It's really not that bad...

Rating: 7/10 (10 August 2007)

People write the most accusatory things when they don't get what they were expecting. While not a masterpiece, it is definitely Shyamalan's best film since "The Sixth Sense", with the most engaging protagonist since the lovable, mature Cole Sear.
"The Village" is the story of a small community in the 1800s in Pennsylvania, living their simple lives in their utopia, under the threat of omnipresent monsters who dwell in the woods - Those We Don't Speak Of. While the social commentary of this film on American society, post-9/11, may be overly simplistic and misguided, several aspects of this film are nice. While it tends to drag a little at the end (Shyamalan likes quiet, slow moments), the pacing is generally quite good. Technical aspects, such as cinematography, acting and music and are all brilliantly executed - especially Bryce Dallas Howard's performance - she's so fun! When she laughs, it makes you smile. Her character, Ivy, is so full of joy and Howard animates her to endearing effect. Adrian Brody similarly stands out, but Sigourney Weaver is wooden throughout the majority of the film - disappointing given her reputation.
Everyone should know by now that "The Village" was marketed completely incorrectly. In the ads, it was dumbed-down to a shock-horror using the brazenly obvious symbolic code of the colour red and some nifty, atmospheric shots through twigs. There is more to this film than twigs and red: The characters are generally well developed. Ivy is a splendid character, one of Shyamalan's better ones, especially since the devastatingly dull, stunted Rev. Graham Hess who dominated "Signs". Joaquin Phoenix's character, seemingly similarly underdeveloped, is revealed to be loyal and sensitive, and surprisingly masculine. Even the retarded 'village idiot', who initially seems included for comic relief, has a greater purpose in the development of the plot, with a bizarre love triangle emerging. Most of the other characters are either left untouched, or the rest is left to the audience's imagination (particularly with the elders).
The music is stunningly good, and (in a rare case with Hollywood films) actually enhances plot development by being closely affiliated with the protagonist.
The plot - It's been said before but I'll say it again! It's a love story. Awww, how nice. Ivy and Lucius are a cute couple, and even if you were expecting a horror film, their romance is strong enough to carry the film. However, one of my major qualms with the film lies in the plot, concerning how much time is devoted to the elders, who frankly, aren't that interesting. Interesting in concept, maybe, but the actors who played the elders were stoic and stiff! But, at the end of the day, "The Village" is definitely not the worst film ever made - it was made with love, with the actors going to a boot camp to learn how to perform typical 1800s activities, and a score that mirrors the protagonist's 'internal struggle'(if I can use a clichÃ© term). However, my one criticism of M. Night Shyamalan is this: Please stop trying to rely on one shot to carry a scene. The audience goes to a film expecting just that - and if you're not using that one shot for an effect, such as suspense, please stop pretending that you're directing a play. Yes, I realise you specially cast theatre actors so they could deal with long takes - but long scenes of one take is just ridiculous. The last scene with the elders exemplifies my frustrations perfectly. But, the long take is used to great emotional effect in the scene on the porch between Ivy and Lucius. I commend Night on that scene, but I think my criticism is fair.
Look, basically, you're into this kind of slow-moving, genre-hybrid, dystopian fantasy, or you're not. It's up to you.