Deprecated: Function create_function() is deprecated in /homepages/3/d161544361/htdocs/mnightfans/forums/Sources/Load.php on line 178

Deprecated: Function create_function() is deprecated in /homepages/3/d161544361/htdocs/mnightfans/forums/Sources/Load.php on line 183

Deprecated: Function create_function() is deprecated in /homepages/3/d161544361/htdocs/mnightfans/forums/Sources/Load.php on line 184

Deprecated: Function create_function() is deprecated in /homepages/3/d161544361/htdocs/mnightfans/forums/Sources/Load.php on line 220

Deprecated: Function create_function() is deprecated in /homepages/3/d161544361/htdocs/mnightfans/forums/Sources/Load.php on line 223

Deprecated: Function create_function() is deprecated in /homepages/3/d161544361/htdocs/mnightfans/forums/Sources/Load.php on line 235

Deprecated: Function create_function() is deprecated in /homepages/3/d161544361/htdocs/mnightfans/forums/Sources/Load.php on line 250

Deprecated: Function create_function() is deprecated in /homepages/3/d161544361/htdocs/mnightfans/forums/Sources/Load.php on line 268
Print Page - M. Night Shame-alan

MNightFans.com

Films => The Happening => Topic started by: dan_arbro on June 15, 2008, 05:08:44 PM

Title: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: dan_arbro on June 15, 2008, 05:08:44 PM
I've never anticipated a film more than this one. It would mark the first M. Night film i'd see in theatres... I LOVE ...I mean... LOVE his films. Here is a review I wrote on my facebook for my friends. Tell me what you think. Try not to tear me to shreds... but this is honestly what I thought and I think I'm the only person who thinks this way too...

Warning. This Rant contains spoilers. If you haven't seen the movie and wish to see it don't continue reading.


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


From the writer and direction from, the Sixth Sense, Signs, The Village, Unbreakable, and Lady in the Water, comes

THE HAPPENING ? and let me tell you? it wasn?t happenin? at all. Most of M. Night?s films have mixed reactions when it comes to his fans. Most enjoyed the Sixth Sense. Most disliked the end of Signs. Most had mixed views of Unbreakable and the end of the Village. Of course there is the matter of Lady in the Water? where most loathed, Daniel loved. I can be biased in saying that I loved Lady in the Water for the social change/religious subtext, but I too understand that the story itself isn?t the greatest. It?s the meaning behind the story a lot of people fall short of seeing.

However, my blind geeky fandom of M. Night Shyamalan and his writing came to a complete halt when I saw ?The Happening? on Friday the 13th. Perhaps the superstition behind the date itself should have been clue enough as to how bad of a movie this was.

The disturbing suicides were the only good part of this movie. The plot reaches a terribly planned climax, and the story itself gets no where. It?s very circular. The crazy lady was pretty scary?but I fail to see the point? The entire point of the film is that we?d better stop hurting the environment?or it will make a spore to make us kill ourselves. Definitely not one of this stronger driving forces in film.

I mean, the Sixth Sense was packed with emotion, mystery, and suspense driving very compelling characters foreword to the climax of the film. Signs followed suit. Unbreakable followed suit. The Village followed suit with amazing cinematography, packed with emotion, mystery, and suspense driving very compelling characters foreword as the others did. The Village also combined with one of James Newton Howard?s best musical scores drove this film home regardless of the ending people had mixed feelings on. Even Lady in the Water had its crowning achievements through Subtext, Amazing Acting, Another amazing score by Howard, and child friendly audience target.

However, the Happening does nothing to win audiences over besides show disturbing images of suicides/gore? which has been done?many times. Saw I,II,III,IV should be PROOF ENOUGH. No one wants to see another lowbrow-common- horror film that has no meaning whatsoever besides ?helping the environment? ? GAY.

Marky Mark Walburg has to have done his worst acting job in this film, followed close second by Zooey Deschanel who?s acting never spun my wheels? Elf has to be her best film? or Almost Famous? but even then?. ?Ehhhhh?.

What was M. Night Thinking? As my friend Michael plainly puts it ?The ENVIRONMENT? They?re running from the WIND? Does anyone see how LAME that is??

what Michael says sums up the movie folks. No surprise ending, no twists, no real scarry threat, just plants trying to kill you using spores. In my opinion it makes a better idea on paper, but I think Night has lost it.

BEING PRODUCED BY FOX SHOULD HAVE BEEN ANOTHER CLUE.

From ruining his reputation with Disney, (which was a cool move on his part, but in the long run foolish for his career), he went to Warner brothers. Alan Horn was cool enough to produce Lady in the Water and it in the end made *some* money. Not enough however to keep Night in Horn?s good books.

The one saving grace of this movie was probably the comedy. If it was marketed as a comedy where Night mocks the making of horror films it might have done better, however, I don?t think he can use that cop out. Its definitely one of the most Hitchcock inspired films. The movie wasn?t so much about the horror or ?scariness? of the Sixth Sense, it was more the curiosity of the ?event? like in Signs that this movie takes on.

The disturbing nature of suicide is the star of this film? and somehow I doubt that will win many over. He must think audiences are getting really stupid because if you know what this movie is about going into the film, you?re going to be snuff out of luck. Don?t let spoilers spoil it for you, the trailers do just that.

I?ve never been more let down?. Oh wait, yes I have. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is STILL worse. But in the end both movies achieve the same thing ? they fall one fry short of a happy meal.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: okokokok on June 15, 2008, 05:30:42 PM
Quote
.. but this is honestly what I thought and I think I'm the only person who thinks this way too...

Lol.  Did you read anyones review here or elsewhere?  More seem to feel as you do then not.  Everything you said seems legitimate to me,  except how you use the term "gay" in reference to something you didn't like.  I'm going to guess your age, but I will keep it to myself. (Of course, I have heard some adults use that term alos, so I am probably way off.)

Quote
The one saving grace of this movie was probably the comedy. If it was marketed as a comedy where Night mocks the making of horror films it might have done better, however, I don?t think he can use that cop out

I am confused here.  Are you saying it would have been better for you, or better for the reception of others?  I am getting confused between what you are saying for yourself and what you are saying for others.  And in reference to the 'cop out'  remark,  are you commenting on interviews he has done, or are commenting on what others here have suggested about the comedy in the film and it's b-movie roots?


EDIT:
Also, why is it that you needed to start a whole new thread for your review? 
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: DANtheFREAK on June 15, 2008, 07:53:31 PM
where do you get that we are supposed to help the environment from this movie. i think ALOT of people completely missed the point of this movie. it has nothing to do with helping the environment it has to do with society helping or i should say changing our ways. Did you not pick up the hints in the film like newspaper headline that read Murderdelphia, the billboard that says we deserve this, or the violent video game product placement at the end.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: Mr_Glass.1 on June 15, 2008, 08:00:02 PM
I agree with DANtheFreak.  He makes a good point.  It is about society, how we treat ourselves and the place we live in, and the consequences.  People haven't learned, what you see in the preview isn't entirely what the movie is about, he always has dramatic and romantinc subplots which drive the movie and are the main force of the movie, maybe he should try marketing them as drama.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: okokokok on June 15, 2008, 08:44:00 PM
I agree with the last 2 posts, in that I don't think the main theme and idea of this film is some kind of "save the environment" plea.  And I agree that is more about, but not entirely, looking at how you are as a person in this world as it pertains to how we relate to one another and the planet.   But I think that anyone who thinks there isn't any ecological theme at all is being just as narrow in their view.  Some examples: the very obvious placement of the power plant behind the hot dog dudes house(it obviously didn't have to be there) and the shot that tilts down when the car backs up over the plants and peels out on them.  Those 2 things seemed deliberate to me.  There are many themes in this movie I think, as there are in a lot of movies.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: Lifeordeath1 on June 15, 2008, 11:11:21 PM
Agreed with some of the other posts.  Why start a new thread for just your review?  2nd, I believe the movie is more about love.  I am sorry you didnt like it.  I am going to have to see it again because there was so to much to take in, in one viewing. 

I do have to agree with you on Walberg's acting though, it def. wasnt his best.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: Rulm on June 16, 2008, 01:52:35 PM
While I agree with most of your points, it seems as though your "review" is more of a vent. Lol. I think you should have focused a bit more.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: dan_arbro on June 17, 2008, 10:34:43 PM
The only point to me from most of the posts you people made just completely turned me off of ever posting here again. You people are all very rude. I hope you report this statement to the admin. I've never been so unwelcomed.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: Wags on June 17, 2008, 11:02:35 PM
Well, when you start a thread titled "Shame-alan", and then go on a virtiolic diatribe about things on a FAN-based message board, what can you expect.  I think that while you're intentions were good, your colorful word choice and overall tone was definitely something lacking tact and irritated the posters above me.  So, while I'm sorry your feelings are hurt, you should have seen this coming.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: okokokok on June 17, 2008, 11:21:03 PM
Wow, I am kinda shocked.  The guy who uses the term "gay" to describe something as bad, and makes a whole new post for his review instead of posting in one of the multiple reviews threads called us rude.  Anyways, I did say one rude thing, so I a apologize.  But wow, there has been a lot worse said here I think, lol
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: Reflection on June 18, 2008, 07:55:51 PM
The only point to me from most of the posts you people made just completely turned me off of ever posting here again. You people are all very rude. I hope you report this statement to the admin. I've never been so unwelcome

I'm sure a lot of people feel that way and don't say anything, no matter what type of review they might or might not give a movie. A global opening and 2 or 3 members on at a time, I think that speaks for itself.

I talk in silly riddles and could possibly be insane!?! But I came here to get stoked about seeing the new movie, but after my visits, I haven't even seen it yet and will probably wait for it to come on tv. I'm sure that's what the board and site are all about huh.

Nice not talking to anyone, but I still wish everyone a great day and a wonderful life. Maybe I'll visit the new site "IF/when" it opens.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: Sri HK on June 18, 2008, 08:04:08 PM
 ??? :o
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: the_sorcerer on June 18, 2008, 08:13:12 PM
The only point to me from most of the posts you people made just completely turned me off of ever posting here again. You people are all very rude. I hope you report this statement to the admin. I've never been so unwelcomed.

ok, are you serious?! come on man, its not the end of the world that people didn't agree with your review.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: okokokok on June 18, 2008, 08:18:15 PM
Quote
  ??? :o

Exactly, lol.

Quote
I talk in silly riddles and could possibly be insane!?! But I came here to get stoked about seeing the new movie, but after my visits, I haven't even seen it yet and will probably wait for it to come on tv. I'm sure that's what the board and site are all about huh.

So seeing, or not seeing, a movie that you want to see is contingent on what other people are doing or saying? ok.  Loud and clear.
Title: Gay is okay!
Post by: JWMMakerofMusic on June 18, 2008, 10:30:57 PM
I'm straight, but I have friends who are of the LGBT community, so I'm just going to say what everyone else is probably already thinking.  :) You say 'gay' like it's a bad thing and then have the audacity to call everyone else 'rude'?  :o If being gay was so bad, why did California legalize gay marriage, hmmm? ::) Such a random slur coming from someone in their 20s.  Grow up mate.  You'll find that maturity is a lot more fun! 8)
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: afi_village on June 19, 2008, 08:14:47 AM
The only point to me from most of the posts you people made just completely turned me off of ever posting here again. You people are all very rude. I hope you report this statement to the admin. I've never been so unwelcomed.

i completly agree!  this site has totally changed.  seriously people, get off your high horses! he clearly wasn't using the word "gay" as an insult.  if you people are so easily offended then how can you be SO in love with a movie that you say is just a fun b movie that isn't meant to be taken seriously but is all about suicide?  using suicide as a joke or something to be taken lightly is far more offensive to me then someone using the term "gay" in the way he did. 

where do you get that we are supposed to help the environment from this movie.

if you are saying that the plants killing people and the interview on the tv at the end of the movie was not implying that we need to save the environment you are over-analyzing. 
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: okokokok on June 19, 2008, 11:48:21 AM
Quote
i completly agree!  this site has totally changed.  seriously people, get off your high horses! he clearly wasn't using the word "gay" as an insult.  if you people are so easily offended then how can you be SO in love with a movie that you say is just a fun b movie that isn't meant to be taken seriously but is all about suicide?  using suicide as a joke or something to be taken lightly is far more offensive to me then someone using the term "gay" in the way he did.

You couldn't be more wrong about everything you said here. 

a.  He was using the term gay as a negative word to describe something he didn't like.  You must think it is cool and a good way to get your point across.  It reflects negatively on the person saying it and it paints their argument.  There are plenty of people who gave negative arguments that had completely civil discussions with those that liked the movie.  I was not offended at all, but It makes me hard to respect the opininion when people use  "that is gay" as description and backup to their point.  You disagree I guess.

b. Just because the movie is in the style of a b-movie does not mean it shouldn't be taken seriously at all.  It just means a movie doesn't HAVE to only be one thing.  M Night said if people walk away from this movie thinking only about the themes, then great.  But he said that that the themes are not in front of the film is all.  Of course, you have taken it to the extreme and say that we ONLY said "yea, hey it's just a fun movie".  Man, just say whatever makes your point stronger I guess, even it it is a complete fabrication.

c.  This movie is about suicide huh?  Are these people killing themselves because they are depressed or something? Christ.

d.  Just because we may be arguing the way someone reviewed the movie, does NOT mean we necessarily love it.  I don't love it.

Please don't lump everyones responses together as the same people, or like we are on the same side.  I clearly and specifically only pointed out that the person felt his review was so important that he needed to make a whole new post.  I also was highlighting that with the fact the he obviously hasn't read many other reviews here because most have been negative, and made a comment like he thought he had some maverick opinion!  And then I was commenting on how he used the word gay as a negative way of describing a large part of the film.  But, I did also say that most everything he had to say was legitimate.


So you're the one that should get off your high horse.


EDIT:
Don't think I forgot about your part in the Lady In The Water discussion where you suggested that those who liked that movie were fooling themselves, and acting blindly.  Oh, it's also the discussion where you said you wanted "some indisputable evidence as to why this film is a masterpiece", as if there is such a thing.  That's called being on a high horse.



Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: steinmansbrain on June 19, 2008, 01:29:50 PM
I find the way you used the term 'Christ' offensive...


Not really ;)
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: okokokok on June 19, 2008, 02:55:18 PM
Frankly, I find it offensive that you are offended.

(I don't feel like putting a cute little smiley, but this is where it would go if I did)
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: JWMMakerofMusic on June 19, 2008, 09:01:05 PM

There are plenty of people who gave negative arguments that had completely civil discussions with those that liked the movie.


That's the point I was trying to get across, and the fact that the poster is in his 20s.  So embarrassing imho. ;D

Also, saying "Christ" in that manner could offend the churchy types. ;D But it's all good mate.  Thanks for backing up my side.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: okokokok on June 19, 2008, 09:32:40 PM
Quote
Also, saying "Christ" in that manner could offend the churchy types.

My point wasn't about being offended.  I was not.  In fact, that was the least of my concerns.  My point is how one is to be taken seriously in a discussion when someone uses such terms to describe what they thought was not good.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: afi_village on June 22, 2008, 04:33:20 AM
Quote
i completly agree!  this site has totally changed.  seriously people, get off your high horses! he clearly wasn't using the word "gay" as an insult.  if you people are so easily offended then how can you be SO in love with a movie that you say is just a fun b movie that isn't meant to be taken seriously but is all about suicide?  using suicide as a joke or something to be taken lightly is far more offensive to me then someone using the term "gay" in the way he did.

You couldn't be more wrong about everything you said here. 

a.  He was using the term gay as a negative word to describe something he didn't like.  You must think it is cool and a good way to get your point across.  It reflects negatively on the person saying it and it paints their argument.  There are plenty of people who gave negative arguments that had completely civil discussions with those that liked the movie.  I was not offended at all, but It makes me hard to respect the opininion when people use  "that is gay" as description and backup to their point.  You disagree I guess.

b. Just because the movie is in the style of a b-movie does not mean it shouldn't be taken seriously at all.  It just means a movie doesn't HAVE to only be one thing.  M Night said if people walk away from this movie thinking only about the themes, then great.  But he said that that the themes are not in front of the film is all.  Of course, you have taken it to the extreme and say that we ONLY said "yea, hey it's just a fun movie".  Man, just say whatever makes your point stronger I guess, even it it is a complete fabrication.

c.  This movie is about suicide huh?  Are these people killing themselves because they are depressed or something? Christ.

d.  Just because we may be arguing the way someone reviewed the movie, does NOT mean we necessarily love it.  I don't love it.

Please don't lump everyones responses together as the same people, or like we are on the same side.  I clearly and specifically only pointed out that the person felt his review was so important that he needed to make a whole new post.  I also was highlighting that with the fact the he obviously hasn't read many other reviews here because most have been negative, and made a comment like he thought he had some maverick opinion!  And then I was commenting on how he used the word gay as a negative way of describing a large part of the film.  But, I did also say that most everything he had to say was legitimate.


So you're the one that should get off your high horse.


EDIT:
Don't think I forgot about your part in the Lady In The Water discussion where you suggested that those who liked that movie were fooling themselves, and acting blindly.  Oh, it's also the discussion where you said you wanted "some indisputable evidence as to why this film is a masterpiece", as if there is such a thing.  That's called being on a high horse.





oh my godness, are you holding some sort of grudge against me for the stuff i said about lady in the water?  why do you even remember that?  or did you go through and read my old posts after you saw this one?  it was quite a while ago!  i think that's a good place for me to say: "Man, just say whatever makes your point stronger I guess, even it it is a complete fabrication."

what's so wrong with asking for evidence as to why something is a masterpiece?  if a film is a masterpiece then there must be some features to it that the majority of the people that watch it would agree is at least done well. 

a- the fact that people use the term gay to describe things they don't like is no fault to the poster that used it, i'm sure that they weren't even thinking when they typed it.  it's a fault that is embedded in our society so unless you're out to save the world i suggest you get over it, there are plenty of worse words that people use everyday.  i would like it if you stopped making assumptions as to what i think or who i am because believe it or not, you don't know.

b- from what i've seen on this board whenever someone has a problem with anything about the movie the go to excuse that pops up seems to be "it's meant to be a b movie", so why is it such a stretch to assume that this is the way that people view it?  have you seen the way this film is advertised?  i'm sure that there are plenty of people who watch this movie and take away nothing except the gore.

c- suicide is the act of someone killing them self, depression is something you have associated with it but it doesn't have to be.  realistically looking at this film can you really say that is is not showing people killing themelves in ways that are trivial and in some cases ridiculous just to add gore?  it shows people killing themselves over and over like it's not big deal.  hey, lets have this guy feed himself to some tigers, cool!

also, i really don't see how using the word christ and gay are any different, can you please explain this to me?

d- it's true, i'm sorry for lumping everyones responses together, the truth is that i don't really remember who has what opinions about things, or anyones user names really. 

is it really so terrible for someone to not read anything else on this board and just post their opinions?

also, who are you to decide whether what i say is right or wrong in the first place?  are you christ?
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: okokokok on June 22, 2008, 07:30:45 AM
I am totally not holding a grudge against you. I just happen to remember you very specifically from that discussion as you ignored something I said in favor of only replying in support of someone you agreed with.  What you originally said was "some indisputable evidence as to why this film is a masterpiece"  And there is no such thing. It was the "indisputable evidence" part that was the issue.  You left that part out here for some reason.  Basically, If a say I think a movie is a masterpiece, and I mean it, then to me it is a masterpiece.  There isn't any  "indisputable evidence as to why this film is a masterpiece".  If you had said "Why do you think this movie is a masterpiece" instead, then I would have no issues, as that is something totally different.   

Quote
a- the fact that people use the term gay to describe things they don't like is no fault to the poster that used it, i'm sure that they weren't even thinking when they typed it.  it's a fault that is embedded in our society so unless you're out to save the world i suggest you get over it, there are plenty of worse words that people use everyday.  i would like it if you stopped making assumptions as to what i think or who i am because believe it or not, you don't know.

You are speaking for this person, just so you know.  Also, in your speaking for this person, you said you were sure they weren't thinking....why would it matter if they were thinking or not if it isn't a big deal to use that word?  And if he wasn't thinking there,  where was he thinking and not thinking during his review? Did you mean to do that?  You are actually doing this person a huge disservice.  Just stop speaking for people while you are ahead.  So what is embedded in our society exactly?  The negative use of language towards a specific group of people?  So if something is embedded or engrained in our society, does that mean it is ok to continue doing it?  There are some horrible things that used to be embedded in our society, I don't even have to mention any examples and I am sure you know what they are.  Were those things ok because that's just the way the culture was?  That is such a ridiculous point to make.  I am not out to save the world, did you even read my response?  My point is not that using that word to describe something negatively propagates the current negative outlook towards a specific group of people in our society, which it does in my opinion.  What I was saying is that it's hard for me to completely respect the review when thats the word they used to describe a major point in the movie.   I WAS NOT OFFENDED, AND COULD CARE LESS IF IT WAS OFFENSIVE.  I WAS COMMENTING ON HOW IT PAINTS THE REVIEW AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED.  THAT IS ALL.  If you can't grasp that, I don't know what to say.  Are there any words or way of describing something that someone could say or do that would make you take less stock in their opinion?  If so, then you understand what I am saying.  If not, you may still not understand. Also, what assumption did I make about you here exactly?

Quote
b- from what i've seen on this board whenever someone has a problem with anything about the movie the go to excuse that pops up seems to be "it's meant to be a b movie", so why is it such a stretch to assume that this is the way that people view it?  have you seen the way this film is advertised?  i'm sure that there are plenty of people who watch this movie and take away nothing except the gore

You did not say that people were saying  "it's meant to be a b-movie" originally.  What you said originally is that people were saying it is " just a fun b movie that isn't meant to be taken seriously"  Those are such completely different things.  DONT CHANGE WHAT YOU SAID.  You used a very specific set of words and it was those specific words that I was reacting to.  I VERY SPECIFICALLY pointed out those two specific things in my original post.  I know exactly how the film is advertised, which is why I made a post earlier about how I thought that is the biggest issue with his last 3 films.  They have been different films then advertised in my opinion, not that I expect anyone to have read that.  Which is why I have continued to reply in some of my posts about some of the things M Night has said about the movie himself, because I was hoping it might explain some of the problems people have had with the film.  Not that that information would make it a better movie for that person but maybe just to give them a different perspective.

Quote
c- suicide is the act of someone killing them self, depression is something you have associated with it but it doesn't have to be.  realistically looking at this film can you really say that is is not showing people killing themelves in ways that are trivial and in some cases ridiculous just to add gore?  it shows people killing themselves over and over like it's not big deal.  hey, lets have this guy feed himself to some tigers, cool!

My point was that this movie wasn't about the issue of suicide.  Suicide just happens to be something that happens in the movie.  Just like The Village isn't about what life is like at the turn of the century.  It just happens in the movie.  Now people killing themselves is a serious thing for sure, but so is murder, but people are cool with Freddy Krueger and Jason Voorhies right?  Does that make sense?  And I don't know what the rest of your point is here?  I was not defending the aesthetic choices M Night made in this particular discussion, so what are you talking about?  However,  I think it would be trivial if people in the movie were not reacting to the deaths at all.  But that's not what happens.  That construction worker is actually crying when his co-workers start dropping I believe.  And if not, he is still pretty upset?  And the woman on the phone with her daughter is crying yes?  And the girl in the car with Julian is screaming and crying when she sees all the hanging bodies?  If they were not reacting or they were laughing, then maybe I could understand the idea of them being trivial.  I would say M Night got rather creative with the deaths, but I don't think they were trivial just because they were such wild ways of committing suicide.  My point was, originally, that movies don't have to be JUST ONE THING.  That is all.  They can mix genres.  A movie doesn't have to be just a thriller, or just a drama, or just a comedy.  Which then goes back to my original point which was that you were saying people were suggesting this was only " just a fun b movie that isn't meant to be taken seriously".


Quote
also, i really don't see how using the word christ and gay are any different, can you please explain this to me?

I wasn't using the exclamation "christ" as a way to describe something negatively.  It was an exasperated exclamation.  If I had said, "dude, the acting was so christ", and I meant the acting was bad,  then it might have been the same.  Does that make sense?  There are some people who might not feel comfortable hearing people say christ like that, but it is not an inherently loaded thing to say like describing something as a "gay" is.  I am not saying anything bad about jesus christ or a religion.  But for someone to describe something that someone thinks is bad as gay, well that is indirectly inferring that being gay is bad, even if they are not saying that directly or intently.  But again, these ideas were never my issue. 

Quote
is it really so terrible for someone to not read anything else on this board and just post their opinions?

Who said it was so terrible?  I just think there is something to be said for people who are interested in the thoughts of others, and there is something to be said for people that don't care about what others are saying , and are only concerned with saying what they wanna say.  It sounds like you disagree.  In my original response to him, all I did was let him know that I thought it was funny that he was thinking he was one of the few that thought as he did, when more reviews here were similar to his then not.  And all I did was ask why he started a new thread.  That's it.

Quote
also, who are you to decide whether what i say is right or wrong in the first place?  are you christ?

Technically, if you say 2+2=4 is wrong, can I say you were wrong without thinking I am christ? Wow.  Well that's how I was reacting because I thought you had misinterpreted things I said, which would have made you wrong in fact.  But you weren't only responding to me, so that was completely my fault.  Miscommunication.  I apologize.


Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: DILinator on June 24, 2008, 11:30:09 AM
Lol!  More and more this place is turning into a soap opera!  Days of Our mnightfans, now coming daily!  ;D

On another note, it's nice to see you arguing with somebody other than me for a change okokokok!  ;)
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: okokokok on June 25, 2008, 05:01:01 PM
Quote
it's nice to see you arguing with somebody other than me for a change okokokok!

Ha, I wish more people argued here.  Not for the sake of arguing, I just love the passion when people are really getting into it.  I don't know why I do it.  I think I really just want to get to the bottom of ideas, and really sort them out ya know?  Very often arguments just spiral into something other then what the actual argument is.  It happened with us a bit when we were going at it.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: Mr_Glass.1 on June 30, 2008, 11:17:36 AM
Hopefully things won't get too out of hand here, with people arguing and all.  Things actually appear to be gettting somewhere with this thread.  I agree with okokokok, I like to argue also, sometimes to prove myself better then others, which is a bad thing, and other times just to understand my own opinion better, because I'm forced to defend it.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: manojrules on July 09, 2008, 04:33:49 PM
Actually, I believe his name is pronounced Shom-uh-lawn and spelled Shyamalan.

But anyways, I actually really love this movie. It had everything I expect in a Shyamalan film. Great storyline, great acting, great idea, great turns, good humor, and it made me want to watch it a million more times and still not get tired of watching it. I loved the movie, in my opinion.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: the_sorcerer on September 05, 2008, 05:02:34 PM
Actually, I believe his name is pronounced Shom-uh-lawn and spelled Shyamalan.

Uh...hmm...I honestly can't tell if that was a joke or not. I sincerely hope so.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: Sanford on September 05, 2008, 05:42:50 PM
Actually, I believe his name is pronounced Shom-uh-lawn and spelled Shyamalan.

Uh...hmm...I honestly can't tell if that was a joke or not. I sincerely hope so.

Umm, that is how it's pronounced.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: Rohan on September 05, 2008, 08:52:19 PM
This is how you pronounce his name.

SHYAMALAN : SHIA-MA-LAAN.   SHEEAAMAALAAAN.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: Namaste on September 05, 2008, 09:35:06 PM
This is how you pronounce his name.

SHYAMALAN : SHIA-MA-LAAN.   SHEEAAMAALAAAN.


indeed.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: Rohan on September 05, 2008, 09:55:08 PM
Am I right about the pronounciation, namaste?

Rohan
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: the_sorcerer on September 06, 2008, 10:00:32 AM
who was questioning how you pronounce it?
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: Rohan on September 06, 2008, 11:34:23 AM
who was questioning how you pronounce it?

I think "ManojRules" was pronouncing his name wrong.

Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: Namaste on September 06, 2008, 05:07:00 PM
yeah, you are right.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: Sanford on September 06, 2008, 05:45:02 PM
Um, I hate to be the one to disagree with everyone here, but his name actually is pronounced SHAW-ma-LAWN.

That's how it's been spoken in every trailer, interview and anything else I've ever seen with him in it.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: Rohan on September 06, 2008, 08:14:11 PM
Um, I hate to be the one to disagree with everyone here, but his name actually is pronounced SHAW-ma-LAWN.

That's how it's been spoken in every trailer, interview and anything else I've ever seen with him in it.

That's wrong though. Its not SHAW-Ma-Lawn...
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: Namaste on September 07, 2008, 10:52:18 PM
it just takes a good ear to pick it out.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: Rohan on September 08, 2008, 01:59:37 AM
it just takes a good ear to pick it out.

May be.
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: Kuzon on November 11, 2008, 08:54:11 PM
I used to pronounce his name wrong before too... lol

I just recently saw the happening on dvd and I LOVED IT
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: Mr_Glass.1 on November 12, 2008, 02:14:36 PM
HIs name is pronounced  right, Rohan's got it.  Hey Kuzon, why did you love it?
Title: Re: M. Night Shame-alan
Post by: Elijah Price on November 29, 2008, 04:40:37 PM
It's actually pronounced: Emm Night Shah-ma-llama-ding-dong.  I've heard it countless times in interviews and trailers and whatnot.  I don't know, maybe it just takes a good ear to catch it.

Lol.