After much await i finally got my chance to watch the latest movie made by my favourite filmmaker M. Night Shyamalan - The Happening. Fully aware of the critical bashing the movie has received (20% from rotten tomatoes) I went to the movie unflinched. And disappointed I wasn't.
On my way to the theatre i kept thinking all about Shyamalan and his movies. My first tryst with his movies started when my sister narrated to me the story of a movie she had seen. It was sixth sense. My sister had always been good at narrating stories but this time the premise of the story caught my imagination. It was different - a child helping ghosts. I rented the cassette and saw the movie. It was great. The next movie of his, unbreakable, i saw it on cable - one day before my first year sem exams. Loved it as well. I was captivated by Shyamalan's treatment of the supernatural, Hitchcock style twists at the end of his movies, gripping build ups to the climax. At this point one of my all-time favourite movies and, in my view, his best film released. Signs. I watched the movie, along with my best friends from engineering, in the best theatre of Hyderabad in those days - Sangeeth. There are only a few books and movies which change the way you see this world. Signs was one such movie for me. I vividly remember getting mesmerised and hypnotised by the climax of the movie and how it was presented - Newton Howard's background score, Mel Gibson and Abigail Breslin's acting, the screenplay and everything. I came out of the theatre wondering what a genius Shyamalan is. I was so influenced by the movie that in the following days i started seeing everything as a sign sent to me by God. If the electricity went off while watching TV during exams, i thought it was a sign from above to get me reading books. If the computer crashed while playing games, i thought it was a sign to make me do some coding. If i missed the college bus, it was a sign to sit at home. I had regular arguments with people over the movie who found it stupid. I took it up as my evangelistic agenda to change people's view of the movie. I took great pains in explaining people that the movie is not about aliens but about faith - do you see a phenomenon as a coincidence or as a sign? Never stopped till they were convinced and agreed with me.
After a long gap 'The Village' was released. First day, first show and this time in prasads. Critics blasted the movie but I, along with other Shyamalan fanatics in the theatre attending the first show, clapped at the end of the movie. I whistled and whistled when i saw the credits on the screen mentioning shyamalan's name. I shouted with a boyish excitement when shayamalan made his unusual entry in the movie. Explained to my friend that it was shyamalan's voice - proud of my instant discovery. Seeing so much criticism directed at the movie 'Lady in the water' made me wonder whether i liked the movie because i adored him or i really liked the movie. I still don't know the answer. I liked the movie. The only disappointment was that there was no mega-twist at the end. It was a fairy-tale told the shyamalan way. No complaints.
So i reached the theatre and was ushered into Screen 5 in prasads - i never saw a movie in that but i heard it was initially built for private screenings. I hoped it would be big enough and deserving to screen a Shyamalan's movie. Alas, my hopes were shattered to see a puny theatre with a puny screen. "NO!!!!!", i declared when i saw the movie being screened in exactly 1/6th part of the already small 35mm screen. Had to control my destructive impulses (wanted to kill the manager who deemed the movie not worthy enough of a 70mm screening). The movie started and nothing else no longer mattered. I enjoyed the movie. I hope i can articulate why liked the movie(Spoiler Alert!):
For one, i never got bored and i am pretty sure nobody who watched the movie did. The movie is gripping. The general discontent with the movie might be because people feel the premise of the story is stupid and the lack of explanation for whatever that is Happening. To make a good movie both of them are not required. A movie maker need not have an agenda or a point to make in the movie. He also doesn't need to explain the reason for an event if he films and treats the screenplay of the event well. It's a human trait that we are dissatisfied if we can't know the proper reason for something. Shyamalan might have done a mistake there and i don't blame him for that because he would be damned if he gives the reason as it would be declared dumb! So instead he opted to leave it to our imagination. It is like reading a murder mystery novel with its last few pages, where the killer is revealed, torn off! It is for this reason all Indian movies follow the same mantra, a movie should end happily, a utopian climax no matter what - even if all the hero's family is dead but he manages to kill the villain and walks away happily with his lady love who, by the way, is never killed. Just because Shyamalan didn't follow a manual he is being persecuted. Not only the climax, even in the middle of the movie there are many scenes that do not have an explanation. In my view, none of them need one. The killing of the two boys, the crazy woman, an oscillating swing and few alike are all experiences faced by three people and the movie is told from their perspective. They themselves don't know the reason and we shouldn't expect to know either.
Coming to the finer details and why the tale gripped me; the movie was typical shyamalan. The movie is not fast paced but one never runs out of patience. He doesn't try to thrill with a sudden sound but by a carefully built up suspense terminated by a scary visual. He, like no one else can, managed to create few laughs in totally serious situations. I kept on guessing what would happen the next moment because the suspense never stopped. I am just re-repeating the word 'gripping' because of a reason. When the movie was stopped in the middle of a scene for intermission everybody went 'Aaaaaaargh..' in unison because each one of us were so captivated by that scene and were irritated by the interruption. It was a perfect testimony. To sum it up, i was entertained; that's what i expect from a movie and that's what i got.
On my way to the theatre i kept thinking all about Shyamalan and his movies. My first tryst with his movies started when my sister narrated to me the story of a movie she had seen. It was sixth sense. My sister had always been good at narrating stories but this time the premise of the story caught my imagination. It was different - a child helping ghosts. I rented the cassette and saw the movie. It was great. The next movie of his, unbreakable, i saw it on cable - one day before my first year sem exams. Loved it as well. I was captivated by Shyamalan's treatment of the supernatural, Hitchcock style twists at the end of his movies, gripping build ups to the climax. At this point one of my all-time favourite movies and, in my view, his best film released. Signs. I watched the movie, along with my best friends from engineering, in the best theatre of Hyderabad in those days - Sangeeth. There are only a few books and movies which change the way you see this world. Signs was one such movie for me. I vividly remember getting mesmerised and hypnotised by the climax of the movie and how it was presented - Newton Howard's background score, Mel Gibson and Abigail Breslin's acting, the screenplay and everything. I came out of the theatre wondering what a genius Shyamalan is. I was so influenced by the movie that in the following days i started seeing everything as a sign sent to me by God. If the electricity went off while watching TV during exams, i thought it was a sign from above to get me reading books. If the computer crashed while playing games, i thought it was a sign to make me do some coding. If i missed the college bus, it was a sign to sit at home. I had regular arguments with people over the movie who found it stupid. I took it up as my evangelistic agenda to change people's view of the movie. I took great pains in explaining people that the movie is not about aliens but about faith - do you see a phenomenon as a coincidence or as a sign? Never stopped till they were convinced and agreed with me.
After a long gap 'The Village' was released. First day, first show and this time in prasads. Critics blasted the movie but I, along with other Shyamalan fanatics in the theatre attending the first show, clapped at the end of the movie. I whistled and whistled when i saw the credits on the screen mentioning shyamalan's name. I shouted with a boyish excitement when shayamalan made his unusual entry in the movie. Explained to my friend that it was shyamalan's voice - proud of my instant discovery. Seeing so much criticism directed at the movie 'Lady in the water' made me wonder whether i liked the movie because i adored him or i really liked the movie. I still don't know the answer. I liked the movie. The only disappointment was that there was no mega-twist at the end. It was a fairy-tale told the shyamalan way. No complaints.
So i reached the theatre and was ushered into Screen 5 in prasads - i never saw a movie in that but i heard it was initially built for private screenings. I hoped it would be big enough and deserving to screen a Shyamalan's movie. Alas, my hopes were shattered to see a puny theatre with a puny screen. "NO!!!!!", i declared when i saw the movie being screened in exactly 1/6th part of the already small 35mm screen. Had to control my destructive impulses (wanted to kill the manager who deemed the movie not worthy enough of a 70mm screening). The movie started and nothing else no longer mattered. I enjoyed the movie. I hope i can articulate why liked the movie(Spoiler Alert!):
For one, i never got bored and i am pretty sure nobody who watched the movie did. The movie is gripping. The general discontent with the movie might be because people feel the premise of the story is stupid and the lack of explanation for whatever that is Happening. To make a good movie both of them are not required. A movie maker need not have an agenda or a point to make in the movie. He also doesn't need to explain the reason for an event if he films and treats the screenplay of the event well. It's a human trait that we are dissatisfied if we can't know the proper reason for something. Shyamalan might have done a mistake there and i don't blame him for that because he would be damned if he gives the reason as it would be declared dumb! So instead he opted to leave it to our imagination. It is like reading a murder mystery novel with its last few pages, where the killer is revealed, torn off! It is for this reason all Indian movies follow the same mantra, a movie should end happily, a utopian climax no matter what - even if all the hero's family is dead but he manages to kill the villain and walks away happily with his lady love who, by the way, is never killed. Just because Shyamalan didn't follow a manual he is being persecuted. Not only the climax, even in the middle of the movie there are many scenes that do not have an explanation. In my view, none of them need one. The killing of the two boys, the crazy woman, an oscillating swing and few alike are all experiences faced by three people and the movie is told from their perspective. They themselves don't know the reason and we shouldn't expect to know either.
Coming to the finer details and why the tale gripped me; the movie was typical shyamalan. The movie is not fast paced but one never runs out of patience. He doesn't try to thrill with a sudden sound but by a carefully built up suspense terminated by a scary visual. He, like no one else can, managed to create few laughs in totally serious situations. I kept on guessing what would happen the next moment because the suspense never stopped. I am just re-repeating the word 'gripping' because of a reason. When the movie was stopped in the middle of a scene for intermission everybody went 'Aaaaaaargh..' in unison because each one of us were so captivated by that scene and were irritated by the interruption. It was a perfect testimony. To sum it up, i was entertained; that's what i expect from a movie and that's what i got.
5 comments:
I would just say, its a review by a typical Shyamalan fan [:)]
Thanks for the review!
"the sixth sense" was certainly an awesome film... haven't seen any other of his films.
Thanks for reading Abhishek. You should definitely see all of his movies.
Now that I have seen happening, I am actually little cool coz i was disappointed u saw happening with out me, i guess i thought we had something going with shyamalan movies.
Happening is a good movie which has some really very good moments but the movie i though fell flat at various junctures - clearly something wrong with shyamalan. because his earlier movies i thought didnt fell flat at all. I havent seen unbreakable(donno why) n Lady in the water(the reviews frightened me) and happening , though good, i would say clearly comes last in the order of his movies that i have watched.
I don't think anything's wrong with him. Its tough job to do When a director limits himself to one genre of himself and yet has to be inventive and creative each time. He came close. Lady in the water would come last if you had seen it :)
Post a Comment