>> ^rottenseed:

Great if you come into contact with somebody low on bullets or easily persuaded to give up...


ok, keep your stupid non bullet proof glass then, negative nancy

>> ^Sarzy:

>> ^chilaxe:
@Sarzy
My understanding is that marketing budgets tend to be roughly equal to production budgets, so double the listed production budget to find the true cost of the film.
A "profitable" movie in Hollywood means earning a lot more than for example a 15% return on investment after 3 years (5% per year) of transferring the money because the ROI has to compensate for that there's substantial risk involved.

Well, notwithstanding the vagaries of profitability in the studio system, I think it's generally accepted that -- broadly speaking at least -- a movie is considered successful if it makes back its reported budget.
But even by your stricter definition of what constitutes a successful movie, with the exception of Lady in the Water, all of Shamalan's movies pass that test.


Titanic grossed almost 2 billion.....whats your point?

>> ^DerHasisttot:

Looks great. Serious Jackie is better than "funny" modern Jackie.


funny jackie is just as badass as serious jackie. they are both equally awesome

ohmygodohmygodohmygodohmygodohmygodohmygodohmygodohmygodohmygod

>> ^dag:

In fact he seems to be mercilessly mocked and ridiculed.

and very rightly so.

*CLUNK* *CLUNK* lol

he cites hitchcock and kubrick and in the same breath claims we "dont get him" cuz of cultural differences? american film goers "got" kubrick (mostly). american film goers "got" hitchcock. so whats your fucking excuse again?

you know, he really is kind of the nicholas sparks of the film industry

>> ^dag:

I'm with you on this one. I would prefer to watch the worst Shymalan movie over the best Michael Bay flick. Somehow Bay gets a free-ride for his CGI splooge fests. At least M. Night's movies focus on story over special effects. And also - Sixth Sense was a sensational movie - he gets a lot of credit from me for that one. >> ^shponglefan:
I don't get all the Shyamalan hate. I've seen almost everything he's made (starting with Sixth Sense up to and including The Happening), and imho he hasn't really made a bad movie. The problem seems to be he made a really good one (Sixth Sense) and has been living in its shadow ever since.



while i dont contest your points on michael bay (but really tho, someone has to make the dumbed down, cgi porn, movies that will appease the average movie goer) couldnt one argue that shyalaman was more or less given a free pass to shill out essentially the same movie in a different package over and over and over again. he makes sixth sense, its a smashing success, he's hailed as among the best new filmmakers at the time, everyone and their mom wants to finance his next movie....i dont see a difference

at the request of BoneRemake (because my "m night shyalaman is an idiot" rebuttal wasnt long winded enough =P):

sixth sense was "meh" for the following reasons:
"These souls who for whatever reason are not at rest are also not aware that they have passed on. Theyre not part of consciousness as we know it. they linger in a perpetual dream state; a nightmare from which they cannot wake." this may sound familiar. it may sound familiar as the general premise of The Sixth Sense and central to the "twist" (if you could even call it that) ending.

it may also sound familiar as a line from Poltergeist, and also being the central premise of the conflict resolution.
speaking of poltergeist, the open cabinet drawers scene in sixth sense is directly lifted from the moving chairs scene in poltergeist. you may call this an homage, i call it half-assed hackery.

his color reference as hints are just too obvious. theyre vague and ambiguous at first, but once you start noticing em it becomes plainly clear. as for the whole "twist" BRUCE WILLIS IS DEAD OMG YOU FOOLED ME YOU OLD TOSSER i felt it took away from the movie. when i originally went to see the sixth sense with my dad i went to see a tense psychological thriller that would chill me. and for the first 20-30 minutes or so, it did not disappoint..... until my dad and i figured out willis was dead (the "i see dead people" scene gave it away for us). we were dumbfounded at first, wondering what in the hell this had to do with furthering the plot, but we didnt need to wonder anymore once the movie became about bruce willis being all emo about being dead. and the big reveal at the end, considering we already knew, really just made us both scoff. simply put, it was a pretty scare and intense movie when it was about the boy, then it became boring and stupid when it does a 180 and becomes about bruce willis. thats my opinion anyway, tomaytoe-tomawtoe

now having said all of that, there is one, and only one thing, i like about shyalaman: his vision as a director. He's not a genius or anything, but he's pretty damn good. he has a real knack for framing, tone, and pacing. probably the only thing i like about sixth sense was his ability to add tangible tension through masterful pacing and mood setting.
....i take that back. theres two things i liked about sixth sense. the overall directing, and the anniversary dinner scene. that scene really did add an ambiguity to the whole dilemma of willis being dead. on one hand the scene must play out as an emotionally drained wife frustrated (and even pissed off) at her husbands increasing distance. simultaneously she must convey a mournful widow still in grief over her husbands death on their anniversary (and the anniversary of his death if im not mistaken). that scene is legit. but credit must be given to the actress and her portrayal more so than shyalaman because she nailed it beautifully.

whether he makes shitty films or not, sixth sense rocked the boxoffice and gave him some arguably deserved limelight. but his subsequent films proved that he is a one trick pony. his movies became exponentially more and more transparent, more and more boring, and more and more stale, lacking anything of substance. (with the exception of Signs arguably. i personally didnt love it, but i kind of liked it and its a solid enough film if you disregard the shit ending) the fact that his handle of "the twist ending filmmaker" is a passive aggressive insult shows this.

m night shyalaman as a filmmaker just.......sucks. theres really not a better or more concise way to put it. as a director, however, he really does shine......which brings us to devil, a movie in which he wrote and produced but did not direct. so basically the one thing he's actually good at, he didnt fucking do in that movie........and it shows.....its utter shite. at the risk of sounding pretentious, the twist ending (cuz you know theres fucking gonna be one, its a shyalaman movie for christ sake) is so limp and stupid, you can figure it out just from watching the damn trailer (i did).

and as far as the michael bay (barf) comparisons, i think the only difference is this: michael bay knows what he is. he knows exactly what kind of movies he makes. In cinema, motion pictures come in two forms: Films (art form) and movies (entertainment). Michael bay makes the latter, and he knows it, and everyone who watches his movies knows it. shyalaman makes movies masquerading as film. seriously, when your go to device is the plot twist, and you have one in each and every one of your god awful movies, they really lose the "surprise" appeal which utterly defeats the purpose of it in the first place and thus, deserves to be mocked

there, that a thorough enough rebuttal for ya, you crusty bastard? =P

as far as The Happening and Hitchcock are concerned, the difference is this: The Birds made me scared of birds, Psycho made me scared to take showers (and of my mother, strangely enough), Rear Window made me paranoid as hell towards my neighbors......The Happening? ya, still not scared of plants....in fact, fuck plants, stupid plants, being all.....planty

he can try and be hitchcock all he wants but he's always gonna fall desperately short

>> ^packo:

>> ^Jinx:
I actually quite liked Lady in the Water...Maybe I'll watch it again someday I wonder what I was thinkin.
But yah. Airbender. Wow was that shit. I've seen better on straight to DVD. I think my favorite bit was the romance between that little ice princess and some guy which goes from first meeting, to love at first to her giving her life in about 6 seconds flat. Yes the acting was terrible, but so was everything else. Literally everything...oh the effects were ok!
The Happening was worse tho. Nothing happened. Well some trees shook in the wind and people went suicidal. The End.

because audiences have too much ADD to enjoy a story where danger literally surrounds you, but doesn't come in the form of a CGI-alien or explosion... how do you fight plant life? or bacteria? or viruses?
in a movie that is hard... the brain dead way (pun) is to use zombies... then we can alleviate some of that ADD with boo scare factor
literally people have to stop going to his films expecting summer blockbusters... and have to start looking at the characterization more... he's not aiming for highbrow, and too many lowbrow seem to go to his movies and get pissed... he wants you to invest a bit into the movie, not just be taken for a pants wetting ride
the same people (i've found anyhoos) who detest his movies, find Hitchcock to be boring as well... I'm not saying MNS and HC are on the same level... but there's definitely some stylistic overlap...
you get out what you put in... if you have nothing to put in, there's plenty of summer blockbusters to for you... you can drool over Megan Fox (or her replacement) and then drool over how cool the transformers look and come out feeling like you spent your money well... but hardly as though you've been challenged as a viewer... beyond eye strain I suppose


from someone who finds hitchcocks approach fascinating, shyalaman is a fucking dumbass

and his obsession with (fucking ill executed) twist endings is ultimately his downfall. put another way, i was able to pick out who the devil was in "Devil" on the fucking trailer alone, it was blindingly obvious

>> ^shponglefan:

I don't get all the Shyamalan hate. I've seen almost everything he's made (starting with Sixth Sense up to and including The Happening), and imho he hasn't really made a bad movie. The problem seems to be he made a really good one (Sixth Sense) and has been living in its shadow ever since.


incorrect, sixth sense was ..... decent and he's been recycling the same damn formula over and over again because he's a one trick pony

as funny as colbert is, this and the banana incident on the daily show are probably his two side splitting funniest moments