|
Author
|
Comment
|
Van45us
Registered User
(7/24/06 8:08 pm)
|
Lady In The Water
I am giving this film a huge rec here because of its urban fantasy/fairy tale quality. Personally, I thought it was brilliant, creative, and original, but some critics have disagreed. This may be due to the film slamming film critics (for which I applaud Night Shamylan) who's skin is notoriously thin. So ignore the critics and see the film. This will hold up for years after Clerks II is forgotten.
|
kickerchick35
Unregistered User
(7/28/06 11:47 am)
|
Lady In The Water
Lady
in the Water was a great movie, but it was also kind of disipointing,
because i was expecting it to be really scary a lot of the time
but it was really more a chick flick than anything, though thats
not always bad. and it did have some kicks to it.
|
Heidi Anne Heiner
ezOP
(7/29/06 11:41 pm)
|
Re: Lady In The Water
And I've been avoiding the film since I don't care for scary movies. But my friends and family keep encouraging me to see it, so I think I just might!
Heidi
|
Storygirl
Unregistered User
(8/7/06 8:26 pm)
|
LITW
I thought this movie was great...and it's really not that scary
(it only has a couple of jump moments). Critics are dumb :rollin
.
I suggest everyone who loves fantasy and fairy tales to go see it. It's not a horror/suspense film at all (though it has those elements).
|
Van45us
Registered User
(8/16/06 9:22 pm)
|
Re: Lady In The Water
Definitely go see it, if you haven't already. It's really no more scarier than Little Red Riding Hood...well, okay, maybe not THAT scary. LOL! I thought it was just a very well done, character-driven fairy tale.
|
Veronica Schanoes
Registered User
(8/16/06 9:28 pm)
|
Mary Sue
I don't know--I just can't bring myself to see a movie in which the writer/director casts himself as a misunderstood, world-changing genius. Sounds too Mary Sue-ish to me.
|
DerekJ
Unregistered User
(8/16/06 11:53 pm)
|
Re: Mary Sue
Oh, I don't know, think we've heard of a few writers on this board
with LESS godlike/world-dominational self-images... :b : lol
(But if by "Mary Sue", you're invoking the fan-culture term for "Author who writes himself into fan-fiction, as bulletproof hero", Shamalyan's personal tantrum bestseller and "synergetic" picture-book marketing of the story-within-the-story didn't do the movie any favors either.)
|
Gregor9
Registered User
(8/22/06 4:27 pm)
|
Re: Mary Sue
Veronica,
Speaking as one of those enormous-ego writer types, I have the same knee-jerk reaction to his "cameo." That and I've found his films to be more and more obnoxious after "Unbreakable." I wanted my money back after sitting through "The Village."
It might be brilliant, but it will have to impress me as such in DVD format.
|
littleredshoes
Unregistered User
(8/22/06 9:18 pm)
|
lady
I liked it quite a bit. I can't be bothered worrying about the politics of film--I just took it as it was, and enjoyed it.
The picture book could have been written better, though...
|
Deepspiral
Registered User
(8/24/06 8:46 pm)
|
Re: lady
I don't know. I really enjoyed it, and hey, after being slammed by the critics a few times why not set yourself up as the tragic martyr figure and have fun at their expense? Totally predictable, and it didn't change my life but I still had fun.
|
Van45us
Registered User
(8/28/06 8:13 pm)
|
Re: lady
Yeah, I find that the politics of these things, unless really important, tend to ruin books and films for me if I let myself care. Night was excellent in the role, ego or no, and that aspect is the only one I really care about or pay attention to. I think his was a total reaction to the critics, and as I've said, that's fine by me, because most of them don't even have the creds to be in the buisiness these days, whether The Villiage was a good film or not.
I agree about The Villiage, a potentially good idea that lost me when I saw where it was going in the first fifteen minutes, so by the end I felt like I was watching a Twilight Zone or Night Gallery episode I'd seen about ten times already. Much ado about nothing. Signs was a good character-driven study of one family's experience of a war of the worlds. The fact it had holes you could drive trucks through was beside the point. It was well done on a human level. Unbreakable was a great film who's downfall came at the bitter end. I can't remember seeing the last five minutes of a movie take down the entire beast like that, ever. I hope someday he re-edits it and resolves it differently.
So I am more than willing to call out his films based on their independent merit. I just thought Lady in the Water was an excellent fairy tale with far less logic flaws and better story writing in it than anything he's done since Sixth Sense. Plus, at least to me, it had a sense of magic I rarely see in fantasy films, most of which are hyper-real or based more on gritty sword and sorcery and have no sense of wonder whatsoever.
|
Van45us
Registered User
(8/28/06 8:17 pm)
|
Re: lady
Sorry for the typo on village. :o
|
Veronica Schanoes
Registered User
(8/28/06 8:49 pm)
|
Re: lady
"The fact it had holes you could drive trucks through was beside the point."
Interesting--so many different people have such different ways of watching a movie. Even minor plot holes completely destroy a movie for me, as do continuity errors (not practical stuff about which hand the actor is holding the cigarette in, but stuff having to do with character continuity and continuity of the universe of the movie/film/book)--Pat Barker's <i>Another World</i> was pretty much ruined for me by the inconsistent years on the tombstones. I just can't stick a movie with plot-holes.
|
DerekJ
Unregistered User
(8/29/06 12:39 am)
|
Re: lady
Strike me up as another one who liked Night's first two-and-a-half (before "Signs"'s foreshadowing-orgy in the last scene) for their ultra-realist style...
But when you have main characters named "Cleveland Heep",
it's kind of hard not to expect a long, hard slog of screenwriter
self-indulgence going in.
(Or, as one net-wag put it, "So Uriah managed to marry and have children?...Good for him!")
|
