M. Night Shyamalan's: The Village

[Nerual]

M. Night Shyamalan's: The Village

Heres a link for the trailer:http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hv&id=1808488393&cf=trailer Not much in it yet, they dont seem to have alot of footage.

What do you all think, with the director of Signs and The Sixth Sense, It could be a very thrilling movie.

[Firebolt_2007]

I love Shyamalan's work! His directing technique is so rich and unique. I have all his films on DVD, and me and a big throng of friends and family are seeing the Village on the 31st!:p Should be incredible! The trailers give me the chills

[IceKat55]

I've been rather disappointed with everything he's done since The Sixth Sense, but I am looking forward to this one. I love Joaquin Phoenix, too....should be pretty good! :)

[Kneazle]

What I love most about Shyamalan's movies is his way of blending themes, and putting unworldy aspects into his stories. His idea of setting a thriller in Victorian Pennsylvania is great. The period setting allows for their acceptance and respect of the 'creatures', and of course the isolation of the community is just frightening. It looks very promising-- I can't wait to see it!

[Emma]

I think that he is one of the most promissing directors out there now. I think that he has real insight of the films...I would rate him as a Hitchcock myself. I love his works.
I'll be there opening day.

[squirpy]

Man, the trailer for this freaks me out. I hate scary movies, but I'm kind of drawn to this one. I won't see it because then I'll be afraid of the woods. ;)

I've read some reviews of the script, and they said that the trademark Shyamalan twist is kind of obvious. But the people who do reviews like that are often kind of cynical, so I don't know...

[iluvhhr]

The trailer's so creepy, especially when the woman says that there are marks on the door. I'm dying to see it. My friend told me that the movie would have been rated R if a sound effect hadn't been taken out. I think the sound effect was of a monster eating somebody.

[emerald eyes]

So funny to see this thread pop up. I was just talking about Shyamalan and his movies with my dad less than 5 min. ago. We were discussing The Village and what the "twist" might be. I agree, he is on the best new directors around. I really enjoyed his other movies. And I'm just sold on the fact that he uses Pennsylvania as the setting in them all! My homestate!! :clap:

[aragog]

He's a brilliant director and I rate Signs as one of my favourite movies. What I love about his thriller stuff is that it's like the old movies -- "what you don't see is scarier than what you do see". These days we're exposed to so much blood and gore that we're desensitised to it and M Night comes along and creates Signs where you hardly see the "villain". The little that we do see gives me chills everytime, especially the alien's leg sliding back into the corn. Heh.

Anyway, I haven't seen anything about his new movie yet, but I'll definitely be seeing it in theatres when it comes out.

[starutena]

I can't wait for this movie to come out. Of course I could be dissappointed like I was with Signs and Unbreakable, but I'm keeping my hopes up. I plan to watch it through my fingers as I clutch my boyfriends shoulder being completely freaked out. Oh I hope that it's going to be good.

[DarkMark]

I haven'tgot a clue when this film will be released in England but i will be there when it does. I really enjoy Shyamalan's work and what aragog said about people being desensitised is true. He leaves it to our imagination with Signs which makes it easier for people to think of something they find quite scary.
I really liked his other films as well and Pheonix is a great actor.
Really looking forward to this film! :tu:

[ScoobyGrl]

And I'm just sold on the fact that he uses Pennsylvania as the setting in them all! My homestate!! :clap:

Same here! I often watch The Sixth Sense when I'm homesick. I would see his movies anyway because I like him as a film maker, but it's an extra bonus to see PA.

[nicolasa]

I can't wait for it to come out! It looks really good, and I love his other movies. I'll probably see it opening day if I don't work.

[tonkscrazy]

I saw the trailler too , its sound really scary :eyebrows:
;) i love all the films he made , i cant wait for this one

[Sugarvixen21]

I agree with emerald eyes and ScoobyGrl, having a talented director using Pennsylvania as his canvas is exciting. Of course it's only natural for him to do so considering he is a resident of Bucks County, Pennsylvania.

From what I've heard The Village is actually based upon rural Pennsylvania folklore. Has anyone else heard this?

[Raethul]

I love M. Night Shyamalan's films. They seem to scare me in a way that is much different from "The axe-murderer just POPPED OUT!!!" of most "scary movies" today. The Sixth Sense scared the **** out of me, and though Signs was less "scary" it affected me in a way that few films do: in that I sat up at night for a long time thinking that it could really happen. I also love how his films hang on atmosphere instead of blood splashing the walls.

[matchboxer]

I can't wait for this to be released. I'm going ASAP. Shyamalan (affectionately known in some circles as Shamalamadingdong) is one of my favorite directors. Joaquin Phoenix doesn't hurt, either.

[WeasleyIsOurKing]

I want to see it. I saw the trailer months ago and I've been itching to see it since!

I've seen The Sixth Sense and Signs and loved them so I can't wait to see this!

The setting and the people sort of remind me of the Amish (hey, there is a good-sized Amish population in PA - I've visited them myself).

[emerald eyes]

I agree with emerald eyes and ScoobyGrl, having a talented director using Pennsylvania as his canvas is exciting. Of course it's only natural for him to do so considering he is a resident of Bucks County, Pennsylvania.

From what I've heard The Village is actually based upon rural Pennsylvania folklore. Has anyone else heard this?

I heard something like that as well. We have a lot of good old stories, especially with all the PA Dutch & German heritage. It's all kind of foggy in my brain so I can't say which folklore. :D

And yes there is a very large Amish and Mennonite population in PA.

I can't wait to see it!!

[snape_sinclaire]

I can't believe I'm going to miss seeing this on the opening weekend (I'm going to Florida). Not that it's a bad thing, but I always love to think that I helped support a movie reach number 1 in the Box Office. I did that with Harry Potter and Spiderman 2 (like it would've made a difference :p).

I always love things that have a good twist to them, and it's fun to see what the director uses to set up the mood of the scene and what's going to happen, i.e. in the Sixth Sense, he used the color red to symbolize trauma or a ghost maybe. I also love rewatching his movies to look out for the things that foreshadow the end.

[idlescribbler]

Yeah, he's bloody brilliant! I love his work, but to be honest, I want to go into this one cold. I don't want to know too much. I saw Unbreakable without knowing anything about the plot, and I think it made the movie that much better for me. It was a complete surprise. Sixth Sense was the first movie in a long time to actually creep me out a little, and I loved it for that. Here's hoping this one will be just as creepy!

[WeasleyIsOurKing]

Here (http://thevillage.movies.go.com/) is the official site. It gives a little more information about the movie, the story, the cast, etc.

Wasn't Joaquin Phoenix in Signs? Or am I wrong?

And you know the red slashes across the door in the trailers? It reminds me the Passover story - the lamb's blood marked across the door to keep the Angel of Death from killing the firstborn child? Except in this movie it seems to be different, because if red is so bad why would they have it all over their doors? And who would be putting red paint and flowers everywhere anyway?

I'm thinking too much. :angel:

[MozBeck]

yes mr. phoenix was in signs. i can't wait to see this movie, either. does anyone else find mr. shyamalan really attractive?

[Esme Dogberry]

OMG, I am so excited for this movie! "Signs" was okay, didn't like "The Sixth Sense" very much. But this one looks really good. I like the fact that it's a period suspense film. Don't see too many of those. Plus, heh, besides being great actors Adrian Brody and Joaquin Phoenix are really, really hot! :drool:

M. Night Shyamalan isn't too bad-looking, MozBeck. I love his name, though. That is an awesome name. :cool:

[RubberSoul]

I can't wait for this movie. I know I shouldn't see it because I get way too creeped out by scary movies, but M. Night Shyamalan's films are worth it because they have interesting plots and aren't slasher scary. And it helps that the trailer for the Village is really well put together. It's so calm, but creepy at the same time, and it shows just enough for you to get interested enough to see what happens, but not enough to spoil the ending like most trailers tend to do.

I love his name, though. That is an awesome name.
Me too. It's such a good name!

[muggledeedee]

The trailer totally creeps me out ! I can't wait to see if the movie is really as scary as the trailer makes it out to be.

By the way - - Does anyone know what the storyline to this movie is all about?

[Esme Dogberry]

By the way - - Does anyone know what the storyline to this movie is all about?

The story is set in late 19th century Pennsylvania. This group of people decided they wanted to start their own town where they would adopt Utopian principles (I think this is the idea). But there are potentially dangerous creatures that live in the woods, so the first settlers made a deal with them: they don't wander into the woods so long as the creatures don't wander into their village. The creatures are attracted by the color red, but hate the color yellow.

I think someone finally is killed by one of the creatures or something along those lines happens. At any rate, the creatures start to get weird. Joaquin Phoenix plays a guy who oversteps the "deal" in order to get outside help to rid the woods of the creatures forever. Bryce Dallas Howard plays his blind love interest, who I assume (from the trailer) follows Phoenix's character into the woods.

This looks like an awesome movie. It certainly has the potential to be extremely suspenseful. I hope the creatures look okay. The "alien" from Signs was kind of scary at first glance, but in the last scenes it was way too CGI to be totally believable.

Adrien Brody forever! :love:

[ChiChi]

He's apparently reshooting the ending.

I heard the original one's ending is that...

*Spoiler*
The monsters aren't real.


Sorry I didn't put it in a spoiler box I don't know how :upset:

[~Tonks~]

He's apparently reshooting the ending.

I heard the original one's ending is that...

*Spoiler*
(I deleted this so people scrolling will know not to look at that part of your post)


Sorry I didn't put it in a spoiler box I don't know how :upset:


UGH!!!!!

You know, I REALLY hope you didn't hear reliable information... I'm supposed to go see that on my birthday... don't say spoilers if you don't know how, so as to not, well, spoil things... for others :sad:

it's [ spoiler ] [/ spoiler ]


I can't wait to go see it, it looks terrifying... I keep hearing a hilarious spoof on the radio called M. Night Shyamalan's... the Village... People... (And then they play YMCA) :rotfl:

[matchboxer]

He's apparently reshooting the ending.

I heard the original one's ending is that...

*Spoiler*
--deleted to protect the unspoiled--

Sorry I didn't put it in a spoiler box I don't know how :upset:

Woot woot spoiler box! Key points of The Sixth Sense, Unbreakable, and possibly The Village revealed.

I've heard that, too, but I don't think I believe it. In The Sixth Sense, ghosts were real. They just were. In Unbreakable, superheros existed. They just did. In Signs, the aliens were really aliens. It just worked that way. In all of M. Night's movies, the non-existant-in-the-real-world things were real. Why would the monsters/creatures be any different?

[emerald eyes]

A friend was just telling me that the SciFi channel (I think) just did a show on M. Night Shyamalan. Has anyone seen it? It apparently gave a lot of background info on him and talked a bit about his movies and such. Talked about things that happened to him such as a near drowning experience he had. My friend didn't get to see all of it but they said that the show mentioned something about the actual site where he filmed The Village has a lot of wierd/mystery real life history to it.

My friend also saw that it was going to re-air but then hasn't been able to find out when. Anybody know anything about it? I'd love to see it or get some more info from it!

[MalkinsCouture]

That Shyamalan "documentary" on TV the other night was sort of hokey, very disappointing.
I love his movies and just saw Signs again last night. They are filled with imagery and ideas beyond just the story being told. I think he's one of the best film-makers today and can't wait for The Village!

[snape_sinclaire]

A friend was just telling me that the SciFi channel (I think) just did a show on M. Night Shyamalan. Has anyone seen it? It apparently gave a lot of background info on him and talked a bit about his movies and such. Talked about things that happened to him such as a near drowning experience he had. My friend didn't get to see all of it but they said that the show mentioned something about the actual site where he filmed The Village has a lot of wierd/mystery real life history to it.

My friend also saw that it was going to re-air but then hasn't been able to find out when. Anybody know anything about it? I'd love to see it or get some more info from it!


There was an article in Entertainment Weekly about that M. Night Shyamalan program and his movie. Here's a snippet from the article:

If Shyamalan is fudging things to keep audiences in the dark until the film's release, it certainly wouldn't be surprising, especially in light of the three-hour Sci Fi Channel "documentary." After weeks of cooked-up controversy, the film proved to be a cornball, Blair Witch style hoax, complete with Ouija boards, purporting to reveal that Shyamalan had the ability to communicate with the dead. Shyamalan didn't just participate in this stunt--in the interests of building up his own brand and hyping The Village, he clearly helped engineer it. (The only thing truly controversial about the project was that Sci Fi's parent company, NBC Universal, evidently found its deceptions so tacky that two days before it aired they admitted the program had gone too far.

[emerald eyes]

Thanks Snape Sinclaire & MalkinsCouture!
I did a search on it and pretty much came to the conclusion that it does just seem to be a big hype and it was said to be really quite tacky and over done.

[IceKat55]

My friend also saw that it was going to re-air but then hasn't been able to find out when. Anybody know anything about it? I'd love to see it or get some more info from it!
Darn it! According to the Sci Fi channels schedule, yesterday morning was the last time it aired. Nothing as to future showings. I would love to see this!

[emerald eyes]

That's what I found out as well, IceKat55. And there are some discussion threads about it, if you look up the title on the IMDB. Most people there think it was just done to help boost the buzz about The Village. There is a lot of talk about it being all out bad filming and such. And the show doesn't appear to hold much truth according to most people who saw it. There's also talk about it being edited and/or approved by Shyamalan and talk about him not backing it at all. I'm half glad I missed it! :huh:

[IceKat55]

Most people there think it was just done to help boost the buzz about The Village. There is a lot of talk about it being all out bad filming and such.
Oh dear, that's a shame to hear. I'm actually kinda looking forward to seeing this one...I adore Joaquin Phoenix, I did like The Sixth Sense very much, and the Village looks fairly good, just from the trailers I've seen...

[HannahStarr]

I saw The Village today, and while I thought it was a great movie, it could have been better in the filming department... shakey camera and stuff like that. Someone told me that the film could be looked at as a metaphor for the Bush administration in the US, and I do sort of see that, which is a bit creepy. :scared: The acting was great, though. :tu:

[Raethul]

Well, I just got back from this movie. It certainly wasn't what I was expecting but I enjoyed it anyway. Joaquin Phoenix's part in this movie actually wasn't as large as I was expecting, neither was Adrian B. This movie isn't really a horror movie I would say; it revolves more around the characters, though it does have a good bit of "jump" moments that caused a couple friends of mine to scream. I really liked the character of Noah, wish we could have seen more of him, but I did like Ivy and we saw a lot of her. The movie's ending is actually a bit predictable (a friend figured it out about a third through the movie). The biggest suprise for me came in the middle of the movie with a certain character's seemingly random action, caused a lot of gasps and hands-over-the-mouth in the cinema. Overall this movie seems different from Shymalan's others, but I found it enjoyable. My favorite film of his, and by far the scariest, in my opinion is still The Sixth Sense, though.

[RubberSoul]

Just got back from seeing it. It was a bit of a disappointment, though it's hard to figure out why, because the setting, the costumes, the acting, and the sound editing were all great, but for some reason the film didn't come together as it should've. Technically there's two twists to it - the first one is pretty easy to figure out, but the ending is really good. And just another thing: the dialogue is extremely stilted...

Bryce Dallas Howard does really well in the movie, and I hope we see more of her. (Thought: for a blind person, she really didn't have much trouble getting around, didn't she?)

[Emma]

I did like it...Alfred Hitchcock all the way...twists and averything...

[Hufflepuffy]

I just saw it last night. I thought it was not quite as good as I expected, but still very enjoyable. I think the movie really had three twists, one where someone gets the bad color on their hands, one in the shed, and one over the wall. I figured out the third one pretty early in to the movie, the scene where Lucius goes to the elders the first time, but I was sitting there, going "no, that will never happen!". But it did.

I thought Bryce Dallas Howard (Ron Howard's daughter) was wonderful in this movie, I hope to see her in more. Adrien Brody's Noah reminded me of Leonardo DiCaprio in "What's Eating Gibert Grape", and I thought very well done. Perfectly chidlike and innocent.

This movie is pretty hard to talk about without giving away a lot of the film.

On another note, I think I would have enjoyed it a lot more without the girl sitting next to me doing a running commentary through the whole movie. To boy standing on stump "Don't just stand there, run! what are you doing", and a lot of "ohmagod's". It was super annoying. Why do people do that, think that everyone around them wants to hear them talk through the movie?

[MalkinsCouture]

Thanks Snape Sinclaire & MalkinsCouture!
I did a search on it and pretty much came to the conclusion that it does just seem to be a big hype and it was said to be really quite tacky and over done.
Yeah, and it surprised me... obviously a marketing thing, and Shyamalan doesn't need to do that. He's an excellent filmmaker with a big audience. Maybe the production company came up with the idea and pushed him into it.
Hopefully, he won't do that sort of thing again.

[SarahBetz1]

I saw it last night, and I liked it. I figured out the ending about a third of the way through also, though none of my friends had any clue. I think Adrian Brody did a great job and Bryce Dallas Howard was also excellent!

I love the jumping points. Some members of my audience were screaming bloody murder, though it just gave me goose bumps. I like thrillers like that. MNS always has the "Oh my God" moments in his movies like the sixth sense did. I loved to hear the reactions of everyone around me when the whole thing was revealed. (I, of course, gasped "I knew it!") And it had its funny parts too. I'll give it a :tu:

[_Firenze_]

The acting was fantastic. You can't really talk about anything in the movie without giving away everything. Amazing twists. So good.

[SarahBetz1]

The acting was fantastic. You can't really talk about anything in the movie without giving away everything. Amazing twists. So good.

Do you think the administrators would let us open a thread with spoilers? I would love to talk about some of the things that happened in the movie without ruining it for others.

[PrtVeela]

I thought it was okay, I think that maybe Shyamalan maybe should have focused more on the characters instead of trying to keep us on the edge of our seats. But it was suprising I shall say that :) I thought it was still a pretty good movie, and I thought the casting was quite good indeed.

[emerald eyes]

Well me and hubby are heading out now to go see it! I'll let ya'll know what I think later tonight.

SarahBetz1 : If we can't open another thread, we always have spoiler tags to use. :)

[kitkatcake1988]

Here's a question, how well do you think The Village will do at the box office compared to M. Night's other films. My favorite would be The Sixth Sense which grossed the highest. I've been hearing a lot of negative comments about The Village which will probably affect it's intake. Of course it will still do pretty well since M Night is a huge box office draw, but probably not as well as his previous films. Disney must be in distress...it hasn't had a hit all year, it's really depending on this and The Incredibles. They must feel pretty stupid about letting Fahrenheit 9/11 go... :rotfl:

[jasper]

. And just another thing: the dialogue is extremely stilted...


Well, that was a clue, wasn't it?

I thought Joaquin Phoenix was too old for the part.

Other than that, I liked it. It wasn't frightening, though. It's a love story.


I'd have liked it more if we got to the theater earlier, since it was packed and we ended up on the front row. I think getting a seat where you can have a view of the whole screen without breaking your neck is a must.

[Credo Buffa]

I saw The Village today, and while I thought it was a great movie, it could have been better in the filming department... shakey camera and stuff like that. Someone told me that the film could be looked at as a metaphor for the Bush administration in the US, and I do sort of see that, which is a bit creepy. :scared: The acting was great, though. :tu:

I actually thought the cinematography was one of the strongest points of the movie. I've always admired M. Night's use of storyboards to plan out his shots, because they're really very effective. I especially like the look of long takes, which gives the movie a much more real, personal look to it. . . in particular, the scene between Lucius and Ivy on the porch at night. . . beautiful!

The acting was overall very good. I especially loved Joaquin Phoenix, who I never really saw as a shy, quiet character, but I was very impressed by the sweet innocence of his performance. I also thought Adrien Brody was excellent: I am always impressed when actors are able to effectively portray the complexities of a mentally handicapped character. And Bryce Dallas Howard is sure to be a star :) I'm glad that Shyamalan took the chance of putting her, as an unknown, in the lead role. It was definitely the right move.

I actually think the political allegory is the main point of this film. It seems to me that most of the people who dislike this movie are the ones who are ignoring the overflowing symbolism in the wake of waiting to be scared or trying to guess the ending. Even the "predictable twist" (which I didn't see coming, but nevertheless wasn't as floored by as in previous Shyamalan movies) has a purpose if you really think about it. In my mind, all of M. Night's films are advertised as what they appear to be on the surface: creepy movies about creatures or aliens or the supernatural. However, these things are just backdrops for what he is really trying to say about human nature. The Village takes it a step further to encompass every detail in a very poignant allegory about the world we live in now, which is very daring in our contemporary society, which generally doesn't seem to have the patience to really analyze what they're watching. Plus, it's a hundred times more creepy than creatures in the woods.

So, my advise to everyone would be to see it twice: once through to get the allegory, and again to really appreciate all the ways in which is falls together.

[emerald eyes]

Well, I just got back from seeing it and I have to say that I think it might be my new favorite from Shyamalan. :clap: I think he did a wonderful job with the story and the filming. I did kinda guess the ending somewhat but even still if you do guess it, you never know how exactly it is going to be presented. I also think that Howard did a wonderful acting job! And of course so did the rest! Do you all notice he has a thing for recasting people over and over?

I was also rather proud of myself - I didn't scream at all but let me tell you the lady behind us sure did. And I also remembered why I prefer renting movies to going to the theater - the girl next to me smelled SOOOOO very bad, I was pratically in my husband's lap the whole time! :evil: But this one was worth seeing in the theater!

[Esme Dogberry]

It seems to me that most of the people who dislike this movie are the ones who are ignoring the overflowing symbolism in the wake of waiting to be scared or trying to guess the ending.
I totally agree. I read a lot of negative reviews before going to see this movie and the reviewers all complained about it not being scary or unpredictable. I think people were going into this film with such high hopes of seeing something similar to "The Sixth Sense" or "Signs" rather than treating it like an entirely different film as it deserved.

It is kind of a shame that some people see only the surface of Shyamalan's films (the "scary" bit) and completely miss his underlying points.

[jasper]

\
It is kind of a shame that some people see only the surface of Shyamalan's films (the "scary" bit) and completely miss his underlying points.

That's like my mom being so anti-religious that she was irritated all the way through Signs. She totally missed how well constructed the film was.

But I didn't really get allegory of the Bush administration from this film. I think that's a stretch. It's much more simple and not as specific as that.

[LuckyPheonix]

Oh my gosh, this is one of the best movies I think I have ever seen! It was definitely suspensful, and I jumped quite a few times! I think it had a really good theme and made a really good point about the interactions of people and their thoughts. Although, I didn't understand why Noah did what he did. Can someone explain?

[jasper]

He did it because
he was crazy!

He also had a keen sense of humor- the animals part, I think was a joke to him. It really made him laugh to see people scared.
Oh, and he was jealous and vengeful. He had a lot going on.

[Weatherby]

I found this movie to be uninspired, horribly boring and just plain annoying.
The few questions it did raise were unaswered. The ending was sooo obvious!
The stilted manner of speaking got old so fast.

I won't tell you what your colours are three times and she never tells him.
And "one of the elders skinned the animals. We have an idea who it is. It won't happen again." and nothing else came of it.

It's a pity the Howard actress is starring in another film. Nepotism at it's worse [after Tori Spelling of course].

[jasper]

I won't tell you what your colours are three times and she never tells him.
.
She couldn't say a color name out loud, could she? Did any of them ever name any color? The safe color and the bad color- did they ever call a color by an actual name?
That was a tad cheesy.
I really think the stilted language was there to throw you off, but it was also supposed to be odd enough to make you wonder what was up. I"m not sure it makes sense in the context. Knowing what the elders were trying to do, I guess they had to edit out half of their pre-settling in the Village vocabulary to avoid referencing anything modern. But why change "we've got to hurry" to "we must make make haste?"

[Weatherby]

She couldn't say a color name out loud, could she? Did any of them ever name any color? The safe color and the bad color- did they ever call a color by an actual name?
That was a tad cheesy.
I really think the stilted language was there to throw you off, but it was also supposed to be odd enough to make you wonder what was up. I"m not sure it makes sense in the context. Knowing what the elders were trying to do, I guess they had to edit out half of their pre-settling in the Village vocabulary to avoid referencing anything modern. But why change "we've got to hurry" to "we must make make haste?"

Night is a hack.
"He taught me the value of a dollar. By the evening he'd have five dollars."
They didn't have dollars in their ramshackle Amish village.
The houses were too nice and gave it away immediately as well. Then "my sister was raped and dumped in the dumpsters in the alley."
Dumpsters?

[jasper]

She said that thing about dumpsters among elders, didn't she?

He's a hack based on just this, or do you not like his other work either?

[Credo Buffa]

But I didn't really get allegory of the Bush administration from this film. I think that's a stretch. It's much more simple and not as specific as that.

On the political allegory:

I guess how strongly you take the allegory will depend on how critical you are of Bush and his administration. My dad, as a republican, thought I was totally crazy. However, other democrats completely understand the symbolism. Here's why:

I thought this movie was about the creation of a culture of fear. Many Americans who are critical of Bush look at the way in which he used the "terrorist threat" after 9/11 as a way of justifying his campaign in Iraq, even though Iraq posed no direct threat to the US. By making Americans believe they had something to fear (weapons of mass distruction, for instance), it gave him the supposed OK to attack Iraq and supposedly cleanse the world of another oppressive government in favor of good old American democracy (if you choose to believe that is truly his objective).

We see the same thing in "The Village." You have a group of elders who make the people of their village believe that there is something out there for them to be afraid of so that they can achieve their own objective of creating a perfect society. Like the color-coded system that we now have in the US marking the supposed level of a terrorist threat, the village has a color-coded system where red (like in our system) is the "bad color," marking the highest threat, and yellow is the "safe color," which is probably about as low a threat as our paranoia will allow us to be.

It is also significant that Ivy is the only one who is told of the truth that the creatures are created by the elders; she is still blind (literally). While anyone else in the village would go out into the "real world" and have the chance to see what is being kept from them, she is completely unaware that the lives led outside of her village are very obviously representative of a completely different period in time. They will not send Lucius, who could easily see these things and return questioning his leaders. What is significant, though, is that Ivy finds kindness in the stranger she meets, which as she says, she did not expect.

I think Ivy's blindness is akin to the blindness of the American people to what is really outside of our own country. I still encounter many people are content to simply believe what they see on TV and what they read in the newspaper about what is going on in the world around them. They have an "If Americans lose allies, so be it--we're still the best anyway" kind of attitude that is our government under Bush has definitely not been trying to avoid. We only are fed so much information: enough to keep the national opinion where they want it, but not quite enough so as to keep us blind from anything else that might color our view of what the government is doing. When people start to question. . . just throw out another sign of the threat (skinned animals and marks on the doors, or another notice from central intelligence increasing the terror alert from yellow to orange) to keep people quiet and afraid. In essence: keep the people as blind as possible.

Finally, there's Noah, who I think is a symbol of American soldiers in Iraq (of course, really any soldier from any country sent there to "keep the peace"). He is disillusioned about the "perfection" of his life when he discovers that the girl he is in love with is going to marry another man. He instills violence to try and take that sense of order back. Finally, in the end, after he discovers the truth about the creatures, but, unable to really process it, takes on the form of the creature itself and is killed.

Of course, a lot of this is the romanticized image of the soldier who goes to fight for the cause of the preservation of his own country in a time of threat. However, I think that a lot of soldiers want to be there as little as most Americans want them to be. But, for the purpose of allegory, Noah's attack on Lucius for "stealing" his love is symbolic of an American soldier's fighting in Iraq for the supposed "stealing" of freedom and his sense of security in his own country.

The kicker is that in the end of "The Village," the elders choose to give Noah a proper burial and say that the creatures killed him, rather than Ivy, the blind member of their community who has had the fear of creatures in the woods so instilled in her that even when she knows the truth, the fear remains. What about all the American soldiers who are killed in action in Iraq, brought home and given a hero's funeral, while the government insists that it was the Iraqis who killed them, not their own actions which put these soldiers in the position to die in service in the first place. Their own blindness, their own fear of discovery, keeps them continuing the charade, even at the price of one of their own sons.

Now, for someone hyper-critical of Bush like myself, this kind of thing is easy to pick out. While a lot of it might appear over-the-top, just remember that it is in the nature of allegory to exaggerate details to make the ones the writer wants you to see in the real world all the more obvious. Allegory is meant to make us look at the world around us and maybe question it, or look at it a bit more carefully than we would have otherwise done. I definitely think that is the main objective of this movie.

[Resolute]

Hmm. Interesting. This film got some horrible reviews in Canada, but it seems most people here liked it. Interesting. I'll probably see it tonight or tommorow, so I'll report back then about what I thought.

I will say this though. I hate it when people bring up political allegory, its just stupid. Unless it is very obvious, or the author/creator is explicit about the double-meaning, I think its pointless to look for allegory or reference in works of fiction such as this. For one thing, there are often many different ways to apply such works to current events, so one person's liberal undercurrent may be another's facist nuance.

I'm as liberal as they come, but if I do see a distinct political allegory in what should be a pure intellectual horror period piece--even one with which I agree--I will be very dissapointed.

[Raethul]

Night is a hack.
Have to put in that I do not agree with this at all. I am still a solid believer that that man is a genius. This movie was different, but that can hardly be used to classify him as a hack, and definitely not by one line alone! Look at his other films; they're brilliant.

Also, did anyone else notice the music in this movie? I loved it. I always tend to like the music in Night's movies. It always seems so fitting and sets such an erie mood to his movies, and sure as heck does a good job with upping the ante in the "jump scenes" the way it builds upon itself until a creature shows itself or the scene with the giant hole caused by the tree trunk; both of those made me jump.

I'm going to see this movie again today. I think it might grow on me even more until it's second on to The Sixth Sense. I'm sorry to see it's getting such bad reviews; I really enjoyed it.

[Hufflepuffy]

On Ivy not telling him his color:

She's blind, isn't she? How could she name a color, if she's never actually seen a color?

Also

someone asked about Noah stabbing Lucius and why he did that. Noah was in love with Ivy, she seemed to be the only person in the village who was nice to him. I guess finding out she was marrying Lucius just made him a little more crazy

[Credo Buffa]

I will say this though. I hate it when people bring up political allegory, its just stupid. Unless it is very obvious, or the author/creator is explicit about the double-meaning, I think its pointless to look for allegory or reference in works of fiction such as this. For one thing, there are often many different ways to apply such works to current events, so one person's liberal undercurrent may be another's facist nuance.

I'm as liberal as they come, but if I do see a distinct political allegory in what should be a pure intellectual horror period piece--even one with which I agree--I will be very dissapointed.

Well, I'll tell you right now that this isn't a horror movie.

Back to the allegory. I'm an English major, and we're taught to analyze beyond the surface. I think that people today generally don't see these things because modern popular culture has essentially gotten rid of them in favor of mindless entertainment. People don't like to have to go to a movie and come out really thinking about what they've seen and having to put together the pieces that they want spelled out in plain English.

So, for someone like me who has studied literature of centuries past, when writers laced their work with what you call "double-meaning," only to be disappointed with what modern literature has to offer for a really intellectual experience (and I include movies in this as well, because movies generally come from a written script), this movie is a real gift. It's tapping into an older form that just doesn't get used enough anymore. It's a complex form that really allows the reader (or in this case viewer) to see what they want to see. It allows the writer to make criticisms without getting caught, because on the surface, there's nothing to indict. I think it's the perfect movie for this time in American history, and I hope that Shyamalan continues to produce this kind of work. . .

. . . though I'd like to see him try something without the surprise ending for one, just so people stop expecting it. It'd do him good.

Have to put in that I do not agree with this at all. I am still a solid believer that that man is a genius. This movie was different, but that can hardly be used to classify him as a hack, and definitely not by one line alone! Look at his other films; they're brilliant.

Also, did anyone else notice the music in this movie? I loved it. I always tend to like the music in Night's movies. It always seems so fitting and sets such an erie mood to his movies, and sure as heck does a good job with upping the ante in the "jump scenes" the way it builds upon itself until a creature shows itself or the scene with the giant hole caused by the tree trunk; both of those made me jump.

I'm going to see this movie again today. I think it might grow on me even more until it's second on to The Sixth Sense. I'm sorry to see it's getting such bad reviews; I really enjoyed it.

I agree with EVERYTHING you've said here (even the part about seeing it again today!). We're definitely on the same page :)

I think M. Night's movies are the best thing that's happened to Hollywood in a long time. Out of all the writers and directors out there making movies like Harold and Kumar go to White Castle that seriously insult our intelligence (no wonder people think American culture is lacking when this is what they see of it), Night seems to be the only one who trusts us to be able to experience a movie that's more than just thrills, but an intellectual and spiritual journey.

About the music. . . I enjoyed it a lot as well. I thought the violin solo sound was perfect for the setting, but had the energy to draw the viewer into this kind of creepy world as well. I've always thought that James Newton Howard's scores for Shyamalan's movies are just the right blend. . . something that's not so typical that it becomes sonic wallpaper that you almost don't hear, but something that's not too thick and bombastic (I hate to say this, but John Williams tends to be one of these guys. . .) to take over the emotional power from the scene and the actors themselves. The music has a perfect minimalist quality to it that really enhances the kind of environment that Shyamalan tries to create in his movies (I thought this especially true with this score and the score for Signs, which I love).

[Weatherby]

She said that thing about dumpsters among elders, didn't she?

He's a hack based on just this, or do you not like his other work either?

If I liked his other films I wouldn't call him a hack. I've never been impressed with his movies. I have a major beef with Signs. Aliens are allergic to water and only religious people deserve to live? No. At least it was more entertaining during the movie. The ending ruined everything.
Signs had a plot - crop circles. In Sixth Sense he sees dead people.
Unbreakable has the hero trying to be a comic book hero.
The village? They live in a village and then we find out the monsters aren't real. Then.. so what? It's not a new idea to propose. Amish people have already done it. There are communities in Canada just like that and they don't pretend there are monsters.
He ruined the whole thing trying to have another twist. It wasn't a work of art. People are imagining political allegories here.

Stepford Wives did it this year too. "Let's go back to a simpler time and force people against their will to do it."
But if you want a political allergory use today to do it and relevant events if you want to shake anyone up.
"Let's make haste during this time we have to ourselves and run."
wow.
The William Hurt dialogue made me gag. Night S was treating his own dialogue as scripture.



Sixth Sense was okay because it wasn't nearly as schmaltzy. Unbreakable was boring.
Why is he a genius??? Charlie Kuafman is a genius to me on a personal level. He has interesting concepts while using true to life emotions in fun creative ways.

I'll just paraphrase Entertainment Weekly's review though they were too kind giving the Village a B - Night S. needs to fire himself as a screenwriter and use someone else's ideas to bounce off of.

[Credo Buffa]

If I liked his other films I wouldn't call him a hack. I've never been impressed with his movies. I have a major beef with Signs. Aliens are allergic to water and only religious people deserve to live?

Is that what you thought he was saying in Signs? Wow, I'm sad for you if that's what you got out of it.

[jasper]

Okay, forgive me for asking that. I was imagining this film might have changed your mind about him- made you decide he was a hack, but it seems you went in expecting not to like it since he's a hack. Why'd you go then?

So, yeah, I loved Signs. I liked it better after thinking about it longer. But I think I already said this- that my mom didn't like it because she's anti-religion. I kind of think it bothered her more because she went in not knowing that religion was going to in the film. I think she felt it was a bait and switch thing.

I'm going to try and look at that giant white spoiler box about how this is an allegory. But, I can say now that I'm not prepared to buy into it. I believe any meaning you want can be teased out of a story, regardless of the author's actual intent.

Wait, Unbreakable was boring? I don't know when I've felt so tense coming out of a movie. I can't say I enjoyed it, but I didn't get bored.

edit: Okay, I've read Credo Buffa's allegory analysis. Thanks for taking the time to type all that :D. I at least feel beter about why that particular shade is the safe color! *

[Raethul]

The William Hurt dialogue made me gag. Night S was treating his own dialogue as scripture.
This didn't occur to me until recently on my second viewing but: Of course the dialogue sounded odd and strange! These people grew up in the late 20th century. Who the heck talked like that in the 1970's! They were most likely mimicking what they read in books and stories. How many people can you find off the street who can convincingly talk as though they lived in the late 19th century! I'm starting to believe the awkward dialogue was intentional. However, I will agree on William Hurt; I'm of the opinion after this that his acting is flat.

It's pretty obvious by this point if you don't like Shyamalan's other movies, why would you see this one? Most of them follow a similar formula. I'm sorry you don't like his movies, to each his own; I love them. I would also like to add if you believed the point of signs was only religious people get rescued, (where did you get that!?!?) then you obviously missed the point of that movie.

About the music. . . I enjoyed it a lot as well. I thought the violin solo sound was perfect for the setting, but had the energy to draw the viewer into this kind of creepy world as well.
I adored the violinist in this movie. I caught her name in the credits to look her up on the internet, but it seems to have slipped my mind. I'll have to find it somewhere because those violin solos were gorgeous.

[Nerual]

This didn't occur to me until recently on my second viewing but: Of course the dialogue sounded odd and strange! These people grew up in the late 20th century. Who the heck talked like that in the 1970's! They were most likely mimicking what they read in books and stories. How many people can you find off the street who can convincingly talk as though they lived in the late 19th century! I'm starting to believe the awkward dialogue was intentional.

I agree. The elders seemed to switch back and forth between how we talk today and how they talked then. It seemed easyier for the kids who had grown up there because they had never talked the way we do today.


I have to agree. The violinist was very good, loved the music!

[ravenclawguy]

This was the most amazing movie I have ever seen. I am not going to post any possibly threatening plot spoilers, but I was FLOORED by this incredible movie. In fact, and this is the honest truth, this is my favourite movie of all time. Underneath the scariness and creepiness of "those we do not speak of", we see the actual storyline of the movie. It is a love story, and a drama. Plus, there was at least 4 twists in the entire movie that made me smile in awe. I absolutely adored this movie, and will see it every chance I get. I loved it, and the acting was incredible. My favourite actress is now Bryce Dallas Howard, for her portrayal of Ivy, the blind love interest of Lucius Hunt (Joaqin Phoenix). She was amazing, and I really hope to see a lot more of her in the future. She is an amazing actress, and the already well-known actors and actresses in the movie were brilliant too. This wonderful film kept me on the edge of my seat, waiting with bated breath for the next scene, sending chills through my spine, and making me jump several times from surprise and fright. I absolutely LOVE The Village, and I really hope M. Night Syamalan continues to make enchantingly moving movies like this amazing production.

[idlescribbler]

To be honest, I was dissapointed with the film as I was watching it. After the fact, I have been able to see levels of complexity in the film that were not readily apparent when I was first viewing it, but on the whole, I feel that it is a flawed film at best. I really like a lot of the concepts he was playing with in the film, I just feel the execution could have been better.

Still, he had the same trademark pace, imagery, use of color and light that have made his films such a visual spectacle. The music was simply great, and I have no issues with the acting. I won't say the same for the dialouge, because I really think the film could have used a rewrite and some tightening of lines. There was some great humor, some nice tension, but overall, the film just didn't resonate with me the same way his previous films did.

No offense to anyone who enjoyed it. Art is highly subjective, and what appeals to one, does not appeal to another. A wiser man than I will ever be once pointed out that art is the antithesis of math, because in art, everyone is allowed to draw their own conclusions, whereas in math, 2 +2 always =4. Well, at least until you get into the really weird theoretical stuff.

[MozBeck]

i saw the movie on tuesday...and i still haven't made up my mind if i liked it or not. i have to say, (and maybe i'm dumb) i didn't see the twists coming at all. i don't think i liked you know who doing you know what to you know who's character. i didn't think that fit him being "slow".

[The Grey Lady]

My 2 cents - rather disappointed!

I love M. Night Shyamalan's films. They are thought-provoking; spooky; thrilling and beautiful. This one is no exception.

My objection lies in the marketing of the film. I'm not sure how it's going to be previewed to audiences overseas, but here in the States it was presented as a scary, scary movie. It is anything but. It has a few jump scenes, but that's it. And the twist wasn't that big of a shock. Methinks we were misled. So, people are going into the movie thinking "Wow, this is going to be really scary!" and come out disappointed. As a result, watch word of mouth kill it. It's a good movie, but people are going to respond to "Was it good?" with "No, not what I expected."


Mr. Shyamalan needs to move away from the "twist" movie and just do what he does best, make interesting, lovely films.

But that's JMO!

[IheartLupin12]

I've seen the movie twice and I still cant decide if I liked it or not...I have such mixed feelings I cant make up my mind! Joaquin Pheonix is a great actor, and I usually love all of M. Night's movies but this one was so different. The movie itself is beautifully done..the camera work, color schemes and music was all great, but the plot was unlike any movie I have ever seen. I somewhat guessed the plot 1/2 way through the movie, and was a little disappointed with the ending. I guess I am a little undecided!

[Nerual]

I have to admit, The only thing that kept me interested was the plot twists.
When I first saw the monster I had to wonder it was really real or not. It didn't look like something Shyamalan would do. He does good work and he does make his monsters and charactors look realistic.

(If anyone knows how to do spoilers it would be fantastic if they could tell me!)

[Classical_Wizar]

Nerual [ spoiler] message [ /spoiler] no spacing
i didnt care for the ending and i missed the first twenty mins of it but i did enjoy it.

[Credo Buffa]

OK, I'm back to this thread. I was determined not to look at it again because I get so defensive on behalf of M. Night, and I really don't want to have to feel like everyone has to see it my way. . . yet here I am again.

So, I liked it the first time, but I knew I'd need to see it again. So, I did. And I can safely say now that it's brilliant in the most subtle ways possible, which you really only gather from multiple viewings. Unfortunately with that diagnosis, most everyone who would need to see it again to change their minds are already so disappointed with it that it'll be hard to get them to do so. Such is the sad irony of art.

I think it's a real testament to M. Night's abilities as a filmmaker to say that I liked this movie(and, quite frankly, all his movies) better the second time, knowing what all the plot twists were going to be. . . After all, if the only thing that a movie has to recommend itself is the "surprise" at the end, then what's the point of ever watching it again? It's only a surprise once.

I was at first taken, as you all know by the "giant white spoiler box" from one of my previous posts, by the political allegory. But on my second viewing, I realized that the story and the messages about human nature that come out of it exist on so many levels that there's really no one way to look at it. I feel like each time I see it, I will absorb something different. The first time, it was a political message. The second time, it was about the beauty of innocence. Who knows what it will be the third time :)

About the score, which so many people are so taken by. I actually went out and bought it on CD a few days ago, and it's absolutely beautiful. . . probably the best film score I've heard yet this year. The more I hear of James Newton Howard, the more impressed I become with his versatility and unique style. The violin soloist is Hilary Hahn, a 24-year-old virtuoso. I read somewhere that part of the intent of having such a young soloist was to complement the theme of "innocence" which resonates in the sound of a young musician. I have to say. . . there is something innocent in Ms. Hahn's sound. It doesn't have the "I'm a virtuoso musician and I know it" kind of arrogance that a lot of older, more seasoned musicians have. It's truly perfect. I'd recommend the score most highly, even if you didn't like the movie.

[~Tonks~]

Gah! *shielding eyes with hands* I've been wanting to walk into this thread but I have a horrible fear of people not using spoiler tags...

I am going to go see this movie tomorrow... I can't wait... The 6th Sense was my favorite by him and I've liked his movies less and less sense... I couldn't stand Signs. The aliens were scary as long as you didn't see them, otherwise they looked like big rubber goons. And come on, they are allergic to water and they come to earth, which is 75% water? :huh:

I really hope this one will be better... if not at least I can drool over Joaquin Phoenix in a quasi-gothic looking hood getup.

[Nostalgia]

I've enjoyed Shamalahaayan's movies, so far. However, I will not be seeing this.

I thought Signs was superb. Obviously, there were a lot of plot holes. However, due to the atmosphere and the build up, the way the movie was crafted, they didn't even occur to me as they usually would until pointed out at a later time. The messages in his films are not for me. The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable were both good.

This sounds horrible. I've read nothing but reviews telling people to avoid, and Ebert gave it one star. That's bad. The dialogue alone sounds terrible to endure and the twist, while not that bad, isn't good either. I do think it's kind of funny.

[DragonBlk17]

I enjoyed watching The Village when I went tuesday. My sister had guessed the twist at the end and,ironically, she was right. I think Joaquin Phoenix, Bryce Dallas Howard and Adrien Brody did a wonderful job in The Village. I had a major headache after I got out though because of the 2 jumps I made and when Noah stabbed Lucius, I had to cry :blush:. My mom had to tell me that it was just a movie and that he's not really hurt! Overall I give this movie 9/10, only because of the twist at the end.

[Nostalgia]

^You should probably spoiler that mention of the violent part.

[DragonBlk17]

^You should probably spoiler that mention of the violent part.

How do you put the spoiler thing in?

[Nostalgia]

Jus making sure this is the right way.

You just put [*spoiler*] then the text that is the spoiler here and then [*/spoiler*] at the end of the spoiler.

Obviously without the *s, they're so the text doesn't go white in my demo.

[jasper]

[/spoiler] is the second tag to use at the end of the spoiler text.
and [spoiler] is the tag you put at the start of spoiler text.

[DragonBlk17]

Thanks for helping me with the spoiler problem!

[Stncold]

I was disappointed by this movie, I thought that it would be creepy and the twist wouldnt be in your face until the end, but no, you see the twist coming a good 30 minutes into the movie, seriously I've been way more creeped out playing Doom 3 the past few days then I was when I saw this movie also.

Way I see it, if you want a movie worth the $7.50 you plan on using to see The Village, go see The Manchurian Candidate instead.

[Nostalgia]

Thanks for helping me with the spoiler problem!

No problem. It's good that you used it.

[winter snow]

I thought this latest attempt was perfectly brilliant! The actors were great, there were a couple scenes where I jumped. I don't get the Bush allegory at all, I think thats a bit of a stretch. I believe it is much simpler than that. I'd state my opinion on it, but I can't do that without giving away the plot. Let's just say I saw an allegory in there, but it has more to do with general mankind issues rather than governmental issues. I thought the twist at the end was inspired. I was trying to figure out where he was going, what his point was, when it was shown I thought it was brilliant. We should all heed the ideas presented in this film.

Edit: Thanks Jasper for explaining how to do spoilers. Now I'll explain my interpretation of the movie.
What M. Night was saying imho, is that no matter where you live, be it a big city, a small country town, we cannot escape violence because violence is inherent in human kind. So, basically he's saying we cannot escape ourselves. Simple, yet imho quite profound. The man is a genius.
Perhaps if they hadn't marketed the movie as a horror/slasher type movie alot of people wouldn't have been so disappointed? I mean, because that's what they were expecting? I loved it. This wasn't a horror picture, this was a picture that was meant to make you think.

[Nerual]

If you do it with spoiler tags then you dont have to worry about giving anything away. If you scroll up there are a couple of posts on how to do that!

[iluvhhr]

I saw The Village for the second time today, and I still thoroughly enjoyed it. I was afraid I wouldn't be very scared, but I was. I jumped again when the creature walked underneath the tower. I didn't guess the ending, but I guessed halfway through that the creatures weren't real. When I saw the movie two days ago, my friend said the ending was a rip-off of a book we read years ago. She didn't enjoy it very much, but I loved it. Joaquin Phoenix had a much smaller role than I thought he would have, considering he's billed first. As for the Bush parallels, maybe it has to do with the fact that the village is based on lies, like the administration? And with the whole dumpster thing, an elder said that. She didn't mention dumpsters when she talked to Ivy.

[tantrix]

I saw the Village yesterday, and I think that this is one of the best Night's movies out there. I somehow compared it to 'The Others' and 'Sixth Sense'. The setup of the movie was amazing and the twist(s) towards the end were electrifying.
Spoilers:

Unexpected ending. Noticed the 'WALKER' on the hats of the employees of the reserve. Apparently, Ivy's dad owned the reserve.

I didn't get the whole dumpster thing in the movie.

Also, they said that Ivy became blind at one time, so she had seen colors before. I wondered if Lucious's color was red.

It was easy to figure out that the monster's were not real - come on - the red cloaks -that have to be human. but the ending was amazing... could never even think about it.

Night acted a little funny in the movie.. I think he should only show his face, but never have a speaking role.

[jasper]

On Ivy not telling him his color:

She's blind, isn't she? How could she name a color, if she's never actually seen a color?

Not everyone who is blind sees nothing. Also I got the idea she was not blind her whole life. From the dialog, it sounds more like she lost her eyesight. And the way she moved and held herself made it seem that way too. I think she could at least perceive light and shadows. After all, she ran through the woods without smacking into a tree.

[Nerual]

She must have lost her eyesight when she was younger, but not when she was first born. She counted steps to Lucious' house when
Noah stabbed him with the knife.
She new where everything was by just counting her steps, you could hear her muttering numbers under her breath as she walked. She probably could see shadows and light. The way she turned to look at someone when they where speaking might have also been to show that she had not always been blind. It seemed like she was raised to look at someone when they talked and she still had that habit even though she couldn't see them.

[jasper]

yep. I wasn't sure at first that the character was blind. Then again, it might not have been the intent- maybe it just wasn't good acting.

[WeasleyIsOurKing]

I loved the movie. I thought it was excellent.

Some parts I expected, like the fact that the monsters weren't real (although the costumes were scary looking. But I sure didn't expect for the setting to actually be set in modern-day America. That was the biggest twist for me.

Do you remember the part after the "monster" was in the town and was about to come into Ivy's house? And the camera panned over a bunch of townspeople, hiding in their cellars? The last two the camera showed were two little girls, holding each other and looking scared. As I was looking at them I thought they looked oddly familiar - and then I realized that they looked EXACTLY like my sister and me when we were little. EXACTLY like us. It was the weirdest thing and I can't get over it. I need to see the movie again to look at them a little closer.

[starlette01350]

I actually thought the cinematography was one of the strongest points of the movie. I've always admired M. Night's use of storyboards to plan out his shots, because they're really very effective. I especially like the look of long takes, which gives the movie a much more real, personal look to it. . . in particular, the scene between Lucius and Ivy on the porch at night. . . beautiful!

The acting was overall very good. I especially loved Joaquin Phoenix, who I never really saw as a shy, quiet character, but I was very impressed by the sweet innocence of his performance. I also thought Adrien Brody was excellent: I am always impressed when actors are able to effectively portray the complexities of a mentally handicapped character. And Bryce Dallas Howard is sure to be a star :) I'm glad that Shyamalan took the chance of putting her, as an unknown, in the lead role. It was definitely the right move.

I actually think the political allegory is the main point of this film. It seems to me that most of the people who dislike this movie are the ones who are ignoring the overflowing symbolism in the wake of waiting to be scared or trying to guess the ending. Even the "predictable twist" (which I didn't see coming, but nevertheless wasn't as floored by as in previous Shyamalan movies) has a purpose if you really think about it. In my mind, all of M. Night's films are advertised as what they appear to be on the surface: creepy movies about creatures or aliens or the supernatural. However, these things are just backdrops for what he is really trying to say about human nature. The Village takes it a step further to encompass every detail in a very poignant allegory about the world we live in now, which is very daring in our contemporary society, which generally doesn't seem to have the patience to really analyze what they're watching. Plus, it's a hundred times more creepy than creatures in the woods.

So, my advise to everyone would be to see it twice: once through to get the allegory, and again to really appreciate all the ways in which is falls together.

I wholeheartedly agree with you. I've read so many negative reviews where people say they figured out the twist at the beginning, but ignore the point M. Night is trying to make. The acting, cinematography, and pacing were all done wonderfully. I think the way the movie is marketed is partially to blame for bad reviews, as it is depicted as a thriller/horror when it is really more of a drama. I found this to be my second favorite film of Shamalyan's after the Sixth Sense. Unbreakable was paced a little too slowly and ended right as it became interesting. Signs was okay, but it was pretty transparent and sometimes silly.

Potential Signs Did anyone else think it was weird that Joaquin's character left the basement empty-handed and defenseless when killer aliens might still be in the house? How hard would it have been for him to pick up an axe, crowbar, golf club, etc...? Sorry, that's just a gripe of mine.

[~Tonks~]

I absolutely loved this movie. It's my favorite of his since the sixth sense and I think it's the best since the sixth sense.

I think Lucius's color was red. At first I thought it was yellow because it's the safe color and Lucius helped keep Ivy safe, but there was something more to Lucius than the other people in the town, there was a sense of wanting to break out, see what is out there, and Ivy was always ending up around the color red... and she was in love with him... so I think his color was red.

and

I think the significance of the dumpster was that in the late 1800s there was no such thing as a "dumpster" because there were no such thing as dump trucks, so when it's brought up, it's sneaking up on you that it's not set in the late 1800s.

[Classical_Wizar]

i saw it too, and i think you are Miss Tonks, about the first spoiler

[aWISHFULthinker]

the Village just blew me away. It was awsome.

[*spoiler*] What was the dumpster thing about? was it just that the elder didnt mention it due to the fact there were no such thing as dumpsters in the village? [*/spoiler]

anyways the movie was great I absolutly love joaquin phoenix ...hes an awsome actor.

[Mikey]

So the village is good eh.......I heard it wasn't from other people I know..so I guess I'll have to se it for myself.

[tantrix]

the Village just blew me away. It was awsome.

[*spoiler*] What was the dumpster thing about? was it just that the elder didnt mention it due to the fact there were no such thing as dumpsters in the village? [*/spoiler]

anyways the movie was great I absolutly love joaquin phoenix ...hes an awsome actor.

haha.. sorry the spoiler thing didn't work for you.. yea.. I loved the village also..

[~Tonks~]

the Village just blew me away. It was awsome.

What was the dumpster thing about? was it just that the elder didnt mention it due to the fact there were no such thing as dumpsters in the village?

anyways the movie was great I absolutly love joaquin phoenix ...hes an awsome actor.


fix your spoiler tags. no *

I edited it in your quote

[elijahsgal1023]

just to answer the question about the dumpsters.... the lady never actually said to Ivy that her sister was put in a dumpster, we heard her saying that at the end of the movie when william hurts character was flashing back when they first started the cult, and they were all telling their horror storys, so the woman never actually talked to any of the younger villagers about the dumpsters :p

[starlette01350]

just to answer the question about the dumpsters.... the lady never actually said to Ivy that her sister was put in a dumpster, we heard her saying that at the end of the movie when william hurts character was flashing back when they first started the cult, and they were all telling their horror storys, so the woman never actually talked to any of the younger villagers about the dumpsters :p

I think you're right. I'm pretty sure that when she was talking to Ivy she said something like:

her sister was raped and murdered and her body was found in an alleyway next to their apartment. That moment kinda stuck in my head because there were no alleys in the village and alleys seem to be more modern to me.

[Blizzard]

I love this movie, i think it was one of the best of the year. It was beautifully done and it makes you think at the end of it.

[Ava]

No offense meant but I'm really disappointed with this movie. Maybe I just expected too much out of it.

[evanescence4491]

is this movie worth renting?

[Blizzard]

Definetly. Just don't expect a horror. Expect a Romatic-Thriller.

[ShelbySB8R]

I didn't think it was too bad, but my son and hubbie hated it. It had the trademark "make you jump out of your seat" scenes, but the story didn't seem as good as The Sixth Sense or Signs, the scary that makes you afraid to walk in the dark through your own house.

[agpotter]

Okay, I REALLY love this movie. I just have to point out that the claims that this movie is political propaganda are completely false, baseless, and in all other ways absolute RUBBISH. Anyone who knows M. Night's style knows he would not make a ridiculous political statement in his films. To further prove the point, if you watch the making-of materials on the DVD, you realize that these are completely absurd claims. It's true, and there's no denying that M. Night is a master of allegory, and he definitely has something to say (i.e. Signs isn't REALLY about aliens, and The Village isn't REALLY about the creatures, they're just vehicles to get the messages across), but it's just not like him to be so blatantly against a political leader or party or event. Truthfully, most of his movies are about transcendental themes (religion, faith, identity, family, etc.). Methinks someone's been watching too much Michael Moore.... Honestly, if this didn't come out at the same time as stupid idiotic Fahrenheit 9/11, no one would have made a political parallel out of The Village. Seriously, this bugs.

Anyway, I love this film more and more each time I see it. Not REALLY scary (it did make me jump once or twice, and definitely suspenseful), but it's not REALLY a monster movie, so that's not REALLY the point. The twists were really rather unpredictable (I tend to think some of the people who insist they knew from the start either hated the movie and want to slam it in any way possible, even if by lying about predicting the whole thing, or they just want to sound like they're really cinematically intelligent.... Or maybe they just figured it out?...), the music is beautiful (I believe the violinist in the score is Hillary Hahn), the cinematography is superb, and Bryce Dallas Howard and Joaquin Phoenix are amazing. I'm actually a little upset that it was (almost?) completely ignored by the Oscars.

[TaraBrady]

I actually took the first 'twist' for granted from the start of the the film, and had a strong feeling about the second for most of it, but I don't think it hurt my enjoyment of the film at all. Honestly, if I had gone into it expecting a huge revelation, I think I would have felt cheated, but I had heard before that the twist was pretty obvious, so I wasn't disappointed at all and was able to appreciate the movie for what it was. It wasn't as good as the sixth sense (I saw that twist coming, too, but I don't think I would have if I hadn't already had the 'surprise ending' hyped for me so much before I saw it. That made me suspicious.)

And maybe it was just seeing it on video rather than in the theatres, but seeing the monster for the first time wasn't as scary as seeing the alien walk into the frame in Signs. That so freaked me out!

I think Shyamalan needs to do a simple, straightforward, no-twist film to get away from all these expectations people are putting on his films. He's an incredible storyteller and the pressure to make another 'sixth sense' is, I think, hurting his work.

[Blizzard]

I love the soundtrack to the movie, I'm sure James will win the oscar. :)

[Holly is Short]

Meh, I loved it. Great movie. Soundtrack is awesome too. I really like the characters. Ivy, Lucius, Noah. They're all great. :p

[reinigt]

I was blown away by the film...and I know its a little childish of me but I totally fell in love with IVY....she was completely beautiful!
The second time I watched it I was able to pick up on a lot more of the film.

Just to clarify...the skinning of the pigs was done by the retarded boy...right??? Because he was the one that found the suit under the floorboards?? :huh:

[agpotter]

Yes, it was Noah, which is why the elders were surprised and confused about it.

[Holly is Short]

It's sad really. I like Noah. He is a very interesting character. My favorite actually. It's even better that Adrien Brody played him! :tu:

[agpotter]

Yes, it is sad because he wasn't balanced, he didn't always seem to know what he was doing.

...and I know its a little childish of me but I totally fell in love with IVY....she was completely beautiful!

You're not the only one, she was beautiful and her acting was amazing. I fell for her a little myself... :)

[Spew Member]

I was really suprised by this film, I usually don't like M. Night Shyamalan's films but I really enjoyed it. The only thing that threw me off was the dialouge, I thought it was pretty hokey.

[agpotter]

Yes, I think it was intentional too. It sounds old English, but it also somehow sounds contemporary... Part of the twist.

[Spew Member]

It felt forced, like they were trying to be old english. It could have been his intention but I really thought it was a bit distracting. That's just my opinion though. :)

[Potters Goblet]

I've loved all of M Night's movie's until this one. Frankly it was just pointless in my eyes. I didn't get it. It didnt' scare me. I spent the entire movie trying to figure out what the movie was about and by the time I figured it out, the credits were rolling and I didn't really care anymore.

My fiance' felt the same way. It seems the majority of people on this thread loved the movie and that's okay. Who's to say you're wrong. Maybe I'm just being a bad little monkey, but I really didn't care much for this movie and honestly it was the first time I questioned Adrien Brodey's movie selection. He's a brilliant actor but why he'd sign on to this I'll never know!

[busy91]

I was fine with it, it wasn't one of my favorites of his, but I thought it was OK. I knew there was a problem with the ending, everyone was telling me this, but they never said what the problem was. I was not happy with it, there was no closure. So she came back and then....? I was disappointed in him this time. I hope he does better next time around.

[agpotter]

I've loved all of M Night's movie's until this one. Frankly it was just pointless in my eyes. I didn't get it. It didnt' scare me.

Just because you didn't get it or it didn't scare you doesn't mean it was pointless. And besides, it wasn't meant to be scary. The monsters weren't even the point of the movie.

And, to ^, on the contrary, I thought the ending was poetic and beautiful. Ivy comes back and even though she knows the truth decides to carry on because of all the lies she's been taught. It's meaningful and even a little tragic.

Anyway, like someone said, to each his own, but I can see exactly why Brody signed onto this. He read the script and met M. Night and decided he had to. Watch the DVD interviews, you'll see what I mean.

[marauderlupin]

I guessed the ending before I saw the movie. It was just a joke because everyone who saw it opening weekend was ****** off about the obvious ending so I was like. How bad can it be? It's isn't set in the present is it? :eyebrows: Yes, I know. I am a genius, but this thread isn't about my genius....

moving on to the movie reactions...

I had low expectations from all the stuff reviewers, especially Ebert, and friends were saying, but I ended up liking the movie. I mean, seriously, people acted like he committed a crime or something. I was waiting for some tremendous filmmaking errors, but I saw none. Night is an amazing filmmaker. Everything about the movie was perfect except the plot. It would've helped if he got himself a co-writer, but I didn't let the fact that i knew the end ruin the movie for me. Despite all the shortcomings, I cared about the characters. I almost had a stroke when Crazy man (Noah?) stabbed Lucius.

Are we still doing spoilers? It's been out on DVD for like a month if not longer...

[Holly is Short]

As I said I love this movie! The plot was a bit ... blah. But I thought it was great still! I almost went nuts when Noah stabbed Lucius. I felt bad for the stabber and the stabbed. :lol: ? Noah doesn't think right so he can't really be blamed for doing all those things.

[agpotter]

Yes, I think we're beyond spoilers... It bugs when people get mad for giving things away when the thing's been out for months (especially in cases like OotP).

Anyway, yes, they were able to develop the characters very well, so we cared about them. I also nearly wet my pants when Noah did you know what to Lucius (then he proceeded to do it again and again... gruesome).

[lorna]

I had huge issues with this film especially the presentation of the character of the "village idiot" for lack of a better term.
And I also figured out the end of this film oh....ten minutes in.
It was a beautiful film to look at but if you took that away the plot was just not credible.
Right up there with Signs --the aliens can pilot a ship at light speed but can't turn a door knob.
Yeh, right.

[agpotter]

Hmmm... That you're worrying about door knobs and politically correctness means you're missing the point of the show. It's an allegory, not historical drama.

Also, I rarely buy when people say they figured out the twist "ten minutes in". Usually that means they didn't like it and want to bash it, or because they want to sound smarter than M. Night.

Anyway, so what exactly were the issues you had with the presentation of the village idiot? Did you think it was un-P.C.?

[Blizzard]

I didn't see the twist coming at all! Maybe I'm just stupid :p

I thought the twist was quite good, and I liked the way they did it.

My favourite scenes in the movie is when the creature comes to the village, and the Wedding Party. :)

[agpotter]

No, you're not stupid. A lot of people didn't see the twist coming (or at least they didn't see ALL the twists coming).

[Holly is Short]

I saw the twist when the Elders when fighting about Mr. Walker -- Spoiler? I'm not going to do it ... it's been out for months -- About Mr. Walker letting Ivy go to the Towns. I had it figured out like ... 5 minutes before the twist was revealed. So it wasn't that obvious for me.