first impressions...


Author Topic: first impressions...  (Read 18665 times)

okokokok

  • LITW

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 175
Re: first impressions...
« Reply #90 on: June 17, 2008, 12:51:05 PM »
Quote
ooh yeah one more thing, I REALY did not like, ms jones.. damm.... What the hell did she come from? Why is she in the picture?

I think her character is supposed to be representative of someone who is closed off and has turned their back on the world, which ties in with a main theme in this film I think.

DILinator

  • The Happening

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 211
Re: first impressions...
« Reply #91 on: June 17, 2008, 01:01:34 PM »
Everybody keeps going back to the B-Movie thing, and I think he obviously fashioned the film in such a manner that lends itself to that genre and feeling.  He's stated so much.  However, I think he really did that for the moviegoing public who does not put a lot of deep thought into movies they are watching.  At least they could come away appreciating the movie for that.

Night always has a message, and a statement about the condition of man that he is making, and The Happening is not different.  There is a clear message there, underlying everything, and encompassing everything.  In many ways, this is his deepest film yet, even though it comes off at first glance as his shallowest.  I've yet to even see it a second time yet, but just thinking about all the events of the film after the initial disappointment wore off I've come to see what he's getting at.  I'm sure subsequent viewings will only reinforce those things I've already detected, and maybe allow me to see even more. 

I just find it interesting than many people think there's not much of a message here, while I see there being a very clear one: just Night has downplayed it because frankly, he doesn't believe in "casting pearls before swine (critics/haters)".  He knows those who have "ears to hear", will hear.   
"See what you have to ask yourself is what kind of person are you? Are you the kind that sees signs, sees miracles? Or do you believe that people just get lucky?"

I'm a "Signs" person.

okokokok

  • LITW

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 175
Re: first impressions...
« Reply #92 on: June 17, 2008, 01:21:49 PM »
Dilinator, I agree that this is not a shallow movie at all.

However, M Night said very specifically that the themes in this movie are not "in front of the movie" as he says himself, as though it is the first time he has done that.  It does not mean they don't exist.  I personally never implied that because this is a b-movie that it has not real messages or themes.  My only point is that, to me, it explains some of the choices that were made in the the film and the overall tone. 

Quote
I just find it interesting than many people think there's not much of a message here, while I see there being a very clear one: just Night has downplayed it because frankly, he doesn't believe in "casting pearls before swine (critics/haters)".  He knows those who have "ears to hear", will hear. 

I'm confused here, sorry.  Are you saying the haters hate him for his themes and messages?  I thought they disliked his writing and execution of ideas?

DILinator

  • The Happening

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 211
Re: first impressions...
« Reply #93 on: June 17, 2008, 01:34:20 PM »
Dilinator, I agree that this is not a shallow movie at all.

However, M Night said very specifically that the themes in this movie are not "in front of the movie" as he says himself, as though it is the first time he has done that.  It does not mean they don't exist.  I personally never implied that because this is a b-movie that it has not real messages or themes.  My only point is that, to me, it explains some of the choices that were made in the the film and the overall tone. 

Quote
I just find it interesting than many people think there's not much of a message here, while I see there being a very clear one: just Night has downplayed it because frankly, he doesn't believe in "casting pearls before swine (critics/haters)".  He knows those who have "ears to hear", will hear. 

I'm confused here, sorry.  Are you saying the haters hate him for his themes and messages?  I thought they disliked his writing and execution of ideas?


I never implied anything about you, but was rather stating that the themes were clearly there, just hidden.  It's like Night said himself: they're not in the front of the movie.  But I believe he did that for a reason, and the reason wasn't that they weren't important, or even the underlying point of the movie. 

There are a lot of filmmakers out there who write poorly and execute their ideas badly.  Yet, virtually no filmmakers stirs up such vitriolic hatred like Shyamalan.  Why?  If people aren't saying something valuable, and something worth saying, even if it's convicting, then they are unlikely to be met with such passion.  The amount of passion and hatred leveled against Night shows me that he's doing something right, and therefore stirring up reactions in those who disagree with his messages. 

While this is not the case with everybody who dislikes his movies, it certainly is why the Hollywood establishment and many critics have turned on him.  They prefer movies with fatalistic and dreary messages, and not ones which have positive, and cautionary ones.  I think there's an element to even the casual moviegoer that will react to the movie, and with their mind they'll say it was one thing or another.  But deep down they were reacting to a convicting message that they didn't like. 

In truth, a stroll around the message boards at IMDB is akin to being on the porch in The Happening.  There are cold and heartless people waiting with shotguns to blast anybody, even if they are simply trying to do what's right and being kind.

People in general are in a bad state today, which is something The Happening points out.  That doesn't exactly mesh with this false belief that is now prevelant that man is basically good.  We're not, because we've all become too selfish, and stopped respecting those around us, valuing our fellow man, and taking care of this world we've been entrusted with.  This is the message at the heart of The Happening, and that's not a very politically correct one nowadays.... 
"See what you have to ask yourself is what kind of person are you? Are you the kind that sees signs, sees miracles? Or do you believe that people just get lucky?"

I'm a "Signs" person.

okokokok

  • LITW

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 175
Re: first impressions...
« Reply #94 on: June 17, 2008, 02:02:32 PM »
My point was, after reading so many professional reviews of his movies(since this what we are talking about), it doesn't seem as though people hate him for trying to say something positive, but rather they hate the means by which he does it.  I have heard very few people/critics rail away at his themes or messages, but have heard many talk trash on his execution and specific writing style.

That's why this confused me.
Quote
I just find it interesting than many people think there's not much of a message here, while I see there being a very clear one: just Night has downplayed it because frankly, he doesn't believe in "casting pearls before swine (critics/haters)".  He knows those who have "ears to hear", will hear.
Because it suggests the reason people hate him is because he is trying to say positive things in his films.  That was my point. 

Quote
while this is not the case with everybody who dislikes his movies, it certainly is why the Hollywood establishment and many critics have turned on him.  They prefer movies with fatalistic and dreary messages, and not ones which have positive, and cautionary ones.  I think there's an element to even the casual moviegoer that will react to the movie, and with their mind they'll say it was one thing or another.  But deep down they were reacting to a convicting message that they didn't like. 

The argument that the Hollywood establishment hates a filmmaker only because the filmmaker is trying to say something positive is pretty out there to me.  Just by they fact of how many very positive movies are released and are given very favorable "professional" reviews and acclaim.  I mean, what about The Sixth Sense?




steinmansbrain

  • The Village

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 129
    • Email
Re: first impressions...
« Reply #95 on: June 18, 2008, 09:20:27 AM »
This movie wasn't just bad by M Night's standards, it was just bad.

I love his other films, even LITW, so i'm not a hater, i'm actually just really upset :'(.

It's like he didn't even write the film.

The climax was a joke. In fact a lot of it was just pointless. It's like going to a regular crap horror like Prom Night or Jeepers Creepers or something where nothing actually means anything and it's all just there to get you from point A to B with a couple of scares.

The main problem is that I have no reason to ever watch it again. I've seen it all. That's all there was. You can't go back and look at the fine detail because there was none!

Lol that I know of...

So plain and basic and arrgghh i'm gonna compare it to another film that I saw recently

10,000 BC

Yep.

Yeah that's the amount of depth. Thats's the characterisation. That's the acting. That's the excitement (that's actually unfair to BC).

I have one reason to be happy, and that's that it didn't end with "I should write a song about this" - which was the initial ending in The Green Effect script.

Just while i'm on that, based on how bad that script was I thought there was no way it could be official.

How wrong I was.

steinmansbrain

  • The Village

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 129
    • Email
Re: first impressions...
« Reply #96 on: June 18, 2008, 09:21:07 AM »
P.S.

There were some good parts  ;D

oglop44

  • Praying with Anger

  • Offline
  • *

  • 2
    • Email
Re: first impressions...
« Reply #97 on: June 18, 2008, 12:16:06 PM »
I'll write a proper response but I just want to say. Why do directors like B-Movies so much that they want to make them? By definition B-Movies are crap and sadly homages to crap movies are still, well crap.


GenPion

  • Unbreakable

  • Offline
  • ****

  • 58
    • Email
Re: first impressions...
« Reply #98 on: June 18, 2008, 12:23:19 PM »
The movie was still meant to scare you. It was still meant to make you think.

It's just that the premise is ultimately kind of silly and the nature of the movie is in that tone. Some will connect to The Happening's offbeat nature. Others will not.

B-Movies are not supposed to be inherently bad either, they are supposed to be a fun time at the movies...

Rulm

  • Futuristic (After Earth)

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 330
    • Twitter
Re: first impressions...
« Reply #99 on: June 18, 2008, 12:58:03 PM »
As much as this movie disappointed me, I STILL think it was better than "Lady in the Water". The reason being that Night's ego seemed to be deflating on with "The Happening"--contrary to "Lady in the Water".

okokokok

  • LITW

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 175
Re: first impressions...
« Reply #100 on: June 18, 2008, 12:58:42 PM »
Quote
I'll write a proper response but I just want to say. Why do directors like B-Movies so much that they want to make them? By definition B-Movies are crap and sadly homages to crap movies are still, well crap.

Actually, you are incorrect.  By definition they aren't crap.  It's a definition of the style, not the quality.

I guess some world class directors just don't have the obviously much more keen and sophisticated aesthetic eye that you do.

Namaste

  • Futuristic (After Earth)

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 3217
  • Personal Text
    The divine in me bows before the divine in you.
    • myspace
Re: first impressions...
« Reply #101 on: June 18, 2008, 01:55:11 PM »
I won't go into too much detail here to avoid spoilers, but it should be clear enough that those of you who have seen the movie will know what im talking about.
I've only seen The Happening once, so I wont have to go too deep to review it (unlike the village or signs or 6th sense) There were a few themes in it and I'm not exactly sure whether shyamalan was for or against them.

Number one: Comfort- the lengths to which we go, just to make the people we care about feel better (statistics, cafe/moodring scene, the "vibes" we give off whether positive or negative, talking with the 2 teenagers about life, not mentioning the happening to the students, the old lady who cut herself off from a world she didnt wanna deal with-ignorance).

Number two: Responsibility (the obvious environmentalist aspect, Leguizamo's character and going after his wife, Zooey's character's fear of commitment, "don't you take my daughter's hand unless you mean it", Wahlberg's character and thinking about what needs to be done, The hotdog guy offering to help the Wahlberg party) 

These are just a few examples. I'm sure there are more. I agree that like most of M Night's work,  on the surface it's a crappy film, but underneath it is deep and beautiful. I didn't find this one technically brilliant like some of his other films; for example there were camera shades and boom microphones in a number of shots, and they were hard to miss. The special effects were mediocre and made me wish shyamalan would stick to pg-13 cuz he really doesnt know what to do with blood and gore. There were a few ironic shots in the film (i.e. the [insert object] behind hotdog guys house and the billboard outside the model home), but overall I think it would have been better as a book.
See the villain's larger eyes insinuating a just-off-normal perspective on how they see the world? I see signs Lucius Hunt; just not as you see dead people. I am so very happy we saw..each other, and no I will not tell you what color love is. Stop asking.

GenPion

  • Unbreakable

  • Offline
  • ****

  • 58
    • Email
Re: first impressions...
« Reply #102 on: June 18, 2008, 02:55:20 PM »
I agree that like most of M Night's work,  on the surface it's a crappy film, but underneath it is deep and beautiful. I didn't find this one technically brilliant like some of his other films; for example there were camera shades and boom microphones in a number of shots, and they were hard to miss. The special effects were mediocre and made me wish shyamalan would stick to pg-13 cuz he really doesnt know what to do with blood and gore.

LOL - I'm sorry but this post made me laugh. In a good way (I want to share my opinion). ;D

It's okay if your opinion is that most of his film's are crappy on the surface, I don't want to suggest your wrong for thinking that. A lot of people consider all of his films nothing more than extended Twilight Zone episodes... but I just wanted to comment on that. I've never had that thought! I think his film's are so well made that they can be enjoyed for people simply looking to find straight-up entertainment and for those of us who are willing to dig deeper to understand his film's themes that is another level of entertainment, another factor of enjoyment that we can get from his work that is separate from most of his film's surface levels. Signs and The Happening, for instance, are both extremely well directed movies that are meant to be scary and run chills down your spine. Audiences, people in general, can connect to that without even having to think about any deeper meaning that may exists beneath the surface. I have always felt M. Night is in a rather strange way an indie director in nature and yet a highly mainstream film-maker at the same time for this reason alone. He wants large audiences to enjoy his films and I have never seen harm in that. The more that see them the better IMHO. He is ambitious enough that he wants to entertain people and enlighten at the same time.

As for Special Effects - He has NEVER been good with them! He has even acknowledged this in interviews. It is his weakness. He tries to stay away from using them too much because it has been a bit of crutch for him as a film-maker, though I hope that over time he will find a fine-balance for how he uses them in his future movies. As for the effects looking too fake in this movie though, I would kind of guess (though I could be wrong) that it has more to do with the fact this was meant to be a B movie. A great one, yes, but a B movie nonetheless... and a lot of those films have strange effects. I personally think The Happening had better effects than most of his other movies have had.

Finally, to address the boom mikes and microphones - they are visible in a number of movies - not all - but a large number of films. It depends on how much the director tries to cover them up and how the film gets projected. This has happened in other Shyamalan films. The projectionist did not frame the movie right for your theater because they are supposed to be able to cover it up if they are properly projecting it. It's a problem with the theater, not Shyamalan. Once you get the movie on DVD or Blu-Ray this won't be the case and you will be able to enjoy the film without that kind of unfortunate set-back. I'm sorry to hear your theater didn't frame it correctly, though, as boom mics and such have been more visible in Shyamalan films than others If I remember correctly... but once again, it is not a problem with the film itself.

DILinator

  • The Happening

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 211
Re: first impressions...
« Reply #103 on: June 24, 2008, 03:52:56 PM »
The "boom mike" thing gets me every time.  Because for all the movies I've seen, I've never seen any in a movie, not even when people start talking like they're everywhere.  Certainly, neither showing of The Happening I saw had any in the shot.  I think that either the projectionist was sloppy in some theaters, or people who are "hating" on the movie make that up just to have another thing to complain about from the movie.
"See what you have to ask yourself is what kind of person are you? Are you the kind that sees signs, sees miracles? Or do you believe that people just get lucky?"

I'm a "Signs" person.

Mille

  • Guest
Re: first impressions...
« Reply #104 on: June 24, 2008, 04:06:22 PM »
The "boom mike" thing gets me every time.  Because for all the movies I've seen, I've never seen any in a movie, not even when people start talking like they're everywhere.  Certainly, neither showing of The Happening I saw had any in the shot.  I think that either the projectionist was sloppy in some theaters, or people who are "hating" on the movie make that up just to have another thing to complain about from the movie.

The boom mic was very much visible in quite a few scenes in the theater where I watched it. I was actually getting really upset because people started raising their hands to point at it!  >:( And some started laughing as well... It almost made me think that Shyamalan was borrowing some ideas from Bertold Brecht. ;D