Oh, I didn't mean that you were the type to pick apart movies as you watch them. I just know there are people out there who do do that, and I wonder if those are some of the same people who didn't like The Village.
That's a pretty fair review. I'll go along with that.
Has there ever been a filmmaker who based his entire career on "twist" endings?
You get the feeling M. Night spends his time between movies trying to dream up "twists", then constructs his movies backwards from there.
Which is too bad, because in terms of camera work, performances, mood, etc. I thought it was pretty good-- but by hanging the movie's success or failure on whether or not the "twist" "works" seems sort of pointless to me.
"Unbreakable", I thought, was particularly egregious on that count. At the end all I could say was "um.... OK. I guess. Whatever"
Like all movies I watch with my fiancee I have to be nice because she just likes most movies, thank God for this thread.
Quote:
I think they didn't like it because they "got it" a little too early in the movie.
Bingo.
How about when they show a well-made aluminum-and-glass greenhouse?
Or the freaking boxes? I BET IT'S BOGEY MONSTERS INSIDE AM I RITE?!
I had one thought from the beginning, "Is William Hurt a bad actor or is he playing a modern guy trying too hard to sound like a time-period character?" Glaring.
Quote:
[B]You get the feeling M. Night spends his time between movies trying to dream up "twists", then constructs his movies backwards from there.
It's not just a feeling, it's a fact.
Shyalaman will always get my money, though, because my fiancee won't learn her lesson about his movies. Cable-worthy.
I'm usually nice about fantasy movies, but I knew this wasn't a freaking fantasy movie because I don't trust the filmmaker whose ego is so goddam huge he can't keep his face off the screen and makes "oh, well that is mildly surprising" endings the crux of his work.
One thing I did like is that it was (intentionally or unintentionally), I think, an indictment against fundamentalist/romantic religious/political belief.
Comments
That's a pretty fair review. I'll go along with that.
MNS's next project: The Life of Pi.
Yep.
(This thread features spoilers about The Village, but let's be nice and not spoil that book here, what do you say?)
You get the feeling M. Night spends his time between movies trying to dream up "twists", then constructs his movies backwards from there.
Which is too bad, because in terms of camera work, performances, mood, etc. I thought it was pretty good-- but by hanging the movie's success or failure on whether or not the "twist" "works" seems sort of pointless to me.
"Unbreakable", I thought, was particularly egregious on that count. At the end all I could say was "um.... OK. I guess. Whatever"
I think they didn't like it because they "got it" a little too early in the movie.
Bingo.
How about when they show a well-made aluminum-and-glass greenhouse?
Or the freaking boxes? I BET IT'S BOGEY MONSTERS INSIDE AM I RITE?!
I had one thought from the beginning, "Is William Hurt a bad actor or is he playing a modern guy trying too hard to sound like a time-period character?" Glaring.
[B]You get the feeling M. Night spends his time between movies trying to dream up "twists", then constructs his movies backwards from there.
It's not just a feeling, it's a fact.
Shyalaman will always get my money, though, because my fiancee won't learn her lesson about his movies. Cable-worthy.
I'm usually nice about fantasy movies, but I knew this wasn't a freaking fantasy movie because I don't trust the filmmaker whose ego is so goddam huge he can't keep his face off the screen and makes "oh, well that is mildly surprising" endings the crux of his work.
One thing I did like is that it was (intentionally or unintentionally), I think, an indictment against fundamentalist/romantic religious/political belief.