True enough - it's possible to get wrapped around the axle with all of the hair splitting this film allows, and nearly all of it is irrelevant. BTW, I don't think unbreakable was about balance, otherwise we would have had the symbolism of Willis dumping the weights because the two paint cans on the right side were empty.
You have touched on some of the points posted earlier. I think the movie has many allegorical images and symbols about life’s' choices. But the full potential of these allusions was squandered on "the twist". That is my frustration with the film - it could have been excellent but was rendered mediocre by an unnecessary plot structure and its marketing as a "monster movie".
As you likely know, the character's in MNS other movies were all greatly affected by the plot twist. In Sixth Sense, Malcolm Crowe discovers he is dead and remained on this plane for some great purpose; In Unbreakable, David Dunn discovers Elijah Price is responsible for many tragedies resulting in hundreds if not thousands of deaths all for the purpose of revealing the hand of God (ok, maybe that is reading into it a bit much, but thats how I saw it); and in Signs, Rev. Graham Hess's faith is jolted back into place after he witnesses a miracle.
In the Village, the twist was more for the benefit of the audience and it gave us a few more pieces to the puzzle. The only character that was really stunned by the revelation was the park ranger who first ran into Ivy Walker. And he was touched only slightly since he did not have full disclosure as to how and why the villagers lived in the reserve. Still, just as the elder Edward Walker, the park ranger was left with a choice to protect or sacrifice innocence by either exposing the village to the real world or letting them remain in the reserve.
The other aspect of this film was how the younger villagers dealt with and even confronted their fears. They were unexposed to the real world and knew only what they were taught by the elders (an allegory for how we were taught and how we teach our children). Noah had likely discovered the truth about the village long before we stepped into the story. Perhaps the discover drove him crazy or perhaps he was his mental state allowed him to appreciate the irony he lived in. He seemed to relish the idea of "those we do not speak of attacking" the village. And as we learn towards the end, he donned one of the costumes and chased after Ivy. Told from a villager's point of view, this was a monster movie.
As you can see, I liked the movie and am willing to overlook many of its flaws. I think MNS is a good story teller. Tarantino is as well. They both have similar structures in telling stories but their styles differ greatly.
I appreciate your comments. Thanks for bearing with mine.
Wow... I rushed that last paragraph. Let me try that again...
The other aspect of this film was how the younger villagers dealt with and even confronted their fears. They were unexposed to the real world and knew only what they were taught by the elders (an allegory for how we were taught and how we teach our children). Noah had likely discovered the truth about the village long before we stepped into the story. Perhaps the discovery drove him crazy or perhaps his mental state allowed him to appreciate the irony he lived in. He seemed to relish the idea of "those we do not speak of” attacking the village. And as we learn towards the end, he donned one of the costumes and chased after Ivy. Told from a villager's point of view, this was a monster movie.
Hope that made more sense.