The emperor has no clothes...

Rating: 1/10 (23 August 2004)

I've been a fan of the reviews on IMDb for many years BUT only now do I feel the urge to put my own views down. After going to see 'The Village' at the weekend, I feel the need to warn others not to waste their hard-earned cash on a load of utter self-indulgent rubbish... So naturally
**** SPOILER ALERT ****
Why the hard line? Well director M. Night Shyamalan has, as other reviewers have noted, a lot to live up to because of his earlier films, such as Signs and The Sixth Sense, which were are all very good. His direction, casting choices and good scripts has turned old genres into real winners, both in style and ticket receipts. But those films, or what made them enjoyable for me, was the unexpected but plausible twists (within the context of the story). Sadly though, Shyamalan has now got his formula and The Village just tries too hard to follow in the others footsteps. Despite strong performances from the leads Bryce Dallas Howard and Joaquin Phoenixm it does little to improve the general crapiness of it all.
Forget the good cinematography, a few bits of impressive screen dialogue, the on-screen chemistry between the two leads, the sharp editing, you're there to see an M. Night Shyamalan film because it won't fit the usual bill. But that's where it all falls down as the film is a turkey because the twist is Shyamalan's attempt to preach a message about unwarranted fear and the need for hope and a quest to fulfill one self. The Village, you see is kept held together (and insular) through fear of the 'monsters in the wood'. This has been going on for years but like Friedrich Nietzsche warned, those who battle 'with monsters had better see that it does not turn him into a monster'. And this is basically the whole premise of the film which results in the killing of the animals and the stabbing.
It seems to me that Shyamalan started the script at the end and then worked his way back to the beginning. Viz - finale and answer to whole film, but to do this you must create reason why people must leave village, but to do this you need to build tension because monsters threaten village as there are monsters in the wood. But the process insults the intelligence of the audience (well it did for me) because you get incredulous plot holes. For example, its 19th century America and there are 'monsters in the woods' - so where are the guns? Right to bare arms etc ? (Sic Tim Burton's Sleepy Hollow). I mean if settlers shot millions of buffalo into extinction surely these pioneers could deal with a couple of slow-moving, red-cape wearing wart hogs? Next was it a budgetry thing, (couldn't they afford a wooden one) but what the hell was an aluminium green house doing in the 1890s.? It was only 10 years after the Bayer process was developed in Austria, what an anachronism..!! Planes...although a reason is given at the end of the film. What about microlights, private pleasure craft, hot air balloons etc. I'm sorry there is no where on this planet that is not free from aerial snooping. E.g. Area 51 is not meant to exist but I bet there are more images on the internet of this site than the White House..!! Same goes for people just climbing the fence. Hey maybe that's the sequel The Village: The Donner Experience...yep really cold winter, kids in a car lose control crash through the fence and stumble on them hungry locals...
It might be more entertaining.
So after 100 minutes you get to the end of the day the film, and you learn that the premise - that as long as fear is used to control there can be no hope, no matter how liberal a lifestyle.
I am therefore sorry M. Night Shyamalan you have lost the plot this time.
I am therefore sorry that after so many good films this one is so bad.
I am also sorry that I can't have my £6 back after being told the bl**ding obvious and in a really dumb way.
M. Night Shyamalan please watch Soylent Green to learnt the answers...