"The Village"- No Spoilers

[Brack Craver]

"I didn't see anything in it that couldn't be condensed down to a 30 minute twilight Twilight Zone episode" That's exactly what I thought. Only you could take the worst Twilight Zone ever made and it would still be better than this debacle- and it wouldn't have cost 60 million to make. And you wouldn't have to shell out $9 to see it.

[Robert Knecht Schmidt]

I've always said it's important to rent Shyamalan movies on VHS that way you can watch them in fast forward.

[Marco Leavitt]

This is one of those times when I find I'm completely out of touch with most everybody. I didn't just kind of like this movie -- I loved it. Everything about it. But then, I came in late and missed nearly the first half. I may see it again, and who knows, maybe I'll change my mind, but so far, I think it's brilliant. I don't even understand why people say the twist is so silly and anti-climactic. But then, I think "From Dusk to Dawn" is brilliant too, so maybe I just lack taste. Everyone else seems to think that movie sucks.

[Patrick King]

Marco,

I'm with you, I liked it. You have to know going into one of his movies that three things are certain:

It will be a slow paced film.
Red means something.
He'll do a cameo.

All three, every time, like clockwork. If you go to a superhero movie and then complain about the movie being unrealistic, well duh! If you go to an M. Night Shyamalan movie, and expect it to be quick, you'll be disappointed.

If he directed a 30 second commercial it would run for 48 seconds. But it would probably make brilliant use of light and audio to make you gasp about something even though you knew it was going to happen.

Years from now film students will study the "M. Night Shyamalan Genre" like they do Hitchcock now.

[Luis Caffesse]

Just to be clear, I don't want to sound as if I was complaing
about the pace. I loved Sixth Sense, and Unbreakable...both
slow paced films. My problems with 'The Village' were more
based in the plot and the (lack of) character development. It had
nothing to do with the slow pace of the film.

By the way, I'm with you on 2 out of the 3 that you listed...but the
color red? I must have not paid much attention in the other 3
movies, but what significance did the color red have in his other
movies?

Just curious.


And as a side note, my 2 cents, people have compared M. Night
to Hitchcock from the beginning, and they still do so now. Unless
he changes up his style, I doubt we'll ever be studying the "M.
Night Shyamalan Genre." At least, not as long as he's viewed as
'another Hitchcock.' To define a genre I think you really have to
break new ground, and don' t think he's quite there.

[Patrick King]

Rewatch the Sixth Sense and notice the red doors and door knobs.

Rewatch Unbreakable and notice who is wearing red in the train station scene. Notice that the only folks not wearing grey/black/brown are the people who brush his hand.

[Yi Fong Yu]

well people compared brian depalma to hitchcock, but brian is no hitchcock. neither is night...

[Boyd Ostroff]

OK guys, I just got back from watching The Village so I'll join in the party here...

I went to see the film with my director friend Kay, and the fun thing was she'd never seen one of Shyamalan's films but I always thought she'd appreciate his style. When we got to the theatre at 8:30 we found that it was sold out, so we sneaked into Collateral and watched the last hour waiting for the next showing of The Village. This certainly provided a nice contrast as I can't imagine two films farther from each other in style.

In short, we both really liked The Village. It's fascinating to see the comments from some of you who didn't. I personally admired the fact that he took the time to develop the story and give the film such a thoughtful, well grounded treatment. My real fear was that we were going to see some ridiculous monsters running around the woods (like the aliens in Signs). But instead I found this to be a much more mature and less gimmicky film and think it's a step in the right direction after his last two. Kay was really impressed with the direction and production. I don't find the film "pretentious" as someone else suggested. But I suppose that's in the eye of the beholder.

After sitting through an hour of Collateral it was a welcome change of pace to watch something with less of a Hollywood feeling. I'll be interested to see what he comes up with next.

[Kevin Lee]

I happened to watch this over the weekend. My friend and i found his cameo appearance (a reflection shot) a bit of a wank.

Found it to be a well-made movie as it should, with the budget and resources it carries. But disliked a lot of jarring/mismatched shots throughout the flick, didn't fancy his over-use of back-of-the-head shots and his cheap raising-of-volume to scare the pants off the audience.

Saw another movie that we shall not speak of which was more provocative.

[Christopher C. Murphy]

Kevin...if we shall not speak of this film how can we all benefit from the potential enlightenment?

[Yi Fong Yu]

boyd, i'd like to know, what specifically did you (or k) like about the filck?

[Kevin Lee]

C C. Murphy
I risk not the bad colour of my cherished ones.
I bid u hush now. The towns people hear your words of curious bravado.

[Brack Craver]

"I bid u hush now. The towns people hear your words of curious bravado."
That's hilarious.

[Boyd Ostroff]

<<<-- Originally posted by Yi Fong Yu : boyd, i'd like to know, what specifically did you (or k) like about the filck? -->>>

Well I don't think I'm up for writing an in depth review, but will offer a few random comments. I liked the slow measured pace which others in this thread found boring. I liked the visual sense, although personally I found it a little too "designerly" at a few points (like the wedding party and multiple outdoor banquets).

I liked the allegorical treatment and think it was obvious that he didn't want you to take the film literally. I think he wanted to provoke some discussion and controversy with the subject matter. For example the title The Village immediately connected in my mind with Hillary Clinton's (in)famous "sometimes it takes a village" quote.

I liked the fact that he didn't rely so heavily on a plot gimmick in this film. Everyone now expects a plot twist towards the end of his films, and he managed to provide one, but in a less heavy-handed way this time. As others have pointed out, you have a pretty good idea of what is about to happen by the time you get to it.

I liked the treatment of the woods as a scary place where something horrible would happen to the villagers. This is an old theme in Hollywood that plays into urban/suburban America's fear of the unknown. The woods are dangerous and full of monsters and demented maniacs. How many horror/suspense movies can you think of with this premise? That's a topic which I have a personal fascination with since I live in the woods and spend as much time wandering away from civilization as I can. To me the woods feel safe and comforting, and this was especially topical when I saw the film last night. My friend lives in the city and we had to walk through some not-so-nice neighborhoods on the way to and from the theatre. Also a nice contrast to Collateral which had such a strong urban feeling.

I liked the symbolism of the blind girl and the guy who hardly ever spoke. And the notion that the whole future of the village was put in the hands of the blind girl who had to succeed in a seemingly impossible quest.

Now I don't know that I would argue that this is one of the "great" films, but I just liked it and was pleasantly surprised by it. This is one of those films that a lot of people will dislike because it is slow paced and doesn't fit the typical Hollywood summer genre very well. It's probably unfortunate that they released it this time of year; it made me think of the article I summarized in the following thread

[Josh Bass]

Let me throw my two cents in, and take a different direction.

First off, I thought it was pretty decent. The twist, I kinda saw it coming, but that might have been 'cause I've read too many threads on other forums, even though I didn't THINK I was reading spoilers. A little slow in some places, but that's Shammy for you.

I did want to point out the zooms (I think) that were used. What's up with zooms? Who zooms? Zooms are the devil! Why not use a dolly? I'm speaking mainly of the opening shot of the film. . .that was a long, slow zoom, no? There a few others, in other places. Seriously. . .why the zoom? Did Shammy's cousin take over the camera for that shot? Maybe I'm just a rabid anti-zoomite. I'll go to sensitivity training, no really.