The Village (2004)
Also known as "M. Night Shyamalan's The Village"
Run. The truce is ending.
Starring: Joaquin Phoenix, Bryce Howard, William Hurt, Sigourney Weaver, Adrien Brody, Judy Greer
Director: M. Night Shyamalan
Running Time: 108 minutes
US MPAA rating: PG-13UK BBFC rating: 12a
Drama, Horror, Romance, Thriller
With the likes of
It's Got: Lots of yellow cloaks - even though that's clearly, like, so last season.
It Needs: Medicine! Why oh why oh why didn't anyone think of building a pharmacy?
Alternatives: Signs, Unbreakable, The Sixth Sense, The Blair Witch Project
Summary: It's not Shyamalan's best piece of work, and it's not as good as it could have been - but it's still one of the must-sees of the year.
Review by Gary Panton
Review Date: 21th August 2004
External Links
Official Web Site
The Village at the IMDB
Comments150 Comments |
| i think the village looks sooo sweet! This is gonna be the tightest movie in the summer! |
| Comment by:- hannah | | 28 July 2004 | ip: logged |
| M. Night Shyamalan is an absolute genius. He manages to capture so many elements that, thus far, had managed to elude the flat, quick fix horror genre. Further more, he manages to do so with limited elements like sex and gore, that had been previously been used to draw in the big crowds. Crowds that his reputation alone now pull in during his films opening weekend. Shyamalan's films are pure original and imaginative ideas that not only inspire fear but also thought, while managing to teach us an eerie lesson about the real world through the supernatural. The Village looks spectacular with an incredibly talented cast and, like all of M. Night's other films, promises not to disappoint. |
| Comment by:- Kira | | 29 July 2004 | ip: logged |
| dude. i mean, dude |
| Comment by:- nick | | 30 July 2004 | ip: logged |
| am i the only one who thinks this movie is terrible? not only was it incredibly cheesy, but it was also boring, long, and simply put, horrible. i was stronly disapointed by the quality of this movie, and my opinion of shyamalan's films has gone down permanently. i highly recommend not wasting your money. |
| Comment by:- angie | | 31 July 2004 | ip: logged |
| Shot very well but this movie did not need to be made.. very slow.. when we we ever be able to get our hard earned money back (refund) from such boring films?... Do not recommend... and I even work in the industry |
| Comment by:- Ken | | 31 July 2004 | ip: logged |
| worst movie i ever seen. i laughed, i wasnt scared. it was pathetic. |
| Comment by:- yep | | 31 July 2004 | ip: logged |
| I really wished I had never seen this movie. It was terrible. That was two hours of my life that I will never again get back. |
| Comment by:- Ariel | www.livejournal.com/~ariellypo... | 31 July 2004 | ip: logged |
| While the dialog exhibits the writer/ directors's typical weakness (heavy-handed, way too sugary)this is still a very solid film-- it may or may not be wrong to promote it as a horror film, but I really enjoyed the story. Having a "known twist" is perfectly acceptable-- the entire mystery genre would be worthless if it were not. If you pay attention, you can puzzle out the "secrets" before the narrative reveals them, and that's half the fun. BTW-- Calling a movie "too slow" is not a valid criticism. I could just as easily say that, uhh, Star Wars was "too fast". If slow-paced movies aren't your cup of tea, why on earth would you go to see a M. Night flick & complain about wasting your money? It's like going to a slasher movie and complaining that it's "too bloody". Hey, I'm going to go see a period western and ridicule the dialog because they "talk funny." |
| Comment by:- mmmm | | 31 July 2004 | ip: logged |
| This was the gayst movie I have seen. It was a waste of time and money. |
| Comment by:- chris | | 31 July 2004 | ip: logged |
| Very disapointed. Waste of money. Most of the people sitting around me thought the same thing. Heard a lot of "Whatevers" leaving... |
| Comment by:- Suz | | 31 July 2004 | ip: logged |
| Am I the only one lost? Are the "villagers" ghosts or lunatics? From the snapshot they show in the movie they were all apparently undergoing counseling when they decided to start their village. They had all suffered a tragic loss for example one woman lost her sister at the age of 23 to a group of men who raped and murdered her. Is she actually the dead sister? Or are they all fearfull of society as a whole and choose to seperate themselves from it? Is Lucious dead? 'Cause no one bothered to tell Ivy? What about Ivys' last name "Walker"? That was also the name of the wildlife security crew? Coincedence? I am either really dumb or this movie leaves way to many loose ends. Can anyone put it in crayon for me? Is it possible, considering M. Night apparently communicates with the dead, that this is a group of villagers that he speaks to and prompted him to put their lives in film? It has been said that all of his other movies have been semi-autobiographical so it stands to reason "The Village" would also play a strong role in his life experiences. Looking for imput..... |
| Comment by:- Daisy | | 31 July 2004 | ip: logged |
| Simply put, a lot of people will be disappointed in this movie because they went in looking for a fast and hard horror thriller, and "The Village" is anything put. Instead, it turns out to be an amazing piece of social commentary that asks deep rooted questions about the nature of humanity, the nature of good and evil, and what entails "utopia". If you're looking for a movie that's going to make you "have a good time" check out any of the other run-of-the-mill movies out right now... Bourne Supremacy, I, Robot, Catwoman, and Spiderman 2 are all available choices. If you want a movie to inspire philosophical thought, The Village is a great choice. |
| Comment by:- Isaac | | 31 July 2004 | ip: logged |
| Suz, I thought the movie tied up the loose ends very well. You were not seeing dead people. The billionaire Walker family was paying to have the villiage isolated. That's why the gaurds had Walker on their hats. They are not ghosts, just people who had so much trouble with their lives and the modern world that they created a new existance. Lucius is not dead. |
| Comment by:- silesian | | 31 July 2004 | ip: logged |
| I think the village was a great movie but so many people dont agree.I also beleive that most people who went into this film where expecting a hard core thriller and horror which is far from the truth.This movie hits so many good points and is a variety of things from romance to suspense, its all there.I advise going to see this movie and deside for yourself as to how it was.I loved it |
| Comment by:- mike | | 31 July 2004 | ip: logged |
| the blind girl waws going to get med. for her boyfirend and the mosters were fake opps just ****e d the ending for u |
| Comment by:- bob dole | | 01 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| If you've seen all of M. Night Shyamalan's movies, then you know they are not about horror at all. They are about spiritual matters, good vs. evil, the human condition. So, if you don't like to go to movies that make you think, then don't go see this one. I was very upset with the teenage and young adult viewers in the theater who would laugh at inappropriate times and who obviously don't have the maturity or intelligence to appreciate his movies for what they are. |
| Comment by:- Tina | | 01 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| Even though the twist may have made most of people who hated this movie the reason why they hated it, it was not a bad movie. Like Tina said, obviously they don't have the maturity or intelligence to appreciate his movie for what they are. |
| Comment by:- Sam | | 01 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| Did anyone catch the political inferences in this film? And if so, will you comment on them? A friend pointed out the "colors" aspect (re security colors like red and orange), the "fear" factor to keep people in line, etc. I'd love to hear some more. |
| Comment by:- luciemac | | 01 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| Daisy, the elders were all part of counseling for the deaths close to them, and then Walker suggested his idea about the village. Walker tells Ivy about his grandfather that was very rich, so it turns out Walker paid for all this land and the security and such. luciemac, Shyamalan has ALWAYS used red as a colour for fear or for whatever, I mean, look at the Six Sense. |
| Comment by:- Demosthenes | | 02 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| I was impressed with the movie eventhough it reminded me of the Prarie family show on PBS. I think that it was very well written and the cast of actors was very well put together. The twist also made me appreciate the way that some people in our society view the rest of the world. |
| Comment by:- Josh Jeans | | 03 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| Absolutely ridiculous, Shyamalan focuses way too much on love and fear instead of building a good story. If I wanted to see a movie about Amish people, I would have rented Frantic with Harrison Ford, at least I could have saved money. |
| Comment by:- Jacob | | 04 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| Shymalan's talent is coupling inconceivably illogical plots with high production quality and calling it art. As social commentary, no one should need a film to understand "Fear = Bad." As for Shyamalan's fabled "twists," it's pretty clear he plagiarized Scooby Doo. All this film needs is a heroic englishman and a phantom tollboth, and it's right on par with Dr. Who. Roger Ebert was right. |
| Comment by:- Anonymous | | 04 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| Personally, I loved "The Village." I am not much for horror films, and when I arrived I thought I was going to be scared silly. I had forgotten that M. Night Shyamalan is not a scarey movie type of person. He tries to inject his audience with some type of knoweldge. If you didn't get the movie, then probably you were looking way too hard for the point when it was right in front of your nose. Or, you were expecting gruesome murders and a terrible "monster." This movie is real, and presents a real issue of how different people deal with society. This group of people ignored the truth and made their own perfect world. The only problem with it was that it was based on fear: not just the fear of monsters, but the fear of heinous acts too. The main problem I had was... why was there so many children out of 6 couples... one of which only having one child??? |
| Comment by:- Elizabeth | | 04 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| To build on Sam's post, I thought the same about the terror colors, yellow is vigilant, red is bad. My stepson said he didn't think so (isn't it neat how we know everything when we're 14!). And then I realized, isn't W's middle name Walker.....? |
| Comment by:- Ed | | 04 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| Just a quick response to "mmmm" comments about "too slow" not being a valid criticism. Sure it is. It depends on how effective that pacing is in regards to storytelling. Slow and measured pacing is fine if it's done right... "The Sixth Sense", "Unbreakable" (despite the flaws and uneveness), "A Midnight Clear" or say any Bergman film. But you have to be drawn in by the story, the charcters... if you're not drawn into them and not interested or invested... then forget it. And by the way... the same applies "too fast". Fast pace that works "The Bourne Idenity", "Raiders of the Lost Ark". Done wrong... pretty much every Michael Bay movie. |
| Comment by:- M.D. | | 05 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| THE VILLAGE ROCKS!!!!!! ITS THE SCARIEST MOVIE EVER!!! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH ~alise |
| Comment by:- alise | ? | 05 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| I thought this was a very good movie by M Night Shyamalan. It had an unexpected twist but thats what made it so interesting.It took me like, 4 times to go see it to get it but all in all it was osm!! |
| Comment by:- steph | | 06 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| Did anyone catch how in the beginning of the movie a man was burying his seven year old son, then later in the end, they showed a newspaper clipping and a radio commentary about a seven year old boy's body being found? What was the connection? I thought the movie was really good, and had many, many different layers of meaning. |
| Comment by:- N | | 07 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| The Village was the most stupidest movie I have seen in a long time. I will never gets those hours of my life back, and for the sake of everyone who hasn't seen it yet, DON'T. Whatever you people say about story and M. Night's take on human condition and society is pure crapola. A monkey on a typewriter could have banged out a better take on those subjects. He had a good idea to start with, except ended up brain farting out the last half of the movie. Too slow, not plausable, many loose pieces, and a joke of an ending. M. Night's movies have stunk more and more. |
| Comment by:- Dane | | 11 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| What a waste of time and money(both me and M. Night Shyamalan)! He's made some good movies in the past,and I know his movies a suposed to make you think but there is no excuse for this borefest.If directors got grades for movies, M. Night would get an E for no effort. 2 whole hours of my life gone! I was tempted to walk out halfway through and when it was over I was looking for any poor souls entering the theater to warn them. That movie should be avoided like plague victims. After this mess, there's no way in Hell I'm seeing another M. Night movie in theaters. I'll just wait til it comes on tv, at least then I can turn the channel. |
| Comment by:- Griff | | 12 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| Well, I really enjoyed this movie. All of you people that say "This movie was horrible, boring, etc." are entitled to your opinion, but you have no good reasons to back it up. This movie was great because there is not a soul on earth that could have predicted the ending. |
| Comment by:- Ryan | | 15 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| In response to Jacob's post, "The Village" actually has a plausible plot, although it is very ironic that this village is kept alive by money (Walker's billionaire father owns the wildlife preserve and keeps it secure). |
| Comment by:- Ryan | | 15 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| does anyone have the web address to the official M. Night Shyamalan web site? |
| Comment by:- Dan Maslak | | 18 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| I saw the film yesterday and i must say that i don't know what to think about it yet... Anyway, just a word to say to Jacob that when you have no culture, you should shut your mouth ! (Amish people story is not in "Frantic" but in "Witness" poor dumb !) |
| Comment by:- isabelle | | 19 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| i never saw the movie but i want to .. it looks really good :) |
| Comment by:- courtney | | 19 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| This movie was ok, if you like complete suckfests. This movie took off at about one mile an hour, and stayed there the entire movie. When the movie ended i had but one emotion, disbelief that I payed 9 dollars to watch a blind chick flirt with a mentally challenged guy, and Commodus at the same time. Then when I found out about the "beast" and it was fake, it made the movie worse. No one can honestly say that they went to this movie expecting that much talk and fake "beasts" and the only few deaths were caused by other humans. This movie was ridiculous and if anyone wishes to discuss their views, I am open to them on this and any other movie (that i've seen) email me at mgraves@dazedandconfused.com |
| Comment by:- Mike | | 20 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| Anybody figure out the connection between the 7 year old buried in the beginning and the newspaper article about the 7 year old at the end? |
| Comment by:- -J | | 22 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| umm i thought it was awsome..it had a good story line and all the guys were dam fine! |
| Comment by:- jess | | 22 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| i havnt seen it bt it looks realy gud! cud sum1 tell me his first name? |
| Comment by:- kimmi | | 25 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| hiya does any1 no m.nightshyamalans official website plz?i need it thanx! |
| Comment by:- kimmi | | 25 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| Just watched it this evening and I think it was rather good! Quite thought provoking. Those who say that it was a load of rubbish are not being fair. I think these people went in expecting a scary movie (and I must say the trailer does lead you to believe that) and were disappointed because it was a whole different movie. Having said that, it was very good at what it set out to do and the twist at the end was great. It's the type of film you'll be thinking about for days later tying up all the earlier clues. In fact it'll be a whole different movie upon watching it a second time, knowing in advance the outcome. My verdict - very good, but don't expect to be scared too much, it's not what this film is about. |
| Comment by:- Stefan | | 25 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| I DIDNT LIKE THE ENDIND YOU GUYS SHOULD TRY DIRTY DANCING HAVAN NIGHTS THAT MOVIE WAS AMAZING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
| Comment by:- Ana Cristina Garcia | | 25 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| Anyone expecting hard-core horror should have looked at the rating (PG-13/12a) and thought again. Pacing seemed good for the story, building characters and tension. I went in guessing the beasts were human, but didn't guess either part of the "full" ending. And actually woke up in the middle of the night making the "Walker" link... mostly. |
| Comment by:- ADB | | 27 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| I thought this movie was absolut rubbish, very slow completely un-scary and BORING. What has happened to M.Knight?? |
| Comment by:- Bryan Powell | | 28 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| I thought it was awesome....totally engaging and brilliant. To all those who found it boring, I have no idea how....I was gripped. I didn't expect it to be scary though - isn't it a 12 certificate?! |
| Comment by:- Helen M | | 28 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| PS People keep mentioning the '9/11 undertones' and I think this is about those with power controlling the masses by keeping them afraid. Red is danger (highest security alert), yellow is safer. I don't know why the 7 year old was being buried if the body had already been found, but in answer to the question about why there were so many people, my guess is that the elders were the ones who planned it, but invited others to join them from the beginning. I honestly do not understand how anyone could have found this film boring....it's the best I have seen this year (apart from Fahrenheit 9/11). |
| Comment by:- Helen M | | 28 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| he ruined it. they tell you the end 30 before it ends you you have to sit through all this crap wondering what he did to the movie. it could have been really good, but he screwed up big time. all his other movies were pretty good, though........ |
| Comment by:- blah | | 28 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| To add to what sam and the other guy said about the colours. I think that it represents how people are afraid of people who look different and judge people by what they look like on the outside. |
| Comment by:- dan | | 29 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| the village is great !! very suspence like, although it did have som borin bits that lasted long and then the horror bit comes up just like that !! i love m night shyamalans and iv seen all of his films and i think there all brill, but a bit simular rele, the sixth sence was brill but then things went down a bit after that film !! but i love m night shyamalan and i hope he does more horror films !! |
| Comment by:- Yaz | - | 29 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| The village is an above average movie, but here are some questions? Is it an anti-utopian movie, anti religious, or pro-utopian and or pro organized relgion? can anyone answer please. |
| Comment by:- Anonymous | | 29 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| i like this movie, certainly unique...however the flow at the end seemed very much out of joint with his past efforts....i felt he was explaining too much to us....is this the result of the re-edits after the initial screening went badly??? also who was responsible for skinning the animals??? was it the adrien brody character??? would recommend it all the same... |
| Comment by:- jim | | 30 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| I thought it was great - but what is this surprise ending everybody is talking about? |
| Comment by:- henrik | | 30 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| I really enjoyed the movie. The twist was great and I didn't guess it until late in the film (unlike 6th sense which was obvious I thought). I think the advertising is probably responsible for the bad reviews i.e. billed as a scary 'horror'.A combination of the film's rating and M Night's previous offerings should have given the game away. I agree with an earlier comment. If you watch this again, now you know the twist, all sorts of things will become clear. I love the issues over the colors: I never thought about that til now. Also, never thought about the Walker link to "W". Interesting... |
| Comment by:- Mark Pennington | | 31 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| Daisy - The support group was for people who had a close family member murdered. The reason they had Walker on their hat...remember when the elder Walker guy said that his father was the richest man and could turn 1 dollar into 5? His father owned the reservation that the village was on, they just wanted to get away from everything wrong with society today, by trying to create utopia. Which will never work, because...everybody is corrupted. |
| Comment by:- Yes | no | 31 August 2004 | ip: logged |
| i saw it today,i dont like any other films he has made,but i found this one rather good.I didnt like them telling about the ending that early,when he did tell the blind girl,i tried to forget i had heard as i think it would have been better,untill we found out about the walker preservation park.A truely gripping and suspenseful film if it is your cup of tea |
| Comment by:- Gemsie | | 01 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| i havnt seen the movie yet but im still going to see it after all of these comments if most of you are complaing about wasting your money then y are you complaining if you didnt know what to expect in the first place? i mean you say it was boring or too long then what made you expect a really scary horror film if you saw a little bit of glimses of things you didnt know what they were yet like if you didnt know what they were then mabee they werent as scary as you thought they were i personaly think that things are only as scary as you think they are if you make them to be really scary then you would obviously be dissapointed with the results if there not as scary as you were thinkin they were gonna be so be patient and wait till you see it b4 u actually make it to be scary or something its an all better experience:) |
| Comment by:- Katie | | 02 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| I have to say, I like the film. I didn't guess the twist, (unlike Sixth Sense, where the advertisements had pretty much told me what it was before I went in. I mean, the kid sees dead people, and Bruce Willis gets shot at the beginning. Obvious.)I thought maybe the structuring was slightly wrong when it flashes back to Walker explaining that the creatures aren't real, though that would have been okay if Shyamalan had waited until later to show that the village idiot had escaped with the costume. Maybe a flashback at the end, similar to Sixth Sense? That's all down to personal opinion though. When I watch it again, I'll decide properly if I think it worked well. Other than that, I thought it was excellently done and brilliantly acted, though I think the film could be understood in several ways, and depending which level you took it on depends whether or not it's a good film. One theory is that the film was constrained by plot devices. If you really wanted to start a new community somewhere else, you wouldn't really have to wear period costume and talk in an old-fashioned way. The women could wear trousers, and you talk like we do today. Shyamalan had to put that in to fool the audience into believing it was a period film, so philosophically, it isn't air-tight. Plus, why would you keep a little trunk of memories that your children know is there, and contains some secret you don't want to tell them, if you really wanted to start a new life? Most intelligent people know that as a society, big secrets don't go hand in hand with trust. And why did they open the trunks near the end and look at the photos? Plot device, pure and simple. If you go through the film looking at it like this, you feel a little let down by the ending, and disappointed with the film as a whole, seeing it as pretty pointless. The other way of looking at it is the film is probably set maybe ten or twenty years in the future, and that Shymalan uses the newspaper the security guard holds near the end as an illustratration of how much crime and violence had escalated in that time. The film is actually a prophesy of the way mankind is heading over the next few years, and of the consequences for the victims - in short, that the village elders are all pretty insane, and completely terrified of the world outside the village. Why else would they believe that locking themselves away in a village would solve all their problems? Why would they insist on wearing old fashioned costumes, such as long skirts for women and corsets, when common sense must have told them it was impractical? Their children would have accepted whatever culture they were brought up in, so the elders must have done it for their own benefit, to try and convince themselves that they really were living in a time when no one got beaten up or raped, or shot. Obviously though, there has been NO time when these things have not happened, so the elders are just blocking these thoughts out of their minds. It's like their playing a game - and the rules are whatever makes THEM feel safe, regardless of the corruption they are causing to the childrena round them. If they weren't mad, they would have known that terrifying their children into staying within the village was totalitarian and fascist, and that they were implementing within their "sanctuary" the very problems they were trying to escape. This can't be compared to the Amish - they teach their children by comparison, bringing them up in one way of life, but not forbidding them to compare it with the modern world, and give their children the ability to evaluate their way of life and choose to continue it or leave, as they wish. The elders in the film are mad to the extent that they actually think it's okay to rule by terror and are blind to Lucius's desire to get medicine, even after they have allowed a seven-year-old boy to die unnecessarily from an infection which could have been cured. Instead, they resort to manipulating him with guilt, and< |
| Comment by:- Jenbo | | 02 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| this movie was a piece of garbage they dress up as the creatures and m night shamlan is a retard he needs to learn how to direct, sixth sense was alright signs was dumb and this was just garbage waste of money |
| Comment by:- Jimmy | | 02 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| When i first saw the film, i thought it was ****. i came out dissapointed and in disbelief about the ending. The more i thought about the film and the more i began to understand it as a result of talkin to my friends about it, i realised how amazing it is. The film conveys so many fears and ideas. i do agree the first twist wasn't dealt with as well as it could have been but the second was so unexpected, it took time to process the whole concept. i love the film now, im goin to see it again. and by the way, no, the elders were not ghosts and no, Lucius is not dead. were u even watching the film????? |
| Comment by:- barlie | | 02 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| Does anybody have M.nights home adress? I need to so i can MURDER HIM!! What a waste of time and money, used to like him. His movies keep getting worse. 6th was awesome, unbreakable was decent, signs was bad and this.......dear lord. And all you dicks who are like " it wasnt meant to be a scary movie" BULL****!! If it wasnt, how come he advertised it like it was. I'll tell you, $$$. If he advertised it as a dramatic display of raw human emotions, i cant think of a single person ( outside of art students) who would go. He should change his name to M. Night Shame-alan. Terrible. |
| Comment by:- sam b | | 03 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| Shame-alan needs to be raped with a pitchfork. High drama? high drama my left testicle, that was about as "enthralling" as dying of cancer.... yes slow and painful, As prior mentioned Arts student may enjoy this, but then again arts students are sub-human left-wing pieces of human excretment, somewhat like The Village, i even read some inbred excuse for a human being try to pass Farenheit 9/11 off as the best movie this year... were you raped as a child? clearly M night shyamalan was.... here's something for you leftist drama geek cretins that actually claim to have liked that, Karma, what goes around comes around, and a pitchfork is headin straight for shyamalans rectum.... |
| Comment by:- Ben | | 03 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| I agree with Ben and sam b. Im a disgrace to humanity, and im off now to suicide so that no-one else will have to witness more of my terrible films. |
| Comment by:- M. Night Shyamalan | | 03 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| Very interesting discussion. I saw the film tonight here in Dublin, expecting a disaster, and was pleasantly surprised. Clearly, it's not a horror film, there are no special effects, no computer-generated gimmickry, and hence won't appeal to any of those whose idea of cinema is confined by such things. Furthermore, I'd hesitate to interpret it one way rather than another on a first seeing - I'll certainly see it again. It did strike me that it was about creating stereotypes of fear in order to segregate societies from one another, and thus preserve power-structures within those societies. The power of money is behind all this, as it is in contemporary USA or EU or whatever. |
| Comment by:- raymond deane | | 03 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| Ben and Sam B, do us a favour and keep the party clean. There's no call for such obscene and offensive language. It's a film, and that's it. No need to get so excited about it. You didn't like it. That's all you need to say. |
| Comment by:- Jenbo36 | | 03 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| i have recently seen this movie and i now wish that i hadn't. it was nothing like the previews led it to look like, and no one should go through the pain of watching it. m. night shyamalan should be put down |
| Comment by:- batman | | 03 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| I saw The Village without having seen the trailer for it. I was so impressed. This movie has to be one of the best ever made. It makes me laugh when i read and hear people bagging this movie and saying it was terrible...Only uneducated fools would think this movie is bad. The Village is full of symbolism and Imagery, the advertising image for example, notice the words 'age' in 'village' appear to glow more than the others...God people are stupid. The Village was a great movie!!! |
| Comment by:- Dane | | 04 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| The Village was the stupidest movie I've ever seen in my life. I was expecting to get scared but I fell asleep because it was soooooo boring. |
| Comment by:- Dedee | | 04 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| I wathed the film and thought it was quite good, although i didn't really understand some of it. you need to speculate a lot to get some of the details. |
| Comment by:- Emby | | 04 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| Very good. In my opinion Noah was innocent as he could not comprehend his actions to an effect or consequence, he is childlike. The twist was intriguing and it left me thinking for hours afterward. Jim, the elders killed the animals to fool the village. Walker said so when 'spilling the beans' to Ivy. The open end lets the audience create their own ending. You can choose yourself whether Lucious lives or dies and whether or not they keep the village going. |
| Comment by:- BeckE | | 04 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| It is so good and really liked it SO GO SEE IT GUYS! |
| Comment by:- Jayme | www.village.com | 05 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| From Cordoba, Argentina. Just saw the movie last weekend, and I agree with silesian. It´s about trying to find a differente way of life, isolated from violent society(the billionaire pays for security), but only in movies can it result. In real life, it's just utopic. |
| Comment by:- Zuli | | 05 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| This movie was great. I was severly dissapointed after watching it. I thought I wasted my money. I realised I thought that because I was expecting a thrilling horror movie. As I thought more and more about the movie I began to like it more and more. The advertising did lead people on. How else could he get people to see it? We live in a time where most of the population are thick headed and only like action and blood and guts, etc. Just my opinion of course. |
| Comment by:- Camo | | 06 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| I was really looking forward to seeing this movie and hearing the soundtrack which was supposed to be great with Hilary Hahn playing the violin solos. The movie was dissapointing, but the soundtrack was the real dissapointment. A total waste of the talents of Hilary Hahn having her play some dumb etude like piece of music. It reminded me of Sevcik (Composer who wrote educational pieces for violin to actually learn to play the instrument). Being a composer myself I was surprised people spoke so highly of this score! Awfull!! (Hilary Hahn is a great violinist, though!!) |
| Comment by:- Christiaan | www.tangodorado.com | 06 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| So this is a shyamalan movie right? so its got to have that twist and the thought.great cast.nicely shot.the real twist was the forest rangers entry in his car.this indian is going places |
| Comment by:- Arun | godforsaken.rediffblogs.com... | 09 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| I love the fact that this film gives a slap in the face to those who went to see it for the usual mindless gore that they seem to crave in entertainment. Katie, it's not the elders who are the sick ones, it's contemporary American society who pay their 10 dollars to watch people get killed, and enjoy it. That's the revolting part about our desensitised generation. When someone dies, it is surrounded by heart-ache and agony. Its not entertainment. Its not fun, it has consequences. It strips it's victims of their trust in the world, they crave a just and good existance. We would be lucky, absolutely behond fortunate to live in a society that based it's existance on morals, happiness and the fundementals of nature. Children who aren't brought up around laziness, violence, brain washing simulated entertainment, dont know any different and are happy to be themselves. Yes the elders use fear to allow this way of life, but in the end they decide that things can always go wrong no matter where you are, that misery is part of life. And that they can hope to continue their exixtance as well as saving others by secretly breaching the 'oath'. this film mocks religeon by saying that life and happiness is more important that religeon, more important than an 'oath' or invisible value. That reducing suffering should be the top priority in order to thrive on life. It says that these children beleive in the creatures the same way many of us beleive in a god, that it's that easy to get caught up in a falsehood, but it is also the protector of morality. Now I think about it its far more noble to have a system of fearing something, than having a system that allows the worship of violence gore and imorality. The Village is a brilliant piece of work and gives current American society the belting it deserves. |
| Comment by:- Jane | dont know.com | 09 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| M. Night shamalan hasn't ever done a horror film as far as i know, from "The Sixth Sense" to "The Village" his stories have always focused on the people in them so why would he turn the "The Village" into a straight horror film. If people expected differently then that's their own fault for mis-interpreting the trailers and advertising. The focus in all of them was about how the people reacted to the mysterious creatures, there was no hint of a bloodbath, battle or anything like that, it was all about the suspence, about being afraid of the unknown, being afraid of what you can't see. I went to watch it expecting a dark film but not a horror film, like his previous "Signs" and I found the film very thought provoking and more real than a horror film. |
| Comment by:- Josh | | 10 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| I THOUGHT THE FILM WAS ABSOULTELY GREAT SOME PEOPLE REALLY HAVE SOME GROWING UP TO DO! |
| Comment by:- LIYAH | | 10 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| I thought it was just a load of fun - a suspense movie about fear itself, how could that go wrong in Shyamalan's careful hands? Shyamalan's latest movie is another film about signs - and what they really mean. There are lots of interesting references, like the Garden of Eden (in the idea of an innocent community) and Pandora's Box (in the box of photos the elders keep locked away) and maybe Passover in the red paint on the doors. But Shyamalan develops these ideas further, asking questions we really need to ask: Is it right to keep people ignorant in order to protect them? How honest can society be when it depends on exploiting people's fears? Is there really such a thing as innocence anyway? It seems to me that Shyamalan and the William Hurt character have something in common: they are both orchestrating a mass deception. But their reasons are very different; Shyamalan is trying to make people think, and Hurt is doing the opposite. I didn't know much about this film when I went to see it last night, but September 11th was a weirdly appropriate day to go and see it. |
| Comment by:- vindaloo | | 12 September 2004 | ip: logged |
Actually, Arun, it was me (Jenbo36) who made the comment about the elders being sick, not Katie. I still think they're deluded. How can you have an innocent and peace-loving society when it's foundations are in fear and violence? This is what their village thrives on, not morals and happiness. The elders moved away from the real world so that they could live without the fear of a repeat of the violence that robbed them of their relatives, but they're emulating that same society for their children. They're even letting children die of minor diseases that they know could be cured in the real world. You say that they were frightening the younger generation for a good cause, but I don't think the end result justifies the means. They should explain to their children what the world outside is like, and why they chose this life, and let them decide to stay for themselves. But they don't want to do that, because they're selfish. They know that if some of the children leave, the whole world will find out about them, and their village of seclusion would have to end. So they resort to using the tactics they were trying to escape from on their children. This is creating a better society for themselves, as they know that their violence isn't real, but the children really believe in the monsters, and so they are still experiencing the violence they would encounter outside through the elders. Eventually, the village would be corrupted in the same way as the world outside. I still think it would be better to have a society that was based on a principle that is good and true, either God, or just in trying to be a good person. JENBO36 |
| Comment by:- Jenbo36 | | 12 September 2004 | ip: logged |
Sorry, Arun, I made the same mistake. It was Jane who mistook me for Katie, and I mistook her for Arun! :D I address my above comment to Jane. JENBO36 |
| Comment by:- Jenbo36 | | 12 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| hey u guyz..dis movie was good..well personally i lik all scary movies u c..so i dnt care if it ends stupid or wut..but i like all scary movies.. it was good.. |
| Comment by:- samar | | 12 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| if you have the intelligence to be able to make your own judgements on a film & not be swayed by others thoughts or reviews or the directors previous efforts, then you will love this movie. there is not a wasted moment & when you piece it all together at the end you can easily see every scene had meaning & direction. it is as good as 6th sense. p.s.anyone who says they knew bruce willis was dead is a liar |
| Comment by:- jj | | 13 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| I can understand how this movie could have lead people to the wrong conclusion about what type of feel the movie was, but I still was't disapointed with the outcome of the movie having thought myself it was going to be scarey.The storyline sent alot of other messages across then just the basic storyline and I think it was quit a well made movie.It had fantastic performances by the main cast and the twist at the end was unbeatable. |
| Comment by:- Jenna Carter | cool chick domain | 13 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| I can understand how this movie could have lead people to the wrong conclusion about what type of feel the movie was, but I still was't disapointed with the outcome of the movie having thought myself it was going to be scarey.The storyline sent alot of other messages across then just the basic storyline and I think it was quit a well made movie.It had fantastic performances by the main cast and the twist at the end was unbeatable. |
| Comment by:- Jenna Carter | cool chick domain | 13 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| I think it's one of the worst movies I have ever seen.. It's about a bunch of Idiots being attacked bij red squirrels with spikes.. I had a good time anyway, it did great as a comedy:) |
| Comment by:- Lorelai | | 14 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| I don't get to the flicks much these days but ventured to see The Village. My opinion? A pathetic piece of crap, a waste of time and money. Our friend Mr M Night is trying to be a bit to clever but ends up giving us trash. Thanks Mr M for keeping me from my vege patch. |
| Comment by:- TT | | 15 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| hmm this movie was i reckon overated!! there is no fricken point to this movie? to get medicine from the other side? why not hide a cellfone just like you hid the stupid costumes and call the outside world and ask for some 'medicine' . this was a very boring movie people don't go see it. waste of money and time!!! |
| Comment by:- anonymous | | 16 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| i am sorry i don't know more about him ravi |
| Comment by:- ravi | | 17 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| i think the movie is ok I know it was no scary or anythink and it could be changed a lot more but its better than some of the movies you would see now days that are ment to be scary |
| Comment by:- Jesse | | 17 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| I've just seen the film here in Brazil. And I got so excited about it that I decided to read people's opinions. I am appalled to see just how many people simply didn't get it at all. I do believe the ads and the trailler are misleading. However, the film is really clever and extremely in tune with the world we are living in. Fear is -and has always been - a very strong force, skilfully manipulated by the powers that be in order to garantee their control over society. It needs to be fed bit by bit to be maintained over a long period of time. It is not logical. If you scare people enough they will believe almost anything and question. That is why, pollitically speaking, it is essential to have a clearly recognized, terrifying enemy - be them beasts,barbarians, communists or terrorists. |
| Comment by:- Kora | | 17 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| Ok, seriously, u people who try and bag me out do your worst, but the fact is the only people who could like this movie on the number of levels most people on this site "claim" it has, have an unhealthy interest in film and television. You have obviously studied film and tv, and no doubt no more about it than me. HOWEVER, i stand by my comment by on a whole, this movie sucked. It promised suspense and it did not deliver. Also, i believe it should have been released as a "film" rather than a hollywood movie, because, deny it as much as you like, 90% of people who see movies HAVE NOT STUDIED FILM AND TELEVISION. Therefore, could not possibly like this movie. |
| Comment by:- sam.b | | 17 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| This movie is a shocker. Yes, it features a bucket-load of suspense - but thats all. Suspense. The suspense never goes anywhere. |
| Comment by:- Neil | | 18 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| I have a question about this movie. and if you haven't seen it yet then do NOT read this message as it could be a spoiler for you. ok so, if only the "elders" are supposed to really know what is going on then why doesnt anybody else??? i mean the elders are all of 50 years old at the most. so that means they havent been in the village for that long. and all the children would've been born outside of that village...and people like Lucious and the others would remember the outside world...i just dont get the concept...i mean, dont get me wrong..the twist was good, but it just doesnt work......if everyone had been living there for generations then i could believe it...but with this being the first group then everybody should know about the outside and everything in it!! good concept, but the twist just doesnt make sense...does anybody else have this issue with the movie??? |
| Comment by:- Anonymous | | 19 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| I'm just going to say that everyone who reacted like they were disappointed here because this was not a scary movie, totally had a wrong idea of the film to begin with. Sure, parts of the film try to scare you, but the whole idea of The Village being a thriller was just set up to bring in the big crowd. This movie is more of a social and psychological brainstorm. And damn good at it, too. I loved it from first to last |
| Comment by:- Harry | | 19 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| I thought the movie was ok, if you like that sort of have to think through the whole movie sort of thing. I do have a couple questions though. Were the beasts fake? I heard that they were really the villagers dressed up, but a person in a suit doesn't look that real! And why would they skin they're own cattle and pets??????? Can someone help me! |
| Comment by:- Kendall*Marie | | 19 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| this movie really sucks,is pure **** i just want **** the mathe ****er blind girl, but all the rest of the movie sucks |
| Comment by:- Jerry Only | www.suckmydick.com | 20 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| i never saw the movie, but i believe it suckSS, specially the ending |
| Comment by:- Luis Enrique | | 20 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| The people that think it was crap probably expected it to be a horror/action flick like the unbreakable. Or the more plausable fact that they just dont have enough mental power to understand the deep mesage of the film. And it is this kind of audience that should pay most atention to the film and itsstory. |
| Comment by:- Milo | | 20 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| Great film - go buy it! |
| Comment by:- Anonymous | | 21 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| too many people see in black & white. i personally enjoyed it but it was slow going in places. from the very first noises emanating from the woods, i thought these people were living in the modern world and were using the monster mythology to scare the villagers into staying. i also kept thinking that it was an analogy of the war in iraq and keeping people compliant in a culture of fear. good point by ed about walker being dubya's middle name! the final twist confirmed my first idea. while the film was well-handled, the idea of a utopia is hardly original and didn't really surprise me, though the idiot noah character was a very good plot device and very well-acted. in hindsight, there are a lot of holes in the plot. i'm also confused by the age of the elders. the village can hardly be older than 30 years - i suppose without the mod cons, the elders had plenty of time to pop out babies :o) |
| Comment by:- bad yaki | | 21 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| I highly recommend it to to people who study society and psychology. To those who love stupid action movies and fiction horror movies, it will be a waste of time. I loved it. |
| Comment by:- Eduardo | | 22 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| Well, I just went to see it today. I loved the film. About the people that claims it sucked, well, everyone is entitled to their opinion, after all, they payed to watch a movie, and if they didnt enjoyed it, they really should warn people that probably will spend their hard earned money to watch something that they think is not a good movie. I never studied movies, or anything like that, I just love a story. Im not much into photography, but this movie looks awesome. Someone mentioned above, that the soundtrack was made by a violin player, well mate, probably you were dissapointed because you know your stuff. You are a musician. Average people like us, can enjoy that soundtrack, I sure will buy it, I really liked it. About the colors, and the relation between war on Iraq, well, to tell you the truth, I really dont care much for that. Dont get me wrong, I know that people is dying over there, and me, and I can speak for the rest of Mexico, we want this to be over as soon as possible. If the US think thats the way to go, then, I really have noy much to say, its up to you, the US citizens, to speak your mind. I can only pray for the ones that are in battle. About the movie, this film is not for everyone, in many ways is like the blairwitch project, either you love it, or you hate it. I like to believe, that I have a good taste (dont get me wrong, movie-making folks out there) in movies, but know that some people like fast paced movies, or romantic movies, or comedy, or well, there is something for everyone. To everyone that enjoyed the movie: I wish we could comment on the 7 year old stuff, maybe someone haves a connection. To everyone that hated it: thats ok folks, I mean, 2 hours of your life that you wont get back, but hey, at least maybe someone heard you and wont go see it, that haves to make a diference. Thanks for your attention. |
| Comment by:- Arkaham | www.fotolog.net/arkaham... | 23 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| WORST FILM EVER "inspire philosophical thought" my arse bore you senseless waiting for a twist that never comes more like. |
| Comment by:- Anonymous | www.stevenspencer.com... | 23 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| Hey guys, Well ive gotta say im on the 'lovers' side of this argument ... I hadnt heard of this movie before, and just went on the off chance of a bit of fun - and it blew me away! Now, ok ill admit i have a thing for redheads, but Ivy's character is brilliant - I think at the end of the film she knows exactly whats going on, but believes enough in her father's dream to keep her mouth shut. I also believe that in the final scene we are told that the village WILL continue, becuase the elders all stand up one by one after Walker's speech in a show of solidarity, the last being Noah's mother who can only silently grieve as she learns how Ivy had 'killed a creature in the forest'. I thought the film was very scary, but mainly the very psychological forest scene because I empathised strongly with Ivy. Some clever camerawork (when the beast is suddenly shown behind the tree near Ivy) and the echoes of Walker's words aids in this also. How did Noah sound so gruff though ... ? Ill be honest, I DIDNT guess the twist, but my friend did, and i agree with some earlier in that I feel it could have been made more dramtic. For instance Ivy would climb the wall and, seeing the world thru her eyes (just colours and shapes) THEN be confronted with the confusion of the siren and radio noise of the guard. I think for those that hadnt guessed, this would have had more impact, which was lessened by the good minute of narrative about the chests and support centre. It is however a fantastic touch that the unseen (apart from his reflection in the fridge door) guard subtly suggests that his colleague should 'get into no conversations' - very reminiscent of so many conspiracy flicks. As for the seven year old boy - we are not made fully aware of the timescale of the film, and it is possible that this 'burial' occurred near the start of the village (judging from the pictures in walker's chest, about 20 years previous). Its possible that the man's (im sorry i didnt get the name of who it was) son had been killed in the outside world, but the body never found, and it was this that drove the character to want to join the village. So to get psychological closure he buries an empty coffin (as is sometimes seen in child murders and abductions), and the boy's body is only found at the end of the film. Correct me if im wrong, but the people watching him grieving over the coffin are all adults, which would be the case if it were right at the beginning of the village? On the political side, there have been many regimes that have used the threat from 'outsiders' to divert attention from their own shortcomings. George Orwell covered it neatly when the government of his society fired mortars at its own people, blaming the atrocities on the unseen enemy 'Eurasians', who dont exist. The difference here is that, unlike The Machines of the Matrix or INGSOC of 1984, the power in The Village seeks to nurture and protect its inhabitants from the genuine atrocities of the outside world. Which leads to another question - are we so right to complain about our own restrictions of freedom and acts of government if they really are for our own good? One could argue that that is exactly what George Dubya did with Iraq and terrorism, but hey im just thinking out loud ... Start a new thread entitled 'Paternalistic Forms of Government REALLY SUCK' if you like ... Maybe i love these movies cos I never see the twists coming, maybe i love them because they make heroes of such vulnerable, human characters, but put it this way - i have never been moved to write about a movie like this in my life. The only thing that ruined it for me was the a couple that actually had oral sex in the row behind me .... im only glad the film held my attention .... Amyway, thats just my two penn'orth on the subject. Anyone wanna theorise about the 7 year old, please do! Im gonna go see it again and maybe spot it .... http:/ |
| Comment by:- Ross | | 23 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| And another thing - i didnt see the trailers but loved the movie ... a large majority of you that caught the trailers hated it .... so blame the advertising genius that chose to promote it as a 'horror' - when it aint! |
| Comment by:- Ross | | 23 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| I actually do know why red is forbidden, it is the colour of blood, and blood should not be spilled, therefore to stop killing, they banned the colour red. |
| Comment by:- Wiseone | | 23 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| Most of you would be aware of this but I think Ross may not be. The guard who remains unseen except for a brief reflection is M. Night Shyamalan. He always has bit-parts in his movies, trying to be a latter-day Hitchcock. While he's good, he's not that good (yet). |
| Comment by:- bad yaki | | 23 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| This movie absolutely SUCKED as a horror movie..As a Drama it was vague. The advertisers played off it like a horror because they could, they had to know it would dissapoint many people, but it would bring lots more people into the theaters initially. This is an old movie trick people, if a film company doesnt think a movie will have good word of mouth from initial viewers they wont count on as many people being there to see it in its 2nd week at the theaters. So they try to hook you with skewed (sometimes blatantly false) advertising to get as many people as possible to go see the movie at the theaters before "word gets out". Hey, it worked with Godzilla. |
| Comment by:- Vern Dudley | www.geocities.com/verndudley... | 23 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| Thanks Yaki! I'm new to this film business ... I shall look out for Mr Shyamalan in future movies ... very cool |
| Comment by:- Ross | | 24 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| Ross -- Exactly why several people tout this (perhaps rightly, I would not venture out far enough to place an opinion on it) as rather subtle propaganda. The foregone conclusion people tend at the end of the film to make is that it is best to live in ignorance. This has been called too 'coincidental' for a coincidence, for if such themes did not exist in any form of relevance within our society, the film would not have any resonance within it to begin with. It was quite well crafted in that respect to lead to such a conclusion. However, the entire premise depends on the implicit assumption being made that the 'outside world' is 'full of atrocities', due perhaps to 'human nature', and it is due to some 'altruistic intent' of the 'powers that be' to 'safeguard the masses' from them. In the real world of course we know this not to be true, if we actually do our research into matters, rather than living in ignorance. Division in society has ever been due to power dynamics, and the tendency for those with it, to keep it. Atrocities, at least on a societal scale are, without exception, generally caused by such. It is well agreed within informed circles that there is commonly statistically little altruistic intent present within the ruling elite in our society, by merit of the very fact that individuals with inherent altruistic intent have much better opportunity to exercise it outside of the ruling elite, and of course this couples with the fact that entrance into the ruling elite is generally granted by other members of it, who do not tend to want a conflict of interest with their own agenda, which is why it is common in concentrations of wealth/power to see agendas dominated by money. The thesis that ignorance = bliss is easily refutable by an observation of the themes within this film, and doing so is a mundane exercise in logic. Suffice it to say that the director is certainly aware of his own personal perspective on things, and instead tries to influence people to believe the contrary. To argue otherwise would be to refute the presence of such thoughts in the film to begin with. Again though, I would not go so far as to call this establishment propaganda, I have not done the research to find links of that sort. But it is an interesting thought exercise. |
| Comment by:- RK | | 24 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| This thought provoking film seemed to be marketed as a horor type film. Clearly it was not. Anyone unaware of the director's previous work, could have justifyable adopted this thought. From their POV, I can understand any feelings of disappointment. This begs the question of whether the end justifies the means? Plot Q1: What was Noah's motivation for slaying Lucius? Plot Q2: What was Noah's motivation for attempting to kill Ivy? |
| Comment by:- Aussie J & K | | 25 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| going to see it tomorrow. |
| Comment by:- dashark | | 25 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| G'day Aussie J&K, I'm from Down Under too. I don't think Noah was intending to kill Ivy. That wasn't the impression I got. I think he was just playing around in his own naive way, chasing her for fun. |
| Comment by:- bad yaki | | 26 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| This Movie is not about the obvious, I'm not sure if people can understand that. This movie is a microcosm of U.S. society and a government policy of containment, isolationism and fear mongering. I mean Come On! Characters actually say things like "Don't breach the border!" It's clear that this movie is analogous to Mr. Bush's "campaign of fear." Replace monsters with terrorists. Replace Mr. Walker with Mr. G (Walker) Bush. Replace the border with, well.... the border! This movie presents the dangers of a society that is willing to allow its' leaders (or elders) to decide what is best for them, even if it includes isolationism and a lack of the truth. Protection at what cost? The lack of medicine (in the movie)? The lack of international freedom (reality)? Look at how the U.S. government protects the freedom of Americans. Then look at how Mr. Walker protects the villagers in the movie. |
| Comment by:- Anonymous | | 26 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| the movie was absolutely beautiful. especially because it plays on such a simple theme. but how long can the elders keep the lie alive? |
| Comment by:- mayuri | | 28 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| one more thing- was the boom visible in 2 shots? |
| Comment by:- mayuri | | 28 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| Its a fantastic movie...anyone who says that is bad...hey you can never get so imaginative and creative as M.Night. The fear and emotions of the Lucious and Ivy is characterized and captured beautifully….the time Ivy says to her father the color did not attract the creature, while lucious is bleeding..none in the village ever thought about it...he father realizes that they need someone like Ivy to continue the life there. … another scene while Ivy kills the creature.... she knows that it is none other than Noah…..she has no choice but to kill him or else she would not save Lucious and believe her father's word while he said there is nothing out there in the woods…..Brother you need to be a multi-millionaire to live a simple undisturbed life….and hope you did not miss Mr M.Night himself in the movie |
| Comment by:- Sweetie | | 29 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| Thanks anonymous, glad I'm not the only one that sees it. I only wonder about the director's personal intent. Certainly the more critical of viewers would tend to see the rather blatant parallels in the movie, but, insofar as it is so with those I have spoken to, the vast majority tend to conclude a viewing with thoughts akin to 'wow, life really is good, I'd better focus on the mundane and enjoy it', 'the outside world really is full of problems, its so nice to live in a safe country away from it all. Well, lets go shop at wal-mart now' and the like. I am not sure whether or not this is simply due to the tendency of a large portion of our society now, for reasons that have been explored elsewhere and that I do not need to get into here, to be either unwilling or unable to deconstruct the incumbent socio-political paradigm being consistently served up predominantly through large establishment media organizations, but I tend to think that if the director did have pedagogical intent towards such deconstruction with this work he would have either chosen a little bit less of an already well explored theme, or kept with the theme but made it a little more obvious. For example, he did portray the world outside of the village as 'full of problems', and life in the village as 'flawed yet in a sense ideal', which does nothing more than propagate and reinforce what we are trying to deconstruct. |
| Comment by:- RK | | 30 September 2004 | ip: logged |
| choot choooooooootiyaa saaaaaaaaala horami kutta.bhazaa nahi hain kya?ek zapppperr dega na |
| Comment by:- forgot my name | | 01 October 2004 | ip: logged |
| i may also be way off here, but myself and others believe that the whole movie is seen through the eyes of ivy (who is a mental patient) the 'village' is a mental hospital. the red is the blood and the monsters are the nurses. hello when Ivy goes into the shed and feels the tips of the monster, she is in fact feeling a needle. Just look at 'crazy' noah..the room he was placed in was the padded room. when ivy leaves the 'village' she infact escaped from the mental institution. as you can tell the list can go on forever..but no one really nows here. it's all a mystery |
| Comment by:- sarah | | 04 October 2004 | ip: logged |
| i like the way you think sarah but why would ivy then come back again at the end? |
| Comment by:- bad yaki | | 04 October 2004 | ip: logged |
| Hmm , first one is ok , taht the village want it self to be isolated , BUT Y , see the time difference between both the ages and area ,the road is of cement.? i see that as a time travel thing , the village is still in 100-150 years behind , and dont want to come to modern times because of accidents that happen with their families look at photos of family , red color can attract things from modern area , all mainly in black-white (non colorfull) cloak ....its perfect time travel story |
| Comment by:- Brip | brip.blogspot.com | 08 October 2004 | ip: logged |
| Hi RK, Thanks for posting the reply, Im glad my comments provoked a little discussion! Its also nice to hear what others think of glabal politics - Im a brit and as such have a lot of negative views of Mr Bush, but, appreciative of not knowing the full facts, reserve judgement. Id love to just say he's an asshole that should put his advisors in their place, but then Tony Blair is well known for his fondness of 'Spin Doctors' too .... And I know its a very sad subject, but any ideas why the British hostage was executed last? Do the trrorists view Blair as a softer touch? Nothing to do with the movie ... sorry .... Im on a weird diet and its affecting my brain :-S |
| Comment by:- Ross | | 09 October 2004 | ip: logged |
| Hi ppl, No matter wht, Shyamalan's a genius ! Lemme tell u why ! he has made a thriller without a storyline at all,which is amazing by any standards. he makes a fool out of everyone, making us so hardly believe the fake monsters and the killings. This is a movie which could have gone rotten any moment and Shyamalans done a tight ropewalk to make it look handsome. ppl who leave their brains outside the cinema hall and ppl always expecting some fast paced ugly junk, please dont go to this movie for u will feel wasted 2 hours of ur precious lifetime and money ! |
| Comment by:- surey | | 09 October 2004 | ip: logged |
| CRAP |
| Comment by:- Anonymous | | 11 October 2004 | ip: logged |
| hey all, saw 'the village' last night, and was fairly disappointed. why, i don't know yet. i am still a shamalan fan. loved his first few movies. i have come to love his storytelling ability i.e building suspence, his cinematography abilities, and his nack for assembling the right people for the right parts is pure genius. however, all that aside, i do think 'the village' could have been alot better. it all ended to quickly, and was wrapped up without any real convincing ending. it seemed as though shamalan had a great script with an even better cast, and about 90% of the way through filiming, he found he was running out of money, or film and just ended it prematurely. this ending could and should have grabbed you by the throat and not let go; however it did the opposite. the mystery, and suspense of the creatures from the forest he built up so well throughout the film was deflated in one single frame as the dullard's character is revealed in the red costume. come on! that's not a twist. that's a let down. sure i suppose it was surprising, but way too anticlimatic. i wanted more m night. i wanted more...he's still a heck of a director, but next time, m night, make the monsters real! |
| Comment by:- katinthehat | | 15 October 2004 | ip: logged |
| sorry but i din't like the movie , it would have been alot better if you didn't make it out to be a great horror movie in the preiveiws. your movie was more of a let down than my favorite cd breaking |
| Comment by:- kitty | | 17 October 2004 | ip: logged |
| sucks!......but shamalan is still a good director |
| Comment by:- grr | | 17 October 2004 | ip: logged |
| the film's startling denouement, which questions the legitimacy of authority, makes you wonder if this is a cautionary story about American isolationism. |
| Comment by:- Ursa | | 20 October 2004 | ip: logged |
| Hi. I saw film here in Finland and I am suprised how few here saw the connection to American foreign policity. I thought the film was very rough parody about it. Somebody asked that how could you make a innocent utopia that is based on the fear and deception... well, thats the question he poses! USA is claiming to be country of freedom and power that the president has is based on the fear he creates. He gets re-elected soon because of the fear. And all these silly wars in the Middle-east - Shyamalan says "the only monster that exists is the one you create yourself". And sometime we need "blind" to see through all deceptions. What comes to the 7-year old. I think he meant it as a metaphor. In the beginning the kid dies in village and in the end kid dies outside the village. I think he just tried to say that sad things like kids deaths just happen ... you cannot escape them to the utopia world. I think it was fabulous movie. And very sad and true in the way he critizised American society. |
| Comment by:- Tris | | 20 October 2004 | ip: logged |
| I would like to make a few points about The Village and also the reviews on this site. First of all, it appears to me that the people who enjoyed this movie are intelligent and The people who hated it are Not so intelligent… For example… 1. some of you say it is too slow? It is supposed to slow!! It adds to the mood, surroundings and the way off life for the villagers. 2. Comments like "crap" and "garbage"… obviously people who haven't got 2 brain cells between them. 3. Why can't some people accept the movie for what it is, not What the previews say. (previews as we know, are to promote a movie so that you all go and see it, if the preview said "intelligent and imaginative people only" Then half you dumb Americans wouldn't have watched it!) Ok so the movie has a few flaws, what movie doesn't, but the idea was a great concept. What a lot of people don't seem to understand, is what Tris points out… "a look into American society and how sad and narrow minded it is becoming" Regards Andy (UK) oh that's United Kingdom by the way!! |
| Comment by:- Andy Parish | | 25 October 2004 | ip: logged |
| Any chance of a Halloween costume being made of the "creatures"? |
| Comment by:- Luke | | 26 October 2004 | ip: logged |
| THE VILLAGE is a good movie;an eye opener. What may have dissapointed other viewers was that it was promoted as a horror flick; the scariest movie of the year. But it wasnt. It is a must-see movie that delves on human nature; on the sense of right and wrong; on utopia; and even on cult behavior. A beautiful movie... |
| Comment by:- Scarlett | | 27 October 2004 | ip: logged |
| THE VILLAGE is a good movie;an eye opener. What may have dissapointed other viewers was that it was promoted as a horror flick; the scariest movie of the year. But it wasnt. It is a must-see movie that delves on human nature; on the sense of right and wrong; on utopia; and even on cult behavior. A beautiful movie... |
| Comment by:- Scarlett | | 27 October 2004 | ip: logged |
| I find it interesting on some of the comments of the viewers who didn't like this movie. I would admit that parts of the film were far from seamless. I enjoyed the movie just the same. I am sure introduction to film classes will have a lot of fun dissecting this one. I am grateful that films like this continue to be made. Bryce Dallas Howard's performance alone is worth seeing this film. Can't wait to see her again. |
| Comment by:- john | | 28 October 2004 | ip: logged |
| do not iconize this movie.. yes, it is quite interesting,quite a good thriller, but there are too much illogical developments in the plot; the simbology and the parallels with the odiern society aren't a reason to pass by these problems. Quite good but not good at all, I think. I appreciate the work of Shyamalan, high quality I mean.. but this one disappointed me... I mean: "what the ****ing hell was going to do a blind girl in the woods???" |
| Comment by:- Jhon Idol | | 29 October 2004 | ip: logged |
| The movie was a bunch of . The people that did the advertising just ripped everybody off.I just want my money back people! |
| Comment by:- alex | | 04 November 2004 | ip: logged |
| An excellent piece of social commentary which aims to evaluate how "real" and "natural" the "constructed" can really be. For anyone more interested in exactly where Shayamalan gets his themes from, which appear to echo through all his movies : I think the answer lies in his Tamil background. As a Tamil myself, I am amazed at how underlying Indian or Tamil his themes really are. |
| Comment by:- Devan Murugan | | 07 November 2004 | ip: logged |
| Andy Parish, you're ok! Anyway, The Village is not meant for US viewers only, but for the World, which means different cultures. And some of these are well-away from the Cokeburger "paradisiac" junkulture. Some of us, out there in cold, dare to think and understand. Essential humanism might be the frame of the film concept. Far from perfect of course, it splendidly melts shreds of legends, tales, myths and creeds from many parts of the world. And what you get is a "symphonic" piece of visual art. Valeriu - from Romania (Planet Earth/Europe) |
| Comment by:- Valeriu Petrescu | | 07 November 2004 | ip: logged |
| pure genius. to the people who said its sh** or trash or whatever? read books |
| Comment by:- kiljek | | 07 November 2004 | ip: logged |
| 'The Village' offers its viewers an elegant yet simple premise: The fear and horror of the unknown and unseen is within - a vestigial construct of our minds. We, as individuals, as a society, or as a species, can run but we can't hide - the sorrow and disappointment will always find us. Denial is a psychological Maginot Line. We can run from our fears and go further into the darkness or we can choose to turn towards the light and face our fears - only to see that that there was never really anything there. Healing is a process, not an end point. Come out, come out wherever you are...and deal with it! I love the fact that this movie works on so many levels. My 13-year-old daughter thought that it was a 'scary movie' and enjoyed it immensely. Thirty four years her senior I figured out where this movie was going before MNS tipped his hand, but loved it even more. I watched it the second time for nuance missed during the first viewing. A movie worth owning - unless one enjoys drooling beasts and spurting arteries. (But what is up with the boom mikes visible in numerous frames?!? It sure destroys the cinematic illusion, now don't it? Did MNS, perfectionist that he is, really allow his movie to be released with this glaring, but easily-correctable oversight? If this is answered above, mea culpa, I didn't read all 140 previous entries...) danno in kosovo |
| Comment by:- danno in kosovo | | 08 November 2004 | ip: logged |
| Wow! I didn't even use the word 'metaphor' in my previous comment... danno (still) in kosovo |
| Comment by:- danno in kosovo | | 08 November 2004 | ip: logged |
| OK, i just saw it now, thought it was an awesome movie, the people who don't like it, what the hell do i care? i thought it was good, i think Shyamalan did an excellent job... You think it was crap, i don't see you out there making anything better? |
| Comment by:- Moop | - | 08 November 2004 | ip: logged |
| I loved it, it was really good. I think M. Night Shymalan did a great job infact it inspired he inspired me to want to become a film director/producer. People (my friends) say it was terrible but I don't know whatr they're smoking I think it was great |
| Comment by:- Theresa McCumber | www.movie-gazette.com/cinervie... | 01 December 2004 | ip: logged |
| From Turkey;i think it was great.İ read all of the personal reviews about the film.İn my opinion we have to think about "being other".Because the villagers create their "others" and because of this fear,they couldn't go to the towns.Like us! |
| Comment by:- Hande | | 03 December 2004 | ip: logged |
| I just saw the movie and i really liked the twist, still like many others some things bother me to, the moment one of the elders show the girld in the locked house, that theuy were only scaring the village peeps, and u see also when the 2 guardians are afraid and go back to the vilklage leaving the girl alone, u will see she throws the magic rocks. Then why in the hell she's is then still afraid of the creatures, or did she knew it was a person inside mask ???? |
| Comment by:- Abdel (Streetkingz Urban Marketing & Communication) | www.streetkingz.com | 04 January 2005 | ip: logged |
| -To long, to boring and to uneventful. Not remotely scary, feeble and unbelievable ending. Why was this drivel ever made? The ending reminded me of Monty Pythons 'The Holy Grail', although that was a much better film. Best watched at 32X while in another room making a cup of tea. -Dave B |
| Comment by:- benzoider | | 01 February 2005 | ip: logged |
| The Village was misunderstood by most. It is sad how they RATE OR PICK APART THE MOVIE. With all of M. Night's films, you simply cannot do that. He was approached by Sci-Fi and caught in many secret things about his life and what his films are really about. My friend, who I went to high school with, Russell, came from where this movie was made and left with a lot of feelings that most cannot describe. I can say this, that if most of us really knew what he puts in these movies and why he tells the actors to not talk about certain things in the making of these movies, then maybe we would be more at light. I happen to know about this because I have been told I have a gift of insight into issues and spiritual matters, which I know I do for a fact as do many people I know. This can be passed off as coincidence or a matter of illusion or deception, but I would never be that way, nor would anyone I know. Let's also say someone I am very close to knows M. Night personally, and they have revealed to me many words on a tape I have and keep in secret. Accept that one person felt a calling to tell me and a few others, not that any of it would be easy to prove. The reason also why these films become so popular is because there are those people out there who cannot stand what they cannot fully grasp or understand and so they want to try and mock it or call it a farse. The movie was made exactly the way it should have been so you either accept it or you be on the outside looking in. So there it is. You be the judge. Ernie |
| Comment by:- erniemink | | 01 March 2005 | ip: logged |
| Hello world. Well i have put off seeing this latest one of the best - or only - supernatural yarn twister in film today. That is how i knew it would disappoint me. And, boy, and girl, when I finally saw it, I wasn't disappointed. I mean - I was disadisappointed. The film starts after an hour and 15 mins, near the end. Only once did it venture out somewhere and surprise or grab me (besides the first flash scare of Little Red Beasting Hood, reminiscent of siQn's alien sighting). Surprisigningly, when William Hurt started to bespeak of love, before his daughter went riding into the red woods, did some magic begin and you could tell there was inspiration blooming behind it, when the words started going somewhere you didn't expect, and kept going on further, then swelled into beauty and truth. Or tried. I admired that bit and was the sign or trademark of Mr Night. For that's when he threw all caution to the love. All plots were off, spontaneously during the filming, and the rest of the film would die in romance. Yes, it suffered Titanic syndrome. Hence the ending had no climax, nay barely a point. But where was the quiet cleverness and solid gems of originality the maker normally expends, instead of empty airs? Ironically, only in the director's cameo I was waiting and waiting for, which I thought a stroke of genius! *APPLAUSE* and full marks for that originality, finally. A first in film, but not part of the story!! |
| Comment by:- M Night Hitchcock. | | 03 April 2005 | ip: logged |
| I loved it....it was leading at parts and just uhmm disappeared on the main idea. Those of you crying because you wanted a horror movie.......... BOO HOO go get some morals. Would have obviously watched this movie if it didn't portray horror? M. Night was trying to get your attention so that he could stress some important ironic points to you.......like you would ever read his book.........or any book for that matter cause obviously you didn't think when watching this movie......CRACK KILLS!!! You just want entertainment; once you get it, you crave more and will do anything to see someone get murdered or shot up just like a fix. You're *(@$%&# blind to the world and what's going on. I think we have enough war on our hands for you to sit front row. I bet if you was in Iraq watching the war, you would ask a dying soldier to go get you some more popcorn..........sad but probably true. @#$@#$ OFF you unappreciative throggle minded asshole who watches others die for your freedom and stands up to say "That's Entertainment!" when all said and done...... |
| Comment by:- bean | about:blank | 20 August 2005 | ip: logged |
