Shyamalan a ding-dong

Back to the subject at hand.

Unbreakable still sucks balls.

A twist ending to the new M. Night movie would be that it's actually good.

 

I wonder about the word 'pretentious' that was thrown out here.
I'm a Shyamalan fan. I don't see anything pretentious about them because I see them as just well-crafted movies.
His movies don't try to be intellectual. They are out to be intriguing, but not intellectual.
They are what I think of as good popcorn movies.

 

Unbreakable was horrible.

Just a boring ass movie.

When I saw it in the theatre, when I came out, I immediately went back in and bought a ticket to "Little Nicky" to get the stench out of my brain. And "Little Nicky" wasn't exactly "Vertigo," but it was better than that train wreck.

 

I wish I'd said it, but a reviewer said when it came out that "Unbreakable" was unbearable.

 

I'll accept that you don't like Unbreakable ... great.

But then you'll throw Little Nicky at me? Wow.

 

Space, I love you, but I've got to agree here.
I loved 'Unbreakable', but I know a lot of people didn't like it.
That's fine.
But it's kind of hard to use 'Unbreakable' to justify paying to see 'Little Nicky.'

 

I have had and will continue to have great success avoiding this would-be Spielberg's movies. He doesn't appear to understand the first thing about science fiction or horror, not to mention storytelling. When the movie lags, he'll play around with his camera. And when he's bored with camera tricks, he'll try to sell you on a premise such as aliens invading a planet whose surface is covered with 75 percent of what is most toxic to them. Yeah. Right.

He diddily diddily sucks.

On an unrelated note, Central Illinoisan, if I ever take another PhotoShop seminar, I want you doing the teaching.

 

Unbreakable should have had SNAKES ON THE MOTHERFUCKING TRAIN!




Sorry, can't help it whenever I think of an SLJ movie.

 

That's well played.

 

Unbreakable was my favorite of the Shyamalan flicks. What a different take on a superhero movie.

One thing I think he is great at doing is building up the dramatic tension throughout the entire movie. His flicks don't generally follow the standard format of 1)Attention grabbing opening 30-45 mins, 2) downtime in the second act setting up the 3)Dramatic conclusion. Instead, everything -- I mean everything -- leads up to the conclusion. The payoff was worth it in three out of four of his flicks and 'The Village' was still decent.

I'm actually surprised no one has said on this thread that he needs to stop doing to the "thriller with a twist" movies. It's something I've heard others say before and my only response to that argument is "Would you have told Hitchcock to do a romantic comedy?" And yes, I think Shyamalan can be every bit as good as Hitchcock (he's got to expand his body of work, but I think he's an excellent filmmaker).

Hey, some people don't get it. I absolutely love it. In fact, I'm going to pop in Unbreakable right now.

 

And I'm going to keep watching "Walker: Texas Ranger." Some people don't get it.

 

Awesome. Totally awesome.

I liked The Sixth Sense. But Unbreakable made me incredibly angry. Ninety minutes leading up to THAT ending? It redefined the suck.

I still gave him another shot with Signs, which, to his credit, sucked from the start. There was nothing redeeming about that. What a god awful piece of pretentious quasi horror crap.

I wouldn't see The Village or another movie of his if you paid me.

M. Night, do me a favor. Never make another movie.