That which comes after the semicolon does not contradict–is not even in tension with–that which comes before.
-FrL-
Something’s being foreshadowing and a Chekhov’s Gun does not make it not a twist.
What do you mean when you say “twist?”
-FrL-
Due to a misunderstanding on my part, I didn’t get the twist and still enjoyed it. I thought the point was about the lengths people will go to in order to manipulate their loved ones, even in the belief that it’s for their own good.
I missed the “secret” because
It never occurred to me they were living in the past, because all their crap was from Pottery Barn, so obviously they live in the present day. I assumed that they were modern-era people who enjoyed living a more simple lifestyle, which is pretty much what was happening.
I love his movies even when I’m not buying what’s happening in them – like Signs, which was ridiculous in premise but was like the best visual candy ever. That’s my favorite thing about his films, they all look so good.
This has been my default position since Signs. Hugely overrated writer – but definitely an underrated director. It’s too bad his internal director is unable to overrule his internal writer during the script stage.
I use it to mean what he did in Sixth Sense. There was a moment at which a previously unmentioned bit of information became known and suddenly the entire plot of the movie was different. Armed with that bit of NEW knowledge, you could rewatch the movie and get an entirely different experience out of it. Dialog suddenly meant different things. Character relationships were totally different. Even actual plot points - things that happened - were different from what we thought the first time we saw it (assuming we went in unspoilered). That’s a twist.
“Swing away” and even the timeline thing in The Village weren’t twists. They didn’t present us with a whole 'nother movie on a second viewing. The Village thing did present us with a different insight into a few characters, but it didn’t fundamentally change the movie the way Sixth Sense’s twist did. (And, like delphica, I never thought anything other than what was eventually presented as a surprise, and I wrote about that when I saw it.)
“Swing away” and the reveal at the end of *Unbreakable *were simply storytelling techniques consistent with the genre. Again, they didn’t “twist” the movie like a mobius strip and present us with a re-write of what had gone before with a single newly revealed point.
Only Sixth Sense had a twist. The rest, while I enjoyed them, where merely well crafted mysteries. People get huffy because he didn’t “twist” them as effectively as Sixth Sense, when I maintain he wasn’t ever trying to.
I see, that makes sense!
I thought people were saying that it would be better without that twist, ie that the whole thing actually did take place in the past, as opposed to what you’re saying, that we know all along that it’s a bunch of modern day people choosing to live that way and manipulating the younguns into not knowing any different
And I totally agree.
Thanks.
I see what you’re saying. Myself, I would side with those saying he continued to try to write movies with a “twist” and just ended up with bad “twists” in films subsequent to Sixth Sense. They’re bad twists for pretty much the same reasons you’re saying they’re not twists at all.
I’m not sure how to argue about whether the author was actually trying to do the same thing he did in Sixth Sense or not.
-FrL-
Imagine if 3/4ths of the way through The Shining, there is a fifteen minute side journey where we find out that the hotel is actually an extravegant movie set and everything scary happening to the people in the hotel is special effects and Jack Nicholson playing a prank on his family. And then the movie cuts back and continues without change to the end.
The “secret” about the Village added nothing to the film. Not only does the entire feel of the movie get unceremoniously dumped, it adds in a not-very-subtle wink to the audience from M. Night as he sits reading a newspaper on-screen. Yeah, it does provide the McGuffin necessary to the plot, but really we didn’t need that McGuffin. In the end all it does is lessen the horror of the events that follow by boiling everything down to simply being about a bunch of bored people who have more money than sense getting themselves into trouble in the woods. Most of the major cast, all of the tension, and all of the story that we had been following just disappears for fifteen minutes, all for the sake of letting Night go, “Oh look at how smart I am! I even worked in Little Red Riding Hood!”
He would have done much better to have left the secret, secret till the last scene where he could do (similar to the Shining’s last shot of the photograph) a pull back to reveal what was outside the village. Putting it smack in the middle of one of the most tense points of the film is just shoddy work. Had he not done that, he could have had a classic horror film.
Fair enough, but the previous point was implied in that sentence. It will hopefully become clearer if I add it explicitly:
The fact that Samuel L. Jackson was the bad guy in Unbreakable isn’t a signature M. Night twist; that’s the standard formula in comic book stories.
The point I (think) I’m getting at is that you can’t hang Sixth Sense and The Village over his head for his entire career. As in, he should be allowed to make a mystery, for example, and not have people rolling their eyes about it being yet another twist since that structure is basically dictated by the genre.
On a side note, I tend to agree with those who don’t characterize The Village as having a signature twist, but I concede that it’s far too close to one to be able to credibly discount it in a debate about how many signature twists he’s done.
I tend to agree that his cameo was hamfisted and cringeworthy, though I love the scene where Howard meets the security guard.
I guess I see The Village differently from most people. I don’t consider it a horror movie in any way. I consider it a straight-up romance, and on that score I think it succeeded admirably.
Well, going outside the source material might be considered cheating, but he’s said in interviews and articles that he never intended to be considered a “twist” director and that most of his movies don’t contain what he thinks of as a twist.
Working solely within the source material, I think the big difference is that in Sixth Sense, while there are lots of artistic clues that are obviously pointing to “the secret” (the color red, for instance, and coldness), none of them are obvious until you already know the secret. “Swing away” is firmly and openly planted and obvious as the day is long - it’s just not apparent that it’s important until later on. That’s why it’s a Chekhov’s Gun - it’s firmly and clearly planted on stage in Act One, so (if you’re used to Chekhov’s theory and writing style, with M. Night uses) it’s GOT to be used in Act Two or Three. I think a Chekhov’s Gun is antithetical to a Sixth Sense style Twist; by definition no clear Gun was planted in Act One, and yet somehow he didn’t just pull new facts out of his ass either (a la The Forgotten). That kind of ambiguity takes a lot of skill; it’s as if Chekhov planted a Gun that looked like a hummingbird and no one hated him for it.
It’s the difference, upon rewatching, between “Oh…right…I should have known that meant something,” (which is apparent in any mystery upon second viewing) and “HOLY $#!^!!! She never actually spoke to him!”.
Whynot, this is a nice distinction! I shall henceforth use it in personal conversations as though it were my own. 
-FrL-
M. Knight Shymalan had me at “The Sixth Sense”. I’ve since made sure to see all of his movies in the theater because they say different things to me and I’ve had to make an effort to get his message. Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy hollywood blockbusters that take you by the hand and tell you six different ways what the meaning of the movie is, but The Sixth Sense, Unbreakable, and Signs are my favorite movies from this director. Sure, Lady in the Water was uh, confusing, but I remember it years after I saw it which is more than I can see about more recent forgettable movies I’ve seen. I’ll be sure to catch “The Happening” on opening day.
I really enjoyed The Sixth Sense, Unbreakable and Signs (even wasting a lot of time here defending the aliens in Signs as not necessarily being aliens, until I heard that Shyamalan referred to them as “aliens” in an interview, which might indicate that they were, in fact, meant to be aliens).
With The Village, I thought he had his head up his ass. “Pull your head out, M. Night!” I mentally shouted at the screen. (With The Lady in the Water, it sounded like he had it even further up there.) I thought the big “secret” should have either been left out, or revealed early on so that the strong underlying themes could be explored without the distraction of building up to a big stupid unnecessary “Twilight Zone” twist.
An excellent director, but he needs somebody to tell him that his scripts suck lately. Maybe he’s got his head together now. I’m a big believer in comebacks.
I don’t understand the Lady In The Water hate. I thought it was very nice. The characters were nice. The story was nice, just enough suspense to keep it from being boring.
OTOH Signs was crap. It might of been okay, without the religious aspect and without Mel Gibson.
The Village was entertaining. The only thing that bothered me about the “twist”, was all the talk about the “twist” which made me think it would be more spectacular.
Absolutely loved *“The Sixth Sense,” * but thought it would’ve been better if the whole “suprise” thing was revealed, (to the audience) during the story for the 5 people who hadn’t figured it out on their own. The big “reveal” kind of made me wish I could watch it the way I was supposed to, by not knowing the thing that was supposed to be a suprise.
“Unbreakable” was okay.
I’ve been a Mark Wahlberg fan since “Three Kings.” So I definately will see it… as soon as Blockbuster gets it in.
It’s not really a “Twist” at all. a “Twist” is when the movie fools the viewer into one perspective of the movie, then reveals that that perspective is dramatically, and usually ironically, wrong. In “The Sixth Sense” we find the main character is not what even he himself thinks he is; in “The Village” we find the village is not what we believed it was. In both cases the deception is particularly relevant to the essence of the story.
Contrast this with the end of “Unbreakable.” It IS a surprise ending, and something of a twist, but it’s not really relevant to the essence of the story. The story is about the growth of its protagonist and how he finds meaning and purpose in his life, and how that restores his connection with his wife and son. The real nature of Mr. Glass isn’t material to that.
The end of Signs is a foreshadowed deus ex machina of sorts, but it’s not a twist; the movie’s main plot is relatively straighforward. Aliens invade Earth, terrorize a family, and they resist the invasion.
I’m willing and even slightly excited to see a new MNS movie. I liked all of his movies a lot except LITW, which I liked a lot of elements of, but which I felt was partially ruined by the fact that MNS pissed all over the movie with his big ego.
First, his name was as large as it could possibly be, way too many times in the credits and too prominently displayed. I like the fact that he plays a small role in all his movies, but did he have to cast himself as the messianic martyred writer of the book that saves the world? And then the endless jabs at (and eventual murder of!) the movie critic! It’s like MNS said, “finally I can make a movie on my own terms, let’s use it to make myself seem really important and to stick my tongue out at anyone I don’t like.” That said, the story was amusing (if over-expositional), the suspense was true MNS form, and the acting was solid. With a slightly better script, and without the pissing context, I would have really enjoyed LITW.
So yeah, if MNS has been humbled at all by the experience, or if the studio has hired someone to reign in his ego, The Happening might be a fun ride.
booga-booga-booga! 
I’ve been a Mark Wahlberg since Calvin Klein Billboard.
Plus he’s a decent actor. 
Interesting. Well, we’ll see. Shyamalan really can do suspense well.
I would have liked The Village fine if the “secret” of the movie had been revealed early on. The central dramatic theme – that even if you create an isolated society, you can’t escape the violence inherent in human nature – could have been explored more intelligently then, without some of the stupid plot devices. Shyamalan’s got a lot of talent, but maybe he should collaborate with somebody who’ll tell him when his head is on the verge of going up his ass, or to remind him that, as Nigel Tufnel noted, “There’s a fine line between clever and stupid”.