I just saw The Village

[Blaine23]

So my buddy calls me up saying he's got free passes to The Village, so we went to see it tonight.

Short review (without the spoilers) - It's not as scary or thrilling as the trailers would lead you to believe. It's actually closer in mood to 28 Days Later, though there is definitely the same vibe you find in all his movies.

Like all his movies, the script is way better than average, the camera work is deft, and the actors are pitch perfect in their roles. Ron Howard's daughter pretty much makes the whole film. She puts in a terrific performance from start to finish. Adrian Brody is a scary man. Joaquin is, well Joaquin-ish.

Also there's a surprise in the movie - one that I actually figured out, which is totally weird because I usually try NOT to ruin the experience by second guessing the director. It just kinda leapt out at me. No on in our group saw it coming but me, so I won't spill it here until we get other folks chatting in the thread after the movie's out this weekend.

All in all, I'd recommend it - but not so much as a "scary movie" but more just as a good story and more like a really cool episode of Twilight Zone than a creature feature.

I've got a ton more to share about it... but I'd hate to be that guy who gives it away. If that's what you're looking for then I'm sure you can find a review that spills the beans.

[zeo-mare]

it looks interesteing i am hopefully going to get a chance to check it out. i did like Signs and he seems like a good director, and it seems like a worthwhile film.

[Jolly Rogers]

Pretty stiff competition this weekend at the box office, I think my dollars will vote for The Manchurian Candidate.

So is this movie worth repeat viewing even after the proverbial cat is out of the bag? I found most of his movies were only good enough for the first time. The Six Sense was good for a 2nd viewing but the rest... meh.

[ZorClone]

I got to see it tonight as well.. Intel sponsored an outing at CPL for about 500 people that managed to get tickets for wearing an Intel shirt and being at the appointed place when called upon via loudspeaker..

ANYWAY

so a group of about 500 routy gamers from CPL goes to see this movie. You can imagine the audience behaviour.

Regardless, this was quite an interesting movie, and definitely worth seeing. I think I still liked Signs better though

One thing that's for sure. Ron Howard's daughter was amazing! I also liked Jaquin Pheonix's character too, I've really liked his work ever since I saw him in Gladiator.

[HG Blows]

Hmmm, is it wrong to be more interested in Harold and Kumar go to White Castle then this or the Manchurian Candidate?

[Blaine23]

About the Manchurian Candidate...

Looks pretty good... but I'm a bit leery of seeing yet another remake of a great film. Jonathon Demme is an awesome director, but he also remade the brillaint Charade into the steaming pile of poop that is The Truth About Charlie... so I'm not sure whether I wanna bother with it.

As for Harold and Kumar... sounds like Dude, Where's My Car? without all of the deeper meaning. Pass.

[Mislovrit]

Watch Manchurian Candidate remake if you don't mind Republican being the bad guys and more Bush-bashing.

[the white drew carey]

The wife and I are going to see it tonight. I suggest we start a spoiler thread for those who want to discuss it (as I surely will). Me and the wife talked about Signs continually for about a week after we saw it!

[do not disturb]

i watched 7 minutes of it the other night during unbreakable(first time i'd seen it, not bad at all). looks very interesting and i assumed it wasn't scary as most of his movies aren't really scary or what i consider scary....more like a suspense thriller. i'll definitely have to check it out.

[mikeszekely]

I saw it today, definately liked it. It definately wasn't scary at all. Signs was more tense. But it was still very enjoyable. Also, expecting a plot twist, Shyamalan still managed to pull one over on me. Oh, bonus points if you caught Shyamalan's cameo in the movie.

[JsARCLIGHT]

Went to see it at lunch today with some guys from my office. It was decent enough. Typical Shyamalan from start to finish with decent performances by the cast. IMHO the cast is what makes this movie as the story felt like one long-winded joke leading up to a not so easy to figure out punchline.

Going to see the Manchurian Candidate tonight with the wife. I hear it is far different from the original with several twists the original does not have...

Edited July 31, 2004 by JsARCLIGHT

[the white drew carey]

So we went to see it tonight. Right at the part with Ivy and the sinkhole, the power blew out! What a surprise twist!!!

So everyone gets a free movie pass and we're going to see it (hopefully from beginning to end) tomorrow.

[Ladic]

This movie was a Major Let down, maybe I had too high espections because I had liked his other 3 movies.

But that blind chick was really good.

[gerwalk25]

I saw it this afternoon. Pretty much like a good Twilight Zone ep. and was less predictable than Signs. The trailers really only tell half the story. M. Night's gotta really good film; in depth and character IMHO.

[bsu legato]

From what I've read here, I'm glad I went to see Bourne Supremecy instead.

[Commander McBride]

As for Harold and Kumar... sounds like Dude, Where's My Car? without all of the deeper meaning. Pass.

Harold and Kumar was so much better than Dude, Where's My Car, it's hard to describe. It was everything good about DWMC without all the bad. The writing and jokes were much better, and the characters were much more likable. ANd this is coming from someone who really liked DWMC.

[EXO]

Saw and loved it. I know if I use the word "original", some guy gonna come along and give me titles of 10 crappy movies, but it far different from the run of the mill movies they are pumping out today. A lot of people came out of the theatre disappointed. I can't seriously blame them, because they came in for a type of movie and didn't get it. But then again, you already saw Signs... why would Shymalan do the same film??? Monsters banging on doors while people hide in the basement? And there were people screaming in the audience, so I know the horror element is there.

There's a certain dynamic between Opi's daughter, Juaquin Phoenix and Adrian Brody, characters that barely speak (except the Howard chick, she has plenty of lines) that says more than the typical teen love triangle movies of today.

If you can't handle the twist, don't watch it. But it you want a great theatre experience then check it out.

[VF-1Guy]

I saw it Friday afternoon. I didn't really know too much about it (only heard about it a couple of weeks back). The director and what little I knew about the premise were enough for me. I definately enjoyed it.

<MUSING BELOW, SPOILER FREE - BUT STILL AVOID IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN IT>

I thought that the plot was fairly easy to figure out. I had guessed the twists long before they played out, but that didn't decrease my enjoyment at all. Even though I was pretty sure what was going to happen, I still enjoyed watching it being carefully played out. I've also spent a lot of time going over the plot and filling in the blanks. There is a little more going on than what is on the screen.

[Angel's Fury]

I hate to crash the love fest here, but I have to say I'm disappointed. IMHO even Unbreakable was better than this one.

[Guppy]

I hate to stand out by myself here, but I can't stand his films!! Obvious plot twists, super-lame 'surprise endings', all hype and no substance. To me his films are like a move version of the 'Emperor's New Clothes'. 'Unwatchable' is on my top 5 worst films of all time. I just couldn't; believe how unbelievable awful the ending was. My mouth was gaping when the credits rolled.

[JsARCLIGHT]

I hate to stand out by myself here, but I can't stand his films!! Obvious plot twists, super-lame 'surprise endings', all hype and no substance. To me his films are like a move version of the 'Emperor's New Clothes'. 'Unwatchable' is on my top 5 worst films of all time. I just couldn't; believe how unbelievable awful the ending was. My mouth was gaping when the credits rolled.

I agree with that on a lot of levels mainly because all he seems to do now are these creepy suspense movies with a crap in your popcorn twist. I liked Sixth Sense because it was new and interesting... Unbreakable was predictable but interesting... Signs, if not for the decent acting was bad... and now the Village, once again if not for the decent acting it would be so awful I could not stand it. Shyamalan is not the god everyone makes him out to be as his movies are most often saved by their actors than their stories. A good cast can save even the worst of scripts just like a bad cast can ruin the best of scripts.

[VF-1Guy]

Maybe M.K.S. needs to tell George Lucas how a great cast can save a bad script.

I think it is a good director along with a great cast that can save a bad script. A bad director usually always ruins a movie.

[Blaine23]

I agree with that on a lot of levels mainly because all he seems to do now are these creepy suspense movies with a crap in your popcorn twist. I liked Sixth Sense because it was new and interesting... Unbreakable was predictable but interesting... Signs, if not for the decent acting was bad... and now the Village, once again if not for the decent acting it would be so awful I could not stand it. Shyamalan is not the god everyone makes him out to be as his movies are most often saved by their actors than their stories. A good cast can save even the worst of scripts just like a bad cast can ruin the best of scripts.

Do you really think those actors can pull those films up without a director guiding them?

I can agree with you completely disliking MKS - the screenwriter - and that's basically what you're saying. You didn't like the story. I think he's pretty overrated in the script dept. as well.

But I'll give the guy his props where he's due. He's very good with cameras and actors - two skills 90% of directors never get right. I've seen Bruce Willis and Mel Gibson turn in some of the worst performances ever in other films with directors who don't know what they're doing.

I'm not taking anything away from the actors' abilities - but trust me when I say that the best actors can be terrible or vice versa, with proper/improper direction.

What MKS does better than quite a few other filmmakers is that he knows exactly what kind of movie he's trying to make before they start. So many flicks lose focus, suffer endless rewrites, and change in front of test audiences a million times because the director is trying to find his focus.

I think the dude is overrated in terms of "the greatest" - but he still has talent and it shows in the performances. More than anything the guy needs to lose the "trick ending" shtick and try something different.

[GobotFool]

I agree with that on a lot of levels mainly because all he seems to do now are these creepy suspense movies with a crap in your popcorn twist. I liked Sixth Sense because it was new and interesting... Unbreakable was predictable but interesting... Signs, if not for the decent acting was bad... and now the Village, once again if not for the decent acting it would be so awful I could not stand it. Shyamalan is not the god everyone makes him out to be as his movies are most often saved by their actors than their stories. A good cast can save even the worst of scripts just like a bad cast can ruin the best of scripts.

Do you really think those actors can pull those films up without a director guiding them?

I can agree with you completely disliking MKS - the screenwriter - and that's basically what you're saying. You didn't like the story. I think he's pretty overrated in the script dept. as well.

But I'll give the guy his props where he's due. He's very good with cameras and actors - two skills 90% of directors never get right. I've seen Bruce Willis and Mel Gibson turn in some of the worst performances ever in other films with directors who don't know what they're doing.

I'm not taking anything away from the actors' abilities - but trust me when I say that the best actors can be terrible or vice versa, with proper/improper direction.

What MKS does better than quite a few other filmmakers is that he knows exactly what kind of movie he's trying to make before they start. So many flicks lose focus, suffer endless rewrites, and change in front of test audiences a million times because the director is trying to find his focus.

I think the dude is overrated in terms of "the greatest" - but he still has talent and it shows in the performances. More than anything the guy needs to lose the "trick ending" shtick and try something different.

Not to be another me too voice but I wholely agree. His script writing has only gotten weaker but his ability to direct the cameras and the actors is fantastic. He should try working with someone else's script at least once.

[JsARCLIGHT]

Unless he also is the cinematographer, editor, post operator, production designer, composer and all the other myriad of people working on the picture the director's true "talent" can be very well covered up by the excellence of his crew. A movie is an ensemble effort, no one man simply pulls a finished movie out of his ass... well, except for George Lucas. Good camera moves are more the camera operator and cinematographer than the director. Suspense comes from editing and the muscial composer, as well as the actors. The true "direction" of a picture does come from the director but to say he is the end all and be all of a movie is short-selling his crew. All a director does is keep a movie on target and basically "conduct" the tallents of those around him. Pretty much anyone can be a director but it takes special skills to fill all the other roles... hence why so many people become directors but you rarely hear of someone becomming a production designer or a post editor.

I'm not saying Shaymalan is a terrible director in the end, I'm just saying that everyone gives him way too much credit for the movies he "makes". Just like Coppola, Spielburg and all the other "greats"... they do not make the movie themselves they have tons of help. Very rarely does a director draw the audience, it is usually the talent.

Edited August 2, 2004 by JsARCLIGHT

[EXO]

It would take a lot for one person to pull all that off, but it does take a good director to get everyone to put out your vision of a script. There maybe a lot of people working on the movie and as much as they should get credit, what you get is pretty much Shymalan's vision. And whether you like his movies or not, that's what you're gonna get. I can respect people not liking the movie, as I said I don't blame anyone from leaving the theatre disappointed. But I can also respect someone who can put a lot of substance in a movie, wherther it be predictable to some or not. Frankly, I was so absorbed in the film I didn't think about the twist. I'm not a big fan of Unbreakable but I thought the twist at the end was pretty good too. It's too bad I had to suffer thru 2 hours before I got there.

I also agree that he maybe overrated, I think he's trying to deliver good popcorn fun but people, maybe including himself, maybe trying to read too much into his movies.

[the white drew carey]

Unless he also is the cinematographer, editor, post operator, production designer, composer and all the other myriad of people working on the picture the director's true "talent" can be very well covered up by the excellence of his crew. A movie is an ensemble effort, no one man simply pulls a finished movie out of his ass... well, except for George Lucas. All a director does is keep a movie on target and basically "conduct" the tallents of those around him. I'm not saying he is a terrible director in the end, I'm just saying that everyone gives him way too much credit for the movies he "makes". Just like Coppola, Spielburg and all the other "greats"... they do not make the movie themselves they have tons of help.

Interesting, but remember that, just like Coppola, Spielberg and the other "greats", he has a lot more control over his movies than say, the guy who directed Catwoman. Or William Shatner ( )!!!

I think the reason people give him a lot of credit is because he ensures that he has a hand in almost every aspect of the film. It's his baby and he wants it done right.

Is Shyamalan the greatest director ever? No.

But what he has done is proven his ability to create the magic of cinema. To be able to bring the best out of his actors and crew. He constantly praises the work of the people he directs, and will readily admit that a big part of his success is the crew that he has brought together for each film.

That's a lot more than your McG's or Michael Bay's can ever attain.

[JsARCLIGHT]

I think it is just the people I am around. When I went to see the movie I went with some guys from the office and when we left they were praising everyone but Shyamalan. They were saying how good the cinematography was and how interesting the costume design was. Not once did any of us even mention Shyamalan until it came to the story and we all pretty much agreed it was not the best. To us, old grizzled marketing and promotional design boys, the director holds the helm and it is his job to make the product flow. What we saw as a long drawn out one note story left us all a bit cold. I will conciede that he did a good job of directing the actors to act and getting the look and feel right but IMHO he did a poor job of telling a story. As others have said the movie feels like one long Twilight Zone episode and then at the end you start questioning the whole movie based on the twist. Not giving any spoilers here but you start asking questions about the girl that died of illness at the beginning and other "strange" things that happen that can almost account to plot holes.

[Blaine23]

Unless he also is the cinematographer, editor, post operator, production designer, composer and all the other myriad of people working on the picture the director's true "talent" can be very well covered up by the excellence of his crew. A movie is an ensemble effort, no one man simply pulls a finished movie out of his ass... well, except for George Lucas. Good camera moves are more the camera operator and cinematographer than the director. Suspense comes from editing and the muscial composer, as well as the actors. The true "direction" of a picture does come from the director but to say he is the end all and be all of a movie is short-selling his crew. All a director does is keep a movie on target and basically "conduct" the tallents of those around him. Pretty much anyone can be a director but it takes special skills to fill all the other roles... hence why so many people become directors but you rarely hear of someone becomming a production designer or a post editor.

I'm not saying Shaymalan is a terrible director in the end, I'm just saying that everyone gives him way too much credit for the movies he "makes". Just like Coppola, Spielburg and all the other "greats"... they do not make the movie themselves they have tons of help. Very rarely does a director draw the audience, it is usually the talent.

Well, the director is the guy who:

A. Hires all of those people.

B. Tells them what he wants.

Particularly in a case like MKS', he's got final approval over what is released and what is done, thanks to the financial rewards of his other films - the credit really does belong to him.

It's a bit like good management in business. If the team works well and creates a good product, they didn't do it on their own. Or a good sports coach. The director doesn't actually move the camera or say the lines, but he's the guy who puts it all in place.

I'll agree with him getting too much credit, but I also think its unfair to say that all of these people somehow managed to make good movies despite him.

[Jemstone]

I saw it and liked it. It's possible I enjoyed because I never expect much from MKS. Just how I enjoyed Signs. The "twist" was weak.

[GreatMoose]

Meh. Saw it coming a mile away. Was a very interesting premise, though. I can almost see it as a true story, you know?

[Skull 001]

I like his past films better even Unbreakable. I think he is trying to write in a twist for the sake of writing in a twist. I think he missed on this one.

[Sundown]

Liked it. Not raving mad about it, but liked it. Especially after Signs-- while enjoyable to watch, left me feeling pretty empty, and with every thought after of the contrived ending causing me to hate it more and more. I wasn't expecting much, other than good acting and good directing, with lots of good dialogue... and *was* expecting everything to be for naught with his usual endings that undo all that happened in the previous two hours.

The obvious problem with Shamalayan movies is that the entire movie is one giant setup for his surprise ending-- which often leaves the audience feeling duped. There's actually not that much *story* going on, and thus, the entire film hinges on whether the audience likes that particular surprise or not. And he's not always successful in conveying the moral theme that might make the audience accept the movie as being something other than yet another trick played on them.

But I liked it, and liked the idea behind the surprise. The possible ending occurred to me a couple of times during the movie, but I didn't really see it coming per se. Wasn't that surprised by it though, but it left me smirking. Ended up thinking about the film's premise afterwards, and of how the little details tied into the ending. When a movie does that, when I was ready to roll eyes at it, then I guess it's doing something right.

-Al

[eugimon]

just saw it tonight, didn't know the twist going in, but I figured it out within 15 mins. not sure what tipped me off, but I turned to my friend and said, bet they're just a bunch a nut jobs hiding from the modern world.

thus, the big twist, big let down.... I give the village: meh

[wolfx]

Saw it 2 nights ago. Definately an MNS film. (Why you guys make his initials MKS? I swore its Night not Knight). Overall....pretty much enjoyed the show but personally, nothing can live up to 6th Sense. I saw the ending coming....and I was guessing that the black boxes contained PS2s. "We keep the painful memories close to us" (paraphrased)

I don't know....but The Village is like Unbreakable. It was Boring...boring...boring....boring....BANG WHAM! THANK YOU MAAM!! the end. I feel the suspense build....but there wasn't enough of it...which was at the edge of boredom.