Mystery Man
First Post
So is The Village really that bad? I've read some rip it to shreads reviews of some really pissed off movie goers on this one. I have not seen it yet, is it worth it?
Last edited:
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
M. Knight Shamalamadingdong - The Village really that bad?
- Thread starter Mystery Man
- Start date
Pielorinho
Iron Fist of Pelor
My feelings about it:
* Beautiful cinematography.
* Excellent mood creation.
* Great acting.
* Interesting subtext.
* A handful of stellar scenes.
* A couple of plot twists so dopesmackingly obvious and trite, and plot holes so stupid and implausible, that they just about manage to negate all that good stuff.
I would advise you to go into the movie knowing the following spoiler (I put it in tags in case you don't want to take my advice):
That'll help somewhat; now you'll just have to deal with the plot holes (the two biggest of which are almost literally plot holes).
My favorite reviewer, a local guy named Ken "Cranky" Hanke, said it best:
* Beautiful cinematography.
* Excellent mood creation.
* Great acting.
* Interesting subtext.
* A handful of stellar scenes.
* A couple of plot twists so dopesmackingly obvious and trite, and plot holes so stupid and implausible, that they just about manage to negate all that good stuff.
I would advise you to go into the movie knowing the following spoiler (I put it in tags in case you don't want to take my advice):
the movie takes place in present times
That'll help somewhat; now you'll just have to deal with the plot holes (the two biggest of which are almost literally plot holes).
My favorite reviewer, a local guy named Ken "Cranky" Hanke, said it best:
DanielCranky Hanke said:
I saw Sixth Sense. It was pretty good, but I figured out the big twist early on so it was no big surpise. Saw Signs and I thought it was a piece of crap. All bulid up, whenever anything exciting happend, you could not see it except for the end, it also had a big plot hole that I could not get over:
They also promoted the movie to be something that it was not. Never say Unbreakable.
M. Night is not on my reccomended list.
Water to the aliens is corrosive acid, so why the heck are they coming to a planet that the surface is 75% acid to them?
M. Night is not on my reccomended list.
trancejeremy
Adventurer
Eh. Clearly a lot of people like his movies. Yes, there are those that don't, but instead of those people trying to change his movies and want something they like, by suggesting he "Fire his writer", why don't they just not go to see his movies? And allow those that do enjoy his movies, to enjoy his movies.
I mean, you can easily find lots of movies not written by him. But there are only 4 or so that are. If you don't like him as a writer, don't see his movies. Simple as that.
Me, I think he's almost like a modern day Rod Serling (or more modern day). Not all episodes of the Twilight Zone made sense, or were horror or scary. But they generally made you think. Which his movies do.
(Also, speaking as someone with a last name no one spells right, it's lame to make fun of strange last names.)
I mean, you can easily find lots of movies not written by him. But there are only 4 or so that are. If you don't like him as a writer, don't see his movies. Simple as that.
Me, I think he's almost like a modern day Rod Serling (or more modern day). Not all episodes of the Twilight Zone made sense, or were horror or scary. But they generally made you think. Which his movies do.
(Also, speaking as someone with a last name no one spells right, it's lame to make fun of strange last names.)
Pielorinho
Iron Fist of Pelor
Ken, I've heard two different explanations for that problem with Signs:
Granted, the movie doesn't really suggest that either of these is true, and that's sloppy filmmaking, but since I overall liked Signs, I'm a lot more willing to cut it some slack on this point.
Daniel
1) They weren't flying-saucer technoaliens at all, but were rather demons sent by God to restore this preacher's faith; the news coverage of them was faked by God, and their appearance was actually highly localized in this one community. Water's effect on them was symbolic, supernatural.
2) They were slave aliens sent down by the master-race that drove the spaceships; they were light-boned so they could jump, and were equipped for knocking humans out, but were chosen for the mission exactly BECAUSE the planet was hostile to them, ensuring that they couldn't escape and "go native" on the planet
2) They were slave aliens sent down by the master-race that drove the spaceships; they were light-boned so they could jump, and were equipped for knocking humans out, but were chosen for the mission exactly BECAUSE the planet was hostile to them, ensuring that they couldn't escape and "go native" on the planet
Granted, the movie doesn't really suggest that either of these is true, and that's sloppy filmmaking, but since I overall liked Signs, I'm a lot more willing to cut it some slack on this point.
Daniel
If they offered any type of expnation in Signs, it would have made more sense and I probibly would have liked it better.
Thats what i think.
I am also surpised that at the end of Signs, there was not really any expostion on the effect the alien invasion had on earth. There should have been, a world altering event like that. But if its like you said in #1, i can see why
Cthulhudrew
First Post
trancejeremy said:
Of course, it's possible that some people like some of his movies, and not others of his movies, and the reason they go to see his movies is because they're not sure of what they're going to find.
For myself, I loved The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable. Didn't care for Signs, and didn't really like The Village all that much. I'm still going to go and see his next movie, though, because I really, really like SS and UnB.
I think of him more as a modern day Alfred Hitchcock, right down to the cameos in his movies. In many senses, I think he is, but even Hitch didn't hit the ball out of the park every time.
Old Fezziwig
Thanks for the sour persimmons, cousin.
KenM said:
I think the first suggestion Pielorinho lists, although I don't agree with it, gets at the point of the movie really well -- the point of Signs is the Mel Gibson character's faith. That's what the film is about. It's not really about aliens any more than The Sixth Sense is about ghosts or Unbreakable's about superheroes, even though all three films use the trappings of those types of stories.
That said, I think M. Night Shyamalan's got to let go of the trick ending thing. It feels a bit too gimmicky to me, and I feel like he could really be freed into making better films (I really like his films, mind you) without it.
best,
Nick
Crothian
First Post
I haven't seen the Village yet, don't know if I will. I do think he has talent but it seems after Sixth Sense he needs a gimick like in that to sell his stuff. I don't see how complaining about him takes away the enjoyment of others who like him. I think the discussion is good.
So, in the Village is it like the other three were there really are few answers and your left wondering about things? Or does it give a reason why it is like it is? And if it does go ahead and spoil it, his movies don't seem to matter much if you know what's going to happen.
So, in the Village is it like the other three were there really are few answers and your left wondering about things? Or does it give a reason why it is like it is? And if it does go ahead and spoil it, his movies don't seem to matter much if you know what's going to happen.
Tarrasque Wrangler
First Post
You know, I've never understood the problem people had with Signs, vis a vis
the alien weakness to water. They make pretty plain that the aliens need humans (and presumably other extraterrestrial lifeforms) for -something-. Life generally needs water to thrive on. Thus, the aliens find themselves around water. You could look at it as a hazard of the job.
Similar Threads
