People will talk about this film 10 years from now

Rating: 10/10 (15 June 2008)

I don't know where else to write about this so I'm going to write about it here. First, I have enjoyed all Shyamalan's films because aside from being plain good movies, there's always a deeper principle to consider that makes his films more like fables or parables than just a plain old movie that helps kill an hour or two. That being said, watching the Happening and assuming it's just a movie about some people who get dead for no apparent reason is like reading Animal Farm and assuming it's a story about animals. Rather, it appears that Shyamalan is trying to make a much bigger point with his films, this one in particular, let me explain. In all of Shyamalan's movies, the main character is called to more carefully consider what's happening around him/ her, and in some cases, to take decisive action based on an enhanced awareness of the situation. Then, as with any fable or parable, the movie-goer may ask him/ herself if parallels exist in their own life where points made in the film may apply. Further, in each of his previous films, Shyamalan has always made some small appearance except in Lady in the Water, where he played a fairly central character. In that character, Shyamalan, through character he portrayed, had the opportunity to say that he had a story to tell, a story that he believed would cost him his life. Some said his lengthy appearance in that film was a testament to his ego, but in The Happening, he does something he had not done in his previous films - he did not appear once. Rather, it could be argued that The Happening is the story Shyamalan (or his character) was talking about in Lady in Water, the story with the point he wanted to make that he believed may cost him his life. Aside from the story, the things to take note of first are the opening credits with the numerous studios and companies involved in getting this movie on the screen; this was not a part time project, this was a major undertaking. Second, the acting; yes it's flat, yes it's understated, but the acting is not the point; (see also: felt-board from Sunday School) AS FOR THE STORY: Think of it in general terms: After a brief shot of the strangely vacant New York skyline, a woman dies after being stabbed in the neck. Workers fall to their death from high-rise buildings. Regular citizens, construction workers, and civil servants lose their lives. Several deaths then occur in rural Pennsylvania. Paranoia sets in, people are on the run, even if they don't know where they're going or what they're running from. Sound familiar? In The Happening, just after 8:30 am EST, woman in the park dies by stabbing herself in the neck. Prior to 8:44 am EST on 9/11 when the first plane struck the first tower, the first woman killed on board that airplane was the stewardess who had her throat cut with the now infamous box-cutter. As the story progresses, people deal with a threat that they can never actually see in a variety of familiar ways: some head out to the rural countryside, some become suspicious and hostile toward people they would have otherwise helped, some occupy their minds with various distractions in spite of an obvious danger (math problems), some subscribe to conspiracy theories ("it was the government"), and some elect an "isolationist policy" (Mrs. Jones). The one point Shyamalan strives to make clear at several points throughout the film is that THERE ARE FORCES AT WORK BEYOND OUR UNDERSTANDING. If you haven't guessed yet, **THIS FILM IS ABOUT TERRORISM AND THE PEOPLE WHO BRING IT**. The characters in the film can't see it, can't run from it, can't hide from it, and can't ignore it. The turning point finally comes when, in a conversation familiar to any number of soldiers serving overseas, Elliot (Wahlberg) is sitting in a dingy room having a conversation with his wife, isolated in another building ("I wish you were here...") he decides that there is something, in this case his family, that he is willing to risk his safety to protect. At this point in the film, at a time between 9:30 and 10:00am EST, the attack ends in a field in rural Pennsylvania. This is the same time window and location of the crash of flight 93, the final event of 9/11. At the end of the film, in an interview similar to many interviews that occurred in the aftermath of 9/11, a scientist suggests that what has occurred should serve as a warning, but is discounted by the interviewer due to speculation that what occurred being an isolated event and would probably not happen again. But at the films' end, it does happen somewhere else; it happens in France, a country where neighborhoods exist that police cannot safely enter due to a violent Islamic population. Lastly, I see that the working title for this film was The Green Planet and it reminded me of a fact I learned while in Afghanistan: a small colored flag is flown over the grave of a man who died performing Jihad; the color of that flag is green. In this light and in the interest of his own safety,(see: Salman Rushdie) it makes sense for Shyamalan to execute this film in such an abstract fashion. The message may be debated but I certainly applaud the manner in which he carried it out.