So...

I used to kind of give M. Night Shymalan the befit of the doubt. I thought Sixth Sense was overrated as hell when it came out.

I also was so-so on unbreakable but liked the concept! i recall liking Signs when it came out & i was younger...

But recently i rewatched it & man is it... just awful Now it's not as bad as his Avatar movie which i actualy witnessed people in the theatre either leaving or falling asleep as the movie was going

But it is so over dramatic and silly... but people still think this is a really good movie. I don't get it

This review right here sums up everything.

The thing I liked about "Signs" was that when I saw it in the movies, the surround sound made you feel like you were in the house when the aliens were outside.

When I tried to watch it again, the "cool" had gone...

• I liked "The Sixth Sense". I enjoyed going back and looking for the clues and things after I had read an article on it.
• I HATED "Unbreakable"
• I kind of dug the end of "The Village", even though I was outvoted on that one.
• "The Lady in the Water" (or whatever the title) made me weep for him...
• "Devil" was poorly made, but I kinda liked it.
• Okay, I forgot "The Happening"... probably for a reason.

That guy was funny! I actually watched the whole thing...




forgotten movie/comment about video

[Edited 8/20/12 21:02pm]

[Edited 8/20/12 21:02pm]

You are CLEARLY on drugs and I will not stand for it.

MelinaB said:

You are CLEARLY on drugs and I will not stand for it.

My love, if you enjoyed signs. YOU are on drugs... and i shall walk on by

I love ALL shyamalans movies even the ones everyone else hates

I especially like him on 30 Rock

oh except the happening

ZombieKitten said:

oh except the happening

Me too!

I think they work as literature, honestly.

The themes and such.

And yeah....I actually busted out laughing at the happening.

chocolate1 said:

The thing I liked about "Signs" was that when I saw it in the movies, the surround sound made you feel like you were in the house when the aliens were outside.

When I tried to watch it again, the "cool" had gone...

• I liked "The Sixth Sense". I enjoyed going back and looking for the clues and things after I had read an article on it.
• I HATED "Unbreakable"
• I kind of dug the end of "The Village", even though I was outvoted on that one.
• "The Lady in the Water" (or whatever the title) made me weep for him...
• "Devil" was poorly made, but I kinda liked it.
• Okay, I forgot "The Happening"... probably for a reason.

That guy was funny! I actually watched the whole thing...




forgotten movie/comment about video

[Edited 8/20/12 21:02pm]

[Edited 8/20/12 21:02pm]

I totally agree with you about the surround sound in theaters when watching "Signs". To me, there wasn't much to the movie, but I throroughly enjoyed Joaquin Phoenix and developed a crush on him.

"The Sixth Sense"...not ashamed to say that I liked that movie. I even cried a few times watching it.

"Unbreakable"...I treated as pure comedy. I laughed so damn much during that movie it was crazy. Especially when Sam Jackson fell down those flight of stairs.

"The Village"...was laughable too...but not as funny as "Unbreakable".

"Lady in the Water"...I didn't even bother going to see this one.

"Devil"...was boring until the end when the old lady got evil. I liked that part.

Hell, I forgot all about "The Happening" too.

[Edited 8/21/12 6:09am]

I quite liked The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, but I found everything else of his that I've seen to be awful.

Signs has too many stupid plot holes for me, the biggest of which relates to water. If the aliens react so violently to water, why have they come to a planet that's surface is 70%ish covered in the stuff, and the atmosphere contains so much of it that it quite often literally falls out of the sky? Also - knowing this, they still go around on the planet completely naked, without any protective clothing at all? And what were they planning on doing with the humans? Eat us? We're about 80% water, and would give them a case of the shits that they'd not soon forget!

Lianachan said:

I quite liked The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, but I found everything else of his that I've seen to be awful.

Signs has too many stupid plot holes for me, the biggest of which relates to water. If the aliens react so violently to water, why have they come to a planet that's surface is 70%ish covered in the stuff, and the atmosphere contains so much of it that it quite often literally falls out of the sky? Also - knowing this, they still go around on the planet completely naked, without any protective clothing at all? And what were they planning on doing with the humans? Eat us? We're about 80% water, and would give them a case of the shits that they'd not soon forget!

I just fell out laughing.

Lianachan said:

I quite liked The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, but I found everything else of his that I've seen to be awful.

Signs has too many stupid plot holes for me, the biggest of which relates to water. If the aliens react so violently to water, why have they come to a planet that's surface is 70%ish covered in the stuff, and the atmosphere contains so much of it that it quite often literally falls out of the sky? Also - knowing this, they still go around on the planet completely naked, without any protective clothing at all? And what were they planning on doing with the humans? Eat us? We're about 80% water, and would give them a case of the shits that they'd not soon forget!

plus: they've mastered intergalatic travel, yet they can't get out of a kitchen pantry???

that movie was really poorly written

cborgman said:

Lianachan said:

I quite liked The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, but I found everything else of his that I've seen to be awful.

Signs has too many stupid plot holes for me, the biggest of which relates to water. If the aliens react so violently to water, why have they come to a planet that's surface is 70%ish covered in the stuff, and the atmosphere contains so much of it that it quite often literally falls out of the sky? Also - knowing this, they still go around on the planet completely naked, without any protective clothing at all? And what were they planning on doing with the humans? Eat us? We're about 80% water, and would give them a case of the shits that they'd not soon forget!

plus: they've mastered intergalatic travel, yet they can't get out of a kitchen pantry???

that movie was really poorly written

I'm going to try and defend this movie.

It won't be easy.....As a matter of fact it will be impossible....

But here goes.

OK OK.

Signs should have NEVER been marketed as a horror. And it certainly should not have been marketted as a science fiction or paranormal thriller of any sort.

It's actually a work of literature.

It is! If any of you have had to take English Lit (American Lit 101) in college, you know the story of Young Goodman Brown, by Nathanial Hawthorne. The story is rich with allegory and inplausible things that take place. Ultimately, it has very little action in it. Mr. Brown's wife, Faith, goes for a walk in the woods where a stranger approaches her. It is inferred from several of his actions, and his ambigous discription that the stranger is in fact, the devil...or just evil. Faith of course, is our own faith, etc.

Anyways, Signs attempts the same type of allegory in it's story telling, at the expense of course to realism and by betraying good sci-fi and horror elements. M. Knight S. attempted to weave a modern day Hawthorne style story---imperfect of course, but to me the attempt alone was commendable.

The signs in our lives...they all have some type of meaning. We can look at them as reasons to deny our faith...or we can look at them as ways to strengthen our faith. The wife's "Tell whats-his-face to swing" line was originally perceived by the main character as proof that there is no God--that everything is random. Because nuerons in her brain fired and caused her to say random things of no meaning. But in the end, it can be reasoned that she was giving him a sign on what to do in the pivitol final scene.

Any ways, the details are hokey, and the glass of water destroying an alien is silly, but had the story been given more artsy-fartsy elements and marketted as an art-film, I think it would have worked.

I just found it to be a refreshing break from what was in the theaters at the time.

I also liked The Village for the same reason. They constructed this completely implausible village to protect the innocent, but the most innocent character dies (Adrian Brody's character), and also commits the most violent crime in the village. In a sense the director was saying, that in order to protect the innocent, do we construct myth? Isn't the sacrifice of knowledge and freedoms a greater price than safety?

I found The Village to be a provocative and important film.

for your thought-out response.

I teach American Lit, so I can see what you're saying...

But yeah, those movies weren't really that good.

imago said:

cborgman said:

plus: they've mastered intergalatic travel, yet they can't get out of a kitchen pantry???

that movie was really poorly written

I'm going to try and defend this movie.

It won't be easy.....As a matter of fact it will be impossible....

But here goes.

OK OK.

Signs should have NEVER been marketed as a horror. And it certainly should not have been marketted as a science fiction or paranormal thriller of any sort.

It's actually a work of literature.

It is! If any of you have had to take English Lit (American Lit 101) in college, you know the story of Young Goodman Brown, by Nathanial Hawthorne. The story is rich with allegory and inplausible things that take place. Ultimately, it has very little action in it. Mr. Brown's wife, Faith, goes for a walk in the woods where a stranger approaches her. It is inferred from several of his actions, and his ambigous discription that the stranger is in fact, the devil...or just evil. Faith of course, is our own faith, etc.

Anyways, Signs attempts the same type of allegory in it's story telling, at the expense of course to realism and by betraying good sci-fi and horror elements. M. Knight S. attempted to weave a modern day Hawthorne style story---imperfect of course, but to me the attempt alone was commendable.

The signs in our lives...they all have some type of meaning. We can look at them as reasons to deny our faith...or we can look at them as ways to strengthen our faith. The wife's "Tell whats-his-face to swing" line was originally perceived by the main character as proof that there is no God--that everything is random. Because nuerons in her brain fired and caused her to say random things of no meaning. But in the end, it can be reasoned that she was giving him a sign on what to do in the pivitol final scene.

Any ways, the details are hokey, and the glass of water destroying an alien is silly, but had the story been given more artsy-fartsy elements and marketted as an art-film, I think it would have worked.

I just found it to be a refreshing break from what was in the theaters at the time.

I also liked The Village for the same reason. They constructed this completely implausible village to protect the innocent, but the most innocent character dies (Adrian Brody's character), and also commits the most violent crime in the village. In a sense the director was saying, that in order to protect the innocent, do we construct myth? Isn't the sacrifice of knowledge and freedoms a greater price than safety?

I found The Village to be a provocative and important film.

[img:$uid]http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m6ftxhOnD21rwcc6bo1_250.gif[/img:$uid]

@ Cborgman:

[img:$uid]http://i339.photobucket.com/albums/n476/woollie2002/laughing.gif[/img:$uid]

chocolate1 said:

for your thought-out response.

I teach American Lit, so I can see what you're saying...

But yeah, those movies weren't really that good.

his first two were good, after theat all of them have moments of strong idea that was poorly implemented.

the moments of intrigue just never add up enough for me against the long stretches of terrible writing and good ideas that were half-baked

cborgman said:

chocolate1 said:

for your thought-out response.

I teach American Lit, so I can see what you're saying...

But yeah, those movies weren't really that good.

his first two were good, after theat all of them have moments of strong idea that was poorly implemented.

the moments of intrigue just never add up enough for me against the long stretches of terrible writing and good ideas that were half-baked

I agree.

chocolate1 said:

for your thought-out response.

I teach American Lit, so I can see what you're saying...

But yeah, those movies weren't really that good.

cborgman said:

imago said:

I'm going to try and defend this movie.

It won't be easy.....As a matter of fact it will be impossible....

But here goes.

OK OK.

Signs should have NEVER been marketed as a horror. And it certainly should not have been marketted as a science fiction or paranormal thriller of any sort.

It's actually a work of literature.

It is! If any of you have had to take English Lit (American Lit 101) in college, you know the story of Young Goodman Brown, by Nathanial Hawthorne. The story is rich with allegory and inplausible things that take place. Ultimately, it has very little action in it. Mr. Brown's wife, Faith, goes for a walk in the woods where a stranger approaches her. It is inferred from several of his actions, and his ambigous discription that the stranger is in fact, the devil...or just evil. Faith of course, is our own faith, etc.

Anyways, Signs attempts the same type of allegory in it's story telling, at the expense of course to realism and by betraying good sci-fi and horror elements. M. Knight S. attempted to weave a modern day Hawthorne style story---imperfect of course, but to me the attempt alone was commendable.

The signs in our lives...they all have some type of meaning. We can look at them as reasons to deny our faith...or we can look at them as ways to strengthen our faith. The wife's "Tell whats-his-face to swing" line was originally perceived by the main character as proof that there is no God--that everything is random. Because nuerons in her brain fired and caused her to say random things of no meaning. But in the end, it can be reasoned that she was giving him a sign on what to do in the pivitol final scene.

Any ways, the details are hokey, and the glass of water destroying an alien is silly, but had the story been given more artsy-fartsy elements and marketted as an art-film, I think it would have worked.

I just found it to be a refreshing break from what was in the theaters at the time.

I also liked The Village for the same reason. They constructed this completely implausible village to protect the innocent, but the most innocent character dies (Adrian Brody's character), and also commits the most violent crime in the village. In a sense the director was saying, that in order to protect the innocent, do we construct myth? Isn't the sacrifice of knowledge and freedoms a greater price than safety?

I found The Village to be a provocative and important film.

[img:$uid]http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m6ftxhOnD21rwcc6bo1_250.gif[/img:$uid]

imago said:

chocolate1 said:

for your thought-out response.

I teach American Lit, so I can see what you're saying...

But yeah, those movies weren't really that good.

Twice in one day, I say: "Dan! "

I have been totally entertained by them all except for "The Happening" and have not bothered to watch "The Last Airbender".

But all his other movies have been interesting and entertaining... but most importantly... unique.

By the way, they have ALL been financially profitable. Some people hate on him and wonder why he gets to keep making movies. It's because he's a multimillion dollar industry unto himself at this point.

I liked Signs, despite the plot holes but that is funny about the water. Didn't see it in the theater and I didn't know it was suppose to be a horror. I liked Sixth Sense and Unbreakable. Got bored watching The Village at the drive-in. And fast forwarded through Devil to just get to the end, after that I never went to see another one of his movies.

chocolate1 said:

for your thought-out response.

I teach American Lit, so I can see what you're saying...

But yeah, those movies weren't really that good.

I have to give credit where credit is due.

Imago, that was an amazing way to describe the value of the movie.

Signs is a very good movie if you want to get something "deeper" than special effects or shock value. It makes you THINK.

I love that movie.

PurpleJedi said:

cborgman said:

PurpleJedi said:

I have to give credit where credit is due.

Imago, that was an amazing way to describe the value of the movie.

Signs is a very good movie if you want to get something "deeper" than special effects or shock value. It makes you THINK.

I love that movie.

as much as i dont like the movie, the buildup to that moment of seeing the alien the first time in the birthday video and the reveal were heartstoppingly good. the stuff that came after that just made me lose all interest, as the huge logic holes couldnt sustain the plot device. part of it too was my longstanding dislike of mel gibson. i havent liked him since the early 90s, when i was in the minority. nowdays...

Seeing the alien "up close" at the end was a real letdown.

Personally...skipping on getting a ride back home & stranding yourself on a "toxic" planet just so you can settle a grudge cuz the man cut your finger off...doesn't make sense.