|By Unccadet08 (Unccadet08) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 10:04 pm: Edit|
I should have posted this yesturday, but to warn you, the movie The Village is the worst movie ever made, everyone left the theater pissed off. I waited over an hour for it to get interresting. Its not scary, but they try using those cheap tricks to spook you, and the suprise twist wasn't that surprising, you sorta have a feeling of whats really going on. So to sum up, don't waste your money, its not at all as good as it was advertised.
|By Ryanstrm (Ryanstrm) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 10:32 pm: Edit|
is it really that bad? i really wanted to see it.
|By Lilmermaide (Lilmermaide) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 10:37 pm: Edit|
i didnt think it was that bad. i was happy that it wasnt as scary as i thought it would be. i had no idea that the twist was going to happen! i recommend seeing it
|By Lucifersam (Lucifersam) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 11:30 pm: Edit|
Another "twist" in one of Shamalyan's (spelling maybe be off) movies? I read something on MSN about that, and I thought that maybe this would be his first movie in which there actually WASN'T some "twist" that he apparently worked into the movie so that moviegoers would be "amazed" and walk out of the theater astonished, akin to the whole Empire Strikes Back thing a good many years back. I was actually considering seeing The Village, but if the director insists on once again "wowing" people with his amazing cleverness, then it's probably another flop, like Signs. The Sixth Sense was good; Unbreakable was at least watchable.
|By Rowan (Rowan) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 11:41 pm: Edit|
It was entertaining, but certainly not revolutionary; it is not his career-reviving answer to The Sixth Sense, nor is it as sneaky as Unbreakable.
It reminded me of a rehash of Signs, with the same scare tactics: rustling bushes, mere glimpses of creatures, things-that-make-sudden-loud-noises to make you jump out of surprise instead of real fear...
If you look at it as a botched attempt to combine a love story with a comedy in a horror-film package, it's pretty good. (Well, that is what it is.) Similar to Signs, they try to beat homely values into your brain by the end of the movie (and the ending was pretty lame).
Though I read the spoilers beforehand and may have just known what to look for, I thought it was unreasonably predictable. It had a lot of potential to be clever, but the parts that could've been clever were simply ignored and went on unexplained, while the obvious was exploited to death.
Still, to each his own.
|By Nmoreno1 (Nmoreno1) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 02:10 am: Edit|
Eh. I couldn't get past the horrible dialogue and bad acting. But eh...it was barely ok (a 2/10 maybe)
in conclusion, Gigli is the worst movie ever made.
|By Lucifersam (Lucifersam) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 02:24 am: Edit|
Man, I really need to see Gigli. I hear everywhere that it was the worst movie made. Well, actually, it's probably the worst "big budget" movie ever made, but if you want to see some truly horrible movies, check out Street Zombies and Axe 'Em. They were both discovered on recent "bad scary movie impulse-rentals" at the local Blockbuster. If you can find them at your own local movie store, give 'em a try.
|By Emeraldkity4 (Emeraldkity4) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 03:10 am: Edit|
I didn't see Gigli but I did see the Blair Witch project that I thought was soo dumb and I hated 6th sense cause I figured it out by the scene that they were having dinner.
Sad, I am getting so picky in my old age that there is nothing I can do but rent "Guess who's coming to dinner" again.
I did like Master and Commander and even Troy wasn't too bad but King Arthur was a big disappointment ;-(
|By Brockpojo767 (Brockpojo767) on Monday, August 02, 2004 - 02:21 pm: Edit|
Did anyone notice the microphones and booms in The Village. I saw them 6 times when the camera shot was above the characters head.
Also, there is this book out there called Running out of Time. I think thats the book's name. Anyways, the "surprise" twist in the end, the whole plot really was closly related to the book's plot. I think he got The Village premise from that novel. What a stealer!
|By Topper (Topper) on Monday, August 02, 2004 - 02:28 pm: Edit|
HA! Yes, Brockpojo! That was exactly what I was thinking! And he didn't even do it well! I'd have to say it was the worst of all the 4 films of his that I've seen. I think I was surprised like once, but..it wasn't scary, and I'm easily scared. I think the thing is that all of his other movies had to do with the supernatural or something kind of off theme (i.e. ghosts, aliens, superhero powers), but this didn't really.
They never explained what the animals mentioned in the History books were! And what was his color? I kept on thinking, "No, this can't be the end, because we don't know what Lucius's color is." grrrrrr. Don't see it. It's disappointing.
|By Demonllama (Demonllama) on Monday, August 02, 2004 - 02:30 pm: Edit|
hey, it wasn't *that* bad as you all are making out to be. seems like some people can never be pleased with anything. it's just simple entertainment. plus, joaquin phoenix has really gorgeous eyes ;)
|By Justice (Justice) on Monday, August 02, 2004 - 04:06 pm: Edit|
I read "Running out of Time" (Young Adult, right?), and although I haven't seen The Village yet, I'm pretty sure that eugenics as a theme has been around for a long time.
|By Unccadet08 (Unccadet08) on Monday, August 02, 2004 - 04:19 pm: Edit|
"it's just simple entertainment"
i was not entertained, but i did leave the theater laughing at how ridiculus the "creature" was; pig face, porcupine back, beaver clawed monster in a red robe.
|By Zas1987 (Zas1987) on Monday, August 02, 2004 - 05:52 pm: Edit|
hey! i just saw it today and liked it!
|By Demonllama (Demonllama) on Monday, August 02, 2004 - 06:33 pm: Edit|
>>i was not entertained, but i did leave the theater laughing at how ridiculus the "creature" was; pig face, porcupine back, beaver clawed monster in a red robe.
well, considering what, or should i say "who" the creatures were...i didn't expect them to actually look...real, whatever "real" would be.
|By Clipper (Clipper) on Monday, August 02, 2004 - 07:28 pm: Edit|
I saw the Village and enjoyed it. Some of you are coming close to spoiling the movie for the others. I watched it not knowing anything and it was good but if I had known something I would have been bored.
|By Slayer (Slayer) on Monday, August 02, 2004 - 09:20 pm: Edit|
I thought it was really good. The romance in it was *adorable*~
|By Brockpojo767 (Brockpojo767) on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 01:37 pm: Edit|
It was a good movie. I just had to mention the fact his cameramen sucked!
"No, this can't be the end, because we don't know what Lucius's color is." grrrrrr. Don't see it. It's disappointing."***************
*****I was upset that we didnt find out what color he was. When Ivy mentioned that in the movie I was thinking auroras(sp?).
|By Feenotype2 (Feenotype2) on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 02:00 pm: Edit|
Alright guys, I saw the Sixth Sense a while ago but I can't remember the suprise ending. Can somebody enlighten me, por favor?
|By Brockpojo767 (Brockpojo767) on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 02:17 pm: Edit|
Sorry for anyone who hasnt seen the movie but Bruce Willis's character is a ghost.
|By Benjamin (Benjamin) on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 04:01 pm: Edit|
Does Signs really have a suprise ending? Is it the water weakness? Because, if it was, that wasn't really crazily suprising...
|By Peacefulchaos (Peacefulchaos) on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 04:49 pm: Edit|
Lucius is yellow, safe colour, and he's unafraid
|By Brockpojo767 (Brockpojo767) on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 06:40 pm: Edit|
How do you know that?
|By Peacefulchaos (Peacefulchaos) on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 06:45 pm: Edit|
just from inferences and opinions from friends
quote from a friend:
"Lucious's colour? I thought it was red at first, but after the movie was over Wil and I talked and she said she thought he was yellow. I agree completely now. The only time Ivy felt safe was when Lucious was nearby. He was safe and yellow is their safe colour. He was never afraid"
|By Duke3d4 (Duke3d4) on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 08:58 pm: Edit|
Gigli was the worst movie. The only good part was when Ben Affleck kept making fun of the retard kid and the one line "What is it, f*cking mental retard day?"
Or something along those lines. Other than that it was a horrible HORRIBLE movie that made no sense. The worst parts are when J lo scares off some tought looking gangsters by talking 10 minutes about some BS karate move that was supposed to be all cool but wow, what an embarassing moment in movie history.
WOrst MOVIE EVER! The retard kid's obsession with baywatch was just as retarded as him, and didn't really connect with anything rather than a corny ending.
How hard is it to hide a retard kid? NOT VERY HARD. This movie was unrealistic, corny, embaraassing, retarded, and basically even the love scene sucked. I bet Jlo sucks in bed.
|By Anijen21 (Anijen21) on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 10:17 pm: Edit|
I thought the surprise in Signs was just about fate, and how everything happens for a reason, like when that little girl left glasses all over the place, it was for a reason, and how the little boy had asthma, it was for a reason blah blah blah...Mel Gibson lost his faith when his wife died, and regained it when he thought God or whatever saved his son from the evil, bad-breathed aliens.
I really liked Signs until I read a review that said "why on Earth would aliens to whom water is fatal come to a planet that is 70% water?"
Then I only liked it.
But I still think it was a good movie
|By Phantom (Phantom) on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 10:31 pm: Edit|
^same thing happened here. LOL
Anyway, I saw The Village the other day, and I thought that, while it was too long, it was a good movie. Although the 'twist' was not unique, I thought it was executed fairly well. The cinematography was great. Remember: The movie is NOT a scary thriller (false advertising!!!), so save your money if that's what you're looking for.
|By Marestar20 (Marestar20) on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 03:51 am: Edit|
Warning.... spoilers below
Yeah, I was disappointed because I guessed both of the plot twists in the first five minutes, and didn't end up being wrong. It was because the houses looked too nice and the speech of the older generation was more modern than that of the younger, and the speech patterns and colloquialisms were inconsistent. I actually expected there to be credit cards and/or cash for medicine in the shed rather than costumes.
But, I did still find the movie scary. I was unnerved by the fact that the adults were willing to go to such extremes to deceive the youth and protect the village - i.e., fear tactics, using a death for propaganda, not getting medicine for a sick child. They were the real monsters in that movie and, upon later reflection, indeed horrifying.
Maybe that was the filmmaker's point?
|By Demonllama (Demonllama) on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 01:36 pm: Edit|
I always thought Lucius' color was red...that's why she wouldn't tell him. Because then it would show that the whole "yellow is safe, red is evil" is BS. but maybe that's just me. oh well.
|By Tropicanabanana (Tropicanabanana) on Thursday, August 05, 2004 - 12:46 pm: Edit|
>>>Did anyone notice the microphones and booms in The Village. I saw them 6 times when the camera shot was above the characters head.
That's the fault of the projectionist in the particular theater you went to, not the movie.
I liked it, but I also guessed the second twist. I thought she would look over the hedge and there would be a whole sprawling city that she would not be able to see. (Lucky that she was blind, eh?)
I thought it was really dumb how the retarded kid (Adrian Brody) was able to act just like a monster..he could not have made those growls and he would have started laughing or clapping or something.
I also thought it would have been illegal to keep people in the village and not letting them leave because of constant fear.
|By Brockpojo767 (Brockpojo767) on Thursday, August 05, 2004 - 08:37 pm: Edit|
>>>>>That's the fault of the projectionist in the particular theater you went to, not the movie.
No its not. How could the theater cause such an error????Its the boom operators fault. Go see the movie again and look for them. If you dont see them then tell me. I would like to know if it was my theater then.
|By Anijen21 (Anijen21) on Thursday, August 05, 2004 - 11:10 pm: Edit|
Just saw the Village.
I'm going to put spoilers in the little "review," so stop reading if you want to be "surprised"
Anyway, I didn't like the movie, but I like M. as a filmmaker. Don't get me wrong, there were parts where I was like, "GOD if you just STOPPED staring at a puddle with a reflection of a red-clad monster for 10 minutes, then maybe I could get home before dawn!!" but the way he focuses on something irrelevant to the action, so the action is just out of reach of the shot, and then slowly rotates the camera toward the action, and the ominous music growing in the background...ahh you're just waiting for the "BAM" that will release adrenaline into your system, giving you the intense pleasure you forked over $9.00 to see.
By the way, Lucius' color was definitely RED. Scientific analysis of the screenplay clearly shows the character of Ivy saying: "Don't let them see his color," before the revelation to her that the monsters were in fact fake, and when Lucius was laying on the floor, dying of blood loss. At first, one may think, "well, blood IS red, Jenny, so couldn't she just be saying, 'don't let the monsters see the blood'?. Unfortunately, this person would be wrong. Remember, Ivy was blind. And although she may know that blood is in fact red, I think M.'s point was to say that she sees Lucius as red. Also, when she was hugging him, blood seeped into her own gown. If the fact that the blood on his clothes was the evil color she was referring to, she would have derobed to stop the evil monsters from attacking her.
Secondly, the metaphoric reason. (did I just invent a word?) Anyway, to me, everything outside the village was red, and according to the elders, evil, and everything inside the village was yellow, according to the elders, safe. Lucius was not afraid of what was outside the village. He requested many times to explore the "towns" and be allowed to leave the village despite the threat of the monsters. Lucius, instead of feeling protected by the village, felt trapped. Some people say that he was yellow because he was the only thing which made Ivy feel safe was his presence, but I think it was the filmmaker's intention to create this irony: Ivy felt protected by the thing she was supposed to be most afraid of. I think this shows what someone earlier said: though the elders told everyone that the village was safe, and everything outside the village was evil, the truth was that the elders were evil, and although the outside may not be safe, it was not as evil as the elders told everyone it was.
So yeah. I didn't like the movie. I thought it was so stupid that they removed Lucius from the plot by having that retarded guy stab him. I was really angry. He was turning out to be a very interesting character, and although I liked Bryce Dallas Howard's acting, I thought that the second half of the movie wasn't as interesting as the first.
Okay. I'm done.
|By Tropicanabanana (Tropicanabanana) on Friday, August 06, 2004 - 12:51 pm: Edit|
>>>>>No its not. How could the theater cause such an error????Its the boom operators fault. Go see the movie again and look for them. If you dont see them then tell me. I would like to know if it was my theater then.
It's true. When you see microphones like that, just tell the theatre and they'll adjust the film. It's happened many times in my theatre. They sometimes do not edit the microphones out of the film, and the theatre just adjusts the film so you can't see them. I've seen them in other movies, and all you have to do is ask someone to move the film down.
|By Unccadet08 (Unccadet08) on Friday, August 06, 2004 - 01:54 pm: Edit|
i don't remember seeing any microphones in the movie and neither do any of my friends, so i guess if you saw microphones then it must be the theatre's fault
|By Iamqueena (Iamqueena) on Friday, August 06, 2004 - 05:46 pm: Edit|
If you want a suspense movie to scare the out of you DO NOT SEE THIS MOVIE!!! however, if you want a good story, do see. Yes, i know the movie has its flaws. But I really liked the message M. Night Shymalan conveyed in this story. the funny part was the more I thought about it, the more I started comparing it to todays world, which resulted in me comparing it to farenheit 9 11 ( my host family wont stop talking about it srry). just think about it.
I never thought about the lucius color thing though. that is interesting. I agree, bryce dallas howards acting was awesome. some of the blind acting was a little off in the end, but otherwise she was pretty cool. I wish lucius hadnt been removed from the plot other. I went to see it with my language program group and one of the adults in the program was like: NOOOOOOOO! now there wont be anymore joaquin (she is obsessed with him).
|By Vancat (Vancat) on Friday, August 06, 2004 - 05:51 pm: Edit|
the only decent horror movies I've seen are :
1. THe Exorcist
2. Night of the Living Dead
3. Frankenstein (1931 version)
|By Salamanda (Salamanda) on Friday, August 06, 2004 - 10:07 pm: Edit|
way too predictable...and the only movie that has ever scared me has been the exorcist
|By Nmoreno1 (Nmoreno1) on Friday, August 06, 2004 - 10:13 pm: Edit|
One of the scariest movies i've seen, though I havent seen in a few years, was that movie Outbreak with Dustin Hoffman and the monkey virus. Boy I was scared for a long time after seeing that one!
|By Chicken123 (Chicken123) on Friday, August 06, 2004 - 10:23 pm: Edit|
If is really really bad. I saw it and I was so disappointed in M. Night Shyamalan. It really really sux.
|By Chicken123 (Chicken123) on Friday, August 06, 2004 - 10:25 pm: Edit|
What does the M stand for anyway?
|By T2opine (T2opine) on Saturday, August 07, 2004 - 09:11 pm: Edit|
Ok guys, don't tell the ending of it. Some of us want to see The Village. And what was so wrong with Signs! I liked that movie!
|By Tropicanabanana (Tropicanabanana) on Saturday, August 07, 2004 - 11:06 pm: Edit|
if you want to see it and don't want it spoiled, don't open a thread about the movie! this thread was around before i went to see it and i had the common sense not to open it.
|By Mcz (Mcz) on Tuesday, August 10, 2004 - 05:08 pm: Edit|
The ending was very obvious and predictable, because:
1. The furniture was obviously antique.
2. The old woman says her sister was murdered by a group of men and left dead in an alley. The way she said it made it sound very modern.
3. The people also had an unbelievable amount of food. They had a lot of bread. Where did all the wheat come from? The people hardly ever worked. There was also a great deal of meat.
4. They left the bloody animals on the ground. If they didn't want the monsters to see them, why didn't they bury them?
5. There was some red in the movie, like the chickens' combs.
6. Many other reasons.
What was the purpose of Ivy telling Lucius that he had a color but she wouldn't tell him what it was? That had no significance to the film. Also, who would kill all of the animals, a large source of food, when you want to stay in the village?
Why did Ivy's sister want to marry Lucius? He showed little personality.
Ivy's senses were too weird. Blind people do not have ESP or other strange powers, so it was weird to include them. How would she know when half the day was over? How could she find the road? The only purpose of her being blind in the movie was so she could go beyond the forest.
The adults in the movie were also obviously mean. They made their children fear for their lives, by telling them the monsters were coming and making them hide.
The pictures of the people shown toward the end made it obvious that the people could only have been in the forest for about twenty years at most. The people did not look as if they had aged as much as intended. Most of the people in the village were older, so it makes no sense that some of the adults did not know the truth, especially with some being married to the elders.
Reviews keep saying that the movie will give you nightmares. The movie was not scary at all, so the ads are ludicrous lies. The movie was highly predictable. Donít waste your time or money.
|By Chapter322 (Chapter322) on Tuesday, August 10, 2004 - 09:01 pm: Edit|
This movie is really good if you look at the big picture. Once you get past the whole "creatures" thing (you may have to watch the film more than once on bootleg dvd) you'll grasp the idea of "just how monstrous people could be (and are), and how some of the worst things done in this world are initially based on good intention.
It seems like everyone wants to make this film into some sort of contest. "I figured it out before you!" The producer didn't proclaim that no one was supposed to or going to figure the twist out... There was more to this film.
Just watch it over. The Village becomes an entirely new film! The elders look SO cruel! The dead child at the start of the film, the family huddling together in the cellar, deathly afraid. They were monsters for sure.
|By Phantom (Phantom) on Tuesday, August 10, 2004 - 09:11 pm: Edit|
I just saw a news article saying that the publishers of Running Out of Time is considering suing Shyamalan. haha
|By Chapter322 (Chapter322) on Wednesday, August 11, 2004 - 02:24 pm: Edit|
OMG! The guy reading the newspaper in the ranger's office is SHYAMALAN!! I knew the guy's voice sounded strange. When I watched that scene again, the camera passes behind M. Night's head. You can recognize Shymalan's ears, curly hair, and his skin color! It was def him! What a cameo! Did anyone else notice this?
|By Phantom (Phantom) on Wednesday, August 11, 2004 - 02:26 pm: Edit|
Yeah, and I believe that the "I'm off to fix the sign" line refers to "Signs."
|By T2opine (T2opine) on Wednesday, August 11, 2004 - 10:08 pm: Edit|
Well I saw The Village a few days ago and I liked it. I don't know, maybe it's because I don't try to find out the ends of movies, but I wasn't expecting the end at all. I have to say, I found it absolutely horrific that parents wouldn't give their children medicine. Do we ever find out what year it is?
|By Mcz (Mcz) on Monday, August 16, 2004 - 11:36 pm: Edit|
It's supposed to really be now, but when they bury the seven-year old in the beginning, the tombstone says its 1897.
Report an offensive message on this page E-mail this page to a friend
|Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.|
|Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only|