Shyamalan Book Reconsidered

• email this story
• read comments (19)
• post a comment
• 
  
  

Bilge Ebiri has read Michael Bamberger's "The Man Who Heard Voices", which everyone knows as the M. Night Shyamalan book in which the famed director bashes Disney (i.e., production prexy Nina Jacobson in particular) for not loving his Lady in the Water script enough. "I don't understand why the critical world seems so eager to pounce on a guy who's actually taking some artistic risks at a point in his career when he could coast pretty easily," Ebiri says. "Lady isn't opening for three weeks, and here's Slate 's Kim Masters...positively gloating that the film has bad buzz (never mind the fact that it isn't true -- 'buzz' is simply what the writer wants to believe). And that's just the stuff that's been published. You should hear my fellow critics rubbing their palms, waiting to pounce on this thing." Bamberger's book is the focus of much of the venom. "There's been a lot of nonsense published that the book is Shyamalan 'lashing out' at Disney execs," Ebiri notes. "First of all, anyone who publishes that tripe has not read this book....certainly not all the way. (A recent Observer article was particularly stupid, Ebiri says, since it suggested that the break-up with Disney is the book's 'culmination' when it's actually in one of the opening chapters.) I can't say too much about the book -- I read it for a review in another publication and it would be wrong of me to trump it with this post -- but, despite the fact that Bamberger's subject is an all-access portrait of M. Night at work, it's simply false to label this some kind of tell-all revenge piece. Indeed, as he continues working on his film in the book, Shyamalan actually admits that the Disney execs were right -- that the script they read did, in fact, need much more work. Which, incidentally, he gave it. And Bamberger even gets to interview Jacobson to get her side of the story."

comment #1

Sam KB says ...

Amen. I can't tell if it's because he's had a good run of hits, or because he's been overexposed, or because he calls himself Night, but the pile-up on Shyamalan has a weird, scuzzy feel to it. This book sounds pretty interesting.

comment #2

says ...

It's because his ego is bigger than the stick up Poland's ass.

comment #3

says ...

Right...and so according to you no other director has a big ego. You've obviously never met a film director in your life.

comment #4

Nag says ...

There's this huge backlash on Night because of the guy's talent. You could feel the backlash prior to the release of The Village.

Say what you will---but each of his films have been better than average genre films that in some instance were able to transcend the whole genre thing.

I think "Lady In The Water" is going to do better than The Village (which isn't saying much I suppose). My feeling is that the reason behind some of the backlash was because everyone had built him up as a director of twist endings. I think he's trying to get away from that now, and in turn, this will mean better numbers for his films.

comment #5

Jason says ...

That isn't anything new, since that factoid was in the original piece which broke the story, that a year after the meeting, he called a lunch with the executive in question and said to her that he was wrong. Everyone just chose to ignore it too look at the nasier bits.

Course, the damage has already been done. This book is probably not going to help Night's image all that much. He also needs Lady to be a good film.

comment #6

TGZ says ...

Of course most directors have big egos, but few of them come across as self aggrandizing, and overly confident as M. Night does in interviews. The LAT's story about the book struck a nerve because it seemed to confirm a lot of the worst aspects of his public persona (which, of course, may just be a big media distortion.) I hope LITW is good, too, but his films have been getting progressively worse. The Village pissed off a lot of people I know, and he had complete creative control over that film, so perhaps this isn't the best time to nail yourself to the cross and claim to be a persecuted artist.

comment #7

patric says ...

Couldn't this book scandal be calculated hype for 'Lady in the Water'? Don't you all remember just before 'The Village' was released, Sci-Fi aired a 'shocking' documentary expose on him that turned out to be a big hoax.
Shyamalan knows that people are going to see this movie because of his name. Therefore, anything that publicizes his nutty persona will hype the film.

comment #8

Geoff says ...

The Village was a piece of crap. People who defend that film are obviously Shyamalan's mind warped little minions.

comment #9

DSG says ...

One word: smug. I don't mind his movies (haven't seen The Vilage) but it doesn't matter how good you are if you come across in interviews as totally up yourself. Eventually the public will turn on you. It may not be fair, but it's true. BTW, I think that's what really knocked Oliver Stones career on its head for a while.

comment #10

Drew says ...

For me, the turning point for M. Night Shyamalan was that hoax documentary about his "secrets" that aired on national cable shortly before "The Village" opened.

It took incredible balls and ego to attempt that stunt, as if people would care about him that much, and once he did that, he stupidly provoked his critics and killed his credibility and trust.

In light of that hoax, you really have to turn up the BS meter to whatever comes afterwards, especially this "Lady In The Water" fracas.

comment #11

BL says ...

I said in another thread - I LIKE Sixth Sense a LOT - I think it is an excellent film.

But MNS's scripts to ME have not only gotten progressively worse, they rely on the same stupid kind of predictable 'trick' endings that at THIS point I find insulting. After being suckered into seeing "The Village" - I have really had it with this guy and admit to feeling a certain animus towards him.

In any case, to hear that he is blind to his flaws is really discouraging - because how can one get back on the right track if one does not even realize there is a problem?

As for people being arrogant pain-in-the-asses, well, I guess Orson Welles was a real pain but I still wish Holleywood had kept giving him money to make his movies in any case because in the end - a filmmaker's films and not their personality is the primary thing.

comment #12

BFE says ...

MNS has obviously built a rep with those third act twists of his, but it's worth noting that SIGNS didn't really have one (it had a third act revelation, I guess, in the usual sense -- just not a patented MNS-make-you-rethink-the-entire-plot kind of thing). And by all accounts LITW is not a "twist" movie, but more a sort of fairy tale.

Personally, I liked the twists in THE VILLAGE and UNBREAKABLE much more than the one in THE SIXTH SENSE.

comment #13

BL says ...

BFE - I can understand somebody NOT liking the ending of the "Sixth Sense" - I can NOT understand somebody liking the end of "The Village" - especially. Even though I personally think the last moments of "Unbreakable" constitute the worst ending to a film I have ever seen- up until that point I think the film is not bad so I can sort of see letting that go.

That nerdy looking alien in "Signs" was so distracting (all it needed was a pocket protector for icing on the cake) I have a hard time remembering very much else about that movie.

comment #14

Steve Schalchlin says ...

I also loved "The Sixth Sense." And I loved it just as much the second time around because it was like seeing a different movie, to see it through the eyes of the boy. But I thought "Signs" was one of the worst movies ever made by anyone. I laughed at it all the way through. "The Village" was even worse. I've lost faith that this guy ever had more than one good idea.

But it was one good idea. And he's managed to get people to buy tickets each succeeding time, hoping they'll see another.

comment #15

Alexander says ...

I think everything you guys are saying is correct. Shyamalan built his name on The Sixth Sense, plain and simple. Unless he does a gigantic genre switch--and, from several interviews recently, it doesn't sound like he has much interest in doing that, at least for a while--he isn't going to be recognized by the Academy like he was with Sixth Sense (which was nominated for Best Picture in a rather crowded field that year).

Obviously, the closest Shyamalan has come to getting lightning back in that bottle was Signs. Say what you want, but the film connected with the moviegoing public; the release date was perfect, the product, for many, was ideal in the sense of it being kind of "fun," etceteras. I would say Shyamalan's batting average with the public is just around .500 at this point, with Sixth Sense and Signs obviously being the films that really did well with the public and Unbreakable being the box office disappointment and The Village, while attracting many people, leaving a very sour taste in many mouths.

Lady in the Water looks like a kind of hodgepodge of many ideas/themes, etceteras I've seen before, but, it does have Paul G. as the lead, and this summer has been so painfully dead for the most part I'll probably be seeing it. I do agree that critics are ready to pounce again; these things are kind of cyclical, I guess.

comment #16

Dixon Steele says ...

There comes a time when some directors actually believe the hype and think they're geniuses.

It happened to the late, great Stanley Kubrick, and now it's happened to the far-lesser M. Night.

Not only has his films gotten progressively worse with each new one (along with his insisting in acting in them - ugh!). THE VILLAGE was embarassing. And look at the AMEX commercial. How self-reverant can you get?

It's official - MNS has jumped the shark!

P.S. BFE - you thought the twist in The Village was better than The Sixth Sense? Did you have a lobotomy lately?

comment #17

BFE says ...

Dixon Steele (is that your real name, or are you just a fan of In A Lonely Place?): "BFE - you thought the twist in The Village was better than The Sixth Sense? Did you have a lobotomy lately?"

Thanks for asking, but no, here's the difference between the two twists for me. I guessed both of them early on, in the first acts of their respective films. But knowing what was going to happen at the end of The Sixth Sense actively interfered with my enjoyment of the film, because it all seemed so thin, like an excuse to have that twist. There's no story there without that twist.

And while the twist in The Village negates the rest of the story, the story itself is still suspenseful. It can work on its own. I think the real reason people don't like the twist in The Village is because they want to believe all that supernatural-pseudo-religious mumbo-jumbo in the earlier films...whereas a cynical twist such as the one in The Village is much more pessimistic and dark. Just my $0.02.

comment #18

Dixon Steele says ...

BFE,

I too saw the "twist" in THE VILLAGE coming a mile away, which didn't help.

It also had one of the most annoying performances by Adrian Brody, as the Village Idiot, I've ever sat through (which he was paid $3 million for).

And I thought he was absolutely brilliant in THE PIANIST.

comment #19

christian says ...

i appreciate m.night's vision, but his self-reverence has gotta stop. whoring ads for amex was the worst. have a vision, use a credit card?

Post a Comment