It's pretty easy to say I saw that coming when you watched the film, yeah really easy. After the fact

I actually like M. Night Shyamalan films so far, The Village isn't really the type of film I'd waste the time watching and my expectations are never high in this genre of film.

People are so picky anymore, that's why they can't enjoy anything.

Anyone with a brain can see the over use of plot fodder in Signs... C'mon... come clean. You don't need to say "HEy, I saw it coming" after the movie.

The first thing you see of merit in the movie is what? Water right? Why would you forget about it the whole movie? You wouldn't if you have an open mind and are a thinker.

M. Nights movies are standard fair in most formes... I don't like one them really, however signs was a decent movie. I thought the aliens were above average and kinda creepy. A little night of the living dead meets... fire in the sky kinda stuff.

However, the baseball bat -- him being a player -- the little girls obsession with water -- the stupid dad -- the kid who see's all -- C'mon, this is what he gave us before.

I'm not sold.

The only aspects of his movies I dont like is how (wont try to spell) HE tries to add supernatural phychological crap to his movies that sometimes isnt at all nessasary---like in certain parts of Signs. It didnt take away from the movie, it added to its running time.

Metaphor and allegory are useful tools and could really bolster some of the run of the mill horror scripts I have perused on these boards. While some are well written and adhere to the rules of the genre they are missing that subconcious mythology that Joseph Campbell teaches us in The Power Of Myth

Movies are always a window into what is going on in a particular society at the time. The thematic trends especially paralell the fears of that society.

In the 50's we were afraid of the Comunists and nuclear destruction. So, like I posted earlier, many mainstream films of the time followed a thematic trend of aliens and mutant monsters. The 60's brought out the great anti-establishment films like Easy Rider and Billy Jack. We were tired of blindly trusting authority as we did in the fifties and feared every value "the man" tried to uphold. In the 70's America was thrust deep into their fear of the sexual revolution hence the birth of the teen slasher film. Teens out having sex and living with morally casual attitudes got chopped into bits as in Halloween. We also had an out of control crime rate in the 70's and this brought on a rash of vigilante pictures. Deathwish, Taxi Driver, Assault on Precinct 13. To some extent NETWORK was a vigilante picture in its own MAD AS HELL NOT GONNA TAKE IT ANYMORE way. Films like Last House on the Left , I Spit on Your Grave and Mothers Day pulled an interesting twist by combining the slasher film with the vigilante film...nice trick!

With the 70's over and time to reflect on the tumult of Vietnam a rash of let's redo Vietnam our way films emerged in the 80's. Rambo, Missing in Action,. Of course the eighties were also the "ME" decade so there were plenty of films about rich whiney kids crying over their flat champagne. Less than Zero, St. Elmo's Fire, John Hughes Ad Nauseum.

So back to my belief that Shyamalan is onto something deeper than just a scary movie about creatures in the woods.  In the same way Romero chose to set Dawn of the Dead in a mall to make a statement about mall culture and rampant consumerism. Shyamalan is tapping into our current fears and uncertainties. Borders crossed, unknown cultures, suspicion, broken promises, territorial disputes all topics paralleling our current milaise
If Shyamalan is purposely structuring his film this way then he is a genius. If not then he is a tool of the genius known as our collective unconcious. Either way it's a lot of fun to deconstruct, observe and be entertained at the same time. Don't ya think?

Here is a review of SIGNS that delves into these ideas and suggests that SIGNS is subversively political. It's a bit heavy handed and long winded, but I generally agree.

http://www.geocities.com/redtheory/redcritique/SeptOct02/readingasrevelation.htm

This one sums it up a bit clearer:

http://www.geocities.com/~polfilms/signs.html

Well, I didnt know there was so much behind Signs. I just thought it was about guys dressed up in mediocre alien makeup trying to take over the world and screw over Mel Gibson.

YOU ARE RIGHT! It is about all those things...and a little more hidden beneath the surface.

Reminds me of that old TV film "The Lottery" based on the Shirley Jackson book.

I don't know.  I seriously came into this thread thinking "The Village" had really been released already somewhere in the world when it's July 30th in the U.S.  I was about to say, "Wha...?  Somebody go to a sneak or go to some premiere I don't know about...?"

But seeing as how this is primarily a debate thread, I'll just say thanks for the filmjerk article, Paula, and Baltis can ya quit with this personal agenda.  Look, B, not taking sides here, it's just become irksome to see whenever you've posted a remark in the same thread as she has, the whole thread takes on a distinctive negative tone and a fun debate becomes a "war against how arrogant she's being".

please - one friend to another - stop.  

i like your commentary, balt.  but i think it detracts when you take so much time and put so much energy into attacks on one person who should not even phase you.  we're a loving community here.  (at least once upon a time we were...what happened...)  lot of folks in hollywood don't like each other but just don't deal with each other.

i know you're ten times better than that.  


thanks.

-L

tbh I found Unbreakable, M. Night's best work, maybe it's because it's better than all the rest of the "superhero" movies :p
Sixth Sense was okay, and Signs was unbearable for me, but the directing was good, I just hate everything else.
The Village seems bad, but I'll watch it anyways.

Goose,
Good eye recognizing the apparent similarities between The Village and Shirley Jackson's short story. The Lottery is one of the most subversive and political pieces of literature of the 20th century. It attacks stagnant social rituals and values as well as the pointless violence that still plagues American society. It is as relevant today as it was when it first shocked those who read it in 1948.

I can't say if Shyamalan is giving a visual and thematic nod to Shirley Jackson's story until I see it, but I have to assume Shyamalan is a reader and knows Jacksons work, but maybe not. It will be interesting to see if their are any allusions to the story.

I'll be first in line to see this film!!

FOR ANYONE WHO WANTS TO READ THE STORY:
http://mbhs.bergtraum.k12.ny.us/cybereng/shorts/lotry.html

Have not seen the film yet, but my enthusiasm is waning.

Thought this bit from Roger Ebert's review was funny.

Speaking on the "TWIST" ending he wrote:

"It's so witless, in fact, that when we do discover the secret, we want to rewind the film so we don't know the secret anymore.
And then keep on rewinding, and rewinding, until we're back at the beginning, and can get up from our seats and walk backward out of the theater and go down the up escalator and watch the money spring from the cash register into our pockets."

I saw "the village" three times already - when it was called "The Sixth Sense", "Unbreakable" and "Signs". Seriously, I can't think of a filmmaker I like less than Shymalan - except maybe Tarantino. I've never understood the hoopla around those two.

But to each their own. I'm glad those who liked it liked it.

Vkonstant:

You don't like Tarantino?

That's an opinion I'd like to see the reasoning behind..do you feel, like many people, that all he does is rehash old movies?  Not like the violence?  Think his films are just plain stupid?  Please explain.

Paula:

I think the definitive 50s Communism scare movie is Invasion of the Body Snatchers.  And regarding the Shirley Jackson story, I would guess that perhaps Shyamalan incorporated it somewhat, either consciously or unconsciously.

Oh and I have high hopes for The Village.  I like Shyamalan.  Wasn't a huge Signs fan but thought Sixth Sense and Unbreakable were very good.

Heretic,

I won't say I don't like Tarantino - I've never met the man. But no, I don't like his films. I find them, without exception, to be overhyped, simplistic, pseudo-Orwellian, pop  culture invested socially consciousless drivel masquerading as cinema.

I like movies where you can walk out and have something to talk about - a point, a morality, a base. I have never found any of his films to have that foundation, nor have I seen any attempt to pursue such a genesis. What I have seen are conversations on Like A Virgin, Michael Madsen acting like a psycho, John Travolta lying about Amsterdam (hell, I lived there for a year and never once saw anybody but mayonnaise on french fries!), Uma Thurman doing - well, Uma Thurman and a prepubescent Asian swinging a Mace in Hollywood's version of a Sake Bar.

Useless, careless, pointless crap. But that's just me, and he's a millionaire with an Oscar, so what do I know?