M. Night Shyamalan - Devil (film)

[Matt H]

Just before, I was talking to a chap about the cinema, and he said that apparently 'The Last Airbender' is chronically terrible. I said I’m not surprised as it’s been made by M. Night Shyamalan, who’s films have got progressively worse since his biggy – The 6th Sense. Now I said this as a pretty flippant comment, based on my own opinion, but when I logged onto the IMDB, I had to chuckle.

 

The following is a list of his films in chronological order since the release of the 6th sense. The ratings are taken from the IMDB (scores out of 10)

 

1. 6th Sense – 8.2

2. Unbreakable – 7.3

3. Signs – 6.9

4. The Village – 6.6

5. Lady in the Water – 5.8

6. The Happening – 5.2

7. The Last Air Bender – 4.3

 

So, based on the above trends, does anyone want to hazard a guess what his next film ‘Devil’ will get?

[AndrewOW]

Not made, hopefully.

[RiceRocket]

6.1 but he's not directing this one, just wrote the story.

 

iUrUlnLOzlE

[Tannhauser]

Yes, but IMDB has Taken at 7.9. That alone is a stark warning not to invest any faith in its ratings system.

[Rob]

I'm guessing the twist will be that "the devil" will in fact be either

a) God

b) Alan Bennett

c) a hoover

[Matt H]

Yes, but IMDB has Taken at 7.9. That alone is a stark warning not to invest any faith in its ratings system.

 

Well you're not going to agree with everything, but I think it gives a good general idea of how good a film is. Based on the sheer number of contributers it doesn't go far wrong. There are of course anomalies.

 

I really enjoyed this particular film, but it got ranked as average on the IMDB:

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0395584/

[Matt H]

c) a hoover

 

Brand or generic term for a vacuum cleaner?

[Tannhauser]

Well you're not going to agree with everything, but I think it gives a good general idea of how good a film is. Based on the sheer number of contributers it doesn't go far wrong. There are of course anomalies.

 

I really enjoyed this particular film, but it got ranked as average on the IMDB:

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0395584/

 

Hmm. I hear what you're saying, but does popular = good?

 

For example, I hear that Dizzee Rascal is wildly popular, and yet I have scientific evidence that he should be thrown to the wolves, and whatever is left boiled down to make soap.

 

...but it's not a serious question. Personally, I like most of Sheikh-el-Sharma's stuff (that I've seen).

[Abz]

3.9

 

Yes, but IMDB has Taken at 7.9. That alone is a stark warning not to invest any faith in its ratings system.

 

I thought Taken was an excellent film!

[Scott]

Taken is an entertaining and enjoyable film but it certainly isn't as good as some of the masterpieces that are rated below it.

 

I take most IMDB ratings with a pinch of salt. I have a collection of 80s movies that I haven't seen. The other night I decided to go through them and watch the first one that got over 7.0 on IMDB. I got hit with Better off Dead and what a horrible flick that was.

 

My favourite of his movies is Signs, yeah it's a little thin but it's the only one I have watched again. The Sixth Sense only had a twist ending, the rest of the film was terrible.

[Tannhauser]

I thought Taken was an excellent film!

 

Taken is an entertaining and enjoyable film

 

What, seriously? It's was one of the worst films I've ever seen.

 

I don't mind a fast-cutting, pacy action film if it's done well - I quite like the Bourne films, for example, but Taken was badly done, objectionable and exploitative.

 

Exploitative, because it's a shameless power trip film. The film-makers start off with the premise that they want an extremely violent protagonist. Then up the ante by putting in some almost fetishised torture scenes - a protagonist in complete control of a victim. Wow, talk about laser-targeted. A gift for rednecks and powerless masturbators who can project themselves and their own victims around the car battery for some down-home cathartic fun. Wise-cracking boss in real life? No problem -bzzzz!

 

Unfortunately, in order to justify this, the villains have got to be ultra-bad, so that the brutality is justified. This means that you end up with unbelievable, one-dimensional cartoon villains.

 

I mean, there's torture in Reservoir Dogs, but that film doesn't attempt to justify it so transparently, and is more honest as a result. Taken is just one of a long line of power trip films, dating back to Death Wish and before, and all equally chronic.

 

Badly made, because the plot asks you to swallow more than a Jemma Jameson omnibus. It's about as plausible as Scooby Doo. And while it's not the sort of film that you expect to win 'best script', it's as hackneyed as some 1950s John Wayne movie.

 

Lastly, personally I find the paranoia, jingoism and xenophobia objectionable. You can tell what sort of film it is when Liam Neeson is terrified about his daughter visiting one of Tham Thar European cities. She's in Paris for Christ's sake. If it had been Detroit I could have understood his sense of foreboding. Then there's the dodgy eastern european baddies - OK, they have to come from somewhere, I guess. But then we have the lily-livered, apathetic, incompetent French police who need a good American CIA-trained ass-kicker to get the job done. Again, the whole thing's exploitative, because it plays on simple-minded paranoia about foreigners.

 

None of this matters because it's entertaining, right? Well, I've got no problem with generic beat-em-ps that require you to disengage your brain. But in the case of Taken, you have to send your brain on an all-expenses paid holiday in Ulan Bator for six months.

 

How Liam Neeson got mixed up with this turkey I don't know. Maybe he did it for a bet?

[Scott]

Yep, seriously.

 

I watched the Karate Kid last night (the 80's version), enjoyed that too

[Westcoaster]

Can his next film be any worse than this one?

[Tannhauser]

Yep, seriously.

 

I watched the Karate Kid last night (the 80's version), enjoyed that too

 

Each to his own.

[Matt H]

Hmm. I hear what you're saying, but does popular = good?

 

Certainly not, but what else have you got but the general consensus of the masses?

 

I think IMDB has actually got worse since it became really mainstream. I think there's now too many views from the morons getting in and there's also an element of 'employee' voting i.e everyone working on a film gives it a 10.

 

But I still maintain that you can 'generally' rely on it for the gist.

[AndrewOW]

But Matt, that's cheating, surely?!

[Mike]

What, seriously? It's was one of the worst films I've ever seen. snip

 

 

I made it half way through Taken, before turning off. I find I do that a lot these days...

 

The torture porn element is a hangover from the Saw/Hostel stable, brought to the masses under the guise of a hooky revenge thriller with someone you've heard of.

 

If you're going to do exploitation, make it so severely over the top that it can't be taken (no pun intended) seriously eg. Kill Bill etc. Don't embed a bunch of dangerous bigoted ideas and act like it's real.

 

I noticed someone remade seventies video nasty 'I Spit on Your Grave' (showing this weekend at Fright Fest) - is this what we're reduced to?

[Tannhauser]

Certainly not, but what else have you got but the general consensus of the masses?.

 

Find someone who you think has lousy taste in films, then avoid aything that they think is fantastic. (This isn't a veiled reference to anyone on this thread)

 

If you're going to do exploitation, make it so severely over the top that it can't be taken (no pun intended) seriously eg. Kill Bill etc. Don't embed a bunch of dangerous bigoted ideas and act like it's real.

 

I noticed someone remade seventies video nasty 'I Spit on Your Grave' (showing this weekend at Fright Fest) - is this what we're reduced to?

 

Yep, that's what I feel. Brutal films aren't my cup of tea especially, but I will watch and sometimes enjoy them provided (a) I can't picture the director or half the audience whacking off to it or (b) it doesn't cartoonishly dehumanise in a transparent attempt to bypass the moral issues.

 

That's where zombie and vampire films score - again, it's that adolescent/redneck fantasy of unlimited violence while maintaining moral certainty. Having a conveniently inhuman set of victims is the way forward.

 

I had no idea that I spit in your gravy was being remade.

[RedM]

I had no idea that I spit in your gravy was being remade.

 

They'll remake anything these days.

 

It's hard to believe but there is yet another new Superman movie coming. Even worse, another Spiderman film that starts from the begining! Why? How many more ways can the same story be told.

 

What will follow? Batman Begins Yet Again? Star Wars (A Newer Hope)?

[Matt H]

It's hard to believe but there is yet another new Superman movie coming)?

 

Where have you got your info from? The last I read the only details were it will be directed by Bryan Singer and it will be called the Man of Steel. Why is that hard to believe though?

 

 

Even worse, another Spiderman film that starts from the begining! Why? How many more ways can the same story be told.

)?

 

Spiderman was ruined with the two worse actors playing Peter and Mary-Jane, coupled with everything being CGI and having the Green Goblin (worst enemy ever) in everything. So dissappointing as I loved the cartoon as a kid I'm all up for a new spiderman film if they just forget the last 3 were ever made.

 

What will follow? Batman Begins Yet Again? Star Wars (A Newer Hope)?

 

I heard there's a film in the pipeline called Batman vs Superman. As long as something has become suitable aged that a remake would do it justice, I see no problems in them.

[RedM]

Where have you got your info from? The last I read the only details were it will be directed by Bryan Singer and it will be called the Man of Steel. Why is that hard to believe though?

 

I find it hard to believe that anyone needs YET ANOTHER origins movie. As I posted, how many times does the same stuff have to be remade?

 

Oh God! I've just imagined a remake of Citizen Kane. We are all doomed.

 

 

Spiderman was ruined with the two worse actors playing Peter and Mary-Jane, coupled with everything being CGI and having the Green Goblin (worst enemy ever) in everything. So dissappointing as I loved the cartoon as a kid I'm all up for a new spiderman film if they just forget the last 3 were ever made.

 

You didn't like them. That's fine. Do we really need the story again? What if you're not happy this time either? Make 'em again and again? Why not just make something new.

[Matt H]

I find it hard to believe that anyone needs YET ANOTHER origins movie. As I posted, how many times does the same stuff have to be remade?.

 

I don't understand where you're coming from? There's never been a Superman movie reamke? The first one didn't even give that much away about his origin. The rest, including Superman returns have been follow ons? The Man of Steel is supposed to be following on from Superman Returns?

 

You didn't like them. That's fine. Do we really need the story again? What if you're not happy this time either? Make 'em again and again? Why not just make something new.

 

I'm not really fussed, I'll choice to go to the cinema and pay for a ticket. No one's forcing you to go. The characters you're talking about are iconic, so there's always going to be an audience for a new take on the story and there probably will be for a long time. You'll just have to live with it

[Rob]

How Liam Neeson got mixed up with this turkey I don't know. Maybe he did it for a bet?

 

Neeson's done a fair few dodgy films of late, I wonder if its related to the loss of the lovely Natasha and he's just chucked himself into any work.

 

You mentioned Death Wish, and a bit like M.Night Charlatan, I can't recall if Michael Winner has actually made any really good films. I started watching that odd thing with Chris Rea and Flicky Kendal a few months ago and turned it off after about 40 minutes.

How is he so rich and so famous?

[Mike]

I don't understand where you're coming from?

 

The Super Hero thing is played out, homes.

[Rob]

I don't understand where you're coming from? There's never been a Superman movie reamke? The first one didn't even give that much away about his origin.

 

Apart from the whole hour about his home planet dying and him being cast into space, landing on earth and growing up you mean?