M. Night Shyamalan's The Village

[tpfkabi]

*spoilers*

the mention of the hole was not with the talk of suspense.

i think i see what you're getting at. are you saying, "Why is Ivy afraid if she knows there are no monsters?"

i guess her fear is from the fact that she's blind and in an unfamiliar place and hearing odd sounds..............but then i guess someone could ask, "Why wouldn't her father go with her?"......and that question kinda goes along with the one about Sigourney Weaver keeping the farce even to sacrifice her own son's life. The people of the village are willing to sacrifice their own kids to keep their seclusion from society I guess.

A few people have said that it's like a feature length Twilight Zone, and I agree. But I like the Twilight Zone and I like this movie despite it's gaping holes (nice pun).

anyone know what the last minute reshoot was?

[Ghostboy]

I think all the stuff in the village after Ivy returns was reshot. You never see Joaquin's face in the very last scene...I'll bet he wasn't available.

I agree with the Twilight Zone comparison...but the great thing about the Twilight Zone is that each minute was 30-60 minutes long. Not as much room for vivible plot holes or lame scenes trying to stretch the suspense past the expiration point.

[tpfkabi]

it almost sounds like i'm a big Night fan, but i'm not.
i didn't like Signs too much.
i do like Unbreakable except that the techno music just doesn't seem to fit in some places.
then there's the Sixth Sense........was this critically praised or panned like The Village?

i can never like this movie because there's no way a husband could live with his wife for a year(isn't there a year + between the death and the revelation?) and not realize they're not actually communicating.......there would have already been a divorce..........no one communicated with him but the boy......surely somewhere he would get the idea....he had a doctorate, right?............how did he open the cellar door if he was a ghost?

i just don't understand why people can overlook that in the Sixth Sense, but not overlook some things in The Village.

[modage]

because the sixth sense still works as a film and this one doesnt.  also because those things you mentioned are before the films timeline begins.  from the point it begins till the end it tells a coherent story where the twist is allowed to work without the entire film hinging on it like a jenga piece that if removed the movie falls apart (like this one).  

the more i think about it, the more this movie really bugs me.  the best part was the thing about people who like each other not touching, thats nice.  its not awful, but i expect better from him.

[Gamblour.]

SPOILERS

I guess I'm the only one who had no problems with this movie. I saw a late showing so maybe I left my left brain at the door and my right brain was getting me all emotional. But I fell for everything in this movie. I'd like to think I'm not stupid for it. I just don't think about where a movie's going, just where it is. I guess I'm shortsighted, or just don't like ruining things for myself.

Anyhow, I was only pissed once, when they first say the monsters aren't real. I wanted them to be real (was I the only one who was really tense/scared when they came into the town and almost got Ivy? I thought that was well done, keeping them out of focus), I though Night ruined his movie by making them fake.

But then I let go of that and kept going, wondering what would happen in the woods. Then, he says the part "there are legends/stories of monsters in the woods" which made me think, 'hey maybe they are real after all, and the suit was a ruse to make Ivy not be scared?' so I was fucking nervous as hell when she encountered the one in the woods. but then realizing again that they weren't real I was disappointed, it actually made me wonder what all was going on, and it was really sad to see Brody in that hole.

When it turns out it's the present, I was really disturbed at thinking of how a group of traumatized people could do such a thing as create a commune, and the fact that they had done it (which no one can dispute how realistic this is, because the movie says it's so) was very disturbing to think about.

I think I'm the only person who liked this movie, no questions asked, after I saw it. If you did, please comfort me lol, I bought everything the movie gave me, but I"m not a sucker for Shyamalan, though I think Unbreakable is one of the best, if not the best, superhero movies ever made. I've grown to like the faith aspect of Signs, which I hated before because of that fucker Culkin.

[Ravi]

SEEMS LIKE A SPOILER, BUT I READ IT WITHOUT HAVING SEEN THE FILM  

admin edit:
yes, BIG FAT OILY GREASY SPOILERS



http://www.newindpress.com/news.asp?id=IEE20040811071327

Shyamalan's 'Village' might get sued for plagiarism

Wednesday August 11 2004 16:39 IST
ANI

WASHINGTON: He might have become eponymous in Hollywood for movies evoking mystery but acclaimed writer- director M. Night Shyamalan has now been accused of drawing his inspiration from children's books.

According to Eonline, his latest movie 'The Village' has come under the scanner after publishing giant Simon & Schuster indicated that it may file a lawsuit against him claiming that the movie is taken our of children's author Margaret Peterson Haddix's first book, Running Out of Time published in 1995.

"It was the fans that really pointed it out in the first place. The book is about a young tomboyish girl in a rural village in the 1800s who comes to learn that, in fact, it is a historical preserve in 1996 and that the adults have kept that secret from the children of the village. She finds that out when her mother sends her out to get medicine. But she learns it pretty early on in the book and then discovers all sorts of other intrigue," the report quoted a spokesman for the publishers as saying.

[ProgWRX]

yah the day after the movie came out a friend of mine linked me to the amazon listing for that book... pretty remarkable indeed.

[tpfkabi]

Hey Gamblor geht weg.,
i feel the same way about the film and pretty much the same way about Night, too.

hmmmm, it has been mentioned that the Sixth Sense was loosely taken from an episode of Are You Afraid of the Dark?

i wonder if Night has mentioned the book before? it is eerily alike.

[Jeremy Blackman]

Aww... and I thought that whole big idea was the movie's one redeeming quality...

[Myxo]

This is from Ebert's website under his Q&A section of the website.

***SPOILERS***

Q. M. Night Shyamalan's affection for "The Twilight Zone" is well documented, so I can't help but wonder if the so-called surprise in "The Village" wasn't at least partially borrowed from "A Hundred Yards Over the Rim," a "Twilight Zone" episode written by Rod Serling that starred Cliff Robertson and originally aired on April 7, 1961.

The exact nature of the surprise, and the way it's presented (also prompted by a medical emergency, by the way), are nearly identical to what Shyamalan serves up so unconvincingly in "The Village." You could argue that there are no new ideas, only new ways of presenting them, and of course filmmakers borrow from their pop-cultural inspirations all the time.

But it seems rather sad that someone of Shyamalan's proven talent would borrow so obviously, and then turn a good idea (like Serling's) into -- let's face it -- a really bad one that collapses under scrutiny.

Jeff Shannon, Lynnwood, Wash.

A. "The Village" stirred up a lot of activity in the Answer Man's world, with 162 readers passionately defending or attacking it in about equal numbers. Some of its defenders argued that the "surprise ending" was beside the point.

Ben Angstadt of Irmo, S.C., wrote: "So did you totally miss the point that 'The Village' was about the politics of terror and George W. Bush, or did you just not care?"

And Erik Goodwyn of Cincinnati wrote -- spoiler warning: "What I mean is that even though the creatures aren't scary once their secret is revealed -- that's the point! Shyamalan is saying something very pointed about the peculiar nature of fear."

Several other readers saw the film as an allegory for terror used as an excuse for political repression. That didn't occur to me, but as a theory it doesn't make the film any more entertaining, in my opinion.

[MacGuffin]

*SPOILERS*

Q. M. Night Shyamalan's affection for "The Twilight Zone" is well documented, so I can't help but wonder if the so-called surprise in "The Village" wasn't at least partially borrowed from "A Hundred Yards Over the Rim," a "Twilight Zone" episode written by Rod Serling that starred Cliff Robertson and originally aired on April 7, 1961.

I thought about that episode, and it would certainly be the episode that is the closest to "The Village's" 'twist' (although "A Stop At Willoughby" has some similarities too), but it's really kind of a stretch since that "Zone" episode plays it more 'time travel', the reveal is early, the 'villagers' are settlers on a wagon train, and it plays it more on the 'modern day' peoples' POV. Actually, the story is more similar to "12 Monkeys".

[Pubrick]

so this finally opened last week here..
and so i finally saw it yesterday.

here are a few quotes i agree with.. prepare to gasp.

I think something to keep in mind is that he actually stayed away from making a supernatural film this time, and the predictable twist wasn't exactly the end of the movie as it had been in 6th and Unbreakable (I don't count Signs as a twist)

Bryce Dallas Howard is phenomenal.

[The film worked better as a love story/triangle, with Howard and Phoenix playing a believable couple. Those moments of watching their affections and feelings for one another blossom, as well as their acting, were the film's strength.

You know, the morning after, this movie is ten times more intriguing to me than it was last night. I somehow wish all the absurdity was intentional.

the hardcore pubrick-philes would remember this opinion..

yeah and she's butt ugly.

i will now fight anyone who says she is.

the thing with ppl and this movie begins with their attitude towards M Night Shyamalan. he inhabits a bizarre realm of popularity, movie enthusiasts who want to sound like they "know what's up" list him as their favorite director working today. that's the first thing that's wrong with this movie.

but wait! here's my twist.. i liked it. oh u would already hav guessed that from reading the quotes above, but that's because i'm being overambitious with this post. i want to diss the twist-requisite style of MNS, and at the same time redeem the film/post through the grace of Bryce Dallas Howard.

so much like the film, i will let BDH carry this review, beyond its flaws.

i went in expecting a really bad ending that would make the rest of the movie unwatchable. i also expected Judy Greer to be the only thing keeping me from leaving if it got too bad. man, she SUCKED. i am no longer a fan of inverse-owl greer. BDH on the other hand, exceeded expectations. when she became the focus of the story, it was like another movie started.. i stopped caring about the shitty twists, and the OH SO LAME 'modern day' references to soldier deaths on the radio. at one point my waning urge to hate the movie took over in one last subconscious attempt to subvert what was turning out to be a pleasant movie experience, i associated certain angles of BDH as resembling Julia Roberts! i could not believe it, is THIS what sleuth meant by being 'so close' to being good? i wasn't going to stand for it, focussing on her fuller lips and flustered youth, feeding on my renewed inclination toward the redhead variety, i overcame my own self-destructive impulses. a lot of shots in the movie seem to hav been set up for the purpose of uselessly illustrating one or two lines, presumably these could be among the reshot things..  BDH running to [lucius'] side in the final shot was one of the few that worked.

seeing the film through the BDH character might enable a future repeat viewing, and that's ok with me, just like i would only watch the Sixth Sense again for the toni colette scenes. at least MNS got over his latent homo-pedophilia and moved onto more attractive pastures.

so.. yeah. i like bryce dallas howard in this. and the movie's not that bad.

[brockly]

wow, shyamalan finally made a decent movie. a shame so many people dont like it. its funny how i found myself so willingly, though unsuccessfully, trying to defend shyamalan, when two years ago i was doing the exact opposite with signs. and it was tough to not be able to take advantage of all the deprived, vulnerable night fans. overall, i didn't love the film, and i can acknowledge its flaws, but i just felt comfortable with where shyamalan was taking it. I agree with most of what P said.

[socketlevel]

this film is the most fascist piece of cinema i have seen in a long time.  this is a movie for george w. supporters.  I suspect m. knight doesn't know he created propaganda for the masses but the rhetoric at the end of the film should have suggested the final decision made by the elite "elders" was the wrong choice to make.  i back this up with adrian brody's martyr like representation to turn their cause into a crusade.

m. knight. suggests that few people should make decisions for the majority of a society.  that is not democracy.  The best way to rule over people is to trick them into fear of the unknown, keep them complacent.  shame on you mr. Shyamalan.

-sl-

[Just Withnail]

Damn you, now I gotta see this after all.