• Categories

Vanilla 1.1.4 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

 
  1. FalkirkBairn wrote
    Watched The Village last night on TV for the first time and, even though I knew what the "twist" was, I enjoyed it very much. Anne had suspicions as to what this twist was as the movie went on but enjoyed it also.

    A criticism was that it seemed to end quite hurriedly.


    The Village is probably one of the best movies I´ve ever seen. People still seem to concentrate on those surprise effects in M.Night´s movies, but continue to miss the much deeper meaning of those stories. The Village was bashed for not being spooky enough, but people missed that it was a movie about fear, and a quite spectacular one I might add. There are so many different things that sprang into my mind after I saw it the first time, and continue to do so everytime I think of it. M.Night is my favourite director when it comes to atmospheric and dramatic impact, and I dearly love every single one of his movies. Yes, even Lady in the Water, which is a brilliantly constructed modern fairy tale that announced why it would bomb in its prologue: Mankind has just forgotten how to listen...
    •  
      CommentAuthorNautilus
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2008
    Timmer wrote
    Erik Woods wrote
    FalkirkBairn wrote
    I watched the first 20 minutes or so of Sin City - hated it!


    Wow! I think it's a wonderful movie. But then again, I was a comic book nerd as a kid.

    -Erik-


    I liked it too! It seems to be one of those films where people love it or hate it without much views inbetween?


    I like it too.

    Im not a great fan of this kind of "videogame" movies , but this movie is simply brilliant. I enjoyed very much every single story and design.

    I recently viewed Close Encounters

    It was a long time since my last view, it's one of the best movies from Spielberg and one of the best UFO's movies ever made.

    I don't find this movie so perfect like everyone says, but it's a really , really good one. Trumball Special Effects helps a lot....they are a piece of Art.

    ( the scene where Dreyfuss character is putting some trees and sand in the house is only in the director's cut ,righ? I think it's a ridicolous scene )
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2008
    I was really impressed with Sin City as well.
    Having only read Frank Miller's graphic novel afterwards, I only appreciated later how well it was translated to the screen. While I did think it was a bit episodic (especially towards the end) I still liked it a lot!

    The Village is probably one of the best movies I´ve ever seen. People still seem to concentrate on those surprise effects in M.Night´s movies, but continue to miss the much deeper meaning of those stories.


    I agree.
    I've said it before on "that other site": The Village is one of the most thought provoking films on communication... or rather the inability to communicate I've seen in a long time. Every single character in that film in some way is unable to connect (directly) with its surroundings. Lies, facades and physical handicaps all hamper a clear view, most painfully and harrowingly made clear by a blind girl who of course has no "view" per se at all.
    Great film.

    RV: The Last King Of Scotland
    Apparently based on a true tale, this is the story of Nicholas, a very young medical graduate who in 1970 leaves for Uganda to sow his wild oats (oh yeah, and help out a bit), and somehow gets caught up in Idi Amin's inner circle, working as his personal doctor, advisor and confidente.
    The acting is absolutely superb (especially by Forest Whittaker as the psychotic Amin), and the story is told involvingly and intelligently without any sensationalism: even with the benefit of 20-20 hindsight, we only slowly find out Amin's true horrific nature as the web tightens around young Nicholas.
    Very sympathetically filmed (it is quite impossible not to empathise with Nick), and a very compelling experience throughout.

    Excellent movie, and highly recommended.
    The sets and photography are beautiful. The score mainly consists of (existing?) African folk songs.
    A very ample 4 out of 5
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
    •  
      CommentAuthorNautilus
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2008
    Martijn wrote

    The Village is probably one of the best movies I´ve ever seen. People still seem to concentrate on those surprise effects in M.Night´s movies, but continue to miss the much deeper meaning of those stories.


    I agree.
    I've said it before on "that other site": The Village is one of the most thought provoking films on communication... or rather the inability to communicate I've seen in a long time. Every single character in that film in some way is unable to connect (directly) with its surroundings. Lies, facades and physical handicaps all hamper a clear view, most painfully and harrowingly made clear by a blind girl who of course has no "view" per se at all.
    Great film.



    In my opinion Shaymalan's best movie.
    • CommentAuthorTimmer
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2008
    Nautilus wrote
    Martijn wrote

    The Village is probably one of the best movies I´ve ever seen. People still seem to concentrate on those surprise effects in M.Night´s movies, but continue to miss the much deeper meaning of those stories.


    I agree.
    I've said it before on "that other site": The Village is one of the most thought provoking films on communication... or rather the inability to communicate I've seen in a long time. Every single character in that film in some way is unable to connect (directly) with its surroundings. Lies, facades and physical handicaps all hamper a clear view, most painfully and harrowingly made clear by a blind girl who of course has no "view" per se at all.
    Great film.



    In my opinion Shaymalan's best movie.


    While I don't think it's his best movie ( I love Unbreakable ) it's great to see The Village getting the support I believe it deserves, damn good score too cool

    Talking of Shaymalan's films, did anyone else guess "the twist" in The Sixth Sense before the ending? I had it nailed from the opening scenes, that's what happens when people who've seen the movie before you all say "you'll never guess the surprise ending", so as soon as the film starts that's EXACTLY what I'm looking for rolleyes
    On Friday I ate a lot of dust and appeared orange near the end of the day ~ Bregt
    •  
      CommentAuthorNautilus
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2008
    Timmer wrote


    Talking of Shaymalan's films, did anyone else guess "the twist" in The Sixth Sense before the ending? I had it nailed from the opening scenes, that's what happens when people who've seen the movie before you all say "you'll never guess the surprise ending", so as soon as the film starts that's EXACTLY what I'm looking for rolleyes


    yes, Because a very funny guy screamed (is this the past of this verb?) the ending when I was buying the ticket....so...
    •  
      CommentAuthorRalph Kruhm
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2008 edited
    Martijn wrote
    The Village is one of the most thought provoking films on communication... or rather the inability to communicate I've seen in a long time.

    Impressing. I never even thought about that one, though it is quite obvious. For me it was all about fear and how civilization is ruled, manipulated, and enslaved by it. That alone was enough to keep you thinking about whether we live inside or outside of the wall...

    Timmer wrote
    Talking of Shaymalan's films, did anyone else guess "the twist" in The Sixth Sense before the ending? I had it nailed from the opening scenes, that's what happens when people who've seen the movie before you all say "you'll never guess the surprise ending", so as soon as the film starts that's EXACTLY what I'm looking for.

    This is exactly what happened to me as well. Thinking about 'oh, what if this was the surprise?' and checking for clues was fun enough, though, so I enjoyed it as much as everyone else... smile
  2. Nautilus wrote
    yes, Because a very funny guy screamed (is this the past of this verb?) the ending when I was buying the ticket....so...


    Well, in cases like those, the dealth penalty doesn´t seem too harsh, does it?
    • CommentAuthorTimmer
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2008
    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    Nautilus wrote
    yes, Because a very funny guy screamed (is this the past of this verb?) the ending when I was buying the ticket....so...


    Well, in cases like those, the dealth penalty doesn´t seem too harsh, does it?


    LOL! biggrin
    On Friday I ate a lot of dust and appeared orange near the end of the day ~ Bregt
  3. Nautilus wrote
    screamed (is this the past of this verb?)

    Sorry, I missed that. Yes, it is.
    •  
      CommentAuthorErik Woods
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2008 edited
    Nautilus wrote
    Martijn wrote

    The Village is probably one of the best movies I´ve ever seen. People still seem to concentrate on those surprise effects in M.Night´s movies, but continue to miss the much deeper meaning of those stories.


    I agree.
    I've said it before on "that other site": The Village is one of the most thought provoking films on communication... or rather the inability to communicate I've seen in a long time. Every single character in that film in some way is unable to connect (directly) with its surroundings. Lies, facades and physical handicaps all hamper a clear view, most painfully and harrowingly made clear by a blind girl who of course has no "view" per se at all.
    Great film.



    In my opinion Shymalan's best movie.


    Oh good lord! Shyamalan's best movie? A thought provoking film? The Village is easily one of the worst films I have ever seen... saved from being the absolute worst by Bryce Dallas Howard's lovely performace. The plot is so transparent. The direction is laughable. The cinematography is just plain bad. The action scenes with Howard's cheese ball music is unintentionally funny. The pace is ridiculously slow with some absolutely terrible dialogue. The climax... which every one going to film is expecting because it's a Shyamalan film... is beyond anti-climactic. You know, I probably would have preferred the "It's All A Dream" climax over the one that Shyamalan fed to us. While some of you managed to dig a little deeper and may have some valid points on communication and fear unfortunately the bad out way the handful of good things the Shyamalan managed to get out of this horrible and just plain old dull film.

    As for Shyamalan's best film... look no further that Unbreakable. Shyamalan takes the best part of a comic book movie - the genesis of the superhero - and brilliantly stretches it out into a 2 hour masterpiece. While the movie is almost ruined by the TERRIBLE title card at the end of the film, the 2 hours preceding is an absolute delight. And Howard's modern touch on the super hero score is perfectly crafted.

    -Erik-
    host and producer of CINEMATIC SOUND RADIO | www.cinematicsound.net | www.facebook.com/cinematicsound | I HAVE TINNITUS!
    •  
      CommentAuthorDemetris
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2008
    Nautilus wrote
    Martijn wrote

    The Village is probably one of the best movies I´ve ever seen. People still seem to concentrate on those surprise effects in M.Night´s movies, but continue to miss the much deeper meaning of those stories.


    I agree.
    I've said it before on "that other site": The Village is one of the most thought provoking films on communication... or rather the inability to communicate I've seen in a long time. Every single character in that film in some way is unable to connect (directly) with its surroundings. Lies, facades and physical handicaps all hamper a clear view, most painfully and harrowingly made clear by a blind girl who of course has no "view" per se at all.
    Great film.



    In my opinion Shaymalan's best movie.


    I totally agree.
    Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders.
  4. I love you all. beer

    To Erik: Your criticisim of the 'climax' is totally off. Only because you expect Shyamalan to have a surprising and spectactular climax he doesn´t have to do it. Instead he wrote a very moving sequence where two worlds collide in a beautiful scene that consists of care, silence, astonishment, wonderment. Call it anti-climax, I call it breath-takingly quiet - which is pitch-perfect when you think of the main character. Think about why Howard didn´t write an 'oh-what-a-big-surprise'- track for the scene, but one of the most moving pieces of film music ever (Track 5 on the score).

    Beyond that, I won´t comment, because - between us - I know I won´t change the fact that you "get" it or not. I know better than to play missionary on Shyamalan movies, since it´s a lost cause. People either get them or not, there is not much to be done about it. Unbreakable, for example. Yeah, its a genesis of a superhero. Hurray. But there is so much beyond that I can´t breath during the whole movie. I just hope that Night never stops doing them the way he does.
    •  
      CommentAuthorErik Woods
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2008 edited
    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    To Erik: Your criticisim of the 'climax' is totally off. Only because you expect Shyamalan to have a surprising and spectactular climax he doesn´t have to do it.


    it's not off at all. That's Shyamalan's calling card especially after The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable. The audience was expecting another shocking ending and Shaymalan was leading up to it during the entire The Village. And when the reveal was made it's total waste of your time because you have basically figure this all out 15 minutes into the movie. Weak!!!

    Anyway, I'm in the minority here at maintitles.net. But I do know that a lot more people outside of this "Village" hate the movie than like it.

    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    I just hope that Night never stops doing them the way he does.


    I hope he does. It's time for a romantic comedy to set him straight. So much potential (The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable) but has since given us utter nonsense in The Village, Signs (there were some good moments) and the worst of the worst, Lady in the Water. Time for Shyamalan to get over himself and do something small.

    -Erik-
    host and producer of CINEMATIC SOUND RADIO | www.cinematicsound.net | www.facebook.com/cinematicsound | I HAVE TINNITUS!
  5. Nautilus wrote
    I recently viewed Close Encounters

    It was a long time since my last view, it's one of the best movies from Spielberg and one of the best UFO's movies ever made.

    I don't find this movie so perfect like everyone says, but it's a really , really good one. Trumball Special Effects helps a lot....they are a piece of Art.

    ( the scene where Dreyfuss character is putting some trees and sand in the house is only in the director's cut ,righ? I think it's a ridicolous scene )


    This has to be one of my faves as well... Loved it as a kid, the whole UFO thing really made my mind go nuts back then, now I see it as a fantastic escape to some alternate reality, where we are not alone and can dream about a better world. Spielberg's direction is second to none, the special effects still hold up to this day, and need I say the score is heavenly and truly one of Williams' best.

    I bought it on blu-ray recently: it's a great box with all 3 known versions of the movie: theatrical, special edition and director's cut. I really want to see the extended ending in the mothership again, because I think it's great, though I understand why Spielberg cut it out in his final version.

    And the scene you talk about, Nautilus, is just there to emphasize the level of obsessive behavior the main character goes through. I'm sure anyone obsessive enough with anything has done something ridiculously similar in his life. To my knowledge it's only in the DC.
    "considering I've seen an enormous debate here about The Amazing Spider-Man and the ones who love it, and the ones who hate it, I feel myself obliged to say: TASTE DIFFERS, DEAL WITH IT" - Thomas G.
  6. I can´t help it. I´m going nuts here. crazy

    Erik Woods wrote
    That's Shyamalan's calling card especially after The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable.

    So those films were good just because of their shocking endings? You really believe that? What´s Spielberg´s calling card then? Is Schindler´s List a bad movie because it´s black and white? Because it has no effects? No fantasy elements? Is a director not allowed to step away from a formula that he only used once, maybe twice, in the first place?

    The audience was expecting another shocking ending

    That´s their own problem.

    and Shaymalan was leading up to it during the entire The Village.

    He wasn´t.

    And when the reveal was made it's total waste of your time because you have basically figure this all out 15 minutes into the movie.

    Exactly. How come no one noticed before the movie´s release? rolleyes

    Anyway, I'm in the minority here at maintitles.net. But I do know that a lot more people outside of this "Village" hate the movie than like it.

    And you really think that makes your opinion more valid? The majority is always right? Then I guess the people of the United States of America were right to elect George W. Bush? Twice?

    Time for Shyamalan to get over himself and do something small.

    How small do you want it to get? Signs is about one single man finding faith again (and NOT about an alien invasion). Lady in the Water is about one single man finding himself again (and not about a mermaid going to heaven).
    •  
      CommentAuthorErik Woods
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2008 edited
    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    I can´t help it. I´m going nuts here. crazy


    Well, you are for thinking The Village is one of the best movies ever made! wink

    Erik Woods wrote
    That's Shyamalan's calling card especially after The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable.


    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    So those films were good just because of their shocking endings? You really believe that? What´s Spielberg´s calling card then? Is Schindler´s List a bad movie because it´s black and white? Because it has no effects? No fantasy elements? Is a director not allowed to step away from a formula that he only used once, maybe twice, in the first place?


    You are putting words into my mouth there, Ralph!!! I never said that just because the shock ending didn't work that the film was crap. I outlined the other reasons why the film blew in my initial post. Might wanna go back and read it again.

    As for stepping away from formula... that's exactly what I'm hoping this guy will do. But each and every one of his films sets-up a surprise or twist ending. And the one in The Village was terrible!!!

    and Shaymalan was leading up to it during the entire The Village.

    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    He wasn´t.


    Yes he was. YES HE WAS!!!

    And when the reveal was made it's total waste of your time because you have basically figure this all out 15 minutes into the movie.

    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    Exactly. How come no one noticed before the movie´s release? rolleyes


    What are you talking about? That makes no sense whatsoever. I was talking about while watching the movie. Within 15 minutes you know, based on Shyamalan's calling card, that there was going to be a twist and with a little commonsense the twist was easy to figure out.

    Anyway, I'm in the minority here at maintitles.net. But I do know that a lot more people outside of this "Village" hate the movie than like it.

    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    And you really think that makes your opinion more valid? The majority is always right? Then I guess the people of the United States of America were right to elect George W. Bush? Twice?


    Yes... that's right, Ralph! That totally validates my opinion. Boy, are we just a little touchy today? BTW, only 50% of American's voted for that moron the second time so half of the country was right and half was wrong. The people who voted for him were wrong... but let's not bring politics into this.

    As for my statement... all I'm saying is that a lot of my feelings are shared with a good majority of people out there who have seen the movie but here I'm in the minority.

    Time for Shyamalan to get over himself and do something small.

    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    How small do you want it to get? Signs is about one single man finding faith again (and NOT about an alien invasion). Lady in the Water is about one single man finding himself again (and not about a mermaid going to heaven).


    Uh Huh? You go on believing that!

    -Erik-
    host and producer of CINEMATIC SOUND RADIO | www.cinematicsound.net | www.facebook.com/cinematicsound | I HAVE TINNITUS!
    •  
      CommentAuthorErik Woods
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2008
    DreamTheater wrote
    And the scene you talk about, Nautilus, is just there to emphasize the level of obsessive behavior the main character goes through.


    Bingo!

    -Erik-
    host and producer of CINEMATIC SOUND RADIO | www.cinematicsound.net | www.facebook.com/cinematicsound | I HAVE TINNITUS!
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2008
    Erik Woods wrote
    ... here I'm in the minority.


    Exactly!
    So shut up, or we'll beat you up! biggrin
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
    •  
      CommentAuthorErik Woods
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2008
    ^ 9 words! That's it? I expected much more... biggrin

    -Erik-
    host and producer of CINEMATIC SOUND RADIO | www.cinematicsound.net | www.facebook.com/cinematicsound | I HAVE TINNITUS!
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2008
    Evidently yet another disappointment you'll just have to contend with after the letdown that was The Village...
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
  7. I normally pick out the twists of films some way off - for example, both THE SIXTH SENSE and UNBREAKABLE. (Having said that - if you know there is a twist, it's not hard to work it out first time round.) I didn't really predict the modern world twist of THE VILLAGE coming until a few minutes before it happened. Guess I was just caught up in the romance. Mind you, I knew the monsters weren't real - they didn't look very real at all, and behaved too human-like.

    I do love the music of that film, and it's a film that suggests Bryce Dallas Howard and Joaquin Phoenix should make more films as an on-screen couple.
    A butterfly thinks therefore I am
    •  
      CommentAuthorRalph Kruhm
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2008 edited
    I just killed my whole post by accident before I could send it. crazy

    I´ll go for a short version then...

    1) I put nothing in your mouth, I was just referring to the calling card thing. Yes, he uses surprises in his movies. I wished more directors would do it, maybe then it wouldn´t be called a calling card if a writer choses to surprise his audience a bit. But his movies are NOT about the surprises. That was what I was saying. If people look only for the obvious effect they won´t find one in some of his movies because THEY ARE NOT THERE. BY INTENTION.

    1b) I COULD say a lot about the other points you made (cinematography and stuff) if you were not so painfully wrong about it that I must ask you if you actually cared to look instead of searching for surprise endings.

    2) Don´t you think somebody - actors, producers, composer, effect guys, whoever - would have noticed that the movie is not surprising BEFORE the movie was released (that´s what I meant)? It is not. BY INTENTION.

    3) I´m well aware of the majority´s opinion about the more recent Shyamalan movies (as I said well above; maybe you should read MY posts again...? wink It´s just that your statement has no reasoning effect whatsoever on the discussion, that´s why I was asking for more validation than sheer numbers. But you´re right. I shouldn´t have gone political.

    4) I do not need to believe what those movies were about, because Shyamalan said it himself at each given opportunity what they were about.

    5) I´m not touchy. I´m crazy Not your fault.

    Well, yeah, forget it. It´s all your fault. wink
    •  
      CommentAuthorErik Woods
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2008 edited
    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    1b) I COULD say a lot about the other points you made (cinematography and stuff) if you were not so painfully wrong about it that I must ask you if you actually cared to look instead of searching for surprise endings.


    Yes, I do. But when everything (well, not everything in this movie but a lot) of the devices use to tell the story are so far off and bad like they are in The Village then it distracts from the "hidden" meanings and deeper emotions. The Village was just terrible story telling.

    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    2) Don´t you think somebody - actors, producers, composer, effect guys, whoever - would have noticed that the movie is not surprising BEFORE the movie was released (that´s what I meant)? It is not. BY INTENTION.


    Maybe they did. I mean, the reviewers and critics were told and I think had to sign a waver that they wouldn't mention the surprise ending or any part of the film's resolution. Now, I know that critics most of the time DON'T reveal the spoilers but to go as far and get them to sign something... well, if the film ISN'T about the surprise ending then why go to such length to make sure nobody says anything. Answers simple, Shyamalan's movies are all about the surprise ending which is sad because yes in some of the films there is more to it. But the surprise ending is Shyamalan's calling card. How many of his movies DON'T have the surprise ending? ZERO!!! While in some cases it REALLY works... The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable... because everything leading up to it is so well done. Unfortunately, it doesn't work in The Village because it's such a poor film.

    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    3) I´m well aware of the majority´s opinion about the more recent Shyamalan movies (as I said well above; maybe you should read MY posts again...? wink It´s just that your statement has no reasoning effect whatsoever on the discussion, that´s why I was asking for more validation than sheer numbers. But you´re right. I shouldn´t have gone political.


    All I was saying was that I'm in the minority at this board where everyone here loves the movie while outside of this board I seem to agree with a majority of the people who hated it. Anyway...

    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    4) I do not need to believe what those movies were about, because Shyamalan said it himself at each given opportunity what they were about.


    I still say bah! I mean, you can say the same damn thing about every movie made. I mean, even though Spielberg says that E.T. is about divorce is that the reason why you like the movie? I'm sure that if Spielberg hadn't mentioned divorce when talking about E.T. then none of us would have even thought about it.

    -Erik-
    host and producer of CINEMATIC SOUND RADIO | www.cinematicsound.net | www.facebook.com/cinematicsound | I HAVE TINNITUS!
  8. Erik Woods wrote
    But when everything (well, not everything in this movie but a lot) of the devices use to tell the story are so far off and bad like they are in The Village then it distracts from the "hidden" meanings and deeper emotions. The Village was just terrible story telling.

    Could it be that you judge the movie based on wrong assumptions? And that this includes the technicalities you might refer to?

    I mean, the reviewers and critics were told and I think had to sign a waver that they wouldn't mention the surprise ending or any part of the film's resolution.

    Disney/Touchstone made a lot of mistakes regarding to the public selling of this movie, possibly including the press junks. That´s why Shyamalan went away after that to direct for other companies in the future, because even Disney didn´t understand what The Village was about.

    Answers simple, Shyamalan's movies are all about the surprise ending which is sad because yes in some of the films there is more to it. But the surprise ending is Shyamalan's calling card. How many of his movies DON'T have the surprise ending? ZERO!!!

    Ehm... Signs? Lady? And do you really call it a surprise that Mr Glass was the bad guy? I could smell THAT one right from the beginning. If you want to stick to your believe that Shyamalan´s movies are all about the surprises, then we should end this discussion right here, because we won´t get anywhere.

    All I was saying was that I'm in the minority at this board where everyone here loves the movie while outside of this board I seem to agree with a majority of the people who hated it.

    Again, WHY did you say it if you didn´t want to use it as an argument that you´re right and I was wrong?

    I still say bah! I mean, you can say the same damn thing about every movie made. I mean, even though Spielberg says that E.T. is about divorce is that the reason why you like the movie? I'm sure that if Spielberg hadn't mentioned divorce when talking about E.T. then none of us would have even thought about it.

    Obviously. But if Spielberg choses to play silly, why does that automatically make Shyamalan doing the same? I mean, THINK about that for one second, dammit. Signs: How much do we really see about this invasion? And compared to that, how many scenes, lines and visuals are about faith? Every single emotional scene is about faith.
    Lady: The same again. The whole movie is bathing in the uncertainty of the main character. His fears, his sadness, his personal nightmares.
    Village: Shyamalan said it is about fear, not about pulling some spooks for the audience, but ABOUT fear as a subject. How we react to it. How we deal with it. What it makes of us. How it challenges us.
    You can´t honestly deny that the movies´ story is about that exactly. Or do you? You can continue quoting Spielberg´s rubbish or start thinking about the possibility that there MIGHT be more to those movies than you are just WILLING to see.
    •  
      CommentAuthorErik Woods
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2008 edited
    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    Erik Woods wrote
    But when everything (well, not everything in this movie but a lot) of the devices use to tell the story are so far off and bad like they are in The Village then it distracts from the "hidden" meanings and deeper emotions. The Village was just terrible story telling.

    Could it be that you judge the movie based on wrong assumptions? And that this includes the technicalities you might refer to?


    There is a possibility that I was expecting one thing and got the other which might have contributed to me not liking the movie but the technical end of the film flat out stunk. And when it comes to movie making all of those elements need to come to together to help tell the story. If they aren't all clicking together then that can easily take you right out of the movie. And The Village is littered with a lot of bad elements.

    However, I will say that I had no idea what Unbreakable was about and expected something complete different then what Shyamalan gave us but that film was so well made that I found myself enjoying it right to the end.

    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    Erik Woods wrote
    I mean, the reviewers and critics were told and I think had to sign a waver that they wouldn't mention the surprise ending or any part of the film's resolution.

    Disney/Touchstone made a lot of mistakes regarding to the public selling of this movie, possibly including the press junks. That´s why Shyamalan went away after that to direct for other companies in the future, because even Disney didn´t understand what The Village was about.


    Aha!


    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    Erik Woods wrote
    Answers simple, Shyamalan's movies are all about the surprise ending which is sad because yes in some of the films there is more to it. But the surprise ending is Shyamalan's calling card. How many of his movies DON'T have the surprise ending? ZERO!!!


    Ehm... Signs? Lady? And do you really call it a surprise that Mr Glass was the bad guy? I could smell THAT one right from the beginning. If you want to stick to your believe that Shyamalan´s movies are all about the surprises, then we should end this discussion right here, because we won´t get anywhere.


    But it worked in Unbreakable. Anyway, end of discussion.

    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    Erik Woods wrote
    All I was saying was that I'm in the minority at this board where everyone here loves the movie while outside of this board I seem to agree with a majority of the people who hated it.

    Again, WHY did you say it if you didn´t want to use it as an argument that you´re right and I was wrong?


    It was never about whether you're right or wrong. This is a discussion. We are having a discussion about The Village. I hate it, you love it, let's talk. I'm not trying to change your mind and that wasn't my intention and never is my intention... except when it comes to Jordi. wink

    Ralph Kruhm wroteYou can continue quoting Spielberg´s rubbish or start thinking about the possibility that there MIGHT be more to those movies than you are just WILLING to see.


    Whoa! Hold on there. First of all, it's not Spielberg rubbish. That's exactly what he says his film is about. Divorce. Why is that rubbish? It's a very personal film and damn well made one at that. Now look who needs to be a bit more open minded... wink

    As for finding a deeper meaning in films... look, I found them in all of the movies you have listed... but in a lot of the cases it's terribly done or just smacks you in the face where its so painfully obvious that you just want to reach out a strange the director for being so goddamn literal. And Lady is such a self-indulgent piece of trash that it makes Kevin Costner self love in The Postman look like an Oscar winner. And if you are trying to say something about fears, sadness and personal nightmares at least. for starts, write a good script.

    -Erik-
    host and producer of CINEMATIC SOUND RADIO | www.cinematicsound.net | www.facebook.com/cinematicsound | I HAVE TINNITUS!
    •  
      CommentAuthorThor
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2008
    I like THE VILLAGE for the most part.
    I am extremely serious.
    •  
      CommentAuthorRalph Kruhm
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2008 edited
    Erik Woods wrote
    The Village is littered with a lot of bad elements.

    Don´t agree. There are some minor problems, that´s all. None of that was at any time distracting from the movie´s topic.

    because even Disney didn´t understand what The Village was about.

    Aha!

    Which only proves that you would make a great member of the Disney Directory Board. tongue



    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    If you want to stick to your believe that Shyamalan´s movies are all about the surprises, then we should end this discussion right here, because we won´t get anywhere.

    But it worked in Unbreakable. Anyway, end of discussion.

    As a matter of fact, it didn´t. I thought this ending to be flat and quite unsatisfying, but not enough to make the movie itself a bad one. There was so much good in it that I could easily ignore the fact that I smelled that rat from the beginning, like in Sixth Sense. But because this is all about whether we judge his movies based on a well or worse executed plot device OR how well he inserted the subject into the whole movie, and we disagree on that, this discussion is, indeed, over.

    It was never about whether you're right or wrong. This is a discussion. We are having a discussion about The Village. I hate it, you love it, let's talk. I'm not trying to change your mind and that wasn't my intention and never is my attention...

    Not mine, sorry. I do discussions to exchange arguments and maybe make the other participant agree with me, not to train my abilities of free speech. If it becomes obvious that no agreement can be met, there´s no need to discuss any further, at least for me. Let´s agree to disagree, then, and be done with it. As I said in my very first answer. I still don´t know why I reacted to yours. Must be the autobot button... "must defend those movies at all costs... must defend..." dizzy

    First of all, it's not Spielberg rubbish. That's exactly what he says his film is about. Divorce.

    Which is exactly what I meant. WHERE is that in the movie? Beside one single remark by Elliot´s mom, there is NOTHING in the movie that obviously supports Spielberg´s statement.

    As for finding a deeper meaning in films... look, I found them in all of the movies you have listed... but in a lot of the cases it's terribly done or just smacks you in the face where its so painfully obvious that you just want to reach out a strange the director for being so goddamn literal.

    Ah, now there ARE deeper meanings? May I quote you again?
    I wrote:Signs is about one single man finding faith again (and NOT about an alien invasion). Lady in the Water is about one single man finding himself again (and not about a mermaid going to heaven).

    You wrote: Uh Huh? You go on believing that!

    So, what is it now? Now the meanings are so obvious you don´t care?

    And Lady is such a self-indulgent piece of trash that it makes Kevin Costner self love in The Postman look like an Oscar winner.

    Yeah, that´s a bad movie, too, is it? Hell, we´ve got different tastes, we too, don´t we? biggrin

    And if you are trying to say something about fears, sadness and personal nightmares at least. for starts, write a good script.

    My god, Lady´s Prologue alone made my hair stand up. Lady is great storytelling from start to finish.

    Let´s end this. There is no sense in continuing further. We´re just too different moviegoers, I suppose.
    •  
      CommentAuthorErik Woods
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2008
    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    Which only proves that you would make a great member of the Disney Directory Board. tongue


    Aha as in I didn't know that... not AAAAHA! I'm right!

    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    Which is exactly what I meant. WHERE is that in the movie? Beside one single remark by Elliot´s mom, there is NOTHING in the movie that obviously supports Spielberg´s statement.


    Have you ever been through one? And do you know why Spielberg made those comments? The concept came from an imaginary friend Spielberg created after his parents' divorced. I can absolutely see where Spielberg is coming from. Some children in a divorce isolate themselves from their parents and create imaginary friends as companions to help them through it all. E.T. is an extension of Spielberg's imaginary friend and his experience during his parents divorce. While that's NOT the main plot point of the film you can see why this is one of Spielberg;s most personal films and a well told film it is.

    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    Ah, now there ARE deeper meanings? May I quote you again?

    So, what is it now? Now the meanings are so obvious you don´t care?


    Oh good God! While these "hidden meanings" are present they just don't have any emotional impact do to the fact that the film is "terribly done or just smacks you in the face where its so painfully obvious that you just want to reach out a strange the director for being so goddamn literal."

    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    Yeah, that´s a bad movie, too, is it? Hell, we´ve got different tastes, we too, don´t we? biggrin


    You... you... cough... cough... liked The Postman?!?!?! shocked

    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    My god, Lady´s Prologue alone made my hair stand up. Lady is great storytelling from start to finish.


    Yikesiroonie!!!

    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    Let´s end this. There is no sense in continuing further. We´re just too different moviegoers, I suppose.


    Ok...

    -Erik-
    host and producer of CINEMATIC SOUND RADIO | www.cinematicsound.net | www.facebook.com/cinematicsound | I HAVE TINNITUS!
  9. Sorry Ralph. When someone stands up for LADY IN THE WATER, a line must be drawn in the sand, and we will be on opposite sides of it. That's a film for the 'true believers', not the film buffs.
    A butterfly thinks therefore I am