The Village
 

http://membres.lycos.fr/igcq2003/cine/the_village.jpg

http://thevillage.movies.go.com/wall...paper6_800.jpg

http://images.killermovies.com/v/the...age_teaser.jpg

http://hometown.aol.com/scifitalk/images/village.jpg

http://nexbase.net/albums/Village%2C..._The.sized.jpg

"Covington Pennsylvania is a nice quiet town surrounded by a beautiful forest where strange, and unseen creatures live..."

sounds very interesting! Actually....it sounds scary as hell but I'm gonna see it none the less ;)

Check out the trailers at www.imdb.com

I went to college with Judy Greer, and this looks like her biggest movie role to date (she's been a "side" character in a lot of other movies)

it reminds me of the blair witch project

why do people think that M. Night Shymalan is such a great director? He's only made a handful of movies. Sure, he made Signs and The 6th Sense, but didn't he also direct Unbreakable? And wasn't Unbreakable a total piece of crap?

I liked Unbreakable :(

This movie will probably scare the majority of western movie goers... But unfortunately nothing produced by hollywood scares me anymore.

The crazy scary japanese/korean/chinese movies i've watched lately have raised the bar to a new level

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0368447/

I find every commericial saying "M. Night Shamalan's" very annoying, though.

It's so as to distinguish it from all the other "The Village" movies out there. ;)

I really enjoy seeing the direction taking on an artistic sense, especially in the symbolism of color. Sixth sense was red, Unbreakable was blue, Signs was green, and The Village is yellow. I can't wait to see it, but need someone with me for moral support to justify jumping out of my seat :)

I certainly want to see this movie - looks awesome.

I think everyone says M. Night Shyamalan is a great director because he is. All of his movies have been great so far. And he's only released a handful of movies so far because he writes and directs them himself.

My wife and I were talking about this film last night...

She mentioned that our son asked her if she wanted to go and see, "M. Night Shaymalan's The Village..." Not The Village but rather M. Night Shaymalan's The Village. She said no, it looks too scary and he said, me neither. Too scary.

1) My family is populated by scardy cats. I only hope my daughter, when she is of age, likes scary films as much as I.

2) Since the success of the Sixth Sense, every M. Night Shaymalan film has been marketed as, M. Night Shaymalan's... I too find this annoying. M. Night Shaymalan as a brand. I mean, his films are OK. Kind of creepy, and definately have a certain vibe to them but who do they think he is... Hitchcock?

M. Night Shaymalan is one of the best directors in recent memory. Even unbreakable was a good movie. Anyhow, I plan on actually finding a sitter for my little one and heading to the movies for the first time this year.

This is exactly what I mean. Too many directors are full of themselves.

What big director doesn't do that? Or producer? Doesn't advertising for Quentin Tarantino, Steven Spielberg, Jerry Bruckheimer, John Woo, Clint Eastwood, Ron Howard, etc. etc. movies throw their names around too? This is hardly reserved just for Shymalan!

Almost every trailer has the voice over guy saying "M Night Shylaman's".....gets old fast.

I find nothing wrong with them stating his name, I actually like it. What makes the director any different from the actors? EVERY SINGLE MOVIE hypes of the actors, they all get that distinction, and the director, IMO, is much more important anyway.

And as far as the movie goes, I love Shymalan, and I cannot wait to see this film.

I disagree...

Where in the latest campaign for The Terminal is it called, Steven Speilberg's The Terminal... yes Speilberg is used as a marketing tool in that they do interview's with him and "they" let it be known he is the director, etc... but my issue is in the actual title of the film as a marketing ploy.

I think they just like the name M. Night Shaymalan because his name itself is kinda spooky.

I don't know that he is too full of himself... in his defense I can see that the studio's marketing department would cook up this name in the title ploy.

Until I hear that he is responsible for it I will give him the benefit of the doubt.

I do like his films, I just find the way they are marketed rather annoying is all.

I remember way back when when a movie called Dead or Alive starring Rutger Hauer was coming out. THey had commercials on TV saying "Rutger Hauer...Wanted: Dead or Alive". Being relatively young, I'd never heard of Rutger Hauer (although it turns out I'd seen him in a couple of things up to that point). I told my friend that we ought to go see "Rutger Hauer...Wanted: Dead or Alive" that Friday. He told me I was a jackass.

I just saw it.

It was entertaining...there's some good thought provoking elements in it. Night is doing all his stuff old school very much like Hitchcock using pacing, music, color, imagination all to make the movies he makes more scary.

I actually had much more fun watching Harold and Kumar.

Just saw it too. I think a lot of people will be disappointed. I definitely was

I seriously doubt it's Shyamalan's ego that is the reason his name is being plastered over everything he does. His name sells movie tickets probably almost as much as Quentin Tarantino, plain and simple, like it or not. The Disney marketing machine knows that, and uses it.

I loved Unbreakable, probably my favorite of his films. I HATED Signs though, and thought Sixth Sense was excellent. I'm looking forward to The Village, but I'm not holding my breath for it. I agree with Booray, I think alot of people will go in expecting alot more than they get.

I think I'll go see it today, looks good, I've always liked his films

Every movie they announce the starring actor... What's wrong with announcing the guy that runs the show and made the entire thing up? He deserves more credit than any of the actors. Although he obviously needs them to put out a good performance.

I feel like I was robbed. It was entertaining, but I kept thinking, "Get to the twist, get to the twist." Then we get the twist and it was crap. Overall, not a waste of money, but better left for cable TV.

I was SOOOOOOOOOOOO disappointed. I loved all the other three films of his, but.....I don't even know what to say.....I was so disappointed by this one. I don't think you can really talk about it without ruining it, so I guess I'll spoiler tag the rest...

Spoiler: This film's main problem is that it's marketed as a film that it is not. It then attracts an audience between 15 and 25 that is so disappointed. If you were going into this movie with no clue what it's about, never having seen a trailer or anything, you may enjoy it. Otherwise, this movie doesn't deliver. 99% of the audience going into this film wants to be scared and on the edge of their seat the whole time. I've never seen an audience that was so obviously upset after a movie. One guy threw his soda at the screen. You can't really blame Disney for marketing the film the way they did. There's no doubt this movie will do well. But, if they think that people are going to walk out of this film satisfied then they are NUTS!

I was possibly concidering looking into thinking about going to go see this movie. I was hated SIGNS and figured this couldn't be worse. My friends went last night but i didn't go with them. I hate movies like this that have to use the cheap ass scares from old school days. You know, where the music drops to low heart beat type sound, the WAAAAA a loud ass noise to make you jump. Crap like that pisses me off because it gets me every time, and it's just cheap. I want a movies to acctualy scare me, get into my head and mess with it. Thats what made Blair Witch such a good movie.
Friends of mine said those cheap scares it never affects them, but i have seen them jump a lil when it happens. When my friends got back from the movie, i asked them if there were those cheap ass scares, they said yep. Glad i didn't go. I'll probly check it out when it comes to video.

Saw it last night, I thought it was good, although I was a bit disappointed at the end.

I just saw it and I enjoyed it. I loved the ending.It was predictable but still a good film.

While I really enjoyed the movie, I definately agree with Fader Monkey's spoiler comment (although, I'm not sure I would consider it a spoiler). They shouldn't have marketed it as they did.

It belonged on a tv show like the outerlimits or the twilight zone than as a stand alone movie.

For those of you who have seen it: would you say it was his worst movie? So far I have liked all his movies, some more than others, but not one would I rate less than an 8/10.

Did anyone here laugh more often than they were scared?
Spoiler: The scene where one girl confesses her love to Lucius and he just stares blankly at her back.


Note: Joaquin Phoenix's son in the movie Gladiator was named Lucius. Food for thought.

I thought it was brilliant. There were plenty of disappointed morons all around me, because they were tricked into sitting through a movie that made them think instead of one where they put forth no effort and have the experience wash over them. I'll probably see this one again.

Beautiful photography, brilliant pacing, brilliant character development. Remember, the name of the movie is "The Village," not "The Things That Live In The Woods And Scare The Shit Out Of Everybody."

The only thing that didn't work for me was the way the Elders talked. If you think about it, it doesn't make any sense for them to talk that way.

This was the most contrived, far-fetched, pretentious, unbelieveably ridiculous movie I have ever seen. It seemed to have so much going for it and then, absurdly, it jumps in your face and screams: "LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT HOW CLEVER I AM! YOU DIDN'T SEE THAT COMING, DID YOU?" And you're sitting there, staring stupidly at the screen, saying, "Uh....no, man. Sure didn't. By the way, are you serious?"

Give me a break. I cannot express the utter lameness of this film.

I think I was the only one in our group that enjoyed the show. It wasnt' marketed correctly so it's attracting the wrong audience, but it's still good. Makes you think about your present situation and what you really want out of life and what lengths you will go to reach it.

the scary movie part aside, I thought the the social commentary about society was brilliant.

as far as the way the elders spoke, given the location of the movie, it was all part of the immerssion.

I thought it was good. I could've done without all of the loudmouthed teenyboppers sitting in the front three rows laughing at innapropriate times and generally being obnoxious. I didn't think it was that scary, though.

Interesting on the thing about 'Gladiator' and how the kids name was also Lucius, but wasn't the kid in 'Gladiator' his sisters' kid, not his?

And, to keep to the thread, I just got back from seeing this movie. I won't go in to details but I give it 6.5/10.

You are calling this a movie that makes you think? You must be kidding, I got the whole thing right away. It was so obvious. How could anyone have missed it? That was the worst idea for a movie ever. Man it makes me so upset that I wasted my money on this stupid movie. Ya it was a social commentary on society, a commentary on how our stupid society could still put up with crappy movies. Do not waste your money on this trite display of 'art'.

And dont say that it was too deep or something, because believe me, it was not.

Spoiler: Spoiler: You cannot tell me that any of you for one second believed that those poorly made 'monsters' were anything but fake.

n/m

I saw The Village yesterday and it was indeed awful. Sixth Sense was the only Shymalan movie that I really enjoyed, and The Village doesn't even begin to compare with it. Awful awful movie. :(

I don't equate "making you think" and "figuring out the secret" as being synonymous.

Hey, If I wrote, produced, and directed a movie I would certainly make sure they said my name alot.


I really liked the movie. It was beautifully told.. I loved the fact that alot of the audience came out saying how much they hated it yet everyone was on the edge of thier seats till the very end

Why are so many people on the Sixth Sense bandwagon. Personally, I think it the wort of all his "twist" movies. In my opinion his directing skills have only gotten better.

That said, his writing has always been hit and miss. Sure he's great at crafting a twist ending, but he's less than assured a writing human drama. Sometimes he comes through and sometimes he doesn't.

Honestly, the love story in The Village was just plain weak. It's only saving grace was that Bryce Dallas Howard was able to bring true emotion to the role (She's an actress to watch for in the future).

Then there's the horrible dialouge. Yes, once you know the big twist maybe the director can argue for the way they speak, but in my opinion it's just poor writing.

This movie, even more than his others, is predicated on the twist. And the problem is that he does everything to keep the audience from finding out the twist even at the expense of the credibility of the world he created. It collapses on itself.

Now, I liked the movie, and I think there's a lot to like about the movie. But I can see where people are dissapointed with it. Even if I think they're being too harsh.

You guys have proven me your movie knowledge once again! I should have waited a bit to see this movie and read your reviews. What a joke it was. Besides the fact that the theater was full of absolute idiots who were talking, munching, wrestling, and laughing (a $$ AMC theater, no hokey-pokey here), the movie just sucked.

The comic relief is what really killed it for me. It made me feel stupid. I must say that I loved the art direction, and I think the story had tons of potential, but it was just really choppy and again, the comic relief was horrendous.

Get rid of the humor in the handicapped man (at least use a no-name actor to make it more realistic) and throw in some better character development and maybe He'd have a winner.

-T

hostile comments removed

I thought that the movie was really good and considering the climate of Hollywood and what gets made vs. what does not I think that it is really great that the director has enough balls and vision to see a film through in his own way.

I give it a thumbs up...hostile comment removed

There are a lot of things that didn't make sense in The Village, and instead of risking spoiling the movie for others, I will leave it at that.

I saw the movie friday when it came out. I have to say I was expecting good things for this movie. Yes, it was a bit slow, but it contributed to the feeling that the end was gonna be great. How utterly disappointed I was with the "twist". I can't say I was surprised when it happened, but I did think "Oh brother". The thing that makes this movie suck is that it had POTENTIAL, and it pissed it down the drain. There was such a creepy vibe going on, then the end just ruined it.

Here is an example of how unscary this movie is. I had to take my 7 year old brother to this movie, since I had to watch him. He is a big pussycat, and I told him we are going to see a scary movie. During the previews, he starts crying uncontrollably, and I try to calm him down, saying "It's ok, it's just a movie," and "I'm here, you don't have to be scared." That didn't help so I had to tell him to buck up and tough it out. Well, he was fine during the flick, covered his ears a couple times when it got loud, but that was about it. Afterwards, I asked him if it was scary, he said no.

We don't need this kind of hostility here.

On the edge of their seats, ABOUT TO LEAVE :)

Seriously though, I thought the movie had a nice creepy tone balanced by an Amish wholesomeness which I found refreshing. Unfortunately all movies are summed up by their endings and this one fell flat, then dragged itself even further and still wouldn't die.

I was surprised by the ending. The movie wasn't his best, but I found it entertaining. It wasn't an "oh man!" ending, but it was a "fun" twist.

Not sure why it was so utterly disappointing to many. Please explain. :)

People are disapointed because

Spoiler: they didnt want it to be a thinking ending, they wanted the monsters to be real, they wanted death, destruction. What M Night presented was a beautifull morality tale, including several well made characters, stunning sets and costumes, and people didnt want that. They wanted it to be scary

The reason people are so dissapointed is NOT because it made us "think." It did not make us think. The ending of the movie is so hokey, so contrived, so "Look at me ma! Look at how surprising I am," that the movie loses all credibility. The entire film is only there to serve the twist at the end. There is no real story, there is only the ending.

Damnit. When you do the "Search for posts by user" it takes off the spoiler tags? Nearly saw what you wrote there losthellhound :p

And now I will quickly leave this thread before I learn more about the ending that I sorta kinda already know about :lol:

Thats a bug ;)

Personally, i enjoyed it. far more so than "Signs" and "Unbreakable," it was a solid few hours of entertainment with strong writing and equally strong acting. a few shaky spots, but nothing worth complaining about.

However, its strength really lay in how the underscore was weaved in throughout the film. It was one of the best underscores I've heard in a long time, it was beautiful, haunting, with strong, memorable motifs, and was used with deft and skill in its placement and integration in the film as a whole.

I give the movie itself a 7.5/10, but I give the score a 9/10

Unfortunately, my avitar is far from pornographic. There is no nudity, the 'tube' is a folded up fan which is the weapon used by the character in the video game she is from. The character you so ignorantly call a pornstar is from a video game from quite awhile back that recieved a ESRB rating of 'T' for teens above the age of 13. This rating was given for mild violence and not any sort of suggestive theme. Sorry I am such a geek that I have a videogame character as my avitar. Oh and sorry if my avitar offends you but you dont really have to look at it if you dont like it.

Please don't get offended by my 'shooting my mouth off' about a horribly written movie that did not deserve to see the light of day.

People were disappointed because they wanted a scary movie. They wrongly marketed it as a scary, edge-of-your-seats movie, when it wasn't. It didn not make you think, just a twist that nobody expected.

The problem with his films is.. he's 'famous' for his twists and surprise endings, so people end up walking into his movies looking and nitpicking trying to deconstruct it to figure out what the twist is rather than enjoy the film and be surprised at the end.

It ends up being more like a puzzle than a movie.

This and the statements about the underscore are the sanest comments I've read in this thread.

Just as Spielberg was smart enough not to keep shooting "Jaws" over and over again, Shamalayan will not continue to serve up "Signs" leftovers for the rest of his career. Each movie will be different from the previous ones, and different from anybody else's.

I probably won't see this.

The Sixth Sense's "twist" was so incredibly obvious it wasn't even funny... then to have everyone say "omg the ending just totally threw me off.." Kinda makes me wonder if people even PAY ATTENTION to what they watch anymore. This same argument of mine applies with The Others and its "twist" ending that was obvious within the first 30 minutes.

Unbreakable was pretty good.

Signs, overall, was a waste of time. It was good at parts, but really it was just a wannabe horror flick. There really wasn't a "surprise" in this movie (not that it would've mattered much)

As a result of this, and considering The Village is another PG-13 "thriller/horror", it's not gonna be good.

A personal rule of mine that I have is: Any movie that claims to be remotely scary or terrifying AND is rated PG-13 is crap. So far it has proved true.

This might be a "downloader" for a rainy day though.

I think that if Alfred Hitchcock was making films today people would say that they suck...but I think that Shamalayan's movies while aren't as brilliant as Hitchcock's, are a throwback to simpler movie making times.

My post is above yours and the one you're talking about is way before mine because you took so long to post it. I'd appreciate it if you removed your comment(s). :rolleyes:

I liked the movie myself, I'm not sure if that puts me in the minority but I dont care either way. I do think the movie was too dependent on the end this time, but I liked the end. So for those of you who were disappointed with the ending it makes sense why you would hate the entire film.

Spoiler: Anyone notice the newspaper M. Night was reading? I think it made a good point about what we see in the paper now days. Every article in the paper you saw was about violence and I think that was the point of the film. Because we get to see how innocent the people were in that time period. I thought the idea of the elders dressing up as monsters to scare the others was great. Not only did it serve their main purpose of keeping everyone from leaving the villlage, it also brought the community closer together. It makes you wonder if it would be so bad to be taken back to a time like that? So, IMHO I think the movie does make you think, made me think at least.


BTW I wouldn't be surprised if that was the biggest spoiler ever.


**edit**

For the record I would just like to say that I think this was probably his weakest film but I still enjoyed it a lot. I love the score's in M. Night's movies. There were some parts in this movie where the score reminded me of a remixed version of Signs, but overall it was great. Im going to have to give the movie an 8/10

People in any time period have never been as a whole, "innocent". There has been violence, hatred, tragedy, atrocity, etc. as long as we have existed. Granted, this makes life interesting in a terrifying way.

Back to the movie though, I remember thinking that I didn't see any CGI, and if there was any, it was so slight that it was unnoticable to me. That was actually quite refreshing.

Xiangsu, super observation. I hadn't caught that! Perhaps this could be construed as a comment on organized religion as a whole. After all, is what they do really any different?

Well this is a special case, because of the creatures the people don't fear each other. Its the threat of violence and tragedy that keeps them bonded.

Spoiler: Even though they are scared, they are safe. So I should say in this village they are innocent.

I feel what you're saying about being innocent Xiangsu, but

Spoiler: don't forget that Noel kills someone. I'd personally fear him as much as the monsters from then on. ;)

Spoiler: Remember also that he was mentally retarded, so what he did was somewhat of an innocent action. He also figured out the secret of the elders and used that against the other villagers. So he wasn't afraid like everyone else.


Btw I think this thread has the most spoiler chat ever lol

I think it may have been the worst movie I've ever seen.

Spoiler: I think that was the whole point about him later dressing as the monsters, a sort of symbollism.

This cant be a spoiler cause those who havent seen the movie will have no idea...

But...

Did Ivy ever say what color? (Although, you can pretty much assume its Knight's fav color)

Also, did anyone else notice the major ending spoiler about 3/4 of the way through the movie?Sure you can put subtle hints together, but there was one about 3/4 of the way through that was the subtle hint to confirm all subtle hints. At first I was like "Did I really see what I thought I saw." Then I though it was a possible editing mistake?

I read all the posts before I saw it- so I had low expectations, and did not expect a horror movie- I and everyone with me (6 people) loved this movie- it was well put together, made sense, and made me think- it just wasnt a horror movie
still, it was the best movie I have seen this year.....

Yea, after seeing past the dissapointment of not getting scared the hell outta. I thought it was a very good movie.

Use some spoiler censors and tell us what you're talking about, you've got me curious for what I missed...

Spoiler: Personally, I thought that this was a pretty terrible film. The music was amazing, but there are so many inconsistancies in this film that go against all logic it is laughable. However, I am willing to admit that the stabbing scene is likely one of the most... disturbing... that I have seen. The lack of struggle, just the non-chalant way that it was done, was just so brutal.

As far as the things that happened in the movie that go against all logic - The implied that the handicapped fellow was putting on the costume and shaving the dogs? Suddenly he becomes intelligent enough to do that? Also, why in the world would you send a blind girl though the woods to get medicine, especially with only a watch to pay for it. Give me a break, one of the elders could have easily gone and gotten it, the fellow at the desk obviously knew that they were living in there. I understand that blind people can get along pretty well, but if you have a blind women basically stepping out from the 1800's into today, I am sure that she would have no idea what a vehicle sounds like.

For the record, I also was annoyed with how they spoke. I understand that it was an attempt to immerse us further into that world, but it was a combination of the old way and new way of speaking. The thing, though, that really did this move in for me was the "Scooby Doo" ending, if anyone remembers watching the old cartoons, you'll see the similarities.

NoSoup:
Spoiler: It wasn't Noel shaving the dead animals, it was the adults.

Also, Spoiler: The father told Ivy that the mosters weren't real. She went into the woods and was horrified to find out that they were (at least in her mind when she was attacked by Noel). Don't you think she would have been at least *a little* emotional and upset with her father for lying to her? :rolleyes:

Spoiler: I will definitely agree with you on the stabbing scene, it kind of made me cringe, and thats a pretty tough thing to do.

I don't think it was a conventional piece of film entertainment.
I do think it was a good allegory about how civilization is always created by instilling fear, as that is the only thing strong enough to civilize humans.

Art, that's a good point you make :)

I saw the movie last night with my mom. The only word I have to describe this movie is "weird."

I liked the movie, but I didn't at the same time.

Great Movie
 

You are the only person I have talked with that saw that twist coming, after seeing it yes it is very apperiant.
And not going to see a movie based on its rating that is just crazy, so because M. Night had to take one 4 second clip out of the movie to keep it for going "R" so you are seeing a "R" movie minus a 4 second clip.

No. Unbreakable was one of the best superhero movies ever.

It's a good thing opnions aren't facts then. I thought it was like an inflated balloon of diarrhea.

Kostya's top ten problems with 'The Village' and it's terrible, terrible plot.

Spoiler:
1. What sort of IDIOTIC maniac actually believes that created an isolated, village in a nature preserve will somehow stave off heartbreak? Did they think nobody would die? Did these people somehow get caught up in their childish dream so much that they didn't perhaps think to consider the drawbacks of leaving the modern world? Worst plot hole in the film.

2. Was it supposed to be a surprise when they opened the box to reveal, shock horror, the secret that they were all really from Philly? I mean this is the secret we all guessed at the first mention of 'the towns'. Moreover, the secret was totally given away when the bearded wanker actually mentioned money and that that his father was shot with a gun about 40 minutes before the supposed plot twist.

3. Didn't anyone else notice that the 'creatures' were quite clearly fake. I mean are we supposed to believe they were evil twig men? Why the hell did he show them onscreen, as soon as you do that it ruins it massively.

4. How the hell could the blind girl know that the thing she was touching was 'those we do not speak of' when she's never touched one, has no idea what they feel like. Moreover, why did the father claim 'I can't explain it in words' and allow his blind daughter to walk terrified into the shed, potentially causing her to scream and totally blow his whole operation when the words 'It's a fake suit we wear when we pretend to be the creatures, yeah we made them up.' would have explained it in words.

5. It is never explained how they 'created' the screaming sounds in the forest? Some kind of water powered gramaphone?

6. I was so outraged by the ridiculous convenience of the nice benevolent ranger happening to drive along the road at the exact moment Ivy climbs the fence it wasn't funny. Moreover, why did he not inform his superiors that a bunch of nutcases were living in the nature preserve?

7. Didn't anybody notice the disturbing absence of ALL the elders everytime the creatures arrived?

8. The conclusion of the film contained no closure at all. The Elders are still living in their ridiculous fantasy, and moreover, now that everyone knows that Ivy, a blind girl, single handedly slew one of the creatures, their mystique is totally fucked since they're mortal and can now be hacked to pieces by angry villagers with apple pickers.

9. Aren't there more effective, less crazy ways to escape the violence of the city like say, move to the country. Or move to another country like Denmark.

10. Aren't the Elders taking their oath a little seriously, especially since they've managed to debunk their entire reason for going. In fact, couldn't one of them gone, gotten what was needed, come back, in the middle of the night, thus not jeopardising the myth of the creatures, or the innocence of the Village in any way.

Don't even start me on the rest of it's drawbacks