Movie FReview--The Village

vanity | July 31, 2004 | grellis

[grellis]

I never noticed mikes! That is pretty bad.

I went to an old brick quarry-turned swimming hole today for a bit of a swim and some sunbathing. The only way to get to the quarry is to hike through about a quarter mile of very dense woods. If the movie had really stuck to me, I would have found the trek at least a little daunting, but it wasn't. Just a plain old walk in the woods.

[Varda]

I saw it Friday and enjoyed it. I already knew that the advertising champaign was grossing misleading; it was definitely not a horror movie. I would call it a philosophical/theological drama concerning the morality of human acts.

Shyamalan's narrative was on the spartan side and he only concentrated on those scenes that dealt with the cause and effects of the actions of the elders. The whole look and content struck me as a kind of art house film. Kids looking for a good scare definitely came to the wrong movie.

[nuffsenuff]

Just finished watching it.

Really good. Completely unexpected twists.

[FredWolfe]

I thought the movie sucked. I saw the twist from MIIIIILES away and when it happened I thought... wtf? M. Night Shyamalan can do WAY better than this.

The "twist" in this movie was just plane stupid, unsuspenseful, it didnt make you think, it was scary or "wow I never thought THAT would happen".


I give it 5 out 10. The acting was good, the story sucked.

[French-American Republican]

I agree. Well-shot, well-edited, well-acted, well-written. What is everyone's problem with this film? It's light years ahead of all of the director's other films other than Unbreakable (Signs was absolutely atrocious).

I didn't notice anything anti-American or leftist about it. The film's thematically had more to do with Calvinist and Augustinian religious philosophy than Bush or the war. I liked it a lot.