Support NeoGAF

[Willco]

Judging by the two AICN reviews, it looks like it has the same crappy ending we heard about eons ago, but nobody really confirms it. Anybody here see it, yet?

Because I'm not stepping foot in a theatre that plays it unless I know otherwise.

 

[hiryu]

I'll let you know friday night.

 

[Screaming_Gremlin]

Judging by Ebert's review it has that crap ending. This was taken from the DVDTalk forum.

''The Village'' is a colossal miscalculation, a movie based on a premise that cannot support it, a premise so transparent it would be laughable were the movie not so deadly solemn. It's a flimsy excuse for a plot, with characters who move below the one-dimensional and enter Flatland.

M. Night Shyamalan, the writer-director, has been successful in evoking horror from minimalist stories, as in ''Signs,'' which if you think about it rationally is absurd -- but you get too involved to think rationally. He is a considerable director who evokes stories out of moods, but this time, alas, he took the day off.

Critics were enjoined after the screening to avoid revealing the plot secrets. That is not because we would spoil the movie for you. It's because if you knew them you wouldn't want to go. The whole enterprise is a shaggy dog story, and in a way it is all secrets. I can hardly discuss it at all without being maddeningly vague.

Eventually the secret of Those, etc., is revealed. To call it an anticlimax would be an insult not only to climaxes but to prefixes. It's a crummy secret, about one step up the ladder of narrative originality from It Was All a Dream. It's so witless, in fact, that when we do discover the secret, we want to rewind the film so we don't know the secret anymore. And then keep on rewinding, and rewinding, until we're back at the beginning, and can get up from our seats and walk backward out of the theater and go down the up escalator and watch the money spring from the cash register into our pockets.

 

[mjq jazz bar]

haha. Finally. M. Night Shymalamalamalamalamala gets a review I like.

You may say that my attack of his name is immature, but that's what he gets for being pretentious enough to tack his name onto all of his "masterpieces".

 

[dark10x]

That's a damn shame, seemed like it could be good. :\

I will probably end up seeing it just out of curiousity...but it isn't sounding too good.

 

[Mrbob]

Welp, I'm still gonna go see it.

Probably should expect flamefest this weekend? I'm a bit worried about the crappy ending, though I don't want to know what it is ahead of time.

 

[belgurdo]

haha. Finally. M. Night Shymalamalamalamalamala gets a review I like.

You may say that my attack of his name is immature, but that's what he gets for being pretentious enough to tack his name onto all of his "masterpieces".

God forbid a director has pride in his works, right?

 

[mjq jazz bar]

Actually yes -- God forbid. I'm not a fan of hubris, especially when the person in question makes his debut in such a loud way.

 

[DJ Demon J]

Urge to spoil movie for those dumb enough to want to see this rising.....

 

[Iceman]

the village has stealthy monsters draped in blood red capes with grotesque spikes portruding from their backs.

the village >>> you

 

[Prospero]

If the ending is as bad as it sounds like, could someone post it inside spoiler tags?

 

[Zilch]

If the ending is as bad as it sounds like, could someone post it inside spoiler tags?

Yes, please.

 

[The Interrobanger]

If I can recall correctly...

Spoiler

They are living in present time, it's just that their village is just in a very rural location. The marks on the doors were made by demolition people because they want to develop the land.

 

[mjq jazz bar]

If I can recall correctly...

Spoiler

They are living in present time, it's just that their village is just in a very rural location. The marks on the doors were made by demolition people because they want to develop the land.

no.

 

[Prospero]

This is the happiest I've ever been that I've read a spoiler, then.

 

[Matlock]

Spoiler

A pair of Levi's! Oooh, spooky.

 

[DJ Demon J]

no.

Yes. That's the incredibly stupid, shitty ending.

 

[6.8]

So what is the real thing?

 

[Outdoor Miner]

Wowzers holy shit! Saved me $10!

I always thought he was a one-trick pony, but even so this was the film i was most looking forward to seeing of his.

 

[human5892]

I predict this movie will make additional people realize that M. Night Shamalyan is a shitty, stupid director.

 

[AstroLad]

Is it true that:

Spoiler

At the end, a black guy drives by and sees the Village folk in their garb and says, "crazy white people" and drives off

?

 

[dark10x]

I predict this movie will make additional people realize that M. Night Shamalyan is a shitty, stupid director.

...he has done good work, though. Unbreakable was a very good film and was well directed.

 

[human5892]

...he has done good work, though. Unbreakable was a very good film and was well directed.

I agree 100%. I actually really like that movie. At the same time, though, I think that, given his other movies, it was really just some kind of fluke.

 

[Catchpenny]

I almost want to see this just to see how people in the theater will react to that ending. It really has riot-inducing potential.

 

[Prospero]

I almost want to see this just to see how people in the theater will react to that ending. It really has riot-inducing potential.

That reminds me of when I saw The Sixth Sense in a packed theater with my sister on opening weekend. She figured out the principal plot twist halfway through, and blurted it out during a quiet moment in the film. That was unpleasant.

 

[border]

I don't know much about how modest or egotistical Shyamalan is........but I doubt that any of you talking shit about him do either.

Attaching his name to films probably comes at the behest of the studio marketing department more than anyone else. They want a way to draw in fans of his previous films, which is difficult to do when one project has very little to do with the next one. Unless he is making The Sixth Sense Too: Electric Boogaloo, there has to be a way to get people to recognize the connection between his works. They obviously want to build him into a trustworthy sort of brand name. Of course, if The Village is as big a disaster as it sounds like then maybe his next picture won't have his name plastered all over it quite as much.

I think he's been built up a bit much anyhow. The next Hitchcock? Bullshit....

 

[explodet]

I'm a fan of Shyamalan, I enjoyed the hell out of Unbreakable and liked The Sixth Sense and Signs.

But I think I'll skip The Village.

 

[Iceman]

this thread makes no sense.

 

[BigGreenMat]

I wouldn't be surprised if the movie really stinks, but the trailer looked good.

 

[Flaming Duck]

I still don't see why everyone thinks it's such a stupid twist, but hey that's just me. I'm easily amused, I guess.

 

[Willco]

Well, it looks like it has the original ending. Fuck this film then. I would've hoped those rumors of M. Night reshooting the ending were true, but I guess not...

OH WELL.

 

[Desperado]

Shittiest ending ever conceived...what was Shyamalamadingdong thinking?

 

[DaveH]

I think he's been built up a bit much anyhow. The next Hitchcock? Bullshit....

I don't think the comparisons to Hitchcock are saying they're equal... just similiar in style. Creating dread and suspense out of thin air and rather mundane- even stupid- subjects. I mean Alfred had movies about the fear of heights, staying at a creepy hotel, and birds (BIRDS for the love of god!). M. tries to do the same thing with people doing not much else but going about their normal lives.

 

[mjq jazz bar]

I don't know much about how modest or egotistical Shyamalan is........but I doubt that any of you talking shit about him do either.

Attaching his name to films probably comes at the behest of the studio marketing department more than anyone else. They want a way to draw in fans of his previous films, which is difficult to do when one project has very little to do with the next one. Unless he is making The Sixth Sense Too: Electric Boogaloo, there has to be a way to get people to recognize the connection between his works. They obviously want to build him into a trustworthy sort of brand name. Of course, if The Village is as big a disaster as it sounds like then maybe his next picture won't have his name plastered all over it quite as much.

I think he's been built up a bit much anyhow. The next Hitchcock? Bullshit....

And that's why big-name directors like Steven Spielberg do the same.

 

[human5892]

I don't think the comparisons to Hitchcock are saying they're equal... just similiar in style. Creating dread and suspense out of thin air and rather mundane- even stupid- subjects. I mean Alfred had movies about the fear of heights, staying at a creepy hotel, and birds (BIRDS for the love of god!). M. tries to do the same thing with people doing not much else but going about their normal lives.

I disagree. Primary sources of fear in his movies:

The 6th Sense - Ghosts
Signs - Aliens
The Village - The Unknown/Monsters

In the subjects (and styles, for that matter -- monotone-talking children, lots of quiet, etc.) he uses to create fear, Shamalyn is all too conventional...a drastic contrast to Hitchcock.

 

[border]

From the way the sound of the screenplay review that got posted, it doesn't sound like one of those deals where they can just go reshoot the last 10 minutes of the film. Much more would have to be done.

It's also kind of hard to think of a decent twist that you could tack on to all that set-up.

Spoiler

Okay, so if it's not set in present day....then what are the monsters? Aliens? Other humans? Ghosts of indians? How can you really turn things on their side in the last 10 minutes? Maybe it would be cool if they got to the modern day city and you're like "Oh that's it...how fucking stupid".......but then the city is infested with zombies! The monsters are real! And then in a nod to the stupid illogic of Signs, it turns out that zombies are killed by trees, and it was all those trees that were keeping the villagers safe.

 

[AstroLad]

From the way the sound of the screenplay review that got posted, it doesn't sound like one of those deals where they can just go reshoot the last 10 minutes of the film. Much more would have to be done.

It's also kind of hard to think of a decent twist that you could tack on to all that set-up.

Spoiler

Okay, so if it's not set in present day....then what are the monsters? Aliens? Other humans? Ghosts of indians? How can you really turn things on their side in the last 10 minutes? Maybe it would be cool if they got to the modern day city and you're like "Oh that's it...how fucking stupid".......but then the city is infested with zombies! The monsters are real! And then in a nod to the stupid illogic of Signs, it turns out that zombies are killed by trees, and it was all those trees that were keeping the villagers safe.

I'm getting flashbacks of the "Bad Twist Ending Theatre" skit on the old Ben Stiller Show.

 

[Dan]

You may say that my attack of his name is immature, but that's what he gets for being pretentious enough to tack his name onto all of his "masterpieces".

Who says it's up to him? It's Disney and its respective studios that handle the marketing.

 

[mjq jazz bar]

http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=1150731

HAHAHAHAHA WHAT A FUCKING RETARDED MOVIE

 

[mjq jazz bar]

From the way the sound of the screenplay review that got posted, it doesn't sound like one of those deals where they can just go reshoot the last 10 minutes of the film. Much more would have to be done.

It's also kind of hard to think of a decent twist that you could tack on to all that set-up.

Spoiler

Okay, so if it's not set in present day....then what are the monsters? Aliens? Other humans? Ghosts of indians? How can you really turn things on their side in the last 10 minutes? Maybe it would be cool if they got to the modern day city and you're like "Oh that's it...how fucking stupid".......but then the city is infested with zombies! The monsters are real! And then in a nod to the stupid illogic of Signs, it turns out that zombies are killed by trees, and it was all those trees that were keeping the villagers safe.

How about NO twist?

 

[Iceman]

the village has stealthy monsters draped in blood red capes with grotesque spikes portruding from their backs.

the village >>> you

Lets follow this up shall we?

You are all judging a movie based on the "reported" ENDING of a movie that hasn't come out yet and has been covered in secrecy forever.

Lets say you hold any other filmmaker to these standards? No, of course not.. then you couldn't be hypocritical.

What about all the inanely predicatble films that you all hold so dear? Why do you watch them? Because you enjoy the adventure, the anticipation, all the little unknowns along the way and the way in which the characters deal with all the scenarios presented to them, right?

The concept of an original story has long been dead. What is left for cinema is character driven work and cinematic arts (set design, costumes, CG, camera work, editing, etc.)

I can't help thinking that its the negativity surrounding this movie is fueled more by a dislike of him rather than a concern for the movie. How can he screw it up? It's his creation and he's shown his ability to competently and cohesively finish all his movies. This isn't somebody else's work where interpretation will play a role in a viewers satisfaction...

People will watch almost any movie just because it was made by steven spielberg.. or even produced.. even useless movies like catch me if you can or the terminal. TV shows touched by the hand of spielberg will get a huge initial draw. He can do this because he's made quite a name for himself with big popular blockbusters crafted with enduring quality. But that's the way the business is... certain people will flock to a Sam Raimi, a Wes Craven film, a Wes Anderson film, etc. What makes these guys less pretentious that M. Night? Because he appears to take his work more seriously? Maybe that's why he was the most sought after script writer in the business?

The whole persona that he crafted for himself-recluse, mysterious, secretive-I thought was purposely designed to draw more people to his films.. but you guys seem to take it personally.

I remember how people were upset about Unbreakable.. definitely not what people expected and that was fueled by the secrecy regarding that story as well.. but people still flocked to see Signs despite similar secrecy and gave him his biggest hit yet. This persona that he created, the one that seems to drive some of you so crazy, works for him financially... and given that he's so good at what he does, making movies, it really makes you all sound more bitter than anything else.

The Village will rock. If you guys didn't enjoy/appreciate Signs for what it was then I can't guarantee that you guys will like it at all... but if Signs is any indication then 300 million+ dollars in the bank will be plenty of evidence to support me.


btw, anyone have a still from the 60 second trailer showing the monster in the red cape? His ugly teeth showing and the spikes out his back?

 

[mjq jazz bar]

When the guy who gave Garfield THREE STARS can't say anything nice about The Village, I -- a person who has hated every M. Night Shyamalan movie -- can't help but make fun of The Village's ending. Oh, and it's not "supposed" anymore. People have seen the movie. They've confirmed everyone's fears.

It's a shit movie.

 

[Willco]

Yeah, the ending has been confirmed. This movie does suck. And I like and still defend Signs.

 

[Dan]

The Village will rock. If you guys didn't enjoy/appreciate Signs for what it was then I can't guarantee that you guys will like it at all... but if Signs is any indication then 300 million+ dollars in the bank will be plenty of evidence to support me.

Box office gross is absolutely no indication of whether the people that saw the movie enjoyed it. You have to see a movie to make a judgment, and in order to see the movie you have to pay. That payment indicates nothing.

 

[mjq jazz bar]

My parents saw Unbreakable, and I can guarantee you they hated it. If a movie gets enough buzz, anyone will see it. That's the secret to his success.

 

[Lord Error]

People will watch almost any movie just because it was made by steven spielberg.. or even produced.. even useless movies like catch me if you can or the terminal.

???

Do you even know what the hell you are talking about? Catch me if you Can is absolutely, positively awesome movie. One of the best Spielberg ever made.

 

[siege]

http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=1150731

HAHAHAHAHA WHAT A FUCKING RETARDED MOVIE

Holy shit, that sounds dumb. Thanks for saving me 8 bucks.

 

[Iceman]

catch me if you can = tripe.. except for the parts with Christopher Walken.. man, he's good.

you'd put this movie up there with close encounters? ET? jurassic park? schindler's list? saving private ryan? indiana jones? amistad?


HA!

 

[bionic77]

Damn there is so much hate for M. Night in here.

 

[mjq jazz bar]

The Bourne Supremacy ruled, dude. I'll watch that again this weekend.