Curious about some criticisms that I've heard a lot

Cafe Society
21

As far as M. Night goes:

I saw The Sixth Sense first run (but it takes a while for 1st run to get here) but I had heard about the shocking surprise. I hadn’t heard what it was, merely that it existed. I figured out Bruce Willis was dead about 1/2 way through and kept waiting for the surprise. It turned out that was the surprise. I felt let down, but it was a decent flick.

I loved Unbreakable

The Village was nothing more than predictability and pandering (I saw it based on liking TSS and Unbreakable.) After that every M. Night movie I heard of all had some twist and I expected they would be as obvious as TSS and The Village so I gave them a miss.

I liked The Last Airbender - I didn’t know it was him until after I’d seen it - but I also had no familiarity with the source material so I went in blank.

I think that’s exactly the reason.

They have started a record label to give exposure to little known (Canadian?) acts and one of their first albums on the label is a stand-up album.

I heard an interview with the comic on the CBC and he said (paraphrased from memory), "Everytime someone hears that I’m on Nickelback’s label they always say things like, ‘Oh aren’t they just the worst? Tell me about ways they suck.’

“And I’m like, yeah, I’m going to bite the hand that just gave me the shot of a lifetime. You know, I’ve never met a Nickleback fan, everyone says how bad they are but they’ve sold tens of millions of albums and are multiple platinum. If they are so bad and everyone hates them then who’s buying the damned records?”

22

With music, mediocre is worse than bad. “Bad” music is like Tiny Tim, or some of Ween’s more drug-addled recordings, or the Beatles’ “Honey Pie”. It’s still interesting and unique, even if it doesn’t sound “pleasant” to your ears. Nickelback is mediocre. Bland. Boring. It sounds exactly like it was written to be played at low volume 24-7 in a department store owned by the “let me speak to your manager” lady. And that kind of music makes me want to take an ice pick to my eardrums in short order.

23

The MPAA imposed a new rule a while back. You can’t get a film rated (needed to have a nontrivial theatric run in the US) if the title is the same as a previous film without permission. There was an old movie called The Butler and the owner of that film refused to allow Daniels to re-use the name. That part isn’t his fault.

It’s sort of a good idea. E.g., the new movie Gold is the same as an old Susannah York/Roger Moore film. Apparently permission was given here. I like the earlier Gold, basically because it has Susannah York in it. And now it’s going to be “buried” by the new film.

Re: Shamalayan and “twists”. The Sixth Sense had no twist. It was clear from the beginning. We enjoyed the movie. The rest (that I’ve seen) are crap. “Twist” or not.

He doesn’t need “twists” to make good movies. It’s a terrible stylistic choice. Move on.

24

The Sixth Sense was really an amazingly well crafted movie. It works on all levels. Well acted, well filmed, and it plays fair. Rewatching the movie, with knowing the twist, shows he made no cheats. It was the audience that drew the wrong conclusions from scenes. The movie was a breath of fresh air, bringing in a new style that people hadn’t seen recently.

Unbreakable wasn’t really a twist movie, though it had a small-t twist in the true nature of Mr Glass. It’s really a superhero origin story. But that fact shows the beginning of the “twist trap” that M got himself into. People thought Unbreakable was another Sixth Sense movie, but just not as good. But that’s not fair - what is was was a pretty good superhero origin story, but set in the “real” world. AWe get to see how a “real” superhero might come about. David Dunn isn’t Superman, but he is a super man. (And he even has a Marvel alliterative name.)

But from then on, somehow M got stuck in not only thinking that he could only make twist films, but that it was the twist (and only the twist) that made his films work. He seemed to not “get” his own success. The Sixth Sense succeeded because it was good, not because it had a twist.

So he became this poor fellow who kept giving what he understood people wanted, but couldn’t seem to grasp why people hated his films. “I gave you what you wanted. Why aren’t you happy?” For a while he reminded me of a 6 year old, trying earnestly to please his mom, but never doing so, and not having the awareness to see what he was doing wrong. The critic character in Lady In The Water is cringingly bad, M thinks he is making a scathing attach against his real life critics, but he comes across as even more clueless (and thin skinned).

I’d love to see him use his talents in different movies. Maybe direct someone else’s screenplay. Split may be a good film, but it doesn’t appeal to me for the plot, not because it is an M film, so I’ll miss it.

eta: there’s always someone who has to show how smart they were because they saw the twist in TSS, and dismiss the rest of us who didn’t see it coming as cretins. Yes, you’re very smart. Here’s a cookie.

25

If that’s the case, he should have titled it: Cecil Gaines, The Butler.

26

Anyone who adopts a kewl name in film school has to prove themselves to a higher level. :slight_smile:

He almost made it with TSS, and could have cemented his reputation had he gotten to complete the Unbreakable trilogy. But I agree with the posters above who think he’s just pointlessly lazy and sloppy about half the details while obsessing over the other half to the point of exasperation.

27

The Sixth Sense was a rip off a kids’ show. 'The Sixth Sense' Ripped Off An 'Are You Afraid of the Dark' Episode & Here's the Proof

28

The thing about Eliza Dushku is that, while a decent actress, her role in *Dollhouse *demanded that she play a different character in just about every episode, and she simply didn’t have the range. This was exacerbated by the fact that some of her co-stars - I’m looking at you, Enver Gjokaj - *could *pull it off, which made her look worse in comparison.

29

I’ll toss another name into the ring of those heavily cirticized, another movie director, to boot. Michael Bay. There’s a guy everyone likes to razz, but his movies make money. And he delivers exactly what you expect. Nothing wrong with a movie that light on substance from time to time. I’ve heard he’s an asshole, but I can overlook such things in the name of entertainment.

30

You just had to bring up that name!
Yes, they make money, but making money doesn’t equate with good work (and he’ll never get any more of my money)
His films are horrible. They don’t entertain me at all.

They’re all just so BORING.

My god, 2+ hours of mindless, chaotic noise. Action that serves no purpose except to fill the screen with movement. Cardboard characters. Insipid dialogue.

Some directors or producers create work, that for the most part, fit into one type of genre. Hitchcock was known for thrillers. Carpenter is known for horror. Brooks for comedy. So you know what to expect going into their films. BUT, they don’t always make the same film. There are enough differences, enough unique takes that you get something new and enjoyable out of it.

Bay makes the same stupid noisy crap time after time.

31

Michael Bay, I can imagine being especially disliked for taking over beloved franchises.

Sent from my LG-V410 using Tapatalk

32

Hubby and I just watched Dollhouse and while Enver Gjokaj might have outshone her a bit, she had a very difficult role compared to him - he got the timeless “love conquers all” theme to work with, plus two hilarious opportunities to mimic Topher Brink.

I think Dushku did a great job in Dollhouse.

33

Many moons ago, a friend of mine said that he was no longer a fan of Nickelback. I asked him why not and his reason was that he hates bands that rip off other albums. I asked which album and his answer was, Nickelback’s first album.

That’s Nickelback in nutshell.

34

Interesting that no one seems to remember his more recent work. Devil? The Visit? After <hork> Earth? No mentions at all yet.

35

Devil was awesome! Even the most critical of film critics should have liked that one.

36

Well, he didn’t direct Devil, only produced it. So maybe that’s why you liked it.

37

He also wrote it, no?

And he’s also written/directed/produced/appeared in Split (which has a CLEVER TWIST AT THE END) which seems to be doing well, although much of the buzz seems to be about James McAvoy.

38

I quite liked “The Happening”. Main problem was the production which smacked of TV movie rather than Hollywood Feature Film. No sillier than many other films, certainly not “bottom five worst movie ever”. Some much better received films are far worse in my opinion (Prometheus anyone?). Seems like people can’t get past That One Thing ™ and enjoy a film for what it is. Mark Wahlberg? Matthew Broderick in Godzilla? Newt and Hicks dying in Alien 3? etc.

39

The Devil was quite good and The Visit was a fun watch. They were nothing like each other or any of his other films nor did they contain a twist. Even The Happening, which overall was a turd, had a few good moments.

I guess it always comes down to the old varying mileage when it comes to taste. I also think when one starts out on top, not only is it hard to keep living up to expectations but there’s also the danger of overexposure / overhype.

40

I’m too lazy to write a whole thing about it. But I rather liked Lady in the Water. I thought it was a very interesting story told in an interesting way. Although I will grant you the ridiculousness of casting himself as the tortured underappreciated writer.