# The Village



## cupotea (Aug 5, 2004)

I was extremely disappointed.

1. The acting was superb, Bryce Howard (Ron Howard's daughter) especially shone, as did Bill Hurt (AS USUAL) and Brendan Gleeson (one of my favorite actors).

2.The writing, editing and cinematography were, as you'd expect from Shyamalan, very well executed.

However,

3.The movie is preachy. All Shyamalan movies are to some degree preachy, however, heretofore the sermons have been at least interesting, this one isn't.

4.M. Night lets the cat out of the bag about two-thirds of the way into this movie, then he makes you think maybe he really didn't only to show you very shortly that he did indeed not only let the cat out of the bag but killed it with a stick.

5.The 'kicker' is predictable and, well, dare I say it, stupid.

I didn't like this movie, and I liked 'Unbreakable'.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Aug 5, 2004)

Matt and I saw it last weekend. This has got to be one of the worst movies I ever saw. Ron Howards daughter was splendid; however, not even excellent acting could save this masterminded rip-off of my hard earned dollars. My opinion, Shyamalan pulled off one of the biggest 'stings' this year.............avoid this village, no one lives here.


----------



## ReformedWretch (Aug 5, 2004)

I HATED signs and because of that refused to go to this movie.


----------



## Craig (Aug 5, 2004)

I've liked Signs and The 6th Sense...don't care for Night's other movies.

The Village does start out quite well...letting that cat out of the bag so early on was terrible.

It managed to keep my attention the whole time...it wasn't the best movie I've seen, but not the worste. I am just glad we saw it at a "cheap" theatre ($2.50 per ticket).
[quote:3ce2bc09c6]The security guard calls the authorities and they cross the border. They indict the adults who are guilty of such deception and roundaboutly guilty of murder, then all the younger ones of the village adapt to the real world. [/quote:3ce2bc09c6]
I think he should have done something like that, too. Maybe even have the security guy go back with Ivy....he falls in love with the place, but the elders end up killing him rather than incorporate him into their society.


----------



## ReformedWretch (Aug 5, 2004)

[quote:4707fbc061="joshua"]Why'd you hate [i:4707fbc061]Signs[/i:4707fbc061]?[/quote:4707fbc061]

Many reasons.

-The pace was way too slow.

-The acting was horrid in my opinion. Who would act like that if aliens were invading?

-The whole losing my faith angle. Just thought it was poorly done.

I had to fight falling asleep.


----------



## cupotea (Aug 5, 2004)

I didn't think that the gal who played Ivy was very convincing at being blind. I was watching for quite a while before I actually figured it out. I think part of the reason I wasn't easy convinced is that I lived with my blind uncle for 5 years, and I pretty well know how to spot 'em. 

I agree the movie was preachy. No money, share everything, and total equality (with the exception of the 'elders').

However, I liked the movie! (I'll duck to hide from those of you who wish to throw tomatoes at me) It was entertaining. That's why I went!!!


----------



## Authorised (Aug 6, 2004)

I thought Signs was actually pretty hilarious. Especially the scene were he refuses to pray and the children start crying when he starts to eat their food. 

I didn't think it was THAT bad, really...its just improbable that aliens could travel through space but couldn't knock a wooden door down.


----------



## Cacklewack (Aug 7, 2004)

[quote:a908a2bc41="ReformedLadyRed"]I didn't think that the gal who played Ivy was very convincing at being blind. I was watching for quite a while before I actually figured it out. I think part of the reason I wasn't easy convinced is that I lived with my blind uncle for 5 years, and I pretty well know how to spot 'em. 

I agree the movie was preachy. No money, share everything, and total equality (with the exception of the 'elders').

However, I liked the movie! (I'll duck to hide from those of you who wish to throw tomatoes at me) It was entertaining. That's why I went!!! [/quote:a908a2bc41]

Aye, I didn't want to see this movie. In the end, I felt it was quite entertaining, and I think Howard's daughter did a spledid job. 

Matt


----------



## voided user1 (Aug 8, 2004)

Signs: Call me a Calvinist who imputes my beliefs into what I watch, but to me this movie was all about predestination and the sovereignty of God. I enjoyed the way aliens were shown so little, yet somehow the suspense kept building.

The Village: I don't think the trailers were a fair representation of what the movie was about. I saw philosophical implications in this movie that reminded me of my separatist fundamentalist upbringing. The "early" letdown was in fact a setup for the second appearance in the woods. Me and my fiance weren't disappointed at all on the fear/suspense factor. We marvelled at how what we thought was a decent story was woven from very little, especially at the start of the movie.


----------



## cupotea (Aug 9, 2004)

Wymer,

You make a good point.

If the movie had been advertised as a commenting discursion on the evils of violence in society and the possible effects of an effort to completely avoid that society by means of radical social separatism, I probably would have liked it more...As such, it was fairly effective, but even so, the fictionality of the account hamstrung it...it was just too contrived...the Amish and other similarly ideological communitarians don't have the same problems or anything like them. Of course the Amish didn't form out of an effort to seek asylum from the violence of postmodern chaos. 

The movie seems to be about this and the damage well-intentioned deceit and secrecy can do to such a society. Shyamalan's argument seems to be pretty fatalistic: No matter how hard you try to avoid murder and societal ill, it will follow you wherever you go and no amount of protective political engineering can circumvent this. It is, of course, only a short step from this to the conclusion that men are conceived in sin and carry within them the seed of all ill, including that which blights his public congress. This too is interesting, especially from an Evangelical perspective...

But again, as interesting as a conclusion like this might be and as much conversation as it might mght spawn, it's not what the movie was advertized as being about.

I guess if I adjust my expectations, I can grant the movie some value, and it may be that I am coming around to appreciate it more, but it all leaves me wondering... Why, if Shyamalan was making a movie about the above-mentioned socio-philosophical point does he star in a Sci-Fi channel mockumentary intimating that he has some kind of 'connection' with 'the other side'? Why bill the movie as a monster-feature? What do I tell people who ask me if they should see it? Should I tell them not to expect a monster movie but a rather complicated commentary on the human desire for security?

uzzled:


----------



## sastark (Aug 9, 2004)

[b:ee0c763574]WARNING! Spoilers in this post! Do not read if you have not seen the movie![/b:ee0c763574]
(of course, if you've read the whole thread up to my post, you already know what's going on in the movie)


[quote:ee0c763574="Steadfast"]What do I tell people who ask me if they should see it? Should I tell them not to expect a monster movie but a rather complicated commentary on the human desire for security?

uzzled:[/quote:ee0c763574]

Tell them what I've told a few of my friends, since I saw it: "It wasn't at all what I expected." 

To be honest, I do not enjoy scary movies at all, but I found absolutely nothing scary about this movie. That was while I was watching it. The more I think about it, the more un-scary it becomes. I mean, what were all those people scared about? There were no monsters. The "elders" never actually killed anyone, they only mutilated the occasional sheep to keep every one in check.

The [i:ee0c763574]only[/i:ee0c763574] part that made me second-guess what was going on was when Ivy was in the woods and encounters one of "those of whom we do not speak", but even then, it didn't take long to figure out what was going on, plus they told you!

I enjoyed the movie, though. The message behind it, I felt was quite good: You cannot escape evil. Why? Because we are by nature evil. Remember, Adrian Brody's character (Noah), was presummed to be the most "innocent" of any one in the village, and he was the psycho-killer! I tell ya what, between the Total Depravity of "The Village" and the Predestination of "Signs", I'm starting to wonder if Shyamalan is a Calvinist.


----------



## govols (Aug 10, 2004)

*Kind of enjoyed it myself*

I thought it was a decent movie. It wasn't the best I've seen but entertaining and, for me, it went by pretty quickly. I was startled twice even when I knew it was coming and got ready for it.  

A different ending would have been the teenager disposing of his cigarette over the fence and burning down the forest.

Or have them all dress up (in you know what) and scare Ivy when she comes back.

A bus of Star Trek groupies getting lost in the woods all dressed up would have been funny. Are you a Klingon?

:bs2:


----------



## RamistThomist (Jan 21, 2005)

I am deliberately going to buck the system: this movie *rocked*!!!!!!!!! It was easily my favorite of M Night's movies. If we are going to build an agrarian society we need to take seriously the faults presented in this movie, lest we repeat them. The blind girl did a fantastic job...probably the best actress/actor of the past three years. I actually think Shamalyan letting the cat out of the bag early was a good idea. Imagine what the girl thinks when she encounters "something" in the woods, "_There had been talk of creatures in the woods before we arrived_ (or something like that), so the father tells the girl after revealing the secret....imagine the shock!!!

Now, throw your tomatoes. I am ready


----------



## RamistThomist (Jan 21, 2005)

Also,
Is there a soundtrack of the movie? I hope so. The music was cool as well.


----------



## Presbyrino (Jan 21, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Draught Horse_
> I am deliberately going to buck the system: this movie *rocked*!!!!!!!!!



Parital 

I liked this movie as well. I thought bryce howard did a great job acting. 

A couple of things did start to give it away as I watched it:
*Women elders. No early american settlement would've had women elders.
*No preachers. Most early american settlements I belive would 've had a preacher. 
*No biblical references at all. I think this started to lead me to suspect something was fishy in the town.

Overall I give it 3 stars..
Good cinematagraphy
Good sound track
Good cast of actors
fair story line


----------



## RamistThomist (Jan 21, 2005)

Stever,
You raise some good points. But when we build our agrarian society, we will take note of that. Blessed is the village whose God is the Lord.


----------



## pastorway (Jan 21, 2005)

I did not and will not see it - just no desire to see any of Night's movies....

as for the comment - *Women elders - you forgot the Quakers! The Friends, whose ministers/preachers were women. They had male elders too but the preachers were/are women. Ever see the movie _Friendly Persuasion_ With Gary Cooper? A classic!


Phillip


----------



## Presbyrino (Jan 21, 2005)

> _Originally posted by pastorway_
> as for the comment - *Women elders - you forgot the Quakers! The Friends, whose ministers/preachers were women. They had male elders too but the preachers were/are women. Ever see the movie _Friendly Persuasion_ With Gary Cooper? A classic!
> Phillip



Good point, I forgot about those. 

Never seen Friendly Persuasion, but I will add that to the list of movies to see. :bigsmile:


----------



## LadyFlynt (Jan 21, 2005)

I have to see this movie...the trailers had been driving me nuts. Like someone above stated...the trailers reminded me of a time I went through in my life. 

Never saw Signs.

Liked (and freaked out) 6th Sense...thought the plot was interesting, but more so the "what?!" ending. Could have done without some of the graphics when dealing with the ghosts though.


----------



## RamistThomist (Jan 21, 2005)

> _Originally posted by LadyFlynt_
> I have to see this movie...the trailers had been driving me nuts. Like someone above stated...the trailers reminded me of a time I went through in my life.
> 
> Never saw Signs.
> ...



I stand by my original statement: This movie rocked!
Also, the moonlight scene where the guy and girl are on the front porch having an old fashioned talk--the moonlight hitting the fog rising off the ground was incredible. That might be the second most perfect scene in moviemaking.

[Edited on 1--22-05 by Draught Horse]


----------



## LadyFlynt (Jan 21, 2005)

cool...


----------



## turmeric (Jan 21, 2005)

I liked it as well. I don't like scary movies to begin with, and I wasn't expecting the critter to appear the second time. Thought it was a great parable. Think of this; how would you make a movie out of Pilgrim's Progress?

Actually I wouldn't.


----------

