[the_sorcerer]

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!!

[BN]

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.

[DILinator]

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.

[mamasan]

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!) 

[Miles]

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.

[okokokok]

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"?

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

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.

[Rohan]

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.

[BN]

*** 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.

[DILinator]

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.... 

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. 

[SenorBudd]

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???

[SenorBudd]

*****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. 

[Veena]

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.

[SenorBudd]

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.

[OMGWTFBBQ]

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...

[Miles]

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.