as long as M. Night Shyamalan is *not* involved, I'm on board.

It's Bryce Dallas Howard. She was in Jurassic World, a few M. Night Shyamalan movies, an episode of Black Mirror, and some other stuff I've never seen. She's also Ron Howard's daughter.

Call M. Night Shyamalan... We found Unbreakable

M Night Shyamalan is that you?!

plot twists like M. Night Shyamalan on crack

*promote

Dude, that's clearly a 90's video. However, the best production value won't help you if your content stinks, just ask M. Night Shyamalan. Having white children rap about religion is terrible. If you can't see this cheap and lazy attempt at making Jesus PR for children for what it is, you'll probably need the Lord's help more than the kids do.

One of the most disappointing films ever, especially for everyone who was holding tight on board the M. Night bandwagon, before his name became a joke and audiences started to literally audibly guffaw in unison inside movie theaters at a voiceover saying proudly "From the mind of M. Night Shyamalan."

WOW RUSSEL IS A GENIUS. To think he was planning this for over a year! Truly a visionary. The next M Night Shyamalan???/

Ohhhhh.... kaaaaay...?

The latest from the mind of M. Night Shyamalan?

Dear M. Night Shyamalan, please stop making movies, thank you.

Funny, M. Night Shyamalan's name is nowhere to be found on this trailer.

I can't imagine why that would be the case. Maybe it's because he sinks ships worse than a gigantic iceberg and in the case of the trailer I think I found the tip:

"IT..HAS..FOUND..YOU."

Don't mind all the details, dag. The more you share, the better.

I can't wait to read more. And I'm hoping "I throw an entire community under the bus" is not an event that has yet to transpire. That would be an M. Night Shyamalan twist ending of apocalyptic proportions. (Which makes me wonder if the Siftpocalypse will be part of your telling of Sift history.)

*promote *frontpage

>> ^AeroMechanical:

>> ^Payback:
>> ^kceaton1:

I'll still see this as it's a Bruce Willis movie and he seems to have an O.K. streak; he hasn't ever really made/been-in a dud, similar to Harrison Ford on that front. Plus Joseph Levitt to boot, should be alright.

Air Force One?

cough Hudson Hawk cough Armageddon cough


While both those films are fairly bad, they are FAR more watchable than the true dregs of movies that have been made by people such as Uwe Boll or M. Night Shyamalan--when M.N.S. made a good show, followed by a decent one, and then proceeded to believe that he made the best films man had ever bear witness to. Plus we both know that there was an audience (and a large one for Armageddon) for BOTH of those movies and also Air Force One, @Payback; sure, they weren't me and you (or @Payback), but there are a lot of people in this world that do not ask very much from their movies.

It's when a movie lets down EVEN THEM that it is a pure and utter failure, able to be ridiculed without equal until the end of time. These are the worst films made. Of course many of the movies that DO succeed, like Prometheus right now (June 2012--for reference), can be made fun of A LOT (like Armageddon, which has been the punchline to many jokes). Why? Because, they have MASSIVE disconnects from reality or other bad writing and screenplay mechanics that they are just ridiculous when thought about with any amount of real thought and prowess in a subject dealing with the movie and it's attempt to portray reality in another light that is utterly false. As I said they appeal to the "entertainment" type audience; someone that would go see Independence Day over and over again. Not to us were we watch someone take off a helmet in a potential zero atmosphere environment "to test it out"; that is UTTER NONSENSE, no one does this in reality! This is the stuff that makes us hate those movies (and create the myriad of jokes for it as well). But, not the entertainment crowd who can enjoy a movie for what it is and suspend their connection with reality for awhile.

Granted if I were to use my "full-on" reviewing analysis of what I would include as good movies--the count of "alright" movies would plummet (for Harrison Ford and Bruce Willis). I can think of atleast 3-4 shows that Bruce has been in that I would consider failures in this light, but I know that many people beyond me DO like these movies--that is why I don't count them as failures as there remains an audience--a decently sized one--for those movies. I have to admit I have my own "cult" movie favorites that no-one likes, really, except for me and maybe a few other people I know. I also have been able to like movies for their entertainment value although I know if I treat them with reality they fall completely apart, quickly. Sometimes it's best to let your imagination rule your heart.

Same thing here. I'm just not on the end of the spectrum that enjoys those movies, if you get my drift. So, trust me, I know Bruce has his bad movies (same with Harrison Ford)--but his bad movies, so far, are better than the real dregs and bottom scraped-up leftovers that are out there. That is what I was trying to say in a lot less context--I hope this clears it up. We most likely see things fairly close or the same; I'm just giving credit to the people that DO like Hudson Hawk, Armageddon, and Air Force One.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

I disagree. QT knows exactly what he is doing. Some of his films are dialog driven (Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown) and some are genre and/or action driven films (True Romance, Kill Bill, Inglorious Basterds). I have no doubt he is capable of writing another Pulp, and that one day he probably will, but for now he is doing high-art pastiche of the classic exploitation dramas he grew up with. This is not to say that these action films are less good than his dialog films, they just have different aesthetic criteria.
He is much like Speilberg in this way, if polar opposites in dialog and style. Speilberg has his serious movies, and he has his homages to the serial action films of his youth.
Prediction: Eventually Quentin will eventually get his fill of action films and create another magnum opus, and likely get himself an Oscar in the process. I would absolutely love for him to take his favorite film of recent times, Battle Royale, and make an American-culture-specific version - not a remake of the film, but a remake of the concept as it would occur if it played out with American high schoolers.
Also, comparing QT to Shayamalan is blasphemy. Even Shayamalan's best work was an average film with a great twist. Shayamalan has never shown even an ounce of the writing or directing skills that QT has. Take it back. TAKE IT BACK!!1!>> ^lucky760:
Win.
I no longer have any confidence Quentin will make another Reservoir Dogs- or Pulp Fiction-caliber film, and I've made my peace with that, but I will still eagerly await every one of his new projects with fervent anticipation.
(I just hope he never descends as far down as M. Night Shyamalan.)



I think even he knows he's lost something. Politely disagree, sir. *tip hat*

It's not a comparison of M. Night's work to QT's, but a comparison of how the anticipation of their newer films has waned. In M. Night's case, it has nosedived so far that people, myself included, now audibly guffaw at the "From the mind of M. Night Shyamalan" brag in trailers for his projects.

The problem with QT is not that his latest works are crap, but given the precedents he set, my expectations for greatness far exceed the quality of his latest works. I'm not at all a hater or even complainer of his latest films. In fact, I like them a lot, and I really appreciate his interpretations of bygone-era genres, but the honest truth is I walk out of his films with a tinge of disappointment.

I just need to set my expectations lower, but then I go and re-watch Reservoir Dogs or Pulp Fiction and it fouls that whole plan up.

I hope he'll someday make the Vega Brothers film that was rumored about so long ago.