# What M. Night Shyamalan movies do you like? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [January 24, 2005, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415 "2005-01-24T15:43:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Ephemera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8baadc/32.png) [@Ephemera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ephemera)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2005, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415/41 "2005-01-25T19:40:45Z")
**aruvqan** : I’m the same way but only to an extent. I know the most well-known directors and some of their styles but once you get outside those dozen or two, I couldn’t tell the difference. ---
**Author:** ![aruvqan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aruvqan/32/2891_2.png) [@aruvqan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aruvqan)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2005, 6:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415/42 "2005-01-26T06:36:28Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > Do you pay attention to the manufacturer when you buy a car? I’m sure there’s some good Fords out there, but I’ve always been a Chevy gal. Same thing for movies. I’ve learned what I like and who I click with and those are the movies I’ll tend to pay the big bucks for to see in the theater. > > When I was younger, I didn’t have favorite directors - I had favorite actors and that was about it. Now I appreciate what a director and a cinemetographer and a screenwriter and even a costume designer bring to a movie. I’ll never miss a movie that Catherine Martin (_Moulin Rouge_) costumes, simply because I love to look at her work. Plus, she picks projects I like. I suspect we’d get along well over a cup of tea and a book of fabric swatches. Now, I just hope she never does a film with Wes Anderson, or I’m sunk! 😃 > > But I also pay attention to buzz and reviews and Dopers, and I’m prepared to swallow my pre-conceptions and see something I thought I might not like. And sometimes, I’m pleasantly surprised. _Catch Me if You Can_ did not entirely suck. Hm, looking out in the field I see a small collection of VWs [abandoned by a previous roommate when he couldnt come up with the cash for his last month rent - anybody want a camper van or squareback, or 71 not a super beetle? reasonable cost, you come and get them=)] 2 subarus [one is a parts car for the other] a pair of scouts [one mine, one mrArus that is being scavenged for parts to fix mine] a yugo, our dearly departed minivan[got in an accident, we haven’t gotten rid of it yet because it has some parts that a friend wants for his mini] a spare jeep belonging to our roomie, mrArus chevy s10 and my vw jetta. In my life I have owned a nash metropolitan, a ford mustang, a dodge omni, a yugo, a fiat 128 spider, a mid 70s ferrari, a TVR vixen and I would commit murder for either a matra-simca bagheera, an abarth scorpioni or a jensen FF. I would consider committing bodily mayhem for a GTO in good condition, or a no shit cobra [mid to late 60s vintage] and I would sacrifice my mother to the demon of your choice for a bugatti=) I listen to music ranging from early medieval bar songs [carmina burana NOT by Orff] through Gregorian chants, Mozart, Eno’s Ambience music, japanese No theater, Spike Jones, PDQ Bach, Beatles, BeeGees and Rammstein. About the only stuff I dont like is fairly modern country, bubblegum pop, and pablum-oid boy and girl bands, and J-Lo can rot in hell as far as I am concerned, sharing an office cubicle with Madonna and the Spice Girls. I watch movie trailers, and if it doesnt look interesting I wont bother trying to see it, unless/untill it comes on cable and is on when nothing else is on and I am too lazy to change the channel. I will make an attempt to see movies by particular actors that I find interesting [either through skill or looks] but I can say that other than Hitchcock, I tend to be blissfully unaware of most movie makers other than acting staff. I do tend to see what movie critics say about movies, and _in general_ they have the exact opposite opinions of movies than I do and if they detest it, and consider it a waste of film, I will probably enjoy it. Like I have said elsewhere, WTF is the deal with Porklipz Now and GodFather? _Why_ do people worship those to movies? About the only 2 scenes worth watching in Porklipz Now are the helos with Ride of the Valkyries and the snake and nape run. My preferred version of Godfather is The Freshman… ---
**Author:** ![Askia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/96bed5/32.png) [@Askia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askia)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2005, 8:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415/43 "2005-01-26T08:37:04Z")
I haven’t seen _ **The Village** _ all the way through yet, but I was bored with what I did see. I was probably in the wrong mood to watch it. I’ve liked the other M. Shymalan movies though none quite packs the punch as well as _ **The Sixth Sense.** _ I agree that \***Unbreakable[/I**] had a great concept that suffered from poor execution. Well, not so much “poor” as “incomplete”… see, every superhero/action movie has a final clash between hero and villain once the villain is revealed. So basically, having revealed himself to David Dunn, Elijah Price should have had one more convoluted plot to spring. This didn’t happen, so after the reveal we have NO final confrontation and the hero just … calls the police off-camera…? No, no, no, no, no. At least have Elijah fly off the handle about David not playing fair or threaten the city with an easily averted disaster or something. For a movie steeped in superhero conventions and presenting itself as an intelligent adult take on superheroes to miss this critical point struck me as a cop-out and deeply unsatisfies. That said, I thought the build-up and reveal were all very good. Samuel L. remains one of Hollywood’s few actors who can convincingly portray a compelling hero/antagonist. ---
**Author:** ![Mal\_Adroit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df788c/32.png) [@Mal\_Adroit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mal_Adroit)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2005, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415/44 "2005-01-26T15:58:46Z")
> [@Askia](#): > > I agree that \***Unbreakable[/I**] had a great concept that suffered from poor execution. Well, not so much “poor” as “incomplete”… see, every superhero/action movie has a final clash between hero and villain once the villain is revealed. . . For a movie steeped in superhero conventions and presenting itself as an intelligent adult take on superheroes to miss this critical point struck me as a cop-out and deeply unsatisfies. I think if some kind of classic confrontation had been staged, the film would have teetered into traditional comic-book movie territory, and I’m guessing that wasn’t at all the kind of film Shyamalan was trying to make. The idea at least as I perceived it was to come at the whole superhero concept from a completely fresh angle,\* so that you don’t even realize you’re watching a superhero’s “awakening” until the end of the film. It’s unfortunate that you came away from it unsatisfied, but . . . if you didn’t know it was a superhero movie going in, and if it aimed to work on this entire other level (the human element–or rather, finding out you’re not exactly human) how could you turn around and start faulting the film for not following a traditional formula? Final clash between good and evil, etc. \*Cinematically, anyway. Alex Ross’s Marvels attempted a similar kinda thing. ---
**Author:** ![Scoundrel\_Swanswater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dfb087/32.png) [@Scoundrel\_Swanswater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scoundrel_Swanswater)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2005, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415/45 "2005-01-26T15:58:51Z")
My list : 1. _Unbreakable_ 2. _The Sixth Sense_ . . . 3. _The Village_ . . . . . . 4. _Signs_ I really wanted to like _Signs_, but I found it much too preachy. I didn’t like _Unbreakable_ the first time I watched it, but found myself thinking about it a few days later. On second viewing I discovered that it was a very deep and moving beginning of a superhero-saga. You have to realise that it is only the opening act to really appreciate it. _The Village_ was okay, but I really cannot stand Joaquim Phoenix. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2005, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415/46 "2005-01-26T17:37:18Z")
I just recently watched _The Villiage_, and I thought it was horrible. Nothing about it was particularly scary or suspenseful. The twist was fairly apparent and relatively far fetched. I thought that the anecdotes that were revealed through the movie, about crime and gun violence, were pretty anachronistic, and led to me anticipating the “big twist” fairly early on. I do agree with **SkipMagic** about that scene being particularly surprising, but at the same time: he is shown kneeling over him and repeatedly stabbing the guy, yet he’s gonna live with a few medicines from an amazingly well-stocked medical supply fridge at some guard shack? Also: Who the hell sends their blind daughter on a hike through the woods, essentially alone? Why would they even send the two other guys along, when it would make it particularly difficult to keep the secret afterwards? Why wouldn’t William Hurt simply go himself? As for Shyamalan, I think he spent himself on _The Sixth Sense_. I found Unwatchable\* to be exceptionally plodding, and gave short shrift to the coolest part, the idea of someone coming to understand and come to grips with superhuman powers. I was disappointed that we only get to see him use those powers once. I also found the conflict between Willis and his wife pretty contrived and distracting from the rest of the story. _Signs_ was just silly. The aliens were silly looking. The “Your wife is severed in two and stuck to a tree, but is alive as long as we leave her be” was silly. The foreshadowing of the water and baseball bat stuff was silly, and the ability to swing a bat didn’t strike me as particularly unique. These aliens were pretty much wimps - trapped in kitchen cupboards, done in by baseball bats, and water. Not much scare nor suspense in that one either. ---
**Author:** ![Mal\_Adroit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df788c/32.png) [@Mal\_Adroit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mal_Adroit)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2005, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415/47 "2005-01-26T17:46:16Z")
> [@Hentor the Barbarian](#): > > The aliens were silly looking. With ya there. We never actually should have seen the aliens. The characters finally seeing them would have worked, and our watching their horrified reactions. But no makeup/special effects guy can create an entity that begins to approach what our imaginations were concocting at that point. And those Roswell wannabes were just craptastic. ---
**Author:** ![Mal\_Adroit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df788c/32.png) [@Mal\_Adroit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mal_Adroit)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2005, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415/48 "2005-01-26T17:54:19Z")
Oh, and **Hentor** (minor point): I don’t think Adrien Brody was stabbing Joaquin Phoenix in the chest after he fell; I’m pretty sure he was just punching at him then like a little kid would. Yet your point is well taken. ---
**Author:** ![Tangent](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tangent/32/3098_2.png) [@Tangent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tangent)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2005, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415/49 "2005-01-26T17:59:17Z")
> [@aruvqan](#): > > Am I the last person in america who doesnt pay attention to the directors when picking movies? Many, many movies are released without promoting the director’s name to try to find an audience. But there are a small number of directors whose movies are _marketed_ based largely on the director’s name and reputation. Spielberg and Scorsese are probably the two most recognized American directors, because of their consistent quality and success. One of their names attached to a picture is almost a guarantee of box office success. Some directors are well-known for having a particular ‘style’ to their films. Tim Burton’s movies are always promoted using his name so that fans of his style will know that this movie might appeal to them. The same goes for Shyamalan. After the huge success of The Sixth Sense, he instantly gained (undeservedly, IMO) that name-recognition status. All of his subsequent movies were HEAVILY marketed as ‘M. Night Shyamalan’ movies. I’m really quite surprised that you could have seen Unbreakable, Signs, and The Village without knowing they were all films ‘by M. Night Shyamalan.’ It was thrown in your face with every commercial and every poster promoting those movies. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2005, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415/50 "2005-01-26T18:36:22Z")
I love me some monster movies, and I love me some fantasy movies, and I love me some good movies. _Eternal Sunshine_ and _City of Lost Children_ are among my all-time faves–so it’s not that Shyamalan fails to live up to my genre expectations. It’s that he cheats. The tombstone in the first shot of the village? Totally bogus, served only to fool the audience. Bad form. And throughout the movie, people behaved in completely unrealistic fashions. Not even aesthetically pleasing fashions, or fashions that are plausible yet stupid. They were unrealistic. It was enough to make me pull my hair out. The cinematography was gorgeous, the concept was great, the moral dilemma at the heart of the movie was fascinating; the fact that it had so much going for it made its ultimate failure all that much worse for me. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2005, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415/51 "2005-01-26T19:16:50Z")
One other aspect that cued me to the big surprise of “The Villiage” that I have to ask others about: I am no expert on the history and design of watchtowers, but the slope-legged construction of the watchtower just felt far too modern. I recall one scene where it sat in the background of the shot for a while, and the effect on me was akin to seeing jet contrails in an old western. Was this just me? ---
**Author:** ![Trunk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/87869e/32.png) [@Trunk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trunk)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2005, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415/52 "2005-01-26T20:07:09Z")
Yeah, somehow I think that was just you. It’s an odd criticism. First of all, they are in modern times, so they would know how to design such a thing. That takes care of that part. Second of all, the point was they were returning to simple clothing, houses and activities to avoid modern conveniences and temptations. I fail to see how sloping the legs on a watchtower really would subvert that. It’s not like they had a radio. They weren’t just doing it for the sake of mimicking the old days. And, what would be the problem anyway? They were trying to raise children in that environment. Unless one of the kids found a book on “watchtower design in the 20th century” I don’t exactly figure the jig is up. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2005, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415/53 "2005-01-26T20:34:33Z")
> [@Trunk](#): > > Yeah, somehow I think that was just you. > > It’s an odd criticism. Thanks for your insightful comments. My issue was not so much (if at all, but I’m sure I just wasn’t clear enough) about the internal logic or justification of the thing, but from a viewer’s perspective about the fact that it gives away the big switch. This is kind of why I likened it to jet contrails in an old western, you see. Perhaps you could argue that M. Night meant for it to be a tip-off. Fine, for whatever reason, I’ll buy that. But thanks again for your contribution. ---
**Author:** ![HPL](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3da27b/32.png) [@HPL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HPL)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2005, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415/54 "2005-01-26T20:57:41Z")
> [@Hentor the Barbarian](#): > > I do agree with **SkipMagic** about that scene being particularly surprising, but at the same time: he is shown kneeling over him and repeatedly stabbing the guy, yet he’s gonna live with a few medicines from an amazingly well-stocked medical supply fridge at some guard shack? The Doctor said he treated the wound, but it had become infected. That’s why they needed the medicine, because apparently they don’t have penicillian. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2005, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415/55 "2005-01-26T20:57:30Z")
> [@Hentor the Barbarian](#): > > My issue was not so much (if at all, but I’m sure I just wasn’t clear enough) about the internal logic or justification of the thing, but from a viewer’s perspective about the fact that it gives away the big switch. This is kind of why I likened it to jet contrails in an old western, you see. “Do not try to explain the switch, that’s impossible. Instead only try to realise the truth; there is no switch.” i.e. there are dozens of “give aways” early on in the movie. The style and finish of the box holding the photos and newsclippings, for example. The colors of the textiles, the smoothness and thinness of the glass in the windows, the lack of a smithy, the carpentry techniques, even the make of the broom used to sweep the porch. The very existence of an “outside” so different as to have radically different and better medicine that the elders know about but do not bring into their village. There are so many “give aways” that I see it as further evidence that there was no switch, nor was there ever intended to be a switch. A plot reveal, sure. Something that would make the main \*\*character \*\*go “WTF?” But I don’t get how any of the viewers wouldn’t see it a mile out. It’s a more interesting movie to me if I know more than she does. Heck, I realized the so-called “switch” you’re talking about when I saw the previews! I suppose one could choose to interpret these things as directorial weakness, but I prefer to see them as clues and stylistic choices. It actually makes more sense than to assume the entire town was flawlessly planned and executed without an anachronistic hitch. The same could be said of the choice in _The Sixth Sense_ to have a red object in the screen every time a dead person is around. Is that a flaw or a clever device that most people didn’t “get” until watching it the second time around? ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2005, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415/56 "2005-01-26T21:17:36Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > A plot reveal, sure. Something that would make the main \*\*character \*\*go “WTF?” But I don’t get how any of the viewers wouldn’t see it a mile out. It’s a more interesting movie to me if I know more than she does. Heck, I realized the so-called “switch” you’re talking about when I saw the previews! Wow. You’re good. My only question is why, then, did you put it in a spoiler box? ---
**Author:** ![mazinger\_z](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5f9b8f/32.png) [@mazinger\_z](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mazinger_z)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2005, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415/57 "2005-01-26T21:25:27Z")
> [@Askia](#): > > I agree that \***Unbreakable[/I**] had a great concept that suffered from poor execution. Well, not so much “poor” as “incomplete”… see, every superhero/action movie has a final clash between hero and villain once the villain is revealed. _snip_ What **Moody Bastard** said. This is a different take on the superhero movie. I had the benefit of having absolutely no idea what to expect when watching this movie. From the few previews I saw, I thought it was going to be about a mystery. I just wanted to show my friends that Shyamalan was a hack. (I was a bit underwhelmed by Sixth Sense b/c I felt lied to. “Hide the ball” is not good directing/writing/explaining…etc.) Boy, was I wrong! As others have explained above, his logic (good comic book logic at that) was that he was on one end of the spectrum, highly fragile. On the other side of the bell curve had to be someone (nighly) indestructible. Since he has not seen or heard of this person, he had to find him. I love the way he twisted the motiffs around. In order to unleash the greater good in the world, Mt. Glass had to become evil. Good and Evil are not clear concepts. They are realistic. In comic books (particularly Golden Age), evil is doing something cartoony, like stealing all the money, or trying to take over the world. The heros are actively trying to put a stop to the villan. In this movie, the “evil” Mr. Glass was trying to make the world a better place by finding the Unbreakable man, his exact opposite. Bruce Willis wasn’t trying to save anyone. He was just trying to keep down a job and keep his family together. Sorry, this isn’t very thought out and I have to leave. But, hopefully, you see my point. The only thing I didn’t like about _Unbreakable_ was Willis’ precog and mind reading powers. Where did that come from? What does being Unbreakable have to do with that? I guess it’s opposite of Mr. Glass who is psychopathic – from what my psychologist friends tell me is, where one sees people and things as the same, that the psychopath has nothing but objective value considerations for everything; e.g. everyong and everything is a “thing” (a widget), and the relative worth is only equal to what enjoyment the psychopath can derive from it. Mr. Glass does not value human life, since he will easily burn down a hotel, blow up a train, etc. to find his goal. To him, blowing up a building, people in it or not, is all the same as long as accomplishes his goal. I guess you could say he is transparent that way. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2005, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415/58 "2005-01-26T21:27:26Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > There are so many “give aways” that I see it as further evidence that there was no switch, nor was there ever intended to be a switch. So why the date on the tombstone? Similarly, when watching _Ever After_, should I have taken such things as the protagonist’s perfect teeth as a give-away that it was actually set in modern times, and that the whole Rennaissance setting was supposed to be a sham? And can you explain to me why there was both a lack of a smithy and a lack of modern-style tools that would preclude the need for a smithy? They were using old-fashioned tools, the type that wear out and break and dull easily, the type you need to have a blacksmith around to fix. I ain’t buyin it. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2005, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415/59 "2005-01-26T21:39:11Z")
> [@Hentor the Barbarian](#): > > Wow. You’re good. My only question is why, then, did you put it in a spoiler box? 😕'Cause the spoiler box isn’t for me, it’s for other readers. Like I said, I’ve had nearly every movie spoiled for me, and I hate it. I am very extravagant with my use of spoiler boxes, because I’d hate to be responsible for ruining someone else’s experience, and only they can judge how much they want to know ahead of time. Maybe they want to feel just as clever as I did by noticing everything I spoilered without reading it on a message board first. It’s not always about preserving a twist or a switch, it’s about respecting a person’s choice of experience. Some movies/shows, I want to know everything ahead of time. I read spoilers, script leaks, rumors and wild-assed conjecture. Then again, there’s some TV shows I won’t even watch “Next week on…” or look in the TV Guide to see who’s guest starring because I want to be totally surprised. So when someone posts a “Guess what! Peter Ustinov is going to be on The O.C. next week!” without a spoiler, I get really irked. When in doubt, spoiler! is my mantra. That leaves the choice up to each viewer. > [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > So why the date on the tombstone? Can’t justify that one. Didn’t like it myself. That felt forced and odd. > [@](#): > > Similarly, when watching Ever After, should I have taken such things as the protagonist’s perfect teeth as a give-away that it was actually set in modern times, and that the whole Rennaissance setting was supposed to be a sham? Why would one do that? It wasn’t Rennaissance, it was fantasy. And yes, there are plenty of indications that it’s a fantasy, the presence of Leonardo being the main one. > [@](#): > > And can you explain to me why there was both a lack of a smithy and a lack of modern-style tools that would preclude the need for a smithy? They were using old-fashioned tools, the type that wear out and break and dull easily, the type you need to have a blacksmith around to fix. Hmm. Never really noticed the tools. I’ll have to watch it again and get back to you. My only WAG is that they hit the Williamsburg circuit hard and bought out all the period tools, so they had plenty of spares in storage. They must have been storing something else in all those sheds! Not sayin’ it was a perfect movie. Never have. Just sayin’ I don’t think it was intended to have a Sixth Sense style twist. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2005, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415/60 "2005-01-26T21:53:58Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > Why would one do that? It wasn’t Rennaissance, it was fantasy. And yes, there are plenty of indications that it’s a fantasy, the presence of Leonardo being the main one. It claimed to be a fantasy set in the Rennaissance. If you don’t like that, though, should the good teeth in _From Hell_ led me to believe it wasn’t supposed to be happening in Victorian England? > [@](#): > > Hmm. Never really noticed the tools. I’ll have to watch it again and get back to you. My only WAG is that they hit the Williamsburg circuit hard and bought out all the period tools, so they had plenty of spares in storage. They must have been storing something else in all those sheds! > > Not sayin’ it was a perfect movie. Never have. Just sayin’ I don’t think it was intended to have a Sixth Sense style twist. Even if they bought out all the period tools, the community is still not sustainable without a smithy or without a large supply of _modern_ tools. Eventually they’re going to run out, and that kind of contradicts the central conceit of the movie–specifically, that the elders have thought this thing through. (Had I been them, I would’ve used modern tools and brought along a large supply of antibiotics). As for the movie’s not intended to have a twist, you’re incorrect: I read an interview with Shyamalan during the movie’s filming in which he was practically wetting himself with pride over the movie’s twist and over the hush-hush secrecy about the twist. The director and writer intended a twist. Daniel [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-m-night-shyamalan-movies-do-you-like/286415.md?page=4)