies after the Village. If it wasn't for the fact I was on a date, I would have walked out. You do not market a monster movie to a horror-movie starved audience then shaft them with a fake monster.

Here's how much I hate the man. If he needed a kidney and I was the only donor match in the world, I'd tell you, "Where do I send the flowers?"

In fairness, M.Night did actually want the film to be marketed as a period-romance with a hint at the end of the trailer that something was off...

But then the marketers came along and decided to play up the horror angle.

So, not really his fault that people didn't get what they expected.

DementedFellow
2008-06-15, 11:05 AM
In fairness, M.Night did actually want the film to be marketed as a period-romance with a hint at the end of the trailer that something was off...

But then the marketers came along and decided to play up the horror angle.

So, not really his fault that people didn't get what they expected.

After the whole thing about the monster being fake, the rest becomes something that is easily guessed.

So with no monster and a wafer-thin plot, why again should I consider it a good movie or him a good director?

Yes, Unbreakable was a nice one-time shot movie, as was Sixth Sense, but how many times have you or anyone else watched the movies? After the initial "surprising twist" at the end, it loses it's replay value.

Besides, with a quick rewrite, they could have made it a better movie than a simple indictment of society. Really, I felt the moral was rather ham handed in execution and the only good scene was when

Joaquin Phoenix gets stabbed repeatedly. Shamalamadingdong actually threw a bone to the audience and gave us what we've wanted for all of the movie.

And it's not just the Village that shows how stupid the plots are in his movies. Look at the alien movie, Signs. It left the glaring question of
If aliens are killed by water, why bother invading a planet that has more than two/thirds of its surface covered by water? No word in the English language can describe how glaring this plot hole is.

The Robot Chicken episode where they make fun of this director is the pretty damn close to how ludicrous the "surprising twist" endings in his movies.

I don't plan on seeing Lady in the Water or The Happening or anything that has his name attached in the future. And I encourage others to do the same thing. Just wait for it to come out on video and even then wait for 99 cent night to rent the movie. Personally I think 99 cent is too much to pay for any of his movies. Let's say for some unknown reason I came into possession of the Village and my friend wanted it to buy it from me, I would accept a speck of lint as payment for this movie. It's not even worth the DVD it's burned on.

TheEmerged
2008-06-16, 04:46 PM
I'm just shocked nobody brought up Durkon yet...

KernelReefer
2008-06-16, 09:43 PM
I'm surprised that there are so many people who are still fans of Shyamalan. As someone of S Asian descent, I was vaguely proud and happy that an Indian made an impact in the film industry with The Sixth Sense, and sadly disappointed shortly thereafter.

It's not that his plots are all the same. It's that they're all nearly the same. The formula is that something idyllic exists, something awry happens to the idyllic scenery, protagonist makes some inroads to the oddity, OMGWTFBBQ twist! And the quality of the film varies wildly, but almost always falls on the left side of the curve.

And a lot of the times, the twist is also a deus ex. And at least once, the twist was ridiculous (Water? Really? REALLY!?), or tired (how many movies do we find out that the character is DEAD at the end? I can name at least 3). Not only that, he's been sued, repeatedly, for plagiarism. Orson Scott Card's Lost Boys and a book I read in elementary school Running Out of Time vaguely mirror the plot points. And by vaguely, I mean religiously follow the overarching concept.

I'm fairly confident that more than just a few people saw the "twist" at the end of several of the movies (save for Signs, for obvious reasons). I also don't think I'm alone in thinking that the romantic execution of The Village was not only token and secondary, but cliched, silly, and sad. Miss Congeniality had a better romance. Even if I'm wrong, I think the addition of the romance does not mark the movie as a departure from his style, because nearly everyone meta-watched it by looking for the twist. It followed the formula. And the romance was clearly not very important to the plot.

It's like adding a touch of basil to a marinara sauce (which you probably should have done anyway). It's still marinara sauce. Sometimes I want something else. You might say that Shyamalan specializes in a certain type of film. Fine. But that's like a Saucier specializing in red pasta sauce. If Shyamalan wants to be a Saucier, he needs to know how to make a Pesto or an Alfredo. Honestly.

hanzo66
2008-06-16, 10:15 PM
I'm guessing the fact that he's the one doing the Avatar: The Last Airbender movie isn't helping?

Quincunx
2008-06-17, 01:10 AM
I am slightly disappointed--had harbored hopes that aiming for B-movie quality (and achieving the graininess on film, according to the stills) would have mitigated that pain of the plot. Instead it just seems to have killed the movie even more than usual.

He did, for once, hire an advertising agency whose trailers only gave away the plot and not the twist. They didn't make me want to watch the movie, but at least they weren't like watching the digested version of it.

Zarrexaij
2008-06-17, 01:42 AM
It was the trees, wasn't it?


So much for a TWEEST.

Ronfar
2008-06-17, 03:46 AM
Yes, this is exactly what Durkon was talking about. Run for your lives, the trees are attacking!