MNightFans.com

Films => The Happening => Topic started by: Dr Malcolm Crowe on June 06, 2008, 03:19:21 PM

Title: Official Review Thread
Post by: Dr Malcolm Crowe on June 06, 2008, 03:19:21 PM
Alright folks, this thread is going to be the home for future discussions and postings of reviews for The Happening. PLEASE avoid starting new threads about the subject, and PLEASE note whether or not a review contains SPOILERS.

Reviews published so far:
The Happening Review from La Butaca (Spanish) (http://www.labutaca.net/films/61/elincidente4.php) [Positive] -(Spoilers?)
The Happening Review from Cine Y Letras (Spanish) (http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_url?doit=done&tt=url&intl=1&fr=bf-home&trurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.guzmanurrero.es%2Findex.php%2FCine%2F-El-incidente-de-M.-Night-Shyamalan.html&lp=es_en&btnTrUrl=Translate) [3 out of 5 stars] -(Spoilers?)
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: SunnyD24 on June 08, 2008, 11:33:10 AM
http://newsblaze.com/story/20080606192325mill.nb/topstory.html

Here is a new not so posotive one.

Not sure what is up with this website, but I wonder how they got the to see it because it is not viewing for critics until June 10th here in the United States.

Maybe it is a Eurpean site?
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Rohan on June 08, 2008, 01:46:17 PM
NEWSBLAZE review doesn't have any spoilers, but it sucks big time how this guy or gal wrote it. Once again, these critics are so stupid that they are still thinking that there will be a twist in all his films. M.Night said it clearly, NO TWIST at all.

mind-rape gloom doom : What is this mean?, I think he was bored and came with an stupid word.

And also the review compares "The Happening" with "The Mist". I have never seen "The Mist", but I don't think they are the same.

Then there's this film's whole fright flight road movie mayhem that appears awfully borrowed from War of The World's panic mode nomad, Tom Cruise

What is this guy thinking. Did he really saw "The Happening". Who showed it to him.

DULL REVIEW. Makes no sense at all.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NEWSBLAZE: Comment on a story: [email protected]

I sent my message to the website in regards to such dull review on their site. Here is my email message.

Hello,



I am Rohan, I was recently browsing through NEWSBLAZE site. I like it alot. It is formatted well and also lots of good information. I tried to find a link so I can reach "Prairie Miller" who

just wrote an review for upcoming M.Night Shyamalan movie "The Happening.



http://newsblaze.com/story/20080606192325mill.nb/topstory.html



If you can please forward this message to Prairie Miller. I am not quite impressed by the review he/she wrote. The review didn't made any sense at all. He/she compared the movie

with "THE MIST and "WAR OF THE WORLDS". There are lots of differences between the 3 movies.



I haven't seen "The Happening" yet, but I have read the script already. I think its pretty well written and I m also sure its well directed.



Prairie's words doesn't make sense the way he/she reviewed the movie. Where the movie was screened? It is scheduled to be screened to critics on June 10. And Praire quoted that



awfully borrowed from War of The World's panic mode nomad



I would like to ask "Why such comment of awfully borrowed from WAR OF THE WORLDs" towards an original idea written by M.Night?



I am not linked with M.Night Shyamalan or with project, but when I read the review I didn't like the Prairie commented negative marks on an original script. And also Prairie thought that there would be a twist ending. M.Night Shyamalan said it there is no twist.



Prairie gave the movie 1 Star?, why 1 star, Prairie said awfully borrowed from War Of The Worlds, Prairie could give the movie NO STAR.



Very dull review was written on an very good website.  I would appreciate if you could pass this email to Prairie Miller.



Thank You.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NEWSBLAZE is located at :
705-2 E. Bidwell St, #213
Folsom, Ca. 95630

They are in US.


Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: okman4ever on June 08, 2008, 04:06:59 PM
I've been lurking these boards since the times of LITW, but I decided to register to start commenting.

1)  super stoked for The Happening.

2) the newsblaze review is horrible.  It doesn't actually say anything that would make me believe the person actually saw it.  They give the same general plot summary we already know, yet fail to give concrete examples of what the reviewer claims to be flawed.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Dr Malcolm Crowe on June 08, 2008, 04:13:41 PM
Glad you finally decided to register okman4ever. I agree, the review seems bogus.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Rohan on June 08, 2008, 04:32:17 PM
I've been lurking these boards since the times of LITW, but I decided to register to start commenting.

1)  super stoked for The Happening.

2) the newsblaze review is horrible.  It doesn't actually say anything that would make me believe the person actually saw it.  They give the same general plot summary we already know, yet fail to give concrete examples of what the reviewer claims to be flawed.

Okman
Welcome...
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: ypehmish on June 08, 2008, 08:36:44 PM
i would not take this woman from Newsblaze seriously. she may have seen it. but she did give there will be blood a negative review and prom night and positive one. hopefully thats a sign of relief.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: okman4ever on June 08, 2008, 11:11:07 PM
Yeah, I just searched her name... she also gave Iron Man 2 stars (awesome movie).

BTW, Rohan, her email is at the bottom of the article:  judythpiazza @ newsblaze . com
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: SunnyD24 on June 09, 2008, 12:11:55 AM
i would not take this woman from Newsblaze seriously. she may have seen it. but she did give there will be blood a negative review and prom night and positive one. hopefully thats a sign of relief.

Wow.....that right there just shot her credibility.

She probably can't handle movies that make you think.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Mr_Glass.1 on June 09, 2008, 09:27:41 AM
Wow, she gave Iron Man 2 stars, that was the best movie so far this year.  Though I think The Happening will give it a run for it's money.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: ypehmish on June 09, 2008, 01:06:17 PM
new review...kinda.. but the reviewer liked it http://miamiherald.typepad.com/reeling/2008/06/a-sneak-peek-at.html (http://miamiherald.typepad.com/reeling/2008/06/a-sneak-peek-at.html)
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: DILinator on June 09, 2008, 01:18:42 PM
i would not take this woman from Newsblaze seriously. she may have seen it. but she did give there will be blood a negative review and prom night and positive one. hopefully thats a sign of relief.

Wow.....that right there just shot her credibility.

She probably can't handle movies that make you think.

I disagree with both posts in regard to her credibility.  While I'm not vouching for her credibility, and I would say that her rating of 2 stars for Iron Man says more about that being poor, disliking that overrated, yawn-inducing waste of my time called There will be Blood certainly does nothing to her credibility.  In fact, I dare say that I would put less stock people's credibility who liked that, and the years other critical joke of a film No Country for Old Men.  This really has nothing to do with The Happening or Shyamalan's films, but to equate disliking TWBB to having bad movie credibility is absurd.  I haven't talked to a single soul who saw that movie and thought it was good.  We all feel like it was a waste of our time in this life.  And I LOVE movies that make you think, hence why I'm a big Shyamalan fan.  I just don't think that movie made anybody think at all.  Sleep, maybe, but certainly getting people to think wasn't a point of that movie.... 
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: ypehmish on June 09, 2008, 01:44:31 PM
dude she liked prom night.<--period
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: DILinator on June 09, 2008, 03:32:59 PM
dude she liked prom night.<--period
\

Now THAT would be a reason to lose credibility! 

However, disliking TWBB certainly does not, which is what the other posters were saying. 

As I just posted in another thread though, if somebody reviews every one of Night's movies like they were the best movies ever created, they lose credibility as well.  There must be an objective balance struck for people's opinions to be taken as meaningful.  It's getting a little irritating even for a die-hard Night fan like me to see some of the man-love going on at this site!   :o 
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: SunnyD24 on June 09, 2008, 04:34:51 PM
new review...kinda.. but the reviewer liked it http://miamiherald.typepad.com/reeling/2008/06/a-sneak-peek-at.html (http://miamiherald.typepad.com/reeling/2008/06/a-sneak-peek-at.html)


I think that dude is right on the money...It will divide audiences. Some people might not be able to stand the message, while others will like it. None the less..it seems as if he had good things to say about it.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: okokokok on June 10, 2008, 04:48:16 AM
For the record, I disagree with everyone who thinks that someone has less "credibility" for only having a different opinion than you about a movie.  Credibility? lol.  Because they like or dislike certain movies?  They are credible because they like the movies I like?  Or they aren't credible if they like a movie I don't?  What?  Perhaps it's semantics and I just think the use of the word credibility doesn't work here.

Rohan, if that person had given the exact same details about the movie in their review, but said the movie was amazing, how would you have reacted?  Would you have spent all that time and effort?   

DILinator, you contradict yourself a bit in your post as you suggest someone's credibility shouldn't be judged on their disliking of a movie, and then you say that you "would put less stock in people's credibility who liked" that same movie.  You are saying the same thing as you are making a point against.

Personally, as an example of how I would consider someone may be lacking credibility would be if, say, someone were to see a movie and not like it all, hate it even, then try to stop people from seeing it for themselves...that would make me lose most all credibility in their discussions on anything art related.  Point being, what if that movie ended up changing the other persons life or becoming their favorite movie of all time?  And they didn't see it because you stopped them from seeing it.  Anyways, I don't see how the idea of credibility is even seriously applied if we are merely talking about someones opinion.  I think it's funny how egocentric peoples thoughts can become when it involves their own personal reaction to a movie.  I include myself in that group.  I have just been involved in too many situations where multiple people have had profoundly different experiences and feelings after watching the same movie, and then have those same people feel exactly the same way about other movies.




Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: ypehmish on June 10, 2008, 05:55:38 AM
new reviews-- no spoilers

http://www.marieclaire.co.uk/reviews/films/259747/the-happening.html (http://www.marieclaire.co.uk/reviews/films/259747/the-happening.html) 2 stars

http://twitchfilm.net/site/view/review-of-the-happening/ (http://twitchfilm.net/site/view/review-of-the-happening/) Mixed


                   

Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: BN on June 10, 2008, 08:54:24 AM
Yet another negative review (minor spoilers possible). These are piling up at an alarming rate while Hulk is at a healthy 71% on the rotten Tomatometer.

http://www.urbancinefile.com.au/home/view.asp?a=14401&s=Reviews

Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: DILinator on June 10, 2008, 09:38:15 AM
DILinator, you contradict yourself a bit in your post as you suggest someone's credibility shouldn't be judged on their disliking of a movie, and then you say that you "would put less stock in people's credibility who liked" that same movie.  You are saying the same thing as you are making a point against.

No, not really....  I was speaking in specific reference to that movie (There Will Be Blood), and I stated that a person's credibility wouldn't be shot for disliking it.  I then went on to say I would put less stock in a person's credibility if they did like it.  Not that they would have no credibility, but the people who are piling on that film and the eventual Best Picture winner, when most people didn't like them, and they were really not even close to as deep as some would have you believe, are clearly not in tune with what mainstream audiences like in a movie.  As this pertains to the discussion of The Happening, my point was that people of the mindset of liking those movies don't have as much credibility in determining whether people in general will like it.  Obviously, it all boils down to people's opinions, and everybody's entitled to their own.  However, when it comes to judging whether a person's review of The Happening is worth paying attention to, you get a glimpse into the other person's thinking when looking at their other reviews.  The fact that this reviewer didn't like TWBB would be a plus in evaluating whether her review of The Happening should be given credence.  However, her subsequent good review of that other film, which I am not familiar with, but sounds like "B" grade slasher film, negates any credibility she could have gained.  So while I acknowledge people's entitlements to their own opinions, those opinions can give you insight into whether you should give "credibility" to other reviews of theirs.   
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Rohan on June 10, 2008, 10:47:42 AM
new reviews-- no spoilers

http://www.marieclaire.co.uk/reviews/films/259747/the-happening.html (http://www.marieclaire.co.uk/reviews/films/259747/the-happening.html) 2 stars

http://twitchfilm.net/site/view/review-of-the-happening/ (http://twitchfilm.net/site/view/review-of-the-happening/) Mixed


                   



Referring to second review. THE GREEN EFFECT wasn't that graphic at all.

Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: SunnyD24 on June 10, 2008, 11:30:47 AM
new reviews-- no spoilers

http://www.marieclaire.co.uk/reviews/films/259747/the-happening.html (http://www.marieclaire.co.uk/reviews/films/259747/the-happening.html) 2 stars

http://twitchfilm.net/site/view/review-of-the-happening/ (http://twitchfilm.net/site/view/review-of-the-happening/) Mixed


                   



Referring to second review. THE GREEN EFFECT wasn't that graphic at all.



Rohan, I thought that THE GREEN EFFECT was pretty graphic...from watching the trailers it had most of what was in the red band trailers.

I'm also conerened about the negative reviews. It seems as if Night was going for kinda a B Movie type thing which explains the feel to it in the clips I have seen, but the problem is that. With its premise, and with its B-Movieish feel it will not connecr with alot of people meaning I'm predicting mixed reviews.

40-60% on RT.

Right now if you count em all...we have 3 posotive reviews (Two Spanish..and the Miami Hearld guy) and then like 4 or 5 negative revies.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: okokokok on June 10, 2008, 01:33:47 PM
Quote
and I stated that a person's credibility wouldn't be shot for disliking it

I didn't say you said their credibility would be shot.  the idea of NO CREDIBILITY was never even a part of our posts.  You got that from somewhere else.  I said you suggested you would JUDGE their credibility depending on what they like or don't like, not that you would negate it.  Saying someone has no credibility or someone has less credibility is judging.  That's what my point was.  So yes, really.

Also, most people didn't like There Will Be Blood?  Where did you get that info exactly?

Anyways, credibility is the wrong word I think is all.  We wouldn't be questioning the reviewers belief that the movie is actually good to them.  We would be determining if they have the same aesthetic as each one of us as a possible indicator of who may or may not like The Happening. 

This wouldn't even be happening if all the reviews were saying the movie was good, lol.  Because, only people who say it's bad should be judged as having not seen it or not being credible, lol.

I will question the credibility of some of the reviews of The Happening at this site though because many people are already saying it's going to be great.  It could suck. 

Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: DILinator on June 10, 2008, 02:46:26 PM
Quote
and I stated that a person's credibility wouldn't be shot for disliking it

I didn't say you said their credibility would be shot.  the idea of NO CREDIBILITY was never even a part of our posts.  You got that from somewhere else.  I said you suggested you would JUDGE their credibility depending on what they like or don't like, not that you would negate it.  Saying someone has no credibility or someone has less credibility is judging.  That's what my point was.  So yes, really.

Also, most people didn't like There Will Be Blood?  Where did you get that info exactly?

Anyways, credibility is the wrong word I think is all.  We wouldn't be questioning the reviewers belief that the movie is actually good to them.  We would be determining if they have the same aesthetic as each one of us as a possible indicator of who may or may not like The Happening. 

This wouldn't even be happening if all the reviews were saying the movie was good, lol.  Because, only people who say it's bad should be judged as having not seen it or not being credible, lol.

I will question the credibility of some of the reviews of The Happening at this site though because many people are already saying it's going to be great.  It could suck. 



Boy, you sure do like to argue with me! lol!

You can "judge" a person's credibility, at least as it pertains to whether you value their reviews or not.  It can be said "credibility" is in the eye of the beholder, but I just took offense to the notion that disliking TWBB would be showing a lack of credibility.  The ironic things is, more often than not the kind of people who like that kind of movie, are going to pan Shyamalan's movies.

As for There Will be Blood, I know very few people who actually liked that movie.  I've already established that Rotten Tomatoes and IMDB ranking are worthless to me, because they represent such a small fringe group of the general population.  Obviously, the people I come into contact with and talk to are a small group as well, but I think it's very telling when a broad variety of people, spanning all age groups, interests, and genders, feel predominantly the same way about a film.  If just a small segment size of the general public feels that way, you can bet that it represents the larger whole of the general public pretty well.  TWBB appeals to the artsy-fartsy movie critic, film snob types out there, but certainly isn't much of a movie when you boil it down to it's essentials.  That's why your normal moviegoer will walk out and think it was a waste.  If you liked it, kudos to you.  But it's not a mainstream film by any stretch of the imagination.

And if you think I'm one of those who is not objective about Shyamalan, then you haven't been paying attention to my posts all over the site very well.  This site is too biased in favor of Shyamalan, and I applaud those (like myself) who are able to say "I think you're a great director Night, and you've made some of my favorite movies, but you blew it here" about one of his movies.  I've done that with LITW, and if I go see The Happening, and come away disappointed again, then I will not hesitate to say that here.  It's called being objective, and I am one of the most objective people here it seems when it comes to all things Shyamalan.   
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Dr Malcolm Crowe on June 10, 2008, 02:57:57 PM
I'm not going to say anything except for: I enjoyed There Will Be Blood. It wasn't great or perfect, but I liked it.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Rohan on June 10, 2008, 03:49:47 PM
I'm not going to say anything except for: I enjoyed There Will Be Blood. It wasn't great or perfect, but I liked it.

Agree, I enjoyed There Will Be Blood, too. I think its directed very well. I love how PAUL ANDERSON wrote it and directed it. Its Classic.

Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: BN on June 10, 2008, 04:41:27 PM
A positive review. I skimmed through it skipping most parts as it appeared to have major spoilers.
http://www.expats.cz/prague/article/film-cinema/the-happening-my-blueberry-nights/
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Cleveland Heep on June 10, 2008, 05:05:32 PM
THAT WAS A GREAT REVIEW.

i hope they stack up like that.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Dr Malcolm Crowe on June 10, 2008, 05:11:12 PM
Yea, keep ones like those comin! lol.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: ypehmish on June 10, 2008, 05:17:15 PM
negative review-- http://correctopinion.wordpress.com/2008/06/10/review-for-the-happening/ (http://correctopinion.wordpress.com/2008/06/10/review-for-the-happening/)
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: SunnyD24 on June 10, 2008, 05:18:08 PM
That IMO was definatly the best written review for the film thus far.

Like the guy from the Miami Herald...he pointed out that this film will polarize people.

It was a very interesting posotive review...he was really mixed on it.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: SunnyD24 on June 10, 2008, 05:22:32 PM
negative review-- http://correctopinion.wordpress.com/2008/06/10/review-for-the-happening/ (http://correctopinion.wordpress.com/2008/06/10/review-for-the-happening/)

If the audience is laughing as pointed out in both of these reviews...that is probably not a great sign. Unless Night is going for some sick, demented, and bizarre kinda like TWBB. In TWBB I found myself laughing or giggling more or less during the last scene.

I think those who review this movie posotivly understand what Night is trying to do with the whole "B" movie thing..but others just aren't getting it.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: okokokok on June 10, 2008, 05:29:39 PM
Quote
Boy, you sure do like to argue with me! lol!

You can "judge" a person's credibility, at least as it pertains to whether you value their reviews or not.  It can be said "credibility" is in the eye of the beholder, but I just took offense to the notion that disliking TWBB would be showing a lack of credibility.  The ironic things is, more often than not the kind of people who like that kind of movie, are going to pan Shyamalan's movies.

As for There Will be Blood, I know very few people who actually liked that movie.  I've already established that Rotten Tomatoes and IMDB ranking are worthless to me, because they represent such a small fringe group of the general population.  Obviously, the people I come into contact with and talk to are a small group as well, but I think it's very telling when a broad variety of people, spanning all age groups, interests, and genders, feel predominantly the same way about a film.  If just a small segment size of the general public feels that way, you can bet that it represents the larger whole of the general public pretty well.  TWBB appeals to the artsy-fartsy movie critic, film snob types out there, but certainly isn't much of a movie when you boil it down to it's essentials.  That's why your normal moviegoer will walk out and think it was a waste.  If you liked it, kudos to you.  But it's not a mainstream film by any stretch of the imagination.

And if you think I'm one of those who is not objective about Shyamalan, then you haven't been paying attention to my posts all over the site very well.  This site is too biased in favor of Shyamalan, and I applaud those (like myself) who are able to say "I think you're a great director Night, and you've made some of my favorite movies, but you blew it here" about one of his movies.  I've done that with LITW, and if I go see The Happening, and come away disappointed again, then I will not hesitate to say that here.  It's called being objective, and I am one of the most objective people here it seems when it comes to all things Shyamalan.

DILinator, right off the bat, I was not talking about you when I was referring to the idea that some peoples reviews at this site will lack credibility.  For me, credibility will not come into play in your review as you seem pretty objective when it comes to M NIGHT, specifically.

I do like to argue, but not with you.  Well I do and I don't.  I get knots in my stomach when I am about to read your replies to my comments.  Look man, I really care, ha.  We just have naturally opposing dispositions I think.  Anyways, not many people here come in as an objective voice, as you do.  You also seem intelligent and I appreciate a lot of the things you say.  So those things make for good arguments/discussions.  But then, in my opinion, you kinda hamstring all your arguments because you, more so then anyone here, speak for whole groups of people often.  It seems right now that your group of friends is the key demographic in how a movie is perceived by ALL those who saw it.  And the fact that you call people snobs because they just happen to like different movies than you makes you a snob just like them.  That's why I appreciate when people have a wide range of films they like.  Not just artsy flicks.  Not just mainstream flicks.  That being said, as far as the M Night lovers, some of them really go totally over board in my opinion.  But I just take less of an offense to someone having a biased opinion about their own feelings towards M Night(after all, we are on an M Night appreciation site), or even against M Night, then I do to people who speak for groups of people, and then make that the basis of an argument for whether a movie is good/successful/accepted/bad/not mainstream, blah blah blah.  Especially when it seems they are primarily using their friends as the indicator for proper judgment of a film.  I mean, is it my friends versus yours or something, because we would probably have a draw.  Then how would we know if it was a good movie or not if we had to cross cancel our acquaintances!??!

And anything can be anything in the eye of the beholder, c'mon.  How do you even have discussions if that's how you are going to argue?  Credibility is just the wrong word here as we are now being specific.  If you don't agree with that, it paints all of your arguments negatively. 

By the way, every indicator we have discussed as far as a movies success and acceptance is in favor of There Will Be Blood, with the exception of you and your friends....that is, people that you and I know, critical review, award, and resources on the internet (movies sites, box office, budget, etc)  I'm not saying it was a blockbuster, nor am I saying that is was made with the intention of being one.  That is an important distinction. 

I must love to hear myself talk.  Or see myself type.  I think that hinders my arguments sometimes, lol.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: SunnyD24 on June 10, 2008, 05:32:02 PM
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/television/reviews/article_display.jsp?JSESSIONID=7J22LT0JD1SrgXk2xvMtp9s51DG35WGPJxctq7x0RnLvGnkdMQwC!1689313521&&rid=11241

Another Negative Review....

Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: okokokok on June 10, 2008, 05:39:03 PM
Quote
THAT WAS A GREAT REVIEW.

i hope they stack up like that.

I agree.  I like how it's either genius or it's like ridiculous.  It makes me think M Night is still making some risky choices.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Wags on June 10, 2008, 05:46:12 PM
These reviews confuse me.  They seem really,REALLY mixed. The negatives have some positive things in it, and the positives have a few negatives.  It just seems like the reviewers dont know really what they think of it.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: SunnyD24 on June 10, 2008, 06:13:55 PM
http://www.montrealfilmjournal.com/review.asp?R=R0001208

Posotive Review (3 out of 4)
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 10, 2008, 07:35:28 PM
Negative....

http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117937379.html?categoryid=1263&cs=1

 >:(
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 10, 2008, 07:42:00 PM
^^ It's more of Shyamalan bashing...... >:(
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 10, 2008, 07:52:44 PM
I'm actually waiting for the review by............Richard Roeper.

 ;)
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Dr Malcolm Crowe on June 10, 2008, 08:01:01 PM
me 2. Roger Ebert too hopefully!
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: okman4ever on June 10, 2008, 10:24:52 PM
all these negative reviews make me sad :(
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: MrStone on June 10, 2008, 10:49:07 PM
These reviews confuse me.  They seem really,REALLY mixed. The negatives have some positive things in it, and the positives have a few negatives.  It just seems like the reviewers dont know really what they think of it.

i can see that - i felt that way when i read the script.  there's an element to it that i would say is classic Night - and then there's an artistic side to it that he probably incorporated since he's gaining more and more control of his own films..
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: GrOoDmAn on June 11, 2008, 01:51:57 AM
Now this is the kind of review I've been waiting for and will give us Night fans hope again; it's a very positive, mini-review by Jeff Wells (he says he'll write the full review tomorrow), but he does say that it's Shyamalan's third best film (after The Sixth Sense and Signs)... there are some spoilers as well...

http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/2008/06/grandson_of_kla.php (http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/2008/06/grandson_of_kla.php)
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Hawkowl on June 11, 2008, 07:33:26 AM
I agree with what someone said before - it seems like some of the critics just don't know what to think about the movie.
That was a nice review, GrOoDmAn. I'll be sure to read the next part of it.
As long as Ebert and Roeper give it at least a moderately good review, I don't really care what other reviewers say.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: BN on June 11, 2008, 08:05:28 AM
Very positive ...
http://www.scifimoviepage.com/happening.html
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: ypehmish on June 11, 2008, 08:30:56 AM
i have been updating reviews on my thread at http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0949731/board/thread/108580352 (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0949731/board/thread/108580352)

i got 18 so far...
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: BN on June 11, 2008, 01:14:48 PM
Very very early, but the On Rotten Tomatoes, they posted 3/5 reviews being fresh for a meter reading of 60%. Nice ! Hope it keeps up. I wil l be highly impressed if it ends with a meter reading of 55-60%.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: SunnyD24 on June 11, 2008, 01:17:10 PM
They posted one more negative one making it 50%..but it hasn't showed yet.

Hopefully they update it with the Miami Herald, Hollywood Reporter, and those two Spanish reviews. Then it would look much better.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: ypehmish on June 11, 2008, 02:02:44 PM
hollywood reporter reivew is negative... wouldn't help out.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: SunnyD24 on June 11, 2008, 02:27:27 PM
The Other Hollywood somthin one that is posotive..that is the one I was trying to refer to.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 11, 2008, 06:57:43 PM
I'm freaking pissed at some of these reviews....made me so angry that i registered for a RT account and i'm posting pissed of comments on the reviews (as desitexan).

I get really pissed off when people think it is ok to call him names....."Shyamala...ding...dong" from a movie reviewr tells a lot about the reviewer than anything else. Fuging douche bags.   >:(
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: GrOoDmAn on June 11, 2008, 07:47:11 PM
Two reviews on this site... one very negative and one very positive...

http://cinephilia.net.au/bigscreen.php (http://cinephilia.net.au/bigscreen.php)
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: DILinator on June 11, 2008, 07:47:21 PM
Getting back to that "credibility" issue, if a reviewer makes comments belittling Signs for having "aquaphobic aliens", or The Village for having "such a predictable twist ending", they've already lost any merit in judging his films in my mind since they clearly missed the point in those movies.  Neither of those things means much of anything in the grand scheme of either film, and is merely a plot point.  Funny how these same reviewers will not likely refer to the myriad of plot holes, or plot points that are absurd in movies like No Country for Old Men.  And I also agree with the above poster: if a reviewer references Night as "Shymalamadingdong", then their credibility in reviewing any of his movies is obviously shot, because they're clearly not going in with an objective mind, therefore distorting any review they muster up. 

I don't want to continue to hijack this thread with my discussion withokokokok, but I'll quickly respond to a few things, and then anything further can be discussed (debated  ;) ) through PMs. 

I do like to argue, but not with you.  Well I do and I don't.  I get knots in my stomach when I am about to read your replies to my comments.  Look man, I really care, ha.  We just have naturally opposing dispositions I think.

In truth, that's the same with me, and while I think we do have some "naturally opposing dispositions", I think there are some things we can agree on as well.  We just both like to put our opinions out there, and even stir the pot a little.  I think we're very similar in many ways, but just have those opposing viewpoints, which causes us to always find ourselves in these little "spats", if you will.   

But then, in my opinion, you kinda hamstring all your arguments because you, more so then anyone here, speak for whole groups of people often.  It seems right now that your group of friends is the key demographic in how a movie is perceived by ALL those who saw it.  And the fact that you call people snobs because they just happen to like different movies than you makes you a snob just like them.  That's why I appreciate when people have a wide range of films they like.  Not just artsy flicks.  Not just mainstream flicks.  That being said, as far as the M Night lovers, some of them really go totally over board in my opinion.  But I just take less of an offense to someone having a biased opinion about their own feelings towards M Night(after all, we are on an M Night appreciation site), or even against M Night, then I do to people who speak for groups of people, and then make that the basis of an argument for whether a movie is good/successful/accepted/bad/not mainstream, blah blah blah.  Especially when it seems they are primarily using their friends as the indicator for proper judgment of a film.  I mean, is it my friends versus yours or something, because we would probably have a draw.  Then how would we know if it was a good movie or not if we had to cross cancel our acquaintances!??!

See, I do feel that my representation of "acquaintances" is a very strong cross section of the American public.  As a person who works with many different people, from many walks of life, and many different tastes every day, in addition to those who are actually in my large circle of friends (who are also quite a varied lot), I get opinions on movies that range all over the place.  So when I get a recurrent response to whether somebody likes or dislikes a movie, it means something to me.  And for the record, I put more stock in "normal" people than film buffs, because I think oftentimes film buffs can't see the forest for the trees.  Their critique of many of Shyamalan's films bears that out especially.  Unless a filmmaker is making a movie for film buffs, or the "artsy-fartsy" crowd, I don't think he should really care what their opinion is.  My brother has started going to film school, and I can already tell that he's losing a little bit of a grip on reality as far as movies are concerned, and is becoming too "textbook film critic" in his assessment of movies.  I think that's too bad, and I strive to maintain a more global view of filmmaking, and what truly defines a movie as good.  With you not knowing my acquaintances, friends, and random people I strike up movie conversations with (because in my job, I deal with TONS of people, different people, every day), and with me not knowing yours, obviously it's hard to compare.  But suffice to say I feel pretty confident that the sampling of people I come across on a regular basis is more than most people do, as that's just the nature of my life.  And if there are "hot topic" movies like LITW, There Will Be Blood", or No Country for Old Men, I make sure to ask people's opinions of those.  And the overwhelming majority do not like ANY of those movies.  You may not feel that those people represent part of a valid argument, but I feel they are as valid and more so really than critics, IMDB users, Rotten Tomato-ites, and film buffs.  Heck, film buffs are a part of that group, but they are very much in the minority compared to the average moviegoer in the lot.   

And anything can be anything in the eye of the beholder, c'mon.  How do you even have discussions if that's how you are going to argue?  Credibility is just the wrong word here as we are now being specific.  If you don't agree with that, it paints all of your arguments negatively.

Credibility is the right word for what I am talking about, but maybe the wrong word for what we are debating about.  I've defined my idea of "credibility" before, and I think it's a pretty watertight version.  If you can pick up on things that skew a reviewers evaluation, then I do think that you can say his credibility is shot, at least as far as being objective is concerned.  Maybe what we're really discussing here is more the "objectivity" of a reviewer, as opposed to "credibility", but I believe that a reviewer that is not objective, or has a preconceived notion going into a particular movie review does lose credibility, at least with me.   

By the way, every indicator we have discussed as far as a movies success and acceptance is in favor of There Will Be Blood, with the exception of you and your friends....that is, people that you and I know, critical review, award, and resources on the internet (movies sites, box office, budget, etc)  I'm not saying it was a blockbuster, nor am I saying that is was made with the intention of being one.  That is an important distinction.

I've already stated that the online movie-board crowd carries little weight with me, as do the movie critics.  I put much more stock in the actual people I know and talk to, who are a better representation of how the movie is faring with those not prone to obsessing about movies (of which I would qualify, since I'm here at this site!).  You may discount that, but I don't.  That's my experience, and the box office take wasn't anything all that grand, and I know people who are a part of that BO that didn't like the movie, so that doesn't mean it's popular by that merit.  I gave the movie a fair shake, and while I found it interesting, in the end I thought it was overrated, and nowhere near as compelling as some obviously think it is. 

I had a discussion last night with an acquaintance, who I know does not look at movies like I do.  I knew he loved NCFOM, so I asked him what his thoughts were about TWBB, even though I already had a good idea of what the answer would be.  He defended the movies' merits, I said I disagreed, and in the end, I no sooner bought his take on the film than he did mine.  However, I wanted to get a glimpse of what those who thought the movie was good saw in it, and why.  Having done that, I still don't think the movie is as great as they do, but I respect everybody's entitlement to their own opinions.  Getting back to the fact that I pretty much knew what he was going to say, I think that shows an important problem I see with the "film buff" crowd.  They're very predictable, and almost like lemmings when it comes to movies they like, and their responses when questioned about why they like them.  I am quite varied in my response to movies, and while I like some "artsy" films, others I reject because they don't ring true, or don't have any redeeming merit in the end. 

I must love to hear myself talk.  Or see myself type.  I think that hinders my arguments sometimes, lol.

I think you and I are in the same boat there! lol.

In the end, I think we can agree to disagree, and any further pursuit of this discussion should be done through messaging, as opposed to wasting space in this thread on a completely unrelated topic.  I respect you, and what would life in an online message forum be like if everybody just agreed with everything you said.  What's the fun in that?  ;)
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 11, 2008, 07:51:28 PM
Two reviews on this site... one very negative and one very positive...

http://cinephilia.net.au/bigscreen.php (http://cinephilia.net.au/bigscreen.php)

Goodness gracious.....when will this reviewers get themselves rid of the "twist" syndrome?!

 ???
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Rohan on June 11, 2008, 09:20:49 PM
I read the positive review at cinephilia site. I like it. Usually the negative reviews have spoilers and positive ones don't.

Rohan
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: San Jose Shark on June 11, 2008, 09:22:43 PM
 Why are you guys getting so worked up over reviews? who cares!Shyamlan is doing just fine and he will be forever loaded with cash and be a happy man. Personally i really don't care if this movie bombs or not, i only care what it does for me. So everybody needs to calm down and have some fruit.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 11, 2008, 09:31:27 PM
Aussie hoy!!

http://www.theage.com.au/news/film-reviews/the-happening/2008/06/12/1212863797111.html

A tantalising, sometimes frustrating parable about the menaces that human beings might face from unexpected quarters.

3 and 1/2 stars out of 4 (or 5 ?)

 ;D
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Rohan on June 11, 2008, 10:25:36 PM
Why are you guys getting so worked up over reviews? who cares!Shyamlan is doing just fine and he will be forever loaded with cash and be a happy man. Personally i really don't care if this movie bombs or not, i only care what it does for me. So everybody needs to calm down and have some fruit.

 ;D Thats the line from signs, the ending phrase,
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 11, 2008, 10:30:21 PM
'Happening' shocks, then bores
- The Associated Press


http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hZYHOi3OU_EtLpEQI6vuhlrpFDRgD91893R80

Okay.....so?  Wht does that suppose to mean?  I hate when a reviewer doesn't come to a solid conclusion!

 ::)



Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sanford on June 11, 2008, 10:39:17 PM
A lot of critics seem to be mixed, it's seemed to me. I don't think they quite know how to take the film yet.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Rohan on June 11, 2008, 11:05:33 PM
Agree. Lot of critics are confused, I think they must watch the movie again...lol...
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 12, 2008, 12:14:46 AM
Twist or No, 'Happening' is Tense, Smart

http://www.dailycal.org/article/101870/twist_or_no_happening_is_tense_smart

 ;)

Very nice review!
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Psychilles on June 12, 2008, 12:40:44 AM
I have to watch it again to... don't know what to day yet....
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: okokokok on June 12, 2008, 03:58:02 AM
DILinator, I wouldn't worry about hijacking the thread, I'm sure people just scroll passed our little discussions and probably mutter something under their breath about us getting lives or something.

Quote
And if there are "hot topic" movies like LITW, There Will Be Blood", or No Country for Old Men, I make sure to ask people's opinions of those.  And the overwhelming majority do not like ANY of those movies.  You may not feel that those people represent part of a valid argument, but I feel they are as valid and more so really than critics, IMDB users, Rotten Tomato-ites, and film buffs.  Heck, film buffs are a part of that group, but they are very much in the minority compared to the average moviegoer in the lot.   .

What about my friends and acquaintances though!?!?!  I never said your friends and acquaintances aren't valid as far as what moviegoers think, just that they actually only represent a small group, regardless of how varied of a cross section you think they are, and not necessarily what most moviegoers think.  It seems as though you are suggesting that you are the only person with friends and acquaintances who represent the movie going public, but I feel the same way about the people that I talk to as well.  So my point is neither of us can say either way which is more representative, in my opinion.  And if that's the case, when you argue about the general movie going public as any kind of basis for anything, your argument becomes somewhat invalid to me.  All those things I mentioned as far as indicators of success/blahblahblah were things that I thought you mentioned as being indicators of a general consensus.  It turns out that you only suggested critical acclaim, boxoffice, and budget should be really be taken into account, if it all.  I think the point still stands up though.  There Will Be Blood was arguably the best reviewed movie of the year and it made 40 million domestically, and 75 million worldwide on a 25 million dollar budget.  That could absolutely be considered successful, under previously stated terms that is, considering the most theaters it ever played in was half the amount of most major motion pictures, and the fact that movies that are slated to be blockbusters generally spend much more money on marketing then a movie like There Will Be Blood also.  That was the point there. 

Look, here is my big issue, obviously you can say a movie sucked, and you can say everyone you know thought the same, and that would actually mean something in your argument, as far I am concerned.  But as soon as that becomes what the average moviegoers think according to you, then it becomes something totally different. At that point your argument begins to lose credibility I think, because you seem to be negating my and everyone's friends and acquaintances opinions in favor or yours being the only true representatives of how the movie fared. 

When I started this, it was gonna be like 2 lines.  I can't help myself.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 12, 2008, 07:40:28 AM
More reviews.... :)

The Happening: It?s Alive! A modern B-movie - (+)

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/breaking/news_breaking/20080612_The_Happening__Its_Alive__A_modern_B-movie.html

'The Happening' offers horrific silliness, B-movie style
  (mixed leaning towards positive)

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/shyamalan-movie-film-2066068-review-wahlberg

Shyamalan swings and misses (mixed - 3/5)

http://www.yourmovies.com.au/movies/?action=movie_info&title_id=35203

The Happening will freak you out!
(3/5)

http://inhome.rediff.com/movies/2008/jun/12hap1.htm
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: ypehmish on June 12, 2008, 07:57:41 AM
47 reviews and counting...

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0949731/board/edit/108580352 (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0949731/board/edit/108580352)
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: BN on June 12, 2008, 07:58:49 AM
27% on Rotten Tomatoes right now. I think the trend is definitely downward. Count on it being pronounced a confirmed stinker by the critics. On the other hand, Hulk is at 75%. As if the Happening needed more things to go against it !
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 12, 2008, 08:05:54 AM
^^ I guess...it is too early to say that ( Just 12....should be more clear by this evening).  There are lot of positive reviews out there. 

Between....Metacritic is at 46  (too early again.....out of 4 reviews)

http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/happening
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: moonflower843 on June 12, 2008, 11:46:52 AM
Australia is having a field day with reviews. Sorry if I have any reviews here that people have mentioned already...

OK! Magazine - really brief review. no spoilers. 3.5 stars
http://www.okmagazine.com.au/entertainment.html?search=567&p=movie

Citysearch review. 2 stars. Negative review. no spoilers.
http://perth.citysearch.com.au/movies/viewContent/1119945819624/1137593580934/1137526451678

Science Fiction and Fantasy Media. M. Night Shyamalan?s The Happening: the critics will hate it. 4/10 rating. no spoilers (but external links to major ones)
http://sffmedia.com/content/view/175/37/

Web Wombat review. The Happening by Sean Lynch. 2.5 out of 5. BIG SPOILER
http://www.webwombat.com.au/entertainment/movies/happening.htm
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: BN on June 12, 2008, 11:47:15 AM
Down to 17% now. ONce it is on this curve, there is no way it climbs back to respectability. Well, so much less ammunition against the haters. At least I hope it does well at the BO - a prospect which looks horrifically dim.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: SunnyD24 on June 12, 2008, 12:01:39 PM
What happened to the Montreal Film Journal review...they took it off?

There are alot of posotive reviews that they have not put on there yet...I hope they update it fully by tonight and it should be between 30-40%
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Rulm on June 12, 2008, 12:43:22 PM
*Sigh*
Rotten Tomatoes' reviews are not so nice...I'm getting a bit worried...
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: DILinator on June 12, 2008, 12:47:55 PM
See, this is why I stress with people to ignore places like IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes.  This small fragment of people, most of whom already knew they were going to write a bad review before they (supposedly) watched the movie, are stealing your joy in anticipation of this film.  Don't let them!  The Lost World (JP 2), The Mummy, and National Treasure are all "rotten" according to that ridiculously out of touch site, yet all three were wildly successful films.  I wouldn't assume that the general public isn't going to like this film just because some film snobs at a fringe site are trashing it.  I never go there, because for all intents and purposes, the site is meaningless in any substantive way.  I recommend all Night fans avoid it as well, at least where Shyamalan films are concerned.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: BN on June 12, 2008, 01:48:42 PM
DILinator,
Agree with you completely. I am going to go tomorrow pretending I did not read anything (tough to do but I will try). My wife, not much of a MNS fan after LITW, really wants to go and said 'the RT guys write cra* anyway'.
You can never tell with the movie-going public but unfortunately when a movie rates this low, even on RT, it doesn't do well at the BO. Perhaps if it is rotten in the 30-40% range, it may still become a hit. OTOH, movies such as Indy 4 are rated solidly fresh and turn out to be bad (and I am/was an Indy fan !) but hits.
Come to think of it, I used to enjoy many movies long before RT and critics started telling me what I should be liking.  ;)
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Hawkowl on June 12, 2008, 01:58:50 PM
Now it's at 14% on RT :(. That's even less than Lady, although of course the Happening doesn't have as many reviews yet.

On a slightly better note, the Happening's MOVIEmeter at IMDB is up 61% since last week. (That means it has a lot of awareness, right?)
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: mamasan on June 12, 2008, 02:01:02 PM
See, this is why I stress with people to ignore places like IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes.  This small fragment of people, most of whom already knew they were going to write a bad review before they (supposedly) watched the movie, are stealing your joy in anticipation of this film.  Don't let them!  The Lost World (JP 2), The Mummy, and National Treasure are all "rotten" according to that ridiculously out of touch site, yet all three were wildly successful films.  I wouldn't assume that the general public isn't going to like this film just because some film snobs at a fringe site are trashing it.  I never go there, because for all intents and purposes, the site is meaningless in any substantive way.  I recommend all Night fans avoid it as well, at least where Shyamalan films are concerned.

To be honest, I had never heard of Rotten Tomatoes till I discovered this MNS Web site. Man, I hate RT. Their critics are so irrational. They are so surly and dour so much of the time that I suspect they don't think film itself is a worthwhile form of entertainment. It seems as if their heads are only turned by the amount of money a movie makes or how much money they *think* it will make. Don't any of them like going to the movies just for the fun of it?

One other thought: the fact that some reviewers have reported giggles or laughs at showings of "The Happening" doesn't bother me at all. Laughing often is my response to something really scary. I realized this last night while watching a Travel Channel show on water parks. The camera followed riders down various harrowing, incredibly high rides--making it feel as if you were on the ride yourself--and once I hit the point of being totally freaked by the height, I had to start laughing out of self-preservation. Am I the only one who giggles after nearly jumping out of my seat during a scary moment in a movie?



Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: SunnyD24 on June 12, 2008, 02:40:48 PM
I'm really frustrated by RT right now. There are alot of posotive reviews that they have not updated the site with...i.e The DailyCal, The DailyCamera, The Miami Herald and The Hollywood Reporter..all of which are very posotive.

What has frustrated me even more is that they took away a posotive review from the Montreal Film Journal.

 Even more frustrating is that The Philadelphia Inquier was rated a rotten when it is clearly mixed but more posotive....it was given a C...but a still I think it is more of a recomendation.

The title is Shyamalan is back.....

"It's a typically ambitious Shyamalan venture - he throws his hat in the apocalypse-movie ring, takes up environmentalism in a big way, references 9/11 and pays tribute to Alfred Hitchcock, all in about 90 minutes."

Is there anyway to contact RT and let them know about this, because whether we like it or not, thousands of people look on RT..so a bad rap there could result in the loss of a ton of people.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: DILinator on June 12, 2008, 02:44:25 PM
Man!  I've decided to swear off reading any reviews, because any I try to read have told me more than I want to know by the end of the first paragraph already!  I'll just wait until after I see the movie, and then read the reviews, though I'll still likely avoid RT, as most of these people just make me laugh at their short-sighted, lemming-like, stupidity.  And the ironic thing is, that's how they describe the general public of movie-goers, and people who actually like movies that aren't depressing (GASP!), or are made by Shyamalan (HORRORS!).  I've said it before, and I'll say it again.  Professional film critics and "film buffs" oftentimes can't see the forest for the trees, and their sheer inability to think outside of the box film schools have created for them, and see reality for what it is, is both funny, and sad at the same time.  

As for the above post, it doesn't surprise me.  Don't think the editors of that site don't have their own agendas of what movies to promote, and slam.  As for thousands of people looking on RT, don't sweat it....  There's millions of people who DON'T look at the site at all (or even know it exists!). 
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: srkbeno.1 on June 12, 2008, 03:06:45 PM
wow rt is at 12% this wont be good as alotta people will see that then decide not to watch the film..
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: DILinator on June 12, 2008, 03:21:20 PM
Ok, so I broke down (I'm really bored at work right now!) and checked out the reviews on RT (just the highlights) to see what they said.  Frankly, few of the reviewers said anything to make me believe that their opinions are worth anything at all.  However, a couple of the negative reviews echoed sentiments that I have had concerns about just from previews of the film, so I would tend to think they may be on to something.  Hopefully it's not as bad as they say, but I'm certainly going in prepared to be let down.  The good thing about that is then the only direction it can go is up!  ;D
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: San Jose Shark on June 12, 2008, 04:56:55 PM
  I really really hope i like this movie cause i'm not looking forward to Avatar at all so this means i wont see another original Night film for atleast 6 years or more. The good news is he has not let me down yet and i own and love of his work from the Sixth Sense to Lady and from what i've seen in the trailers this is the exact kind of movie i would love to see even if it wasn't directed by Shyamalan.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: ypehmish on June 12, 2008, 05:08:43 PM
ebert review (3 our 4 stars) http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080612/REVIEWS/545929629 (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080612/REVIEWS/545929629)
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Miles on June 12, 2008, 05:13:45 PM
Roger Ebert gave an M Night movie 3 out of 4 stars...

did you hear that guys?...that was the sound of hell freezing over.

That guy said the village was the like the 5th worst movie of the year in 2004. Which is bullocks. But im glad he gave the happening a decent review. People actually respect his opinion.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Dr Malcolm Crowe on June 12, 2008, 05:18:38 PM
Roger Ebert gave an M Night movie 3 out of 4 stars...

That just made my day!! To be fair though, he gave Signs 4 out of 4 stars.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 12, 2008, 05:20:49 PM
Long live that old man.......he is great.

I'm eagerly waiting for Richard to chip in soon....as he is known to be a big fan of SHyamalan.

 ;)
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: ypehmish on June 12, 2008, 05:21:15 PM
ny times review positive http://movies.nytimes.com/2008/06/13/movies/13happ.html?8dpc (http://movies.nytimes.com/2008/06/13/movies/13happ.html?8dpc)
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Miles on June 12, 2008, 05:28:16 PM
Long live that old man.......he is great.

I'm eagerly waiting for Richard to chip in soon....as he is known to be a big fan of SHyamalan.

 ;)

Agreed lol Roper always gives Night the upper hand.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: okokokok on June 12, 2008, 05:28:41 PM
I don't know why, but I am surprised by Eberts review.  I like what he had to say about the landscapes specifically.  I'm excited.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Hawkowl on June 12, 2008, 05:45:27 PM
That Ebert review made my day too! Especially after the rotten Rotten Tomatoes rating....
And it's good that the NY Times gave it a positive review too.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 12, 2008, 05:53:51 PM
I just read the Roger Ebert review in full again (avoiding any spoiler kinda sentences) and it purely falls into the kind of story and direction that we expect from Shyamalan.  I personally feel that Ebert got felt let down by the ending but he actually might have liked the rest of the movie....even though his review doesn't say so. :)

The rest of the reviewers can go to ......u know where i'm heading....

Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 12, 2008, 05:56:42 PM
Another honest review..

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/movies/366824_happening13q.html

"The script is not at all complex or even remotely challenging but it is skillful and effective, combining fear of suicide (the impulse behind panic syndrome), fear of terrorism and fear of environmental retribution in a way that has a distinctly creepy impact.

As a director and a storyteller, Shyamalan can be shallow, overly sentimental and self-conscious. But aside from its weak ending, "The Happening" is unexaggerated, hauntingly naturalistic and easily the best thing he's done since "The Sixth Sense."
"
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 12, 2008, 06:03:24 PM
Another positive review...

Shyamalan gets back on track with ?The Happening?


http://www.idahostatesman.com/entertainment/story/409625.html

Seriously....now....why aren't these reviews being put up on those movie sites?

 :o ???  >:(

Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 12, 2008, 06:08:12 PM
Goodness gracious......even the Catholic News Review is leaning towards positive!!!!  (For a R rated movie!!!!)

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/movies/08mv093.htm

 8)
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Dr Malcolm Crowe on June 12, 2008, 06:08:52 PM
I am creating a list of positive reviews not on Rotten Tomatoes and E-mailing it to them, maybe y'all want to do the same?
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 12, 2008, 06:11:43 PM
^^ Hey man...if you are already preparing the list and email.....can you please PM all of it to the regulars?

We can all send it to RT and meta critic in separate emails.  Say what?

 :)
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Dr Malcolm Crowe on June 12, 2008, 06:18:54 PM
Anybody who want the list of positive reviews to send to Rotten Tomatoes and Meta Critic, PM me and I will reply with the list.

 ;D
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 12, 2008, 06:41:09 PM
 ;D

Done Sir.  Lets collect more positive reviews and send them out again tonite.

 ;)
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: ypehmish on June 12, 2008, 06:49:06 PM
new positive http://www.reelingreviews.com/thehappening.htm (http://www.reelingreviews.com/thehappening.htm)
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: DILinator on June 12, 2008, 07:51:26 PM
This is what I was talking about in regard to RT....  They are not a reliable or accurate representation of overall sentiment about movies.  Specific types of people post there, so you basically get what you expect when it comes to movie reviews.  And I expected there to be mostly hatred.  That's because the fringe group that predominantly posts there hates Shyamalan, especially everything since Signs.  Hopefully the positive reviews get put up, but don't be surprised if they don't.... 
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: ypehmish on June 12, 2008, 07:52:27 PM
another positive http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/06/12/DDS5117GQK.DTL (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/06/12/DDS5117GQK.DTL)
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Unbroken on June 12, 2008, 08:59:29 PM
Wow. The Happening obviously isn't being given the chance it deserves.

Where's a critic-eating scrunt when you need him?
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 12, 2008, 10:43:14 PM
It's just baffling that most of these critics have such hatred towards Shyamalan. It is just heartbreaking and sad that one of the few filmmakers who makes meaningful movies is being told to stop making them.

 :'( 
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: DILinator on June 12, 2008, 11:16:12 PM
Hollywood is all about the establishment.  There's a line you're expected to tow, and if you're a maverick like Night, you're going to get branded, and spurned, and that's what's happened.  The critics are mere pawns in the politics of Hollywood.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: SunnyD24 on June 13, 2008, 12:01:19 AM
This is just sick....seriously...if you count the Montreal Film Journal Review they have failed to put up 14 posotive reviews.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Rohan on June 13, 2008, 09:06:22 AM
Joblo.come is trashing the movie as well, but giving the cinemtography some credit. Who cares they are not the film makers. I have read good reviews and bad reviews. Joblo.com stated that they it was really hard film for them to review it. You guys can check it out now on joblo.com

I have no idea. Some are saying M.Night's The Happening is a feel good film and some are just trashing it. I think may be they don't get it. I think the should watch the movie once again.

Rohan
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: the_sorcerer on June 13, 2008, 10:19:29 AM
I think a lot of people on this board have a double standard....if the reviews were good for the happening, nobody would be trashing the critics, but because they didn't like it as much, people are calling them all "shyamalan-bashers," (granted that i agree with this about a lot of the critics).  True that popular opinion tends to stray away from critics, also true that a lot of people read rotten tomatoes and make their judgements of movies based on the reviews.....i'm not worried about the happening failing this weekend, i'm worried about it not living up to my expectations, as a lot of critics have written very valid points of things that i can see even from the trailers (i.e. there might be a lot of cheesy performances).  I'm still hopeful and think this movie is going to scare the living hell out of us!!! i've gotta wait till after 10pm to see it, so if anyone sees it earlier today PLEASE let us know what you think!!
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: BN on June 13, 2008, 10:43:49 AM
I hate that 'they don't get the movie' statement. Simply means you have no solid concrete ways to explain why they should like the movie. If you think the majority of people 'didn't get it' it just tells me the film maker failed.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: DILinator on June 13, 2008, 01:14:17 PM
I hate that 'they don't get the movie' statement. Simply means you have no solid concrete ways to explain why they should like the movie. If you think the majority of people 'didn't get it' it just tells me the film maker failed.

I semi-disagree.  As a filmmaker myself, whether or not somebody "got" my movie is not completely incumbant on me.  A director shouldn't have to spell everything out, and sometimes the fun is in letting people realize what's going on slowly, without having to force feed it to them.  With Shyamalan's movies in particular, there is often such a depth to them, that they must be evaluated on a certain level, or they will come off only superficially, which leads to "not getting it".  I do think a filmmaker is responsible for making the events in the film good enough to not obscure the "message" or the "meaning" of the film.  I think that's where Night blew it in LITW, and why the message in that movie does not prevail over the execution flaws of that film.  I'm not saying that to turn this thread into THAT discussion again, so that's the last I'm going to mention it.  But I just wanted to agree with you BN that there are times where a film maker does fail to properly support his message with the movie around it.  Conversely though, The Village is an example of a movie where many people "don't get it", and I think in that case it has much more to do with the simple-mindedness of the viewers, or their false expectations of the film, than any failure on Shyamalan's part.

I have seen The Happening, at 10:25 earlier today, and will review it more in an "un-official thread" (because I'm assuming this is more for "official" reviews, correct?).  However, suffice it to say that The Happening will be a film of his that is easilly mis-understood, and it will lend itself to the "they just don't get it" argument.  In fact, I didn't quite "get it" as I left the theater either, but found myself understanding it better while ruminating on it afterwards.  Night's movies are just like that, and reviewers who take them strictly at face value, or what hits them as the credits roll and they leave the theater, are going to miss the real point behind the films.  I do think part of the fault for this in the case of The Happening does fall on Shyamalan, as the movie feels rushed at times, and the message isn't completely clear, at least upon first viewing.  There are also so many blatent and obvious things happening (pardon the pun), that the subliminal and hidden things are harder to see while viewing.  Still, in the final accounting, I think the movie is a step back in the right direction for Night, and while it will no doubt fare poorly with many critics and even casual viewers, over time it will probably be appreciated more.  Don't expect a big BO take though guys, if the attendance of my showing is any indication.  Sure, it was early morning on a work day, but less than 8 people total (and my dad and I were 2 of them) is not a great sign.  I think this movie will be received much in the way The Village was (lukewarm and confused), as opposed to LITW (universally panned), and will fare somewhere between those two movies did BO-wise.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: mamasan on June 13, 2008, 04:08:05 PM
I think a lot of people on this board have a double standard....if the reviews were good for the happening, nobody would be trashing the critics, but because they didn't like it as much, people are calling them all "shyamalan-bashers," (granted that i agree with this about a lot of the critics).  True that popular opinion tends to stray away from critics, also true that a lot of people read rotten tomatoes and make their judgements of movies based on the reviews.....i'm not worried about the happening failing this weekend, i'm worried about it not living up to my expectations, as a lot of critics have written very valid points of things that i can see even from the trailers (i.e. there might be a lot of cheesy performances).  I'm still hopeful and think this movie is going to scare the living hell out of us!!! i've gotta wait till after 10pm to see it, so if anyone sees it earlier today PLEASE let us know what you think!!

I have to disagree a bit. Some critics didn't like the movie and blasted it, which is their prerogative and completely fair. But there also is a fairly large contingent of critics who make direct, personal attacks on MNS while criticizing the movie. They're pretty easy to detect. They're usually the ones who use phrases like "Shamalamadingdong," "Shyamalan Isn't Happening," "ShyamaLAME," etc. All of those types of personal attacks, IMHO, indicate a critic who is more interested in trashing and throwing knives at a filmmaker than in writing a professional review, (even if the review is scathing; nothing wrong with a well-written, scathing review).

I don't know why MNS brings out the dipsh** in so many reviewers. All of the interviews and TV shows make him seem like a likable person. But he sure does get more than his fair share of crappily written reviews and personal attacks from so-called 'professionals.'

For the record, I saw "The Happening" today and give it a 7 or 8 out of 10. I liked it a lot, even though I wish some things had been done differently. Let's just say it was entertaining enough to keep me in my seat for an hour and a half, despite a bladder that was, er, talking to me. (TMI, I know!)  ;)

Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Miles on June 13, 2008, 04:19:28 PM
I think a lot of people on this board have a double standard....if the reviews were good for the happening, nobody would be trashing the critics, but because they didn't like it as much, people are calling them all "shyamalan-bashers," (granted that i agree with this about a lot of the critics).  True that popular opinion tends to stray away from critics, also true that a lot of people read rotten tomatoes and make their judgements of movies based on the reviews.....i'm not worried about the happening failing this weekend, i'm worried about it not living up to my expectations, as a lot of critics have written very valid points of things that i can see even from the trailers (i.e. there might be a lot of cheesy performances).  I'm still hopeful and think this movie is going to scare the living hell out of us!!! i've gotta wait till after 10pm to see it, so if anyone sees it earlier today PLEASE let us know what you think!!

I have to disagree a bit. Some critics didn't like the movie and blasted it, which is their prerogative and completely fair. But there also is a fairly large contingent of critics who make direct, personal attacks on MNS while criticizing the movie. They're pretty easy to detect. They're usually the ones who use phrases like "Shamalamadingdong," "Shyamalan Isn't Happening," "ShyamaLAME," etc. All of those types of personal attacks, IMHO, indicate a critic who is more interested in trashing and throwing knives at a filmmaker than in writing a professional review, (even if the review is scathing; nothing wrong with a well-written, scathing review).

I don't know why MNS brings out the dipsh** in so many reviewers. All of the interviews and TV shows make him seem like a likable person. But he sure does get more than his fair share of crappily written reviews and personal attacks from so-called 'professionals.'

For the record, I saw "The Happening" today and give it a 7 or 8 out of 10. I liked it a lot, even though I wish some things had been done differently. Let's just say it was entertaining enough to keep me in my seat for an hour and a half, despite a bladder that was, er, talking to me. (TMI, I know!)  ;)



Funny cause my bladder was full too lol but I did not want to get up. I agree with the 7 or 8 out of 10. If you didnt like the movie that sucks but there will be more from Night. If you did then awesome. Its all opinion. So whatever. Its far from bad, but not in anyway Nights best.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: okokokok on June 13, 2008, 05:05:56 PM
Quote
The Village is an example of a movie where many people "don't get it", and I think in that case it has much more to do with the simple-mindedness of the viewers, or their false expectations of the film, than any failure on Shyamalan's part.

Dude, I seriously do not search you out DILinator, lol, but you just happen to say things that drive me crazy.  I think I would have much less of a problem with your points if you wouldn't phrase them as a matter of fact.  I am probably just as annoying with all my "it seems like"s or my "It feels like"s, but that's why I use them.

And why couldn't that same thing be said for Lady In The Water, about people "not getting it"?

Quote
But I also won't accept the "you don't get it" argument

Quote
I'll just never accept that those of us who dislike the film are somehow missing something, or wrong in our assessment of the movie as a stretch of credulity.

You said those words in a discussion we had once.  So why is it ok for you to say that others "didn't get it" about a movie you like?  If someone else doesn't "get a movie", is it not possible then that you may not get a movie?  Because if you think it's not possible, you are putting yourself above a lot of people.  I DO NOT subscribe to the idea of "you don't get it" as an argument(for the most part), but you seem to believe it is justifiable, so I was hoping for some clarification on how that makes sense.  Hopefully it's not having something to do with box office.

That being said, BN, I HATE the "you don't get it" argument as well, but I don't think it is completely baseless all the time, but mostly annoying all the time.  And I don't think the reason people use it is always because they have nothing to say.  Of course, I do agree that it is the reason they say it some of the time.  But if I say I really enjoyed the story, and you say the story was horrible, where do you go from there?  Where do you go when the very thing that you think sucks in a movie is the very thing I think was amazing?  I'm not saying that's where the "you don't get it" argument is justified, but that's where it comes from I believe.  I think it comes from people not understanding each other.  And it just sounds like an insult really.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Rohan on June 13, 2008, 05:51:16 PM
I think a lot of people on this board have a double standard....if the reviews were good for the happening, nobody would be trashing the critics, but because they didn't like it as much, people are calling them all "shyamalan-bashers," (granted that i agree with this about a lot of the critics).  True that popular opinion tends to stray away from critics, also true that a lot of people read rotten tomatoes and make their judgements of movies based on the reviews.....i'm not worried about the happening failing this weekend, i'm worried about it not living up to my expectations, as a lot of critics have written very valid points of things that i can see even from the trailers (i.e. there might be a lot of cheesy performances).  I'm still hopeful and think this movie is going to scare the living hell out of us!!! i've gotta wait till after 10pm to see it, so if anyone sees it earlier today PLEASE let us know what you think!!

I have to disagree a bit. Some critics didn't like the movie and blasted it, which is their prerogative and completely fair. But there also is a fairly large contingent of critics who make direct, personal attacks on MNS while criticizing the movie. They're pretty easy to detect. They're usually the ones who use phrases like "Shamalamadingdong," "Shyamalan Isn't Happening," "ShyamaLAME," etc. All of those types of personal attacks, IMHO, indicate a critic who is more interested in trashing and throwing knives at a filmmaker than in writing a professional review, (even if the review is scathing; nothing wrong with a well-written, scathing review).

I don't know why MNS brings out the dipsh** in so many reviewers. All of the interviews and TV shows make him seem like a likable person. But he sure does get more than his fair share of crappily written reviews and personal attacks from so-called 'professionals.'

For the record, I saw "The Happening" today and give it a 7 or 8 out of 10. I liked it a lot, even though I wish some things had been done differently. Let's just say it was entertaining enough to keep me in my seat for an hour and a half, despite a bladder that was, er, talking to me. (TMI, I know!)  ;)



Mamasan
I agree with you.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: BN on June 13, 2008, 10:14:37 PM
*** SOME SPOILERS BELOW ****



Some more on the 'didn't get it' thought. I think saying that is a cop-out by the poster. It should be supported by a discussion about what exactly the viewer was supposed to 'get' that he/she did not. I saw the Happening and both my wife and I enjoyed it. However, I didn't see any deep implied meaning that anyone could miss. It was a straight-forward movie with simple presentation. Quite different from his earlier movies and I mean it in a positive way. He did many things which he was panned for doing recently - (1) Being pretentious. The movie was not preachy and did not portend to be a philosophical one (2) Giving way too much importance to his own role. He 'appears' as someone saying one whole word (3) Relying too much on the twist: This ending wasn't really a twist.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: DILinator on June 13, 2008, 10:24:14 PM
Dude, I seriously do not search you out DILinator, lol, but you just happen to say things that drive me crazy.  I think I would have much less of a problem with your points if you wouldn't phrase them as a matter of fact.

I'm sorry I drive you crazy, but I guess I'm a burden you'll have to bear.  I stand behind everything I say, and I say it matter of factly because I believe it to be fact.  If I didn't believe something to be fact, why would I say it?  People who don't have a conviction about what they're saying are not very believable. 

In the excerpt you quoted that evidentially "drove you crazy" I believe what I stated to be fact.  The Village is a very misunderstood movie, in that even people who claim to understand it, and then start saying it had to do with 9/11, or was an anti-war statement, are way off base.  In the reviews I've read, people either complain about how it wasn't scary, or the twist was predictable and happened too early.  Neither is even the point of the movie, so the people obviously "didn't get it". (DING!)  There's a lot more that could be said about that film in particular, but this isn't the place for that. 

As for supposed contradictions, again, there are none.  I explained it all in the post above, even referencing LITW as an example of a movie where Night did blow it.  That discussion as well is not for this thread, and is a dead horse long over being beaten in LITW threads.  So I'm not going there again, even though I did mention why this was the case above. 

Is it possible for me not to "get" a movie?  I suppose anythings possible, and I'll be sure to let you know when that's the case, and I need some enlightenment.  Until then though....  :P

About BN's post above: I disagree on your first point.  I do believe there's a definite message in this film, it's just a little more concealed amongst the other stuff going on.  I didn't think so at first upon leaving the theater, but after thinking about the movie 15 to 20 minutes, the bigger picture message of what it was about came to me.  I've mentioned it in other places, so if you're interested, you can check it out there.  I definitely believe there was a message here, and don't think Night would make a movie where he wasn't trying to say something. 
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: SenorBudd on June 13, 2008, 10:37:36 PM
I was scared in certain scenes. Girls screamed when crazy stuff happened. Nobody clapped or cheered at the credits. I recommend it  ;)






*****MORE SPOILERS*****



The ending is not supposed to be a "twist." Because Night is this good at telling a story with unexpected occurrences is why everybody likes to spread the rumor that all his movies have a "twist." Give the man some credit here. Everybody will definitely be surprised as the movie goes on.

The happenings are all great but I don't think it pays off in the end. Emotionally, I felt good about how the movie ended. Philosophically, I was let down. Sure, scientifically(?) it could happen... But c'mon. It reminded me of "War of the Worlds" at that moment.

Things I loved: Knitting old bags or Old bags knitting, Zooey!, Mark Wahlberg's panicking calmly, camera angles, creepy wind!, pudgey black and white kids( :'(), Rated R

Things I didn't get: How did the workers on the roof get the effects? Why was that crazy old lady sooooo crazy???  Where was Night???
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: SenorBudd on June 13, 2008, 10:44:48 PM
*****MORE SPOILERS*****



About BN's post above: I disagree on your first point.  I do believe there's a definite message in this film, it's just a little more concealed amongst the other stuff going on.  I didn't think so at first upon leaving the theater, but after thinking about the movie 15 to 20 minutes, the bigger picture message of what it was about came to me.  I've mentioned it in other places, so if you're interested, you can check it out there.  I definitely believe there was a message here, and don't think Night would make a movie where he wasn't trying to say something. 


"An Inconvenient Truth" anyone? Good message but that's not what I wanted from this film.  :(
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Veena on June 13, 2008, 10:56:03 PM
Night's cameo was an audio one this time.....Very easy to miss
He was Joey....and its listed in the credits too.
He briefly says "hello" when Zooey Deschanel's character answers her phone.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: SenorBudd on June 13, 2008, 11:04:25 PM
Night's cameo was an audio one this time.....Very easy to miss
He was Joey....and its listed in the credits too.
He briefly says "hello" when Zooey Deschanel's character answers her phone.

Nice catch! I can't believe I didn't recognize that voice.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: OMGWTFBBQ on June 14, 2008, 04:14:35 AM
Well, I can honestly say this was one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Maybe the twist is that it's so bad YOU the audience member wants to kill yourself by the end.

I'm definately a fan of M's work. I love most of the rest of his body of film, but this just has no redeemable qualities whatsoever. The acting is beyond subpar. The plotline thought interesting, goes nowhere and winds up in a neat, packaged fairytale ending (too many bed time stories to your kids perhaps M, you're getting soft). Some of the dialogue is so ludacris that I actually laughed out loud (as did many other theater patrons) even though the scene was not trying to invoke humor. I literally tried to get my money back after seeing it (to no avail they had a 30 minute returns policy). Don't waste your time or money on this disappointing pile of garbage.

Marky Mark needs to stick to grittier roles...I doubt he'll be able to get any work outside of reuniting with the Funky Bunch for a reunion tour along side his brother in New Kids On The Block after people see this movie... ::)
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Miles on June 14, 2008, 08:08:55 AM
Well, I can honestly say this was one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Maybe the twist is that it's so bad YOU the audience member wants to kill yourself by the end.

I'm definately a fan of M's work. I love most of the rest of his body of film, but this just has no redeemable qualities whatsoever. The acting is beyond subpar. The plotline thought interesting, goes nowhere and winds up in a neat, packaged fairytale ending (too many bed time stories to your kids perhaps M, you're getting soft). Some of the dialogue is so ludacris that I actually laughed out loud (as did many other theater patrons) even though the scene was not trying to invoke humor. I literally tried to get my money back after seeing it (to no avail they had a 30 minute returns policy). Don't waste your time or money on this disappointing pile of garbage.

Marky Mark needs to stick to grittier roles...I doubt he'll be able to get any work outside of reuniting with the Funky Bunch for a reunion tour along side his brother in New Kids On The Block after people see this movie... ::)

An oscar nominated actor not getting work because of one movie...Im not too sure about that. Besides he did fine in my eyes. More thanfine actually. I liked his performance. I really liked the movie. I think it plays out well. And the theater I was in was sold out, and everyone laughed only when Night intended and screamed at all of the frightening parts. I only heard one person say something bad about it, and like 10 people talking about how muchthey liked it so. Im not worried.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: MrStone on June 14, 2008, 08:10:41 AM
Well, I can honestly say this was one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Maybe the twist is that it's so bad YOU the audience member wants to kill yourself by the end.

I'm definately a fan of M's work. I love most of the rest of his body of film, but this just has no redeemable qualities whatsoever. The acting is beyond subpar. The plotline thought interesting, goes nowhere and winds up in a neat, packaged fairytale ending (too many bed time stories to your kids perhaps M, you're getting soft). Some of the dialogue is so ludacris that I actually laughed out loud (as did many other theater patrons) even though the scene was not trying to invoke humor. I literally tried to get my money back after seeing it (to no avail they had a 30 minute returns policy). Don't waste your time or money on this disappointing pile of garbage.

Marky Mark needs to stick to grittier roles...I doubt he'll be able to get any work outside of reuniting with the Funky Bunch for a reunion tour along side his brother in New Kids On The Block after people see this movie... ::)

An oscar nominated actor not getting work because of one movie...Im not too sure about that. Besides he did fine in my eyes. More thanfine actually. I liked his performance. I really liked the movie. I think it plays out well. And the theater I was in was sold out, and everyone laughed only when Night intended and screamed at all of the frightening parts. I only heard one person say something bad about it, and like 10 people talking about how muchthey liked it so. Im not worried.
where actually did you see it?  I am just curous where you could get an audience that bought into it that much.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Miles on June 14, 2008, 08:40:18 AM
ha In Delaware. I guess maybe because there is only open landscapes around here that the movie was believable lol I dont know but there was DEFINITELY a bigger positive reaction than a negative one.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: MrStone on June 14, 2008, 08:48:15 AM
ha In Delaware. I guess maybe because there is only open landscapes around here that the movie was believable lol I dont know but there was DEFINITELY a bigger positive reaction than a negative one.

here's my experience, i went with two friends - neither who read the script - and they thought was good.  or at least above average.  i having read the script thought it was below average.  maybe because i saw his original vision of the film - i found it frustrating how it ended up.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: MrStone on June 14, 2008, 08:48:36 AM
ha In Delaware. I guess maybe because there is only open landscapes around here that the movie was believable lol I dont know but there was DEFINITELY a bigger positive reaction than a negative one.

on another note - we're in Arkansas
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Miles on June 14, 2008, 09:09:02 AM
I guess we might be in the same boat then lol, everybody I was with, a group of about 10 only one person said it was ok. everyone else enjoyed it a lot. But the entire theater seemed to be into it, maybe I just got lucky? Im sure that wont happen again. But it was nice. I have a freind who works there and after the movie (which was my second veiwing), I talked with him and a group of kids that worked there and they all said they didnt understand why the movie was getting such a bad rap. even one of them said "Im not really into those types of movies but I didnt think it was BAD" so Idk. Im sure next time I go it wont be close to the same. But my friend got me the happening poster since they took it down, which was awesome ha.
Title: Think and Watch...Don't be a languid viewer
Post by: takendell on June 14, 2008, 09:55:27 AM
You know, I just wrote my review...which was more like a defense...for M. Night on Netflix because I had to say something after seeing the film last night.  Here is what I wrote...this is my first time on Mnightfans.com so I hope you will be kind...  :D

I was not a fan of The Sixth Sense as I guessed the surprise ending within the first 20 minutes of the film.  I am not a lover of Signs either.  I enjoyed the STORY of Lady in the Water and The Village as it depicted fiction within the realities we understand.  The movie, ?The Happening,? is one that walks on the back of Hitchcock in its framing.  I have to think back to the hatred of the movie we now love called ?Vertigo.?  I found The Happening to be a movie that brings the current realities of our allergy-induced environment into a grotesque montage of graphic atrocities.  There was a great deal of critical thought in this film and I felt that most people wanted to be entertained and this film was definitely for the intellectual film lover, not the lovers of The Sixth Sense.  Like some of Hitchcock?s films, this will be loved later, as generations of the future are faced with the events that were characterized in the movie.  If you like to think while watching, then this movie is going to be at least 2.5 stars on your rating scale.  I am sure a number of people do not like the movie because they were reflecting on M. Night?s past works.  He was breaking a mold and I thought he did that well.   Other movies that I find similar under the category I call ?intellectual fiction? while being categorized as horror/suspense are ?Suspiria,? ?The Stand,? ?The Fly,? and ?The Shining.?  They were hated films as well.  After leaving, you could write a dissertation, not discuss the reasons why the director did one thing and not something else.  The only negative I noticed was the dialogue.  It was realistic, as most people tend to talk in the manner written, however, it is not true to the way most film writing is done.  I did notice that the same people who left the theatre saying the movie was horrible were the same people who could not move off the edge of their seat, were biting their nails, and screaming during surprises?to each his own, right?  I would watch it again and I give the film 2.5-3.5 stars depending on the day of the week.  STOP WAITING FOR A TWIST AND LEARN SOMETHING  PEOPLE :o  Great job, M. Night and ask Gore to share that Nobel Prize with you.
Title: Re: Think and Watch...Don't be a languid viewer
Post by: OMGWTFBBQ on June 14, 2008, 01:11:15 PM

I am sure a number of people do not like the movie because they were reflecting on M. Night?s past works.     
STOP WAITING FOR A TWIST AND LEARN SOMETHING  PEOPLE

I just wanted to point out that this movie is very similar to his other movies so I didn't understand what you meant by breaking the mold. Small, developed character base, anguished child who whispers, travelling the countryside and holing up in a beaten up old country home, plotline leads to a worldwide morality lesson. These traits have all been represented before in his work.

I honestly think (as someone has said before) that either M is uber-smart and the twist is that it's actually supposed to be a comedy. Or possibly that it makes you want to kill yourself at times because of how bad it it. OR, its just a very poorly made movie with no twist ending (not that that would matter anyway).
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: okokokok on June 14, 2008, 02:11:08 PM
Quote
I honestly think (as someone has said before) that either M is uber-smart and the twist is that it's actually supposed to be a comedy. Or possibly that it makes you want to kill yourself at times because of how bad it it. OR, its just a very poorly made movie with no twist ending (not that that would matter anyway).

Well, I personally think it was supposed to be funny and silly.  Not an outright comedy however.  The over the top "bad things will happen"  low horn cues in the soundtrack were the first thing that tipped me. The weirdo guy, who knows all about plants and can't stop thinking about hot dogs.  Does anything think M Night is thinking "yea dude, this hot dog dialogue is supposed to be very serious.  I want this movie to be taken very seriously so I am gonna have a dude talk about hot dogs".  M Night knows that the dude is talking about hot dogs, lol.  Ultimately, the mix I feel he struck will be confusing to many, and then will likely fall on the side of not being good, largely because of how his films get advertised. They don't know how sell his movies of late. They have done it incorrectly for the last 3 movies, and that has been the biggest hurdle for all of these movies in my opinion.  That being said, even if the right audience was targeted and everyone knew exactly what they were in for, I still don't think everyone would love it, but they might have a more appropriate perspective when sitting down to watch it is all.
Title: Re: Think and Watch...Don't be a languid viewer
Post by: BN on June 14, 2008, 02:20:17 PM

I just wanted to point out that this movie is very similar to his other movies so I didn't understand what you meant by breaking the mold. Small, developed character base, anguished child who whispers, travelling the countryside and holing up in a beaten up old country home, plotline leads to a worldwide morality lesson. These traits have all been represented before in his work.

I honestly think (as someone has said before) that either M is uber-smart and the twist is that it's actually supposed to be a comedy. Or possibly that it makes you want to kill yourself at times because of how bad it it. OR, its just a very poorly made movie with no twist ending (not that that would matter anyway).

[/quote]

My personal opinion is that it is very different from his earlier movies because of (1) Character development: He doesn't do much of it in this movie (2) Twist: There isn't any (3) Using the supernatural as backdrop for a movie about relationships or faith: This movie was very simple, no deep implications anywhere (4)His own cameo: He doesn't even appear in the movie except as a voice that says one word

Looks like you did not like the movie and that is fine - to each his own. I appreciated what he has done in this movie and enjoyed the movie also.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: okman4ever on June 15, 2008, 03:16:54 AM
I saw the movie yesterday, and was a bit dissapointed.  Maybe it is because I've been following the movie since The Green Effect and hyped it up way too much for myself.  The movie was entertaining, but there are a few things I would like explained, things I didn't understand.  I liked the ending though.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Cleveland Heep on June 17, 2008, 06:53:03 PM
honest to God this is the BEST Review of the Happening I've ever heard.

Watch it:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=vlDT3BUy11Q



AND THEY SHOULD HAVE KEPT THE TITLE 'THE GREEN EFFECT'

Spoiler: I just found ou that GREEN was the color of LOVE on the mood ring!
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 17, 2008, 08:03:24 PM
honest to God this is the BEST Review of the Happening I've ever heard.

Watch it:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=vlDT3BUy11Q



AND THEY SHOULD HAVE KEPT THE TITLE 'THE GREEN EFFECT'

Spoiler: I just found ou that GREEN was the color of LOVE on the mood ring!

Very good review.   :)

Title: Richard Roeper gives thumbs up!!!!!!
Post by: Sri HK on June 17, 2008, 09:01:25 PM
....while the other guest reviewer doesn't!!!   >:(

http://bventertainment.go.com/tv/buenavista/ebertandroeper/index2.html?sec=1&subsec=5779

I love Richard.....he is a consistent thumbs-up reviewer of Night's movies (and he feels exactly as we fans do about his movies.).

 :-*
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 17, 2008, 09:08:02 PM
And this makes it..... two thumbs up for the movie!!!

 ;)
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Wags on June 17, 2008, 10:57:26 PM
I swear to God, if I hear one more person say "The Happening isn't happening", I'm gonna jump off my roof.  Should have stuck with "The Green Effect".
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 17, 2008, 11:02:54 PM
I swear to God, if I hear one more person say "The Happening isn't happening", I'm gonna jump off my roof.  Should have stuck with "The Green Effect".
:D

Actually....the happening happened....look at the box office numbers suckers (critics).
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 18, 2008, 12:24:02 AM
A nice take on the film...

http://www.conversantlife.com/film/whats-happening-in-the-happening#continue

Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: okokokok on June 18, 2008, 02:19:47 AM
I seriously wish that they would outlaw professional critics.  Or any person that massive amounts of people listen when making a decision on seeing a movie.  Not only because they prevent people from seeing movies they might like, but because critics opinions can have too big of an influence on the way people feel about a movie as well. 
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Rulm on June 18, 2008, 12:51:52 PM
I swear to God, if I hear one more person say "The Happening isn't happening", I'm gonna jump off my roof.  Should have stuck with "The Green Effect".

Are you gonna' jump of the roof..."The Happening" style? Lol.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: GenPion on June 18, 2008, 01:50:41 PM
A nice take on the film...

http://www.conversantlife.com/film/whats-happening-in-the-happening#continue



Thanks for sharing this. I really enjoyed reading that.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Namaste on June 18, 2008, 02:09:26 PM
yeah..to that guy who said that green was the color of love..I conjectured that last night on the "mood ring interpretations" thread. I agree it is very possible..but where did you learn it for sure?
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Wags on June 18, 2008, 05:22:23 PM
I swear to God, if I hear one more person say "The Happening isn't happening", I'm gonna jump off my roof.  Should have stuck with "The Green Effect".

Are you gonna' jump of the roof..."The Happening" style? Lol.

Not exatly: I wouldn't go palcidly. Right before I crash through my deck, I would curse the name of the person who said it.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: ajufe on June 21, 2008, 09:19:04 PM
Hi!
This weekend The Happenig opens in Argentina, where I live. I saw it today with my girlfriend and we loved it.
The film had more good reviews here than in the US! Of the three more important newspapers of Argentina:
CLARIN said Good :)
AMBITO FINANCIERO said Very Good :)
LA NACION said Regular :-\
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: DILinator on June 24, 2008, 11:37:33 AM
I seriously wish that they would outlaw professional critics.  Or any person that massive amounts of people listen when making a decision on seeing a movie.  Not only because they prevent people from seeing movies they might like, but because critics opinions can have too big of an influence on the way people feel about a movie as well. 

I know how you feel man, and I agree with you!
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Rohan on June 25, 2008, 10:41:48 PM
Is there any TV SPOT for "The Happening' after its release. They never showed it again once it released.

Rohan
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Dr Malcolm Crowe on June 25, 2008, 10:43:16 PM
Yeah, I saw a couple TV Spots. One advertised quotes from Roger Ebert, The New York Times and The San Francisco Chronicle reviews.  ;D
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Rohan on June 26, 2008, 08:51:56 PM
Yeah, I saw a couple TV Spots. One advertised quotes from Roger Ebert, The New York Times and The San Francisco Chronicle reviews.  ;D

Really?... I never saw one. Anyone have it online?

Rohan
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Rohan on July 12, 2008, 01:55:24 PM
For the record, I disagree with everyone who thinks that someone has less "credibility" for only having a different opinion than you about a movie.  Credibility? lol.  Because they like or dislike certain movies?  They are credible because they like the movies I like?  Or they aren't credible if they like a movie I don't?  What?  Perhaps it's semantics and I just think the use of the word credibility doesn't work here.

Rohan, if that person had given the exact same details about the movie in their review, but said the movie was amazing, how would you have reacted?  Would you have spent all that time and effort?   

DILinator, you contradict yourself a bit in your post as you suggest someone's credibility shouldn't be judged on their disliking of a movie, and then you say that you "would put less stock in people's credibility who liked" that same movie.  You are saying the same thing as you are making a point against.

Personally, as an example of how I would consider someone may be lacking credibility would be if, say, someone were to see a movie and not like it all, hate it even, then try to stop people from seeing it for themselves...that would make me lose most all credibility in their discussions on anything art related.  Point being, what if that movie ended up changing the other persons life or becoming their favorite movie of all time?  And they didn't see it because you stopped them from seeing it.  Anyways, I don't see how the idea of credibility is even seriously applied if we are merely talking about someones opinion.  I think it's funny how egocentric peoples thoughts can become when it involves their own personal reaction to a movie.  I include myself in that group.  I have just been involved in too many situations where multiple people have had profoundly different experiences and feelings after watching the same movie, and then have those same people feel exactly the same way about other movies.






Nope. I don't like any INDIANA JONES movies, but I know they are made very well. I don't like "Batman movies" but they are all made very well.

That review was stupid.

Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on July 12, 2008, 10:57:40 PM
http://www.accuweather.com/mt-news-blogs.asp?partner=accuweather&blog=Weathermatrix&pgurl=/mtweb/content/Weathermatrix/archives/2008/07/blogitis_m_nights_evil_wind.asp
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: ZEDTMBI on October 05, 2008, 03:16:24 AM
I've have seen all of M Night's films, and have loved just about all of them, and defended them to the end when my friends have put Nights obvious talent down. However, even as big of a fan I am I could not bring my self to say anything good about "The Happening". It was terrible! Mark Walberg and Zooey(Whats her name)'s performance in this film was incredibly One-dimensional! Even though these two actors are not the brightest stars in hollywood, the writing was ridiculous and completely out of character for M Night. His best accomplishment in my opinion was "signs", and this movie was probably done in its vein( with the personal focus on a family, which is different from your topical disaster movie) but this group of people are bluntly put, Stupid! the girl Zooey is just that, a little girl through most of the film, her fear was not at all apparent,neither was her emotion! Walberg is not much better either his emotional attachment to his character was not even close to any of the leading men before him, given way more difficult characters to play then a high school BIO teacher. The best acting in the film comes from John Leguizamo, who is sadly only a supporting actor, and only around for a short time. Now don't get me wrong, I would never, ever! discount the talent of M Night he is obviously one of the most visionary directors of our time, but what is with the cheap tricks in the movie trailers? He has had a tendency to show and give a vibe for a movie but not actually deliver with the end product. When I went and saw this film I felt raped after the credits started rolling. really I did! I really think he is forcably pulling his audience in with false ideas. His movies are beautiful masterpieces already, and the fans that know that will come and see his films regardless, furthermore this films premise was one of the most original I have seen in a long time, and it really disappoints me to know how great it could have been....gezzzz...well I guess all I can say is o well better luck next time, because as much as this movie has hurt my idea of the kind of game M Night plays, I have already fallen in love with the lovable Indian, and even if he never makes another great movie, he will always be my favorite director for his past works.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Namaste on October 05, 2008, 06:22:28 AM
The best acting in the film comes from John Leguizamo, who is sadly only a supporting actor, and only around for a short time.

agreed.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Mr. Heep on June 10, 2010, 03:22:21 AM
Quite a bit of smart reviews here... some I disagree with as well. ;) Posted mine a while back on IMDb (no one ever read it though :P).

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0949731/usercomments-1197

I haven't seen it in a while; I might change my opinion on second viewing.
Title: Re: Official Review Thread
Post by: Sri HK on June 14, 2010, 11:08:47 PM
^^  :)