I just thought I'd mention this on account of that bloke who did 'Sixth Sense' is making it, and yet again, he's got to make a 'twist ending' movie. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, you understand, but apparantly everyone who's seen it has guessed the twist five minutes into the film, and I guessed it two seconds after hearing the plot.
s
p
o
i
l
e
r
r
r
r
r
The film centers around an eighteenth-century village surrounded by a forest full of monsters that prevent the villagers from leaving. Except the twist is that it's actually the present, and not the 1800's, and they've been isolated from the rest of the world all that time.
Can anyone on the board tell me if this is for real, or am I being mucked about by my mates?
ARGH! FUUUUUUUUUUCK!! I can't stop myself reading once I start!!
Lousy twist if that's it, but he's not a bad filmmaker. Should be pretty good anyway.
If you know how Shyamalan makes his films, this may not seem so stupid as the twists are not what his films are only about, he directs a film that has two hours of good content and direction; it's not all about the twist, since once you've seen it the effect will diminish anyway. We don't go to the movies to see twist endings, we go to watch film-making, otherwise films would only need to be 10 minutes long.
I guessed the twists in "the 6th Sense" -and "Unbreakable"- 5 minutes in, I still thought it was amazing, in fact once you know that Bruce Willis is already dead, you can see what the film means even more while watching it all the way through.
i reckon this as well.
but i think they are all dead. and the red marks are the real wold marking to be demolished on them.
the things that happen are the real world tearing the place up. not seeing the spirits whom inhabit the place.
NOT SEEN THOUGH. just my geuss.
Bollocks :-(
I couldn't help but read that and I've so been looking forward to seeing this film...
Signs is one of my all time faves, because I really do think like that, I look for signs in life all the time, call me weird but it's true.
Yeah, I think that that having twist is not the sole purpose of the film. Espescially after watching Sixth Sense again knowing about Willis' character adds a differant view to it.
Was never very keen on Signs though for some reason. Loved Unbreakable.
It was the lack of internal logic that got me.
The Aliens are hurt by water.
Why the hell would an advanced Alien species travel thousands of light years to try to attack a world that was 70% water?
Heh.
I found it rather preachy, all this there something else out there (like a god) just did my head in. I was disapointed after watching sixth sense and unbreakable. I thought it was a bit weak.
I like the look of the village saw a preview of it a couple of weeks ago. Nice ideas, a good cast. Cant be too bad? Can it?
Slips
Everyone was in the mood to slate Shyalamalaman after Unbreakable was so damn good. Your second film has to be shite, goddamit!
Then Signs turned out to be a huge hit, so critics couldn't slam it as hard as they wanted. Now the knives are out.
I'm just bored of this future shock film making.
I saw Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, but couldn't face Signs and couldn't face this. He had a chance early on to stop making twist ending movies (everything you've believed in for the last 2 hours isn't true, you may now leave the cinema) and now he's stuck with them.
People will either tire of them, because when you are expecting a twist ending, the movie somehow becomes irritating, or he'll stop and they'll be asking where the twist ending is, and stop going to see his films.
I'd rather have genuine mystery than just a twist ending.
Personally, like Signs, I'm glad I know the twist ending and don't haver to watch the film. I've seen the trailers, I know what happens in the end. That's all I need from a future shock film.
Someone make a movie of Al Ewning's ultimate future shock and put Shyamalan out of a job.
Signs doesn't have a sodding twist!! C'mon people!! It JUST has an ending. Unbreakable had one, but wasn't the focus of the story. The Sixth Sense was the only film he's made so far where the 'twist' affected the entire film.
He's damn good though, and his films are enjoyable regardless. Even Signs, where the silly 'it all happens for a reason' logic made me feel a bit queasy. Tense, neatly plotted stuff.
(everything you've believed in for the last 2 hours isn't true, you may now leave the cinema)
Not true at all really!
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
In The Sixth Sense, Willis is a ghost, Yes, it's a twist. Fine. First movie.
In Unbreakable, Samuel L Jackson is the villain. Surprising twist, yes, but it doesn't really alter the rest of the movie. He's still got these abilities, and the focus is on them being explored and explained a little.
Signs has no twist. Sorry but 'they get hurt by water' is a plot point, and so is 'it all happens for a reason'. Nothing to make you radically rethink any of the events in the movie.
The Village is only the second film he;s done with a real twist IMHO.
The "aliens" in Signs were only parasites who came to harvest a few humans then leave -like cosmic gypsies- they did not plan to take over as was first thought.
We generally don't know much about the aliens and what kind of technology they have, I mean they fight hand to hand without weapons, more like insects. They may, naturally, be able to travel through space going from planet to planet until they are welcome no more. We don't even know how there ships -if they are ships, we only see lights- work so it's all vague but in a good way.
This makes them far more interesting than dumb aliens in metal spacecrafts -ala Indepandence Day- who get beaten, even though they do, have better tech. than us.
Anyone who just dismisses them as silly are merely stuck in cliched, stereotyped thinking about aliens in films.
After all the universe is stranger than we can imagine.
Yes but Earth, being covered in water. Might not be the best target if you're a species that is hurt by water.
And there's water in the air, too. Surely that means Earth's atmosphere is acidic to the aliens?
I must confess, I haven't seen Signs OR the Sixth Sense, but I can recite their plots virtually blow by blow at this point, making the actual watching of the movies a redundant excercise. Ditto for Shawshank Redemption and Usual Suspects.
Well, the tedious Unbreakable means that any spoilers that get me out of seeing his films are welcomed - confirm away!
I thought Signs was rubbish. Absolute rubbish. I did really enjoy Unbreakable and The Sixth Sense, but Signs seemed, to me, to be aimed at the contradictory Creationist/Alien Abduction mass of middle America. It was a dumb film, and there is no way for me to soften that point.
seen it,
GOOD
lots of clues. which are all so apparent in the end.
overall see and enjoy
General - the thing with Signs is this - if you don't empathise the film most people don't like it.
Then Signs turned out to be a huge hit, so critics couldn't slam it as hard as they wanted
that depends on the critic. One of my favourite reviewers slammed it for (amongst other things) the aliens, who can be destroyed by water, travelling across the universe to a planet that is 70% water and the way that these otherwise technologically advanced creatures can be stopped by a simple locked wooden door....I haven`t seen the film but it seems to have blown.
yours remembering that Independence day was both a huge hit and one of the worst movies ever made
Who ever said the aliens were technologically advanced?
The writer? When he had them master interstelar space travel? 'member?
But how did they master "interstellar space travel"? This could have been a natural ability for them, we saw no ships, only "lights", for all we know they could have been produced by something completely other than what we know as technology. Don't presume what is not stated. The aliens could have travelled in some more unusual way than we can understand, that is why it's vague. We see no landings etc... only that they have arrived. These aliens may live in space fow all we know, thay may be able to survive in many environment.
You are just relying on cliche to explain the aliens when that is not what the film is about.
No, that's not what the film was about. But it was still dumb. The main message of the film was 'have blind faith, everything is proceeding according to benevolent but unknowable plan.' An obscurantist, anti-intellectual message.
We are told, very specifically, that ships are hovering over the major cities. Then they go!
The newscaster calls them "ships" but all we see are lights, so we really don't know what they are.
And the message of the film is you either believe or you don't, it never truly states that what happened was prearranged but that these things can be purely subjective as in the assembling of a fragmented message from his wife to him, the trick is that he came to believe this himself but it still could be just the subjective connections he makes of the message from his wifes warning.
How is faith anti-intellectual?, faith has been "scientifically" thought of as a survival technique for humans since any kind of belief was born. Belief, whether of any religion, has always had some pragmatic benefits about everyday living. Belief is not always about a God or a plan or even benevolence but that you can survive. Today we rely more on science, good or bad.
I found it anti-intellectual in the sense that it seemed to encourage us not to question events, just to accept them and believe in the 'higher purpose'.
Come on, they were ships. I know, silly point to return to, but... What the smeg made the crop circles?? How would humanoids who seem to breathe air survive in deep space??
I didn't find it silly that they couldn't open a locked door though... It's entirely possible their civilisation had moved beyond things like that, and they were advanced to a level we can't even imagine.
I may have to watch Signs before I can comment on specifics, but while faith in and of itself isn't mutually exclusive when placed alongside science, Signs seems to be suggesting that blind faith in a nebulous 'plan' is preferable to asking difficult questions.
Faith of any measure (or worth) can survive a few difficult questions posed by science, and because of the way the bible has been changed through the centuries to accomodate/hoodwink new cultures into accepting it, some people would say that asking questions is essential to keeping the right-wing leanings of the clergy of any major religeon on their toes.
Of course, Mel Gibson is a homophobic, fundamentalist catholic (yes, that's right - the Pope isn't right-wing enough for some people, apparantly) with questionable opinions (at best) where the jews are concerned, so a movie that glorifies the slave mentality of blind faith over intellectualism isn't really that surprising. Now I'll HAVE to watch this - if only to be able to continue to slag it off on the board.
Faith - good.
Blind faith - bad.
"Signs doesn't have a sodding twist!! C'mon people!! It JUST has an ending. Unbreakable had one, but wasn't the focus of the story. The Sixth Sense was the only film he's made so far where the 'twist' affected the entire film."
Heh, but they do all seem to be 'revelation' movies. Whther you think the ends are twisty or not, M Night is just filling in time till he can spring his surprise on us. Once you have the revelation, then you just kind of feel deflated.
I saw Don't Look Now a while back and I knew the main spoiler beforehand, and it was much more rewarding than Sixth Sense.
'they get hurt by water'
Actually if watch M Night's movies he has a thing about water, its Bruce Willis' weak point in Unbreakable as well.
.
.
.
Sixth Sense spoilers (like anyone doesn't know)
.
.
.
Maybe it's a childhood spent trying to second guess the end of futureshock style tales, or perhaps having seen a bunch of films with basically the same "twist", but I had the Sixth Sense figured out from the moment that Bruce Willis was, um, quite blatantly shot and killed. That?s about five minutes in. I still enjoyed it though, so I'm not sure it totally hinges on that.
It's a good film even when you know the twist.
Anyway, back to signs!
The point I'm trying to make is not whether the aliens are using technology or not, or whether faith is a good thing or not.
It's the fact that they are vulnerable to water.
It would be like humans attacking an alien world with an atmosphere of battery acid. Silly.
But hey, I enjoyed signs up till the end. Plenty of tension.
Also, come to think of it, if you've ever walked through a field of corn on a dewy morning you?d realise that it would be a really shit place for water hating aliens to hide.
I was very tempted to see The Village as I'd quite enjoyed Unbreakable and Signs (although both are flawed). However I recently heard one critic I who I like say that 'the ending doesnt work' and after reading that the box office plunged in the second week when word of mouth go to work I thought I'd give it a miss and spoiler it for myself.
Spoliers follow...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Well 10 mins research on the web reveals that the twist is 'it's actually modern times'... don't know if there is any further explinations (like why are they doing it? is it an experiement, a prison, what?)
And another review by another critic I rely on totally panned it, so I'll wait for the a telly showing.
Signs is worth watching if only for the guy in the alien suit at the kids birthday party. Comedy gold!
If Signs is anti-intellectual, why is there so much debate about it?
unless I`m missing something, the only debate I`ve seen about it has been here, with you on the `it`s misunderstood genius` and everyone else on the `it`s ridiculous/a bit of fun` side.
Still, it is possible there is a world of interesting debate aroused by `Signs` which I haven`t noticed. That still wouldn`t mean it was not anti-intellectual.
We could have a discussion about any object. Let's say 'pants'. Now, the discussion *about* pants could be extremely thoughtful and well-reasoned. That does not mean that pants *themselves* are thoughtful and well-reasoned.
Or let's take the example of book-burning, or the murder of 'intellectuals' under the reign of Pol Pot in Cambodia. That a great deal of time, study and thought has been expended on events like this do not make the events themselves pro-intellectual.
And the message of Signs was, I contend; do not think.
In a battlefield of ideas (rather than actions such as book-burning) that message is about as anti-intellecual as you can get.
Link: Bartlett's Bizarre Bazaar
I was forced to watch Signs very much against my will, and actually quite enjoyed it. It is a different kind of alien invasion movie, from a much narrower and more limited POV than usual, and while the water thing was bloody silly in Triffid Movie fashion, the rest of the film was pretty gripping interpersonal stuff.
As for the Shawshank Redemption, this may or may not be a twist movie, but it I find it simply endlessly rewatchable for its stunning performances, signature lighting and crispdialogue. Bloody gem.
Heh, but they do all seem to be 'revelation' movies. Whther you think the ends are twisty or not, M Night is just filling in time till he can spring his surprise on us. Once you have the revelation, then you just kind of feel deflated.
I saw Don't Look Now a while back and I knew the main spoiler beforehand, and it was much more rewarding than Sixth Sense.
Revelation movies I'll accept, yeah. And I think it's a shame because he's actually a talented filmmaker.
But don't get me started on Don't Sodding Look Now...
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
After hearing about it for as long as I can remember, I finally watched it. Genuinely creepy and filled with suspense. I overlooked the silly psychic stuff because it actually worked to enhance the atmosphere to a ceertain extent.
The father finally corners the 'daughter'. What's going to happen? How can this tale possibly end? Just like when watching Ring, an atmosphere has been created where I'm just thinking 'Oh shit.... Please don't let me see her face!'
Then she turns round.
And it's a sodding GNOME! A GNOME!! Midget-dwarf-troll-gnome serial killer woman. What the HELL?? THIS is what I spent my time building up to?
I thought the film itself was beautifully done, and subsequent viewing has unvcovered a lot of subtle touches. But the end.... No! She looked ridiculous!!
DON'T LOOK NOW
THE SPOILERS
The 'silly psychic stuff' is the real surprise in the movie, not the dwarf. I found the old woman quite shocking and grotesque, despite knowing it was coming. Much better than some undead zombie daughter, or a ghost. The horror and supernatural existed only in the mental realm, the best place for it in my opinion.
But it's only then I pieced together all the information about his sight, the spilled fluid at the start, the feeling he had that something had happened to his daughter, the time he saw his wife even though she had left venice, the two old women and their various mumblings, that I really marvelled at it. And of course, that if he'd accepted and understood these things, he'd still be alive.
In my opinion, Don't Look Now is in so many ways superior to The Sixth Sense.
You totally need to see "Santa Sangre".
I'll agree that it's superior to the Sixth Sense. Like I said, the film itself was superbly crafted. The end spoiled it for me though.
Don't Look Now is in so many ways superior to The Sixth Sense.
Yup plus it's got the very scary stunt where he nearly falls of the scaffolding (scary if you know how it was done... basicaly because of the locations there was no protection)
And 'real' sex...
I like Signs, I don't think it's crap. It appeals to me on a certain level.
Yes there are bits that you think, uh that's stupid. But there are pieces of pure genius hidden in the plot. I think the reason why I have such an affinity with the film is that I look for signs to guide me in my life, and because of this I instantly related to what the film was trying to say. I can't explain it but it's like an instinctual thing, and you do remember the oddest of things when certain occurances happen during the day and they link in with things in the past, I can't explain it, but this then helps me make decisions. I know it sounds weird but it works for me, it's not blind faith and I don't do it all the time, just when it feels right.
That's why at the end of Signs with the water and the baseball bat I was crying and had goose bumps down my spine because I knew what was being said.
I thought 'Sixth Sense' was good and 'unbreakable' was excellent. 'Signs' was just okay, but i will go and see 'the village' then make up my own mind. As i don't see how you can slate a film before you have seen it (unless Woody Allen was in it or directed it).
Meh. I so wish I could argue with that after Annie Hall, EYEWTKASBWATA, Manhattan Murder Mystery..... But I really can't. I WILL say that some of his best work has been in the last 8 years, though people overlook it.
But generally, I agree.
If boy's spoiler turns out to be right, I guessed it after just seeing a review of it on Talking Movies last weekend.
Of course, no-one down the pub believed me. With this t'interweb invention they all just think I read it smewhere. The cads.
err was there a point to the dwarf in don't look now?
Most sensible meanngs say 'No'. The significance is in his death and the fact it isn't his daughter etc, etc. I can't find any reason for it to be a psycho dwarf woman. Except for height.