M. Night Shyamalan - why isn't there more love for this fine director? in Second Takes on Films of the 2000s Forum

0 Points

Forum Jump

M. Night Shyamalan - why isn't there more love for this fine director?

Author	Comment
Tyrannocaster		#21	[-]
Jan 12 09 8:24 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I'd certainly agree about Del Toro.
	Remove this ad
Siouxsie Sue		#22	[-]
Jan 12 09 8:44 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	You can keep his mainstream efforts, but I loved Pan's Labyrinth. I am not liking much modern horror at all, tho. I still enjoy Argento's work but I realise there is a cycle of diminishing returns. I suspect that looking away from America is the way to finding better things, but I don't do that nearly enough.
Koukol 5		#23	[-]
Jan 12 09 9:06 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I hate Del Toro's films too.
Siouxsie Sue		#24	[-]
Jan 12 09 9:28 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I don't like those Hellboy pictures. It's another blamed computer game fest. I'm over-saturated with that stuff. It's really boring me.
oldmanster		#25	[-]
Jan 12 09 10:41 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Larry Fessenden, Lucky McGee, Guillermo del Toro. Three filmmakers I enjoy over M. Night. Del Toro for sure -- Cronos, Blade II, Devil's Backbone, Pan's Labyrinth, both Hellboy films -- since he's developed a fine body of work to date. Fessenden shows a lot of promise, but only has two genre films under his belt. McGee...? Only thing that comes to mind is a less-than-adequate Masters of Horror segment. So... I agree with you re Del Toro, but the other two have yet to grow into Shyamalan's shoes. ... Reed
Omega Man		#26	[-]
Jan 13 09 3:44 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Joe Karlosi wrote: If I may be so bold, I think a common stigma I keep coming across (not just here, but everywhere I read) is that many people just cannot get past THE SIXTH SENSE, and it's against this successful hit that all of Shyamalan's subsequent pictures are judged. Well, I had a hard time getting through THE SIXTH SENSE. I guessed the "twist" right after Willis' character was shot, and afterwards all I could think was, "Rod Serling could do in 30 minutes what it took this guy two hours to do." ZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.... When I heard about the aliens/water angle in SIGNS, I decided that it was a picture I wouldn't waste my time on. "Dammit, it's jammed!" www.eccentric-cinema.com
Joe Karlosi		#27	[-]
Jan 13 09 7:01 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Siouxsie Sue wrote: I don't like those Hellboy pictures. It's another blamed computer game fest. I'm over-saturated with that stuff. It's really boring me. Oh, hell yes. I was furious watching BLADE II in the theater, crap like that. Nonstop video gaming... during that movie in the theater I did something I never would do and have never done, in all my 40+ years of theatergoing... I just leapt up in my seat at one point, pretending to grab two video game joysticks, as my wife tried to pull me back down into my seat. It was THAT frustrating. Which is the exact example of why I'm touting Shyamalan here... completely opposite styles.
Joe Karlosi		#28	[-]
Jan 13 09 7:05 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Omega Man wrote: Joe Karlosi wrote: If I may be so bold, I think a common stigma I keep coming across (not just here, but everywhere I read) is that many people just cannot get past THE SIXTH SENSE, and it's against this successful hit that all of Shyamalan's subsequent pictures are judged. Well, I had a hard time getting through THE SIXTH SENSE. I guessed the "twist" right after Willis' character was shot, and afterwards all I could think was, "Rod Serling could do in 30 minutes what it took this guy two hours to do." ZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.... . When I saw THE SIXTH SENSE I didn't know there was supposed to be a twist, otherwise I suppose I would have been actively searching for it, and may have figured it out. (I'm not saying this was the case with you; I'm sure you didn't know there was supposed to be a twist either but yet you probably still guessed what was going on). That's why I'm of the opinion that if a twist ending becomes the usual signature, it gets tired and then the viewer spends his time looking for it. But all that said, the great thing about THE SIXTH SENSE is that it rewards on subsequent views anyway, because once you know the ending you can re-watch it and it'll work well from another angle too, to see how it all fits. When I heard about the aliens/water angle in SIGNS, I decided that it was a picture I wouldn't waste my time on. That's a shame, since you never know - you might have found other things to admire in it. You can't really know without seeing a film through. Last Edited By: Joe Karlosi Jan 13 09 7:07 AM. Edited 1 times.
Omega Man		#29	[-]
Jan 13 09 7:28 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Joe Karlosi wrote: That's a shame, since you never know - you might have found other things to admire in it. You can't really know without seeing a film through. Absolutely true. I cannot say whether (in my opinion) the film is good or bad, because I have not seen it. But it's not a "shame". BTW: My wife absolutely loved SIXTH SENSE. It was one of the very first DVDs that she purchased and brought home. However, she thought SIGNS was "stupid" -- and hasn't watched another M. Night film since (that I'm aware of). "Dammit, it's jammed!" www.eccentric-cinema.com
Joe Karlosi		#30	[-]
Jan 13 09 7:31 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Well, the reason I saw SIGNS in the first place was because two people told me they'd loved it, and thought I'd like it too (which I did). One of these was a 50-ish horror/sci-fi fan who can't stand most pf the newer types of genre films, and he (like me) felt this was a return to form from the good ol' days. I agreed.
	Remove this ad
Tyrannocaster	Del Toro	#31	[-]
Jan 13 09 7:53 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Siouxsie Sue wrote: You can keep his mainstream efforts, but I loved Pan's Labyrinth. One Word: MIMIC
yendor1152		#32	[-]
Jan 13 09 9:45 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I, too, enjoyed--and really liked--The Sixth Sense. To me, the best scene is between the boy and his mom as they sit in the traffic jam. Great acting, very touching, and very well done. It was with much eagerness that I bought my ticket to Unbreakable, but the experience of actually seeing it left me strangely deflated. The real-life superhero concept was great, and I didn't mind the creation of a super-villain, but the film itself went on for way too long. Also, for an invulnerable superhero who couldn't be hurt, it was interesting that Willis had very clear earring holes in both ears. Then came signs. Great concept (at least, in the trailers) and immensely disappointing. The film had nothing to do with signs. Instead, it was a lame take on War of the Worlds, with a cheesy alien that didn't like what we're all so very used to...in this case, water. Plus, it was the THIRD film featuring the director himself as a cast member. I think THAT'S what really got to me. I began to see him more as a self-promoting egotist than a creative spirit. Certainly Hitchcock never gave himself lines and it was a wink and nod to the audience. With each new film, Shyamalan's parts grew bigger and bigger. My last experience with him was the totally deceptive The Village. Marketed as a horror film and soon revealed to be nothing more than a sham, it completely destroyed my interest in this new wunderkind. When I heard Ronnie Howard's daughter mumble, "the shed that must not be used," I almost lost it. Tripe all the way. And again, Night gave himself a role that stretched "cameo" beyond any definition I've ever heard, read of, or encountered. In between all this, there were commercials featuring the director and even TV "documentaries" exploring his "haunted" world. It was obvious to me that he set himself up as the new voice for horror in the 90's, bolstered by an ego that was rapidly growing to behemoth levels. He had a falling out with Disney because they didn't like his concept for Lady in the Water, even though they gave him his start and were the one's responsible for making him a superstar. They obviously knew better than he did, since the film was a monumental BOMB. Is he a good director? Yes. Is he a wunderkind? No, I don't think so. But that's how he sees himself. And when ego blinds everything else and good sense flies out the window, wunderkind directors wind up directing Nickolodean movies. Rod Last Edited By: yendor1152 Jan 13 09 9:48 AM. Edited 1 times.
Joe Karlosi		#33	[-]
Jan 13 09 9:48 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I don't think he should place himself in the movies, I'll give you that. I hate when Quentin Tarantino does it too.
Rakshasa		#34	[-]
Jan 13 09 10:07 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	yendor1152 wrote: Then came signs. Great concept (at least, in the trailers) and immensely disappointing. The film had nothing to do with signs. Instead, it was a lame take on War of the Worlds, with a cheesy alien that didn't like what we're all so very used to...in this case, water. I have to agree with you. In fact, I walked out of Signs before it was over at the theater. I remember all the pretentious stuff with the little girl (Dakota Fanning) irritating the hell out of me. Her spacey, goth-look coupled with her Spielbergian stares into the distance seemed so heavy handed and obvious to me, I felt my intelligence being insulted with every moment she was onscreen. I don't remember much else about why I despised this film enough to walk out on it (it was several years ago), but I can tell you that I never saw another one of his films after that, leaving Signs as my only exposure to the works of M. Night Shyamalan. I'm sure The Sixth Sense is great (as everyone I know who ever saw it loved it), but for some reason I never got around to seeing it. SPOILER ALERT****************** One thing I can say, the premise of The Sixth Sense (yes, I know the ending) sounds an awful lot like those of Carnival Of Souls and The Twilight Zone episodes "The Hitchhiker", "The Hunt", and the short film/Zone episode "An Occurrence At Owl Creek Bridge" to me. You know, the old "Oh my God! I've been dead all this time!" twist. Did any of you ever think that? Am I stating the obvious? In fact, I remember people telling me how blown away they were by the ending twist of The Sixth Sense and me saying "C'mon, didn't you ever see Carnival Of Souls and all those Twilight Zone episodes?! It's been done before!". To this people would roll their eyes and say "Yeah, whatever man...". Maybe that's why I never saw The Sixth Sense! Links To All The Classic Monster Stills I've Posted: http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/topic/30758 Last Edited By: Rakshasa Jan 13 09 10:16 AM. Edited 3 times.
Joe Karlosi		#35	[-]
Jan 13 09 10:20 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I know that THE SIXTH SENSE Is derivative. But I think CARNIVAL is one dull, overrated nothing of a film... so I prefer SIXTH. We can get into this "dervivative, been there, done that already" thing forever - we can do this with many films we all know and love. I'm sure there have been times I myself dismissed a film "because it's been done before", too. But yet, depending on how much we enjoy the rehash or not, we sometimes tend to give it a break. By the way - I wanted to add that what Rod said about Shyamalan's "self-importance", I feel, is another pre-determination for some people as to not being as open to his films these days. Some (not all) detractors have an instant thing against M Night, and their minds are sort of made up.
Rakshasa		#36	[-]
Jan 13 09 10:31 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Joe Karlosi wrote: I know that THE SIXTH SENSE Is derivative. But I think CARNIVAL is one dull, overrated nothing of a film... so I prefer SIXTH. We can get into this "dervivative, been there, done that already" thing forever - we can do this with many films we all know and love. I'm sure there have been times I myself dismissed a film "because it's been done before", too. But yet, depending on how much we enjoy the rehash or not, we sometimes tend to give it a break. By the way - I wanted to add that what Rod said about Shyamalan's "self-importance", I feel, is another pre-determination for some people as to not being as open to his films these days. Some (not all) detractors have an instant thing against M Night, and their minds are sort of made up. Joe ~ Let me explain my comments clearer. My point wasn't that I don't like some derivative things better than their sources, my point was that a lot of the people I knew credited The Sixth Sense with innovating that particular twist ending (obviously because they weren't familiar with those more obscure-to-the-common-movie-goer sources I mentioned above). This irritated me in a subjective way, making me feel like M. Night Shamalan was soaking up the credit for what to me was already an established, almost cliche' plot twist. Like I said, I'm sure The Sixth Sense is great. I just have that highly subjective grudge against it for stealing that twist ending from earlier sources. It's a Rakshasa "thing" and not too rational. BTW, I too think Carnival Of Souls is pretty boring, but I also think it is memorable and really cool for a myriad of reasons. Links To All The Classic Monster Stills I've Posted: http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/topic/30758 Last Edited By: Rakshasa Jan 13 09 10:36 AM. Edited 2 times.
Siouxsie Sue		#37	[-]
Jan 13 09 3:11 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	So Mimic's worth checking out, huh? Joe, I understand your point on his films, really. I guess I'm just pretty cynical about any modern horror films lately. The new Wolf Man's one of the few that's got me semi-hopeful, tho I also expect terrible disappointment there too. Being wrong would be very cool indeed. I'm eager to see Let The Right One In and am looking forward to Argento's Giallo quite a bit. Not much else, offhand. I must see Carnival of Souls again one of the days...
hermanthegerm		#38	[-]
Jan 13 09 3:26 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Mimic suffered from studio interference. But, even then, it is still good. A director's cut should be forthcoming on DVD. http://www.rottentomatoes..._and_the_movies_interview "There is a lot of money tied up in this film and people expect to hear a boom when something blows up, so I'll give them a boom." George Lucas as quoted by Harlan Ellison's WATCHING Last Edited By: hermanthegerm Jan 13 09 3:29 PM. Edited 1 times.
Doc Dynamo		#39	[-]
Jan 13 09 4:01 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Joe Karlosi wrote: If I may be so bold, I think a common stigma I keep coming across (not just here, but everywhere I read) is that many people just cannot get past THE SIXTH SENSE, and it's against this successful hit that all of Shyamalan's subsequent pictures are judged. I am one of those people who doesn't have a problem with the "water" angle in SIGNS. Okay, so they're not the most brilliant aliens around. Or they figured as long as they don't go around swimming in the water or taking a shower, they'd be okay on Earth. I mean, Count Dracula never knows how to steer clear of the sun or to invest in a wristwatch through decades of movies, and nobody minds. I think you're right about Sixth Sense, but it goes further than this. I thought Sixth Sense was great. But after that he seemed to go steadily downhill. Unbreakable was really interesting, but slow. Signs had its moments, but ultimately seemed kind of dopey. The Village was pretty weak. I skipped his last two. Night gets great performances from his actors and can create wonderful mood and atmosphere, but he seems to have lost his touch in terms of story sense. Maybe he should direct somebody else's screenplay.
Koukol 5		#40	[-]
Jan 13 09 4:17 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	... making me feel like M. Night Shyamalan was soaking up the credit for what to me was already an established, almost cliche' plot twist. Almost cliche? For me it was predictable from the start and was such a cliche that it was insulting. I would throw in THE OTHERS as another insulting obvious bore. I would rather watch CARNIVAL OF SOULS anyday.
	Remove this ad

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Yuku free message boards

M. Night Shyamalan - why isn't there more love for this fine director?