m. night shyamalan's "the village" (spoilers)

WARNING: IF YOU HAVE NOT SEEN THE MOVIE AND DO NOT WANT TO KNOW ABOUT ITS SECRETS, PLEASE STOP READING.

otherwise, scroll down

Alright, i haven't seen the movie yet, but i must have a mutant power where i can figure out "the big secret" in this guy's flicks within 15 to 20 minutes.

(i fell asleep early on when watching "Signs," and haven't felt the urge to see it since so i guess i'm only 2 for 3.)

Okay, here's my big question(s) about "The Village."

i've only seen the on-line trailers and noted that Ebert gave it 1 star. i'm guessing that "the big secret" is something along the lines of:

a) the movie is NOT set in the 17th/18th century, but modern times (or the future). A situation where, generations ago, a group turned their backs on society - draft dodgers, Civil War vets wanting peace over butchery, Okies escaping the Dust Bowl of the Depression, post 9-11 survivors wanting to get back to basic - and set up this village.

b) the monster things are not real, but someone in the village using it as a scare tactic to keep the villagers in line.

Anyone out there seen it and will confirm/deny my lame-@ss ramblings?

[Edited by Hanford to add extra spoiler warnings]

[ Edited by: hanford_lemoore on 2004-08-01 02:56 ]

I saw it last night. You're right but you're missing one important plot point: The town elders made a deal with the devil to basically live forever, but the rest of the town does not know this.

Okay I made that up. I just have to say that if you see his movies JUST for the plot twists, then you'll be disappointed. But even though the ending can be seen from a million miles away, I enjoyed the movie, and have been thinking about it and discussing it all day. I actually think the earlier you discover the trick ending, the more you'll enjoy it.

YOU ARE CORRECT SIR!

Ok, I will stop chanelling Ed McMahon, and say... saw it last night. Wasn't too surprised by the 'twist'. I hadn't figured it out for sure but when it was revealed I was not in the least bit surprised. My husband figured it out right away. However, it is still an entertaining film, I enjoyed it. Nicely shot, good soundtrack, not a waste of my film going dollar by any means...

I guess my real question is who slaughtered all the animals during the wedding? Was it Noah? There's the scene with Weaver and Hurt talking back-to-back; talking about what killed them. That didn't make too much sense to me.

~Hanford

Yeah, it was Noah. There was some scene that alluded to that with his parents figuring it out...

The entire plot is posted on "Ain't It Cool News" --

Seems like a very cheap "reveal.""Sixth Sense" was so cool, one of the best -- if not the best -- "trick" endings I've ever seen. Then "Unbreakable" movie was so freakin' boring, so freakin' unimaginative. Then "Signs" so cheap (plot wise). And now this. M. Knight as Disney's dancing bear (please throw us some quarters!).

Box office for "Village" shows dropoff in biz from Fri to Sat nights. That means everyone's telling their buddies "this was a gyp." B.O. always jumps from Fri to Sat for a true hit.

I saw "Manchurian Candidate" instead. Some parts are nice, very nice. Some parts are boring, very boring. Don't worry about getting more popcorn during these scenes, you won't miss anything. Recommeded? Yes. When it comes on HBO.

On 2004-08-01 20:59, tikifish wrote:
Yeah, it was Noah. There was some scene that alluded to that with his parents figuring it out...

Yeah I caught the part about him finding the costume, but not the reference to him cutting up the livestock.

*On 2004-08-02 00:10, Satan's Sin wrote:*And now this.

Don't let the negitive press or the over-hype get to you, SS. Don't succumb to the fanboys on AICN to decide for you whether or not the movie is any good. If you're a AICN regular it would be pretty hard to go see the movie without thinking it is going to suck, but I do think there are redeeming things in the film. Just not the ending. Actually Knowing the twist makes the ending less of a let down, in my opinion.

Actually, it was Roger Ebert who put the kibosh on it for me. He usually likes everything, and the fact that he gave a thumbs down to this one was an eye-opener. He even called the "reveal" --- "just one step up from 'it was all a dream.'"

My understanding is that M. Night actually appears at the end as one of the characters. True? And that he "explains" away some of the loose ends. True?

In the old Hollywood, when screenwriters had to resort to creating a character to state bald exposition to the audience, they would derisively call this character "Irving, the Explainer."

I'll watch it when it comes on HBO. But this HAS been a pretty dry year for good movies, hasn't it?

Last good movie I saw was on TCM -- "The Nun's Story," starring Audrey Hepburn. Now how weird is that? No monsters, no fate-of-the-world-in-the-balance, no CGI, just Audrey Hepburn's triumphs and sorrows as a nun. Absolutely riveting. Every single bit of it. How WEIRD is that?

Saw it last night.

It struck me more as an Outer Limits episode than a feature presentation.

It had a cool cameo by the guy who played the killer in that Sandra Bullock movie about the killer teenagers.

The Pianist guy did a good job, and Sigourney is a premanently attractive woman. She and Susan Sarandon.

William Hurt did a good job, too.

The evil Roman Emperor from Gladiator did nicely as well.

This will be a good rental candidate. While you watch and eat popcorn, you can chat about how the movie might end.

There was this point in the film, if I recall, when Noah's parents go 'but what about the animals?' and then they look at each other, horrified, so you know they relized it was him. Something like that...

Ok, I'll do a Jesse Helms and weigh in on this, even though I haven't seen it or any other MNS movie. It seems to me that the whole problem with his oevre is that the plots could easily support a Twilight Zone/Outer Limits/Tales from the Dark Side TV presentation, but asking people to sit through a 2 hour feature film for one twist ending is asking a lot.

Now that there are 4 MNS movies to see, I might consider renting the other three and seeing this one in the theater, just to get his style down. Especially if I'm in some kind of horrible accident/shark attack, and the doctor recommends that I not see anything intellectually stimulating.

This discussion of twist endings got me thinking about this movie "Jacob's Ladder" (1990) - that was one of the first movies I really remember that used the twist ending to its advantage!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099871/

M. Knight Shama-LAME!!! I agree that sixth sense was good, but I still saw it coming. There were too many clues in the movie not to figure it out...

Were there clues in the Village that would have let you figure out they were not living in the 1800's? I am curious if there were. I didn't catch them.

William Hurt was seen wearing a digital watch.

And there was the part where Sigourney Weaver uses the patented Juiceman. I don't think that was invented yet.

For me, the biggest clue was someone going to town for medicine. In the olden days, they'd just pray and apply leeches!

(I didn't see the movie.)

I was entranced by the young actress, Bryce Dallas Howard, who played Ivy. Thought she was really beautiful and handled the role well, (or I may just like redheads). I didn't find out till afterwards that she is actor/director Ron Howard's daughter. That made me feel old.

Sabu

Things that tweaked me:

1. The main flaw: Humans who are fearful of beasts and cowed by them. I immediately wondered, "What the Hell?" Us humans destroy all in our path and take no prisoners until the beasts in question are almost extinct, then we toss them in zoos. Real settlers would have made a fort and slaughtered the beasts.

2. If the rules were "we won't kill you if you stay out of the forest", then why did they need fires and night sentries?

3. The way some lady mentioned her daughter being killed in an alley made my wife think it was said in too modern a way.

4. They lived in a small valley but had cotton clothing. With no travel in or out for trade, where did the cotton come from?

5. They would also need infrastructure for steel knives and other tools, glass, especially for the doctor's optical lenses.
   Loads of infrastructure is needed for wood milling, paper making, oil for lanterns and torches, shoe makers, steel for razors to keep the men clean shaven, lock boxes, hardware, etc.

I figured so few people couldn't maintain a totally seperate environment for any length of time.

Where would they get all those dyes for all the clothing colors?

6. Inbreeding would have gotten a little out of hand over time.

7. If the beasts kill all who enter the forest, then how did the people get to the town in the first place?

Plus.

Why send a blind chick with no clue about cars, the modern world, ID, or anything out to get a prescription filled?

If he was using her because she was blind and he didn't want anybody to go who could report back, then...why didn't he go?

The dad already knew the secret, and it was only half a day's walk. He could have blasted out after dinner one evening and been back in time for breakfast with none the wiser. We know that "Elders" must have gone missing for hours at a time because they used to dress up and go make noise in the woods.

And another thing...

Why keep the costumes on site?

If nobody left the village, shouldn't they have kept the Santa suits somewhere off campus? Then NOBODY could accidentally find them and they wouldn't have to worry about putting them on at home and then trying to sneak OUT of the village.

The Village, HA!

Those village people had no policeman, no Indian guy, no construction worker, no leather guy.

Harrrrumph.

It was like a really long twilight zone episode.

a REALLY long twilight zone episode.

Just saw the box office on boxofficemojo ... Village is down 72% from last weekend and that is a bad, bad drop and means a lot of people are telling their friends that this is not worth $8 ... ("acceptable" drops from opening wknd to next is like 30% (source: Variety); anything more means weak "legs").

I like MNS and I think the mantle of Hitchcock is deservedly his, but I think he slacked off on this script and maybe this will be the bucket of cold water he needs. I really would like to see something as good as "Sixth Sense" again.

Frank Sinatra always said that when you "made it," that didn't mean you could kick back and take it easy. It meant you had to work even harder.

[ Edited by: Satan's Sin on 2004-08-07 20:24 ]

I just saw the movie and really liked it.
Why don't you guys just let your imagination flow and let you captivate by the story ??
Even if I understood the end from the beginning, I really enjoyed the all film. And even if the all story wouldn't be possible, who cares ??
Don't you like hearing fantasy stories ? Don't you like watching movies such as "Charlie and the chocolate factory" or fairy tails ?? Well I do, and I think it's great.

And I'd love to live in a tiki village :)

This discussion of twist endings got me thinking about this movie "Jacob's Ladder" (1990) - that was one of the first movies I really remember that used the twist ending to its advantage!
.

Jacob's Ladder was a great movie. I believe the whole twist ending was mastered by Hitchcock, though. Take movies like Vertigo, or Psycho as an example.

As far as the village goes.....it was an okay movie. I had it figured out about 30 minutes into it and I didn't even have to analyze it that much. It was just sort of obvious to me. I hated Signs, and I hated Unbreakable even more, so finding the Village somewhat entertaining was a plus.