probably Suspension of disbeleif is one thing but he stretched it too much Aliens were idiots Rocket River
Check out this review here: http://aint-it-cool.com/display.cgi?id=23916 I usually agree with his assessments and this feels right on the money...i didn't read it all the way through cause he goes into the story halfway (spoilers) through. I also read a pretty good article in EW the other week based on his new book. I have liked M. Night's movies in the past but it's becoming pretty obvious that the dude is developing a huge ego and needs to check himself. The fact that Disney passed on the movie because they didn't get the story coinciding with such terrible reviews suggests as much. He's been banking off of Sixth Sense fame for too long now. Every director has help in the process; so should he.
What is this movie even about? The trailers I've seen seem to show multiple topics. Is it a Lady in the Water? or a Big bad Wolf?
It's supposed to be a fairly tale. "Apartment building superintendent Cleveland Heep (Giamatti) rescues what he thinks is a young woman from the pool he maintains. When he discovers that she is actually a character from a bedtime story who is trying to make the journey back to her home, he works with his tenants to protect his new friend from the creatures that are determined to keep her in our world."
I'm with you on this, Max. I thought Signs gets a lot of undeserved criticism. I think M. Night definitely has a lot of talent, but he made the mistake of painting himself into a corner after Sixth Sense. He never should have made another movie with a 'twist' for a long time after that one. People expect it now. And if you go in expecting it, a lot of the impact is already lost. But you look at a movie like The Village, which everyone could see coming a mile away, and I think his ability is really pretty clear. If you take away the 'secret' of the village, and look at the 'monster' part of that movie; the combination of the girl, the monster, and her relationships; that plays out well and it's why I think he does have talent. By itself it is a well told story onscreen (the 'chase' near the end with the girl and the creature in the forest works, despite the setup around it). Night is extremely talented when it comes to setting up tension, mood and atmosphere in his filmmaking.
The critics are hammering it. Eleanor Gillespie or whatever of Atlanta Journal Constitution gave it an F. It has an average Critic rating of C-. Looks like I'll be watching Clerks II this weekend. It's gotten very good reviews.
i agree. it's the Twilight Zone. you know the twist is coming, so you look for it throughout and it distracts you from the great things that are happening in the story and with the characters.
Given this M night about as much of a chance as possible. Will probably watch this flick when it hits DVD but won't see it on the big screen. I personally think he's Hitchcock hack with the twist deal mixed in. why doesn't anyone ever talk about his first film...
Because I heard it sucked. It comes on TV sometimes. Give Night his props for Stuart Little though. One of my all time favorite kid flicks.
didn't know he did stewart little that boosts him up a bit has Rosie O Donnell been in a good movie well . .Starred in one? Rocket Rive
I guess they point is. . why have the twist at all I was unnecessary . . and distracting he is a good director . . . he does mood well but The Village was just . . not good . . . Good to watch but the story line was weak Rocket River
No interest in seeing this now. The reviews have been terrible and considering how weak Signs and The Village were, I have no reason to believe the critics are wrong on this one. I don't think you can criticize him enough for the huge plot holes and easy answers he puts in his movies. In Signs, for example, it's easy to have someone and his quirky family regain their faith when all their weaknesses and idiosyncrasies (which have caused their suffering) help quash an alien invasion. But a good story (let alone real life) shouldn't wrap up so neatly, and it's even worse when the quirk (leaving water glasses) happens to be the solution to a ridiculous weakness (water is lethal to the alien). Even the book of Job doesn't resolve the question of human suffering so neatly - Job never gets to know for sure why he must suffer in the first place, only that God has his reasons and humans must accept it without losing our faith. But Signs skips the crucial detail of humanity's blindness to God's motives altogether - if M Night had written the Book of Job, it would have ended with aliens killing all the prosperous inhabitants in the land while sparing the poor (including the now destitute Job), thus confirming in the dumbest way possible that our suffering always has a reason that will reap positive consequences. Similarly, the Village had great potential with the concept of utopia. In their quest to preserve a perfect micro-world free from the fear and violence of the modern world, how much fear and violence would the village elders introduce into their own society in order to prevent the utopia from falling apart? The focus should have been on the village elders and their struggle with this question. Instead, M Night got caught up with keeping secret the fact that this backwards utopia existed in modern times and left the question wholly unanswered. I realize these are just movies, but I also think that if you're going to be as ambitious as M Night, you can't be so simple (and lazy) with the story.
I like M. KNight's movies, 6th Sense, Unbreakable, SIgns and the Village, I loved all of them. He is a great story teller and knows how to thrill without throwing it in your face. With all that being said, Lady in the Water was very bad! It did not entertain at all and the plot was so slow to develop. There was great acting by B.D. Howard and Paul Giamatti but I didn't really like this movie at all. And Shymalan was practically in the whole film. DO NOT READ AHEAD IF YOU HAVEN"T SEEN IT YET AND PLAN TO *******SPOILERSSS******* *******SPOILERSSS******* *******SPOILERSSS******* *******SPOILERSSS******* *******SPOILERSSS******* *******SPOILERSSS******* *******SPOILERSSS******* The only cool thing in this movie are the jabs he took about the war and the current political situation as well as the jabs at his critics portrayed by the critique (he even kills him off at the end ). The critique comes out and says that there is no originality left in movies and everything is so predictable, which is what M. Knight tries to get away from, and then ironically the critique does not give him the right clues to tracking down the correct people to return the girl to her world and ends up being killed after stating the predictability of horror flicks will allow him to escape death by a few inches. That was great! Also the way he portrayed characters of various races and economic levels working together peacefully to come to a resolution was nice to see.
I hate M Night Gimmick with a passion. I thought Sixth Sense was decent, I thought the Village looked nice and was decent. I thought Signs was probably one of the ten worst movies I've ever seen in my life, along with Unbreakable.
I can't believe how horrible this movie is- when it ends you wonder- ok, what exactly was the point of all of that? I didn't think he could do worse than the Village, but apparently he has- STAY AWAY!
i saw paul giamatti on conan the other day to promote this movie and though he was joking around a lot, i really got the feeling he was trying to distance himself from this film already.
I have a feeling that the big names actors will no longer want to be in his films anymore. He may be the only one acting in his next movie.
