Tell me i'm not the only one who sees this *spoilers*


Author Topic: Tell me i'm not the only one who sees this *spoilers*  (Read 9677 times)

okokokok

  • LITW

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 175
Re: Tell me i'm not the only one who sees this *spoilers*
« Reply #30 on: June 21, 2008, 11:40:42 PM »
Fair enough Namaste.

On a side note, if you don't mind, I am curious about you think are examples of major plot flaws in his movies.   PM me if you'd like, or you can reply here just as well.  I am just curious, and am not suggesting that there are not any flaws in M Nights plots.

marco

  • Futuristic (After Earth)

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 363
  • Personal Text
    "Look! A circle!" - "Yeah...what's the problem?"
Re: Tell me i'm not the only one who sees this *spoilers*
« Reply #31 on: June 22, 2008, 10:27:34 AM »
Well,I'm not sorry for me,Namaste.
I'd like to clarify only one thing: Shyamalan is my favourite writer/director and I've been watching his movies for almost ten years...Maybe I'm not as "educated" as you are (???),but one thing is sure: you cannot say that I'm not able to appreciate even one of his movies only because the best part for me in watching them is getting lost into the story.
Oh,and all the things you have listed (music,hidden messages,meaning of particular shots or colors,...) definitely add to the beauty of the story as already said by okokokok and spikeshinizle,but the fact that I didn't mention them doesn't mean that I can't appreciate them ;).
« Last Edit: June 22, 2008, 10:53:06 AM by marco »
"Welcome to The Cove"

marco

  • Futuristic (After Earth)

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 363
  • Personal Text
    "Look! A circle!" - "Yeah...what's the problem?"
Re: Tell me i'm not the only one who sees this *spoilers*
« Reply #32 on: June 22, 2008, 10:43:09 AM »
Did not mean to offend.


What?!?You've just said that I'm an uneducated person and you don't even know me!This is what I understand from your post above,tell me if I'm wrong.
"Welcome to The Cove"

srkbeno.1

  • Wide Awake

  • Offline
  • **

  • 16
Re: Tell me i'm not the only one who sees this *spoilers*
« Reply #33 on: June 22, 2008, 03:53:47 PM »
did anyone notice that when they run from the model home.. right after the lawn mower scene.. there is an advertisement for home sales that reads "You Deserve This".. coincdence?

Also in the old ladies bedroom with the doll.. there are tons of Jesus pictures.

Namaste

  • Futuristic (After Earth)

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 3217
  • Personal Text
    The divine in me bows before the divine in you.
    • myspace
Re: Tell me i'm not the only one who sees this *spoilers*
« Reply #34 on: June 22, 2008, 11:26:17 PM »
I'll mention the plot flaws in the two movies i own; Signs and The Village.

Signs: "we're highly-advanced, super intelligent interstellar farmers..Oh, here's a planet that is 70% made up of the most dangerous thing in the universe to us. Let's go there. AND not only that, let's go unarmed to capture humans by hand (by the way humans are 75% water themselves..dont get anything like blood or spit or sweat on you). I'm sure they dont have any guns or tanks or anything like that..we just don't want them to use their nuclear weapons." And besides the aliens, the whole "everything happens for a reason" premise is sort of a deus ex machina to explain away anything in the plot that doesnt seem logical..I mean it's a nice message but so many writers just use it as a crutch. Instead of giving the aliens a backstory, he might as well have said "they came unarmed and exposed because it was meant to be that way."


The Village: "Here's an idea..the world has become uninhabitable. It's just not worth it to live here anymore. Let's pick an arbitrary date when the world was somehow less evil and pretend we live there. Let's not take anything useful from our time period, like..I dunno medicine, or rubber-soled shoes. Oh and let's spend extra money to hide things that probably could be explained away easily enough by a few words..just to draw attention to ourselves in the papers. And let's just re-live history, not try to make a better history. No modern ideas or inventions, no additional focus on love or goodness to avoid the same progression of history. (well, ok the vegitarianism was a good effort)" And the "shed that is not to be used"..it makes about as much sense as the magic rocks did to Finton when it was just sort of tacked on as a plot device.

That being said, i really do enjoy Signs, and The Village is my second favorite movie of all time.

and Srkbeno, i DID notice that billboard!  I laughed out loud in the theater but I dont think anyone else got it.
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.

Wags

  • The Happening

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 236
Re: Tell me i'm not the only one who sees this *spoilers*
« Reply #35 on: June 22, 2008, 11:53:51 PM »
Wouldn't giving the aliens a backstory be kind of silly given that the whole movie focuses on the strife of the Hess family?  And as for the water thing, I'd like to state a hypothetical: what if we are the only other living planet on the galaxy, aside from where the aliens came from?  And, as we know, Night doesn't just put things in his movie to "fill up time". 

So, when Merril and Graham are just standing in the basement, listening to the story on the radio about aliens "dragging people away" or whatever, one can only assume that that is why the aliens came to earth in the first place, to harvest us.  Yes, water, blood, spit, etc., but there are ways to get rid of that stuff.  Like a space-strainer, or maybe people jerkey? 

While ultimately water is damaging to the aliens, I always wonder if it is actually deadly to them.  After all, yes the alien had an averse reaction to the water, but he also got a baseball bat broken against him by a hall-of-fame baseball player.  So that might come into play somewhere in there.

And I wouldn't necessarily call the "everything that happens for a reason" message of the film a deus ex machina, because Night hints back to it throughout the whole movie.  From wikipedia (I know, not the most reputable source, but bear with me): A deus ex machina (Latin IPA: [ˈdeːus eks ˈmaːkʰina] (literally "god out of a machine") is an improbable contrivance in a story. The phrase describes an artificial, or improbable, character, device, or event introduced suddenly in a work of fiction or drama to resolve a situation or untangle a plot (such as an angel suddenly appearing to solve problems, or the entire story having been just a dream one of the characters was having)." Given that definition, I find it really hard to deem that message a deus ex machina.

Just my opinion, though.  We're dealing with really subjective material here.

Namaste

  • Futuristic (After Earth)

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 3217
  • Personal Text
    The divine in me bows before the divine in you.
    • myspace
Re: Tell me i'm not the only one who sees this *spoilers*
« Reply #36 on: June 23, 2008, 12:08:05 AM »
Well the thing is, Shyamalan DID give the aliens a backstory indirectly through the stuff in that book on aliens which so conveniently happened to arrive in town, and that's where I'm getting my ideas on their motives, methods, etc.

If we humans, primitive beings that we are, were to find a planet of say..70% asbestos or hydrochloric acid..I think we would at least come in some sort of biohazard suit even just to look around, and even more so if we were planning to be involved in hand to hand combat with the locals who are chock full of it.

as for the deus ex machina..ok so it wasn't introduced suddnely..but my point is that it is quite handy for explaining away illogical occurrences, whether they be intentionally coincidental or unintentional.
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.

DILinator

  • The Happening

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 211
Re: Tell me i'm not the only one who sees this *spoilers*
« Reply #37 on: June 24, 2008, 10:55:56 AM »
Though there's lots of things here that I have some thoughts on, there are three things I want to comment on:

1) Some of the most "well educated" people I've known, are actually the stupidest people when it comes to logical thought process, and common sense.  Anybody who mistakes a piece of paper from "an institution of higher learning" as an indication of one's actual intelligence, is making a grave mistake, and a rather "uneducated" one at that. 

2) Nobody knows anything about aliens, other than silly theories which are really no more than fiction themselves.  So some book in a store, isn't going to give backstory on the specific aliens in the movie.  It's all just people's assumptions from...  well I don't know where people who write books like that get their assumptions, but in truth, they get them from their own imagination really, since it's not even a known fact that aliens exist.  As for how that pertains to Signs, I think analyzing the aliens too much is missing the point in the first place.  Even still, it's highly probable (within the construct of fictionalized aliens in the first place) that the aliens didn't realize the problem water posed to them until they came here, and started coming into contact.  So I've never agreed with the line of thinking that even regards that as a plot hole in the movie, since there's no reason why they SHOULD HAVE known, since they are products of the writer's imagination anyway.  It's not like we're discussing a known quantity here or anything....

3) As for the supposed "deus ex machina", I think that whole line of reasoning is something introduced by film snobs, and people who like to think that filmmaking fits into a box, and is not subjective in nature.  I don't agree with that line of reasoning, as it's a creative art, and cannot fit into a box created by some arbitrary assessor of what filmmaking "should be".  I also would contend that there's an attitude behind the "deus ex machina" line of thought which is athiestic, and says that all things in life are explainable, and can't be results of some "faith" or a higher power.  Considering that the entire message in Signs is about faith, if you refute the notion that faith and God are actual, living components of life, you've rendered the entire movie pointless.  Then you will find faith to be a plot contrivance.  However, I see things that would qualify as "deus ex machina" all the time in real life, so why wouldn't I (or Shyamalan) as a writer incorporate that into my stories.  It's as real as anything else in the story.
"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.

Namaste

  • Futuristic (After Earth)

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 3217
  • Personal Text
    The divine in me bows before the divine in you.
    • myspace
Re: Tell me i'm not the only one who sees this *spoilers*
« Reply #38 on: June 24, 2008, 11:50:26 AM »
1. Thank you for clearing up the difference between education and intelligence for the people who were getting offended. When I say "educated" I mean "educated". When I say "intelligent" I mean "intelligent".

2. There is no question (for anyone who understood the film) that the book was MEANT to characterize the aliens. Also, they had many advanced scouts (couldn't have just been the Hess farm and one in brazil) and there is no way that none of them came into contact with water.

3. I don't by any means say that "all things in life are explainable" but all things in a work of fiction should be. There is a general consensus that fiction has to make sense or it will be considered lazy writing. Why? Because it is a world created by the author, and he can choose what goes into it and what is revealed. Anything that does not pertain to the plot or the intended message in a way that makes sense is considered superfluous.
"The difference between fiction and reality? Fiction has to make sense." - Tom Clancy

Anyway, I liked the movie, and I do believe in faith and God's planning in real life.
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.

DILinator

  • The Happening

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 211
Re: Tell me i'm not the only one who sees this *spoilers*
« Reply #39 on: June 24, 2008, 11:56:41 AM »
2. There is no question (for anyone who understood the film) that the book was MEANT to characterize the aliens. Also, they had many advanced scouts (couldn't have just been the Hess farm and one in brazil) and there is no way that none of them came into contact with water.

3. I don't by any means say that "all things in life are explainable" but all things in a work of fiction should be. There is a general consensus that fiction has to make sense or it will be considered lazy writing. Why? Because it is a world created by the author, and he can choose what goes into it and what is revealed. Anything that does not pertain to the plot or the intended message in a way that makes sense is considered superfluous.
"The difference between fiction and reality? Fiction has to make sense." - Tom Clancy

Anyway, I liked the movie, and I do believe in faith and God's planning in real life.

You bring up a good point about the advance scouts, and you're right that they should have been able to warn the others.  So I'll concede that argument, even though I hold that the specifics about the aliens are rather unimportant to the story and point of the film.

I just do not agree (if I'm understanding you correctly) with the idea that all things in fiction should be explainable.  I write fiction, and make films, and have my entire life.  So this is a topic of great interest to me.  I think there are way too many people trying to force writing and filmmaking into a specific mold, and I do not agree with that line of thinking at all.  If you are just saying that everything should have an explanation, even if it is faith-based in nature, then I agree with you there.  However, in my opinion, writing things off to faith, angels, God, or anything of that nature is perfectly acceptable, and not a cop out or lazy writing.  In fact, that may the very point of the whole movie.  Maybe we're actually in agreement and just talking around each other, it's hard to tell.
"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.

Namaste

  • Futuristic (After Earth)

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 3217
  • Personal Text
    The divine in me bows before the divine in you.
    • myspace
Re: Tell me i'm not the only one who sees this *spoilers*
« Reply #40 on: June 24, 2008, 12:35:48 PM »
Fate is ok to use, I guess, as it has been used as a plot device almost since the beginning of storytelling itself. And divine intervention..I guess for me that is too "real life" for me to accept as a plot device, if you know what i mean..but looking at the film from a strictly secular point of view I would need all the results of fate/divine planning to be forshadowed in the film (like the water and the baseball and all the other obvious ones were). I think the idea behind all art is to take everyday unexplainable life and make some sense or order out of it. God is a very complicated person, and if you use him as a character, it has to be a fictional version of him rather than a force of nature which is free domain (i hope you're following me) because you can't write a part for God and expect him to play it. If you use God as a force of nature (or supernature as the case may be) it makes it hard to come away with a sense of order and logic to the work, due to the fact that God is very difficult to explain in concrete terms. To mix faith with art is a bold, and unconventional tactic indeed, as they are somehwat at odds with each other. Even modern art follows rules to a degree, on a psychological level...sorry I'm not really expressing my ideas very well lol but i hope you get the jist of what I'm trying to say.
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.

mamasan

  • Guest
Re: Tell me i'm not the only one who sees this *spoilers*
« Reply #41 on: June 24, 2008, 03:28:45 PM »
Did anyone comment on these two things yet?
The hot dog guy's name (the actor, that is) is "Frank," as in "frankfurter." And when Elliot looks down the road at the dead bodies, Alma asks him what he sees. Sure seems like his answer would have been "I see dead people." Is MNS goofing with us?  :D

DILinator

  • The Happening

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 211
Re: Tell me i'm not the only one who sees this *spoilers*
« Reply #42 on: June 24, 2008, 03:42:51 PM »
Fate is ok to use, I guess, as it has been used as a plot device almost since the beginning of storytelling itself. And divine intervention..I guess for me that is too "real life" for me to accept as a plot device, if you know what i mean..but looking at the film from a strictly secular point of view I would need all the results of fate/divine planning to be forshadowed in the film (like the water and the baseball and all the other obvious ones were). I think the idea behind all art is to take everyday unexplainable life and make some sense or order out of it. God is a very complicated person, and if you use him as a character, it has to be a fictional version of him rather than a force of nature which is free domain (i hope you're following me) because you can't write a part for God and expect him to play it. If you use God as a force of nature (or supernature as the case may be) it makes it hard to come away with a sense of order and logic to the work, due to the fact that God is very difficult to explain in concrete terms. To mix faith with art is a bold, and unconventional tactic indeed, as they are somehwat at odds with each other. Even modern art follows rules to a degree, on a psychological level...sorry I'm not really expressing my ideas very well lol but i hope you get the jist of what I'm trying to say.

I guess we're just going to have to agree to disagree I suppose, because I don't think mixing faith with EVERY aspect of life, including art, is at all at odds with one another.  In my latest film I'm making, the two are meshed, and I don't think it's at all untrue to how life can really play out.  God intervenes on behalf of those who follow him all the time, and depicting that in film doesn't seem like a stretch at all.  I have a real relationship with God, not an abstract one, so relating those things which I've seen, heard, and understand through the use of art is not difficult.  Maybe those with a more secular view will reject the movie because of that, but in the end, the film is not for those who don't have "ears to hear", so to speak.  I'm not sure how far we're allowed to wander into such topics, but considering the overwhelming amount of "faith based" messages in Shyamalan's movies, I would think we should be allowed some leeway.  I think it's all a matter of perspective, and what beliefs you bring to the table when approaching the discussion. 
"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: Tell me i'm not the only one who sees this *spoilers*
« Reply #43 on: June 25, 2008, 04:40:13 PM »
Quote
I'll mention the plot flaws in the two movies i own; Signs and The Village.

Signs: "we're highly-advanced, super intelligent interstellar farmers..Oh, here's a planet that is 70% made up of the most dangerous thing in the universe to us. Let's go there. AND not only that, let's go unarmed to capture humans by hand (by the way humans are 75% water themselves..dont get anything like blood or spit or sweat on you). I'm sure they dont have any guns or tanks or anything like that..we just don't want them to use their nuclear weapons." And besides the aliens, the whole "everything happens for a reason" premise is sort of a deus ex machina to explain away anything in the plot that doesnt seem logical..I mean it's a nice message but so many writers just use it as a crutch. Instead of giving the aliens a backstory, he might as well have said "they came unarmed and exposed because it was meant to be that way."


The Village: "Here's an idea..the world has become uninhabitable. It's just not worth it to live here anymore. Let's pick an arbitrary date when the world was somehow less evil and pretend we live there. Let's not take anything useful from our time period, like..I dunno medicine, or rubber-soled shoes. Oh and let's spend extra money to hide things that probably could be explained away easily enough by a few words..just to draw attention to ourselves in the papers. And let's just re-live history, not try to make a better history. No modern ideas or inventions, no additional focus on love or goodness to avoid the same progression of history. (well, ok the vegitarianism was a good effort)" And the "shed that is not to be used"..it makes about as much sense as the magic rocks did to Finton when it was just sort of tacked on as a plot device.

Thanks.  I was just curious as to what you thought were plot holes.