They didn’t talk, Yosemite_Joy. If you get the movie, you’ll notice all they’re doing is sitting there before Cole comes in. No dialogue took place until Cole’s mom left the room.
Still how did he get inside?
He’s dead. He probably walked through walls or whatever the hell ghosts do.
Well, wouldn’t that be weird Moosie? After all, he didn’t KNOW he was dead at that point. Do you regularly walk through walls? Sober, I mean?
Coldfire
How did he get anywhere? He appeared in many places, and most had to be accessed by door. How did he walk in to the Hospital, his wife’s store, his own house, etc.? As a matter of fact, how did he cause the glass in the door to break when he stormed out, angry, from his wife’s store?
I did not realize he was dead until the moment they wanted it revealed. The movie was excellent as far as plot. Watching it a second time, I can tell the boy knew from the first moment he saw the doctor that the doctor was a ghost.
I love this movie! Just wanted to add my two sense. I saw it with a friend and she claims she knew. She even warned me, “I think he’s dead.” But I didn’t buy it and I was completely shocked. I even cried! (not unusual, really!). I have seen it like 10 times, and it blows me away every time.
I can’t wait to see M. Night Shamalayan’s new movie with Bruce Willis, Unbreakable. There is an excerpt from the movie in this month’s Esquire and it looks really good.
IIRC, they never even looked toward each other. That was the scene that confirmed my suspicions.
Regarding Crowe’s movements:
Crowe was basically in denial–he just blanked out on how he got places. He just appeared where he wanted to be–like all the others showing up in Cole’s apartment. Remember how Crowe could never open the basement door? The scene always just jumped to him in the basement.
As for breaking the glass, they showed us a ghost affecting material objects when the Kira (the poisoned girl, sp?) pushed the box out for Cole–or when his “tent” collapsed on her. It’s consistent with the internal logic of the movie.
<Usual Suspects hijack> The lawyer’s name in The Usual Suspects set off alarm bells for me for some reason. I figured it out a little before the end. Good movie.</hijack>
I just thought of something else that should’ve clued me in. When Cole and Crowe went to the poisoned girl’s wake, they took a bus. Wouldn’t the good doctor have had a car if he were alive?
No, Crowe was looking at Cole’s mom but she had her head in her hands - obviously thinking about what Cole’s problems were.
AWB, not necessarily.
I looked up a movie review site to get a little info on whether it was a good movie, hit the wrong part of a discussion thread, and had the secret revealed to me, so I knew when I went to see it. But I didn’t tell anyone I was with, and they were all stunned.
Knowing he was dead, I watched for any tells that would require him to be alive, and there weren’t any. They did an excellent job of masking his non-interaction while hinting at it. There were clues, like the anniversary dinner, the fact nobody but the kid interacted with him at all, the fact that the door to the basement kept being locked and eventually blocked. The hospital scene, where he is in the room but not talking to the doctors and they don’t notice him.
And yes, the kid knew right away. That’s why he ran to the church and was praying. Yet Crowe was not like the other scary ghosts, and kept interacting nicely. He knew he had to interact to keep the ghost happy, and learned how to deal with the other ghosts because of it.
Ugh.
The Sixth Sense is a mediocre, not-scary, ponderous ghost story with a twist that surprises some and not others. Every promotion for the movie let you know that the kid sees ghosts, yet the kid doesn’t even mention it until you’ve plodded fifty solid minutes into the movie. M. “NightMan” Shamalamadingdong needs to reread his filmmaker’s manual, particularly the section on “building tension”.
The movie made half its money from people who went back a second time to see the clues they missed the first time through so that they could reassure themselves that they weren’t stupid for missing them. Missing the clues didn’t make you stupid, of course, it just made the film dishonest. The movie did NOT deserve the attention it got from the public, and young Freely Joley Payton Ozma or whatever his name is did NOT deserve an Oscar nomination for whispering his way through a role that could have been played by a trained gibbon.
On the plus side, the director has, by making so much money, set up impossible-to-meet expectations. NightMan’s next few films will likely be major disappointments, with atmosphere and scenes rehashed from Sixth Sense, because he knows he’ll never equal his past success. Hopefully, the hype around him will burn out quickly.
Whew. Sorry. I take some film topics too seriously, I think…go about your normal daily business.
I don’t see why this is important. If we go into the theater already knowing the kid can see dead people, then it doesn’t matter when we find out about it in the movie.
No worse than all those Leo fans going to watch Titanic fifteen times.
Calling it “dishonest” isn’t fair. Just because you missed some clues that you got eventually in the end? Same thing here. I might have felt a little dense for a while, but so what? No permanent damage done. I have a feeling that us viewers grasping the clues in hindsight was an intentional part of the movie anyway.
Besides, I’m glad I got to think at the theater for once. There have been a lot of stupid movies lately.
Okay. When I first saw Sixth Sense, I came to the conclusion that it was (basically) a remake of the excellent, superb, incredible, etc. Bruce-Willis-realises-he’s-dead flick 12 Monkeys. Now, what little I’ve seen and read of Unbreakable makes me wonder: is this Fearless (the excellent, superb, incredible, etc. Jeff-Bridges-realises-he’s-unkillable flick)?
What movie is Shamalayan gonna rip off next?
Well, ** Montfort, ** of course there is no surprise, I was taken in by both ‘Fight Club’ and ‘The Usual Suspects’ too, ‘Suspects’, I liked, and the Fight Club bugged the stew out of me!
I enjoyed the thread that aha did of it in GQ [I think] more than the movie. Not to sound like ‘Mrs. Cranky’ but the ending was SO stupid!
Unfortunately, I don’t have a DVD machine to get the extra footage of ‘Sixth Sense’, but I DID notice the video has just come out, and they are touting that as having the same advantages, anyone know if that is true??
Montfort, 12 Monkeys and Fearless are definitely on my 10 best list, and your comment about Shamalayan ripping them off made me think of something Roger Ebert says: Movies aren’t WHAT they’re about, but HOW they are about it. Any good story is worth retelling. If 6th Sense was a “rip-off” of 12 Monkeys, it was a pretty good rip off, and just another way of telling a similar story.
IMO, any movie with Bruce Willis is a good one, and yes, I will even include Hudson Hawk on that list!!
I’m not going to argue with that. But, I’m sick of people praising the film for such an “original” concept when it in fact was not original, nor was it nearly as well-done as in the Gilliam film. And, I’m certain that the new one is not as well done as Peter Weir’s film.
Why he doesn’t pick bad directors to rip-off is beyond me. There’s plenty of improvement to be done on Michael Bay’s work.
The whole genre of the narrator hallucinating/lying/paranoid/delusional/something-he-doesn’t-realize-he-is is interesting as we still expect, after all these years, that the narrator is an omnipotent truth teller for us (think Jacob’s Ladder, Naked Lunch, Blade Runner (Ok, I think Ford’s character was a replicant himself all along-- I’m not sure whether that is obvious, though), Total Recall, Matrix, Usual Suspects, Last Tempatation of Christ, the giant fungus episode of X-files, perhaps the Rear Window as an Ur-quelle). Must relate to the po-mo epistimological crisis literary trend (thinking of Eco-- Foucault’s Pendulum, et al). It’s started to almost feel derivative, really (although I still enjoy the films), so how long before you think it loses its novelty? It has this certain plot-twist quality that can get really lame (like the “dream-sequence” bit in soap operas). I like it best when it remains very seductive but ambiguous at the end and noting is resolved for certain for you, but you are left wondering about this new possibility.
Anyway, just been thinking about this lately.