I really liked Unbreakable.
The Sixth Sense I found trite and predictable, and generally ‘blah’. It’s watchable, though, based on the strength of the performances.
I haven’t seen the others.
Enjoyed Sixth Sense.
Thought **Unbreakable ** was a nice premise built into a very poorly executed movie.
Some would say **Signs ** was drivel. I disagree. I think it was tedious, laboured drivel, that simply wasn’t worth watching. Having cranked his plot into action, he didn’t have an ending and he knew it. And the CGI was awful, even by the standards of awful CGI.
Village… haven’t seen and don’t particularly plan to. He broke my trust with the last two, so I’m no longer interested.
Incidentally, I attended a special advance screening of Signs in London for all the ‘real’ circle-makers. Quite a fun event, laid on for free by the UK distributors. On the whole I don’t think people were terribly impressed.
I like them all.
I’m curious who couldn’t see the motivation of Sam Jackson in Unbreakable? Were you not listening? That’s my only problem with the movie, it’s laid out for you in NO uncertain terms. I usually have a terrible time figuring out characters motivations and I had no problem with Unbreakable.
Signs scared the crap out of me, so it gets my vote.
Sixth Sense is 1. Beautiful and 2. well crafted.
Unbreakable is unbelievable in every way, but I still enjoy it.
The Village has some of the best performances by its leads that I’ve seen in years. Bryce Dallas Howard is spectacular, as is Joaquin Phoenix.
They each have their flaws, but the cinematography is always amazing. Roger Deakins (O’ Brother Where Art Thou) (my personal hero) shot the Village, Tak Fujimoto (Philadelphia, the Manchurian Candidate remake) did Signs and The Sixth Sense, Eduardo Serra (Girl With a Pearl Earring) shot Unbreakable.
The work of the cinematographer adds an amazing amount to these films, especially Sixth Sense and the Village.
Same here. I have the other three on my Netflix queue though.
I like all of his movies. Signs is probably my least favorite.
From this thread, I realized that there are some similarities between Shyamalan and Tarantino. There are major differences too, but the similarities are interesting:
Both include a lot of tributes to older films/directors from the same genre. Think of the opening credits/title screen from any Tarantino movie and then look at the opening of Signs.
Both take familiar stories and attempt different takes on them.
Both try to have a deeper level beyond the surface. The difference here is that Tarantino is much more subtle. Shyamalan has a problem now that his movies don’t really work on the surface level much at all, so you don’t have to go digging to find the real meaning and people feel that he is only trying to make a point, not a good movie.
Both have a lot of fans and detractors.
Trunk:
I think the motivation is clear:
He has a genetic deformity that makes him weak, and frail, as do lots of people. If a genetic deformity can make one man frail, can it not make another strong?
As to causing the accidents, well, I think that the years of being bitter about his condition combined with doing nothing with his life except read comic books, and top that off with not yet having found someone who is his ‘opposite’ jkinda drove him a bit mad and VERY determined to prove his theory correct.
Besides, it has the best last line of any movie, ever.
“They called me…Mr. Glass.”
I like:
Signs (funniest movie I’ve ever seen, my and my friend laughed trough the whole film)
The Village
The M. Night home movies on the special features are awesome!
Have yet to see Unbreakable or Sixth Sense.
Ah! Thank you! Now I remember what made me less enthusiastic about *Unbreakable *than the others; The motivation of Sam Jackson’s character: it’s laid out for you in NO uncertain terms. I like a little ambiguity in my movies, because I love to figure out character’s motivations and play mental games with multiple interpretations of things. I had a little problem doing this with *Unbreakable *because it was wound up so tightly, with no room for interpretation.
YMM, obviously, V.
But I still liked it. It was just not my favorite favorite of some of my favorite movies.
The Sixth Sense was great. Worked well on several levels.
I liked Signs, but I think you have to watch it as a haunted house movie, not a Sci Fi movie.
Never saw Unbreakable.
I just watched The Village over the weekend and was very disapointed. The twist was kind of silly, and I had figured it out early on in the film (not the exact details, but close enough).
You wrote what I wanted to write!
Maybe get Kevin Smith, who cannot direct his way out of a paper bag, but can certainly write, to team up M. Night.
I pretty much rank them in order of release: my favorite is The Sixth Sense, followed by Unbreakable. I found Signs to be watchable, and not bad, but I haven’t purchased my own copy and probably won’t. Haven’t seen The Village yet, but I’d like to; for some reason I think that I’ll enjoy it more than the last one.
Well, if Mr. Breakable’s motivation is just “I’m a miserable old crank and kill people until I find a guy who is my opposite, if such a guy even exists, and he must by my faulty logic, or at least logic understood by a small subset of the move-going audience, and then say “hi” to him”, then I guess I do get it.
I think that FilmGeek is right about some of the appeal of Shyamalan’s movies. The Village was, what I’d call, a beautiful movie. The season, the trees, the costumes, the lighting, the colors. I liked the understated acting, and the “proper” way of talking. And, there were may scenes of just a unique tone, some scary, some touching, some uncomfortable. It was excellent just for all it’s pieces. I think I had a similar reaction to **Signs[b/].
The fact that the payoff was less than some expected was almost secondary in The Village. I do think that after Sixth Sense, people want to leave one of his movies going, “That was great. He really got me,” but maybe you need to look at his movies in a different way.
Maybe I need to see Unbreakable again. I only saw it once, like the day it came out. Perhaps I got caught up in the wrong mindset.
Dismayed and scratching my head more than a little at all the Signs haters out there. That flick was suspenseful and creepy throughout, well acted, well written (as all of Shyamalan’s stories are), and genuinely moving. I can’t fault you if you found the ending or–if you want to be so reductionist as to label it a “message”–trite, since taste is subjective, but damn. You gotta be pretty jaded to have problems with such a beautiful denoument.
P.S. to bouv: I liked the “Mr. Glass” line myself, but two friends I saw it with nearly burst out laughing when Jackson delivered it- they just thought it was beyond corny. Like an old-time movie villain shaking his fist and crying, You’re no match for me, Bendable Boy! I saw what they were saying, but like you, I still thought it was a killer line. Goes to show how polarized people are when it comes to Shyamalan’s stuff.
Actually this whole thread is testament to that!
Not to mention actually complaining about the CGI. Could you miss the point MORE? You’re not watchng Spiderman.
Signs, Unbreakable, Sixth Sense
.
.
.
.
.
.
The Village.
In that order.
The only 2 good movies he has written:
The Sixth Sense
Stuart Little
Am I the last person in america who doesnt pay attention to the directors when picking movies? I had no clue that the dude did all of the movies, I jsut get the popcorn, and watch movies. I am roughly aware that there are specific directors, but I want to be entertained, not vote on a damned Oscar fergoshsakes. I dont care if tarrentino is making a action flick or the care bear movie, as long as it is entertaining.
I doubt it, but for me, it’s the overriding factor in establishing – at the very least – my initial interest in a movie.
Scorcese is the reason I went to see “Aviator”. Eastwood is the reason I’m going to see “Million Dollar Baby”, and the reason that, beyond all understanding, I saw “Space Cowboys”.
With the reviews “The Village” got, I would never have seen it if it wasn’t Shyamalan, but since I know he can be so polarizing (as are many good directors) I was still intrigued to see it.
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. Ones I’m not crazy about I don’t waste my time or money. Ones I’m not sure about, I’ll wait for Netflix. Sure, it’s not a $20,000 investment, but my time is valuable, and even $10 is hard to come by sometimes.
Knowing that I’ve never seen a single Wes Anderson film that doesn’t make me want to gouge my eyeballs out with a spork means I have an extra 2 hours and $10 by not seeing The Life Aquatic. Do I miss a good one occasionally? Probably. I still haven’t seen Pulp Fiction, because I haven’t liked anything else by Tarantino. Maybe I’ll rectify that via Netflx soon.
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.
I wanted to like “Signs”. I thought it could have been very creepy. It certainly laid the groundwork fairly well.
Unfortunatly, it’s hard to be afraid of “Idiots from outer space”. Aliens who travel millions of miles to attack a planet that mostly posionous to them, and don’t even bother to bring any weapons in case some human decides to lock them in a pantry.
Not to mention that the bit at the end where his faith is restored only makes sense if you believe that there’s no other possible way he would have thought of the idea of SWINGING THE FRICKEN BAT AT THE ALIEN without remembering the “prophetic” last words of his late wife.
So it doesn’t really work as a Sci-Fi movie or as a movie about faith, in my opinion.