Apparently it "works" on the many levels a thriller/horror like this is supposed to.
Yay!
So this cynical prediction proven false...
http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/07/14/lol-graph-predicts-m-night-shyamalan-will-be-responsible-for-the-first-ever-negative-tomatometer-rating/
maybe because he just contributed the STORY, and let someone else do the full screenplay and directing? (although sometimes his writing does surprise you (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=stuartlittle.htm)...)
PS: spoilers all over the internet, so if you're interested in what appears to be a decently-produced claustrophobic twilightzonesque film I would recommend avoiding even watching a trailer on Youtube. Plus watching the trailer imo shows a bit too much about what happens. But possibly full of red herrings too, who knows...
Err, wanna be clear on WHAT film?? I checked iMDB and he's only involved with the story on "Devil" 2010, he's not wearing the puffy director pants on anything that will be released in the wild until 2011.
I shudder when I think of his only other offering which took a big fat dump on what is one of the best animated works in the last decade.
As Count Floyd would say "Woooo boy kids, that one was a KLINKER! WooooOOooOOooooOOoo!! But next week, next week we have... oh boy... a REAL scary film you WON'T want to miss!"
Quote from: Mr. Analog on September 17, 2010, 11:28:06 AM
Err, wanna be clear on WHAT film?? I checked iMDB and he's only involved with the story on "Devil" 2010, he's not wearing the puffy director pants on anything that will be released in the wild until 2011.
Like I said, the guy has amazing story potential, just sometimes his ego gets in the way a good final edit of a film, it's hard to have healthy perspective when you are screenwriter and director, I love most of Night's films for the cinematography and music i.e. MOOD it evokes, I like having my emotions stirred and my brain a little manipulated (i.e. mind@%&# movies ftw) but if this is the first of a series of films "made" by other people, only with a Night story, then by the sound of it, this new way of doing things is full of win. And I guess I'm glad to hear it.
And hey, Stuart Little, doesn't that sweet movie make up for any of the steaming piles of the last few years? ;)
PS: if you're interested, a decent interview here: http://staticmass.net/?p=3839
I dunno, I think there's a lot of chance involved in his projects determining whether they will be good or not I mean, generally to make a bad movie have place one person in any two of the following roles:
-Writer
-Director
-Actor
I look back at movies like Unbreakable, The Village and The Sixth Sense and most of what makes those offerings great are the major plot twists (what a twist!). Now that he's gotten away from the "what a twist!" trope his movies are a lot less fun and generally don't work.
I mean, re-watch Sixth Sense and try to imagine if the boy just saw ghosts and that the man was just a man... kinda bland ain't it?
I guess what I'm trying to say is that he dazzled me with one trick and now I expect it (which defeats it).
Quote from: Mr. Analog on September 17, 2010, 12:07:22 PM
I look back at movies like Unbreakable, The Village and The Sixth Sense and most of what makes those offerings great are the major plot twists (what a twist!). Now that he's gotten away from the "what a twist!" trope his movies are a lot less fun and generally don't work.
Wow, in my opinion the acting and cinematography (and mood-inducing pacing, etc.) are what made those films an enjoyable, immersive experience. The "twist" in Signs was not any different in terms of "rolleyesomgsrsly?" than the other films, but somehow people seem to overlook the above 3 (which, btw, I'm happy to see someone else grouping together as great, @%&# the haters ;) )
Cineplex has the new motto "Come Escape With Us" and that's what movies are supposed to be, a fun audio-visual ride along with a few hundred other people, into the minds and hearts of our fellow human beings... not analysed-to-death fooder for internet know-it-alls who say "yeah, I knew so-and-so was a one trick pony
way before the rest of you n00bs" etc.
PS:
Quote from: Mr. Analog on September 17, 2010, 12:07:22 PM
I dunno, I think there's a lot of chance involved in his projects determining whether they will be good or not I mean, generally to make a bad movie have place one person in any two of the following roles:
-Writer
-Director
-Actor
It's so nice to see (based on comments on IMDB etc. in early screenings, and of course meta-review sites* ) that Ben Affleck defied the odds in The Town. Many serious comments on IMDB (yes! even on IMDB!) seem to be along the lines of this one: "Just got back from the screening in Scottsdale,AZ. Damn good movie, one of this years best. Fans of Heat will love it, had the same feel as Gone Baby Gone for obvious reasons. Ben Affleck is becoming a great director. Surprisingly had some humor in it to but it fit well." The cowboy from Armageddon is finally growing up, I guess (but still not taking himself so seriously that he stops being in skits with Jimmy Kimmel from time to time -- Handsome Men's Club (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyGJXLxtVEo) ftw ^_^ )
* http://www.metacritic.com/movie/the-town http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_town/
The sign of a really good filmmaker in my opinion is that they can make interesting films even if they are good or bad. The side effect though is that there is endless analysis of some peoples work is because people pick up so much from the content.
I think that films can be an escape, but I'd also like to see more films that are thought provoking AND entertaining (like A Clockwork Orange).
I'd actually really like to see a zombie flick that exposes the underlying existential question posed; is what makes us human our minds or our bodies or the combination thereof?
Like imagine some future world where people hook up to some network through their brains directly and evolve past their bodies (i.e. their minds inhabit some kind of "cyberspace") and basically leave their bodies behind, now what if those bodies became autonomous (i.e. zombies) and THEN what if those zombies began developing a whole new kind of intelligence/culture/etc??
That would be AWESOME
Quote from: Mr. Analog on September 17, 2010, 01:38:26 PM
I'd actually really like to see a zombie flick that exposes the underlying existential question posed; is what makes us human our minds or our bodies or the combination thereof?
I Am Legend, kinda.
Quote from: Darren Dirt on September 17, 2010, 01:43:32 PM
Quote from: Mr. Analog on September 17, 2010, 01:38:26 PM
I'd actually really like to see a zombie flick that exposes the underlying existential question posed; is what makes us human our minds or our bodies or the combination thereof?
I Am Legend, kinda.
Which version? The Vincent Price one is awesome!
I suspect that "Devil" got a "thumbs up" from Armond White -- a film critic with ... unique taste
http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/?attachment_id=30981
(via http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2010/09/will-armond-white-ruin-social-networks-100-rating )
Quote from: Darren Dirt on September 29, 2010, 10:55:39 PM
I suspect that "Devil" got a "thumbs up" from Armond White -- a film critic with ... unique taste
http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/?attachment_id=30981
(via http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2010/09/will-armond-white-ruin-social-networks-100-rating )
Who the hell is Armond White you ask!
Some hack newspaper movie reviewer that gets his panties in a bunch over bloggers, which gets bloggers all hot and bothered and venting their collective rage to the deafening silence. This is engaging a sort of Streisand Effect, since every movie reviewing dweeb with access to blogger is jumping on the Armond White is a clueless maroon bandwagon it's actually drawing attention to someone who nobody outside of New York gave a @%&# about.
My god! NOW I'M DOING IT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF!
Quote from: Mr. Analog on September 29, 2010, 11:05:21 PM
Who the hell is Armond White you ask!
Simple: he's a black man who hates his last name, fought The Man and won, and now writes for the uppity NY Press therefore has to use ten dollar words every chance he gets... and not do anything "reviewy" in his reviews, instead using them as sounding boards for his wit and wisdom.
imo.
and geez man, what a horrible way to categorize/navigate your (likely prolific) collection of film reviews! Using "ha ha" phrases for your article titles, that often do not even HINT at what movie you are reviewing... and then NOT having a "see all reviews by ..." ANYWHERE on the article? wtf, how can I see what lulz you dished out for "Devil"? :(
PS: re. The Social Network...
http://www.nypress.com/article-21675-discourteous-discourse.html
http://www.nypress.com/article-21676-creeps-as-heroes.html
Quote from: Darren Dirt on September 29, 2010, 11:14:42 PM
Quote from: Mr. Analog on September 29, 2010, 11:05:21 PM
Who the hell is Armond White you ask!
Simple: he's a black man who hates his last name, fought The Man and won, and now writes for the uppity NY Press therefore has to use ten dollar words every chance he gets... and not do anything "reviewy" in his reviews, instead using them as sounding boards for his wit and wisdom.
imo.
PS: re. The Social Network...
http://www.nypress.com/article-21675-discourteous-discourse.html
http://www.nypress.com/article-21676-creeps-as-heroes.html
That's exactly what I said LOL
:)
Now everyone shut up about him forever!
oops, I see your point.
The "NY Press" is basically View/SEE magazine here in River City: "New York Press is a free alternative weekly in New York City and is the main competitor to the Village Voice..."
Quote from: Darren Dirt on September 29, 2010, 11:14:42 PM
Simple: he's a black man who hates his last name
:cough:
http://www.slantmagazine.com/house/2007/12/white-power-ten-armond-white-quotes-that-shook-my-world/
"something poignant... silly, lightweight film almost deep" - White on "Little Man", yes the one by the Wayans Brothers :omg:
but seriously, move along people, nothing to see here... (although maybe first check out what Sir Roger Ebert has to say: http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/08/in_defense_of_armond_white.html [cliffs: "I am forced to conclude that White is, as charged, a troll. A smart and knowing one, but a troll."] )
Quote from: Darren Dirt on September 29, 2010, 11:14:42 PM
PS: re. film critics criticizing film criticsThe Social Network...
http://www.nypress.com/article-21675-discourteous-discourse.html
What has not received widespread attention is the total disregard for interpreting or understanding a film. Useless clamor distracts from the fact that the decline of intelligence regarding popular culture has become routine; fanboy enthusiasm has replaced reflection.
...In giving up, they merely rubber-stamp the summertime notion that criticism is meant to only promote movies. But criticism should be an act of reasoning that prepares us to reason through life. The Internet?s free-for-all and anonymity fosters gullibility and incivility even among those who consider themselves film-lovers.
gadzooks! the pompous ass is actually right!
A-Dub's confusing review means TSN = still 100%
http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2010/09/armond-white-doesnt-ruin-social-networks-100-percent-rating
or maybe not?
http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2010/09/correction-armond-white-did-ruin-social-networks-100
PS: even back in July, A-Dubs was popping up all over the dayum place!
http://www.cracked.com/article_18645_6-great-novels-that-were-hated-in-their-time_p2.html
To quote Austin Powers
WHY WON'T YOU DIE!
rofl College Humour always finds a new way of making fun of something... or some ONE.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hksKLHt9Kzg
LOL "did I imagine I had fans?"
LOL, that was great.