comment #1

Richardson says ...

The over-under for Jeff's retraction is sixteen days.

comment #2

Rothchild says ...

Wow. You just... Wow. I have to go talk to my houseplant about this.

comment #3

quitstaringatme says ...

Wow that Zooey Deschenal looks cute.

Oh, sorry Jeff.

comment #4

Richardson says ...

"It scares, un-nerves and guilt-trips you simultaneously, and I can imagine some people -- young looking-for-entertainment types, I'm guessing -- not caring for this combination."

Jeff liked this movie just to spite those young whippersnappers. There's that X-factor malcontent attitude columnist we all love.

comment #5

berkguru says ...

it looks stupid, no thanks

comment #6

Goulet says ...

I agree 100% with Jeff. Not a perfect film, but as a "high-end B-movie", it works well enough. Critics who'll come gunning for this, pushing each other to throw the most vitriol, are assholes.

comment #7

BurmaShave says ...

Why couldn't he have just stuck with THE GREEN EFFECT? It's a dumb title too, but no one would have been giggling over it.

comment #8

Adonis says ...

"I'm such a non-conformist, that I'm not going to conform with you non-conformists"

Wow, Wells just Goth served us.

comment #9

MiraJeffAICN says ...

So much for that embargo, eh Jeff? No, in all seriousness, I'm glad you liked it, because what I've been hearing has not been encouraging. That said, Unbreakable is a great, great movie and while I liked Signs just fine, there's no way I prefer it to Unbreakable, but hey, to each his own. The question about The Happening is, how was Wahlberg? Because I thought he was miscast from the start in the role of a science teacher. Night should've reteamed with Adrien Brody. And as gorgeous as Zooey is, I have my doubts that she can handle this material as the lead. We'll see on opening night though, as I pass the throng of Hulk fanboys en route to see the latest from The Man Who Heard Voices.

comment #10

Marty Melville says ...

"Wow, Wells just Goth served us."

More to the point, he Gort served us.

I'd disagree that The Day The Earth Stood Stiil is not heavy-handed (if Wells is actually saying this)... I think Wise's movie, as much as I love it, is stodgy and heavy-handed... but endearingly, bleeding-heart-liberally, so... plus Herrmann's score and Gort himself delivers every bit of Klattu's "shape up or ship out" message with an undeniable pulp/sci-fi kick.

This actually has me intrigued to see The Happening (I liked both Sixth Sense and Unbreakable). But that title... yikes!

comment #11

Aladdin Sane says ...

Rothchild, I was totally waiting for a "just kidding" from Wells. I feel what you're feeling.

comment #12

Sax says ...

It's almost as good as Signs? That was possibly the worst movie I've ever seen. Aliens who CANNOT SURVIVE CONTACT WITH WATER come to invade a globe known locally among the other sun-orbiting bodies in our gossipy little solar system as THE WATER PLANET. An invincible alien is locked into someone's pantry. That would work. And then we spend the rest of the movie in claustrophobia world -- It's Independence Day shot in some hick's basement. The kid has asthma and his medicine is upstairs, in a house full of aliens? Does the directror use this great set-up for the nail-bioting edge of tour seat action sequence of the year? No, he decides to have Mel pray, instead. And lie the kid down on his back, the worst possible position for an asthma victim. Shaymalan's disregard for (or just iignorance of) ther basics of human behavior and the practicalities of human life astound and nauseate throughout. So if The Happening isnt quite up to that high standard, I'll give it a major pass.

comment #13

bdboudreaux says ...

"Aliens who CANNOT SURVIVE CONTACT WITH WATER come to invade a globe known locally among the other sun-orbiting bodies in our gossipy little solar system as THE WATER PLANE" - OH FOR FUCK'S SAKE - okay let's take it a little slow, because I'm sick of this shit. Signs has a HUGE, as in two mack trucks stacked on top of each other huge, religious under current to it. I'm guessing that there was probably no way of saying this without making it too over the top, but it wasn't tap water. Or ocean water. Or dog piss. It was water that had been touched by blessed or holy people. When the news reports on the tv mention that the weakness was first discovered, it was discovered where? The middle east. Who wants to take a bet that it was the sea of galilee or perhaps the red sea. Or any other body of water that some important person from biblical times dipped their big toe in. There are about oh a dozen times where it is pointed out that the little girl is miraculous, an angel even. So needless to say: She's got the touch. She's got the power. Ok Sax, got all that. See if you WATCH and LISTEN during the movie you usually find your questions answered. That's what I tell my six year old and it's good advice for you too.

B

comment #14

bradb says ...

Sax, if Signs is "possibly the worst movie [you've] ever seen" you must have a very small list of films you have seen. When people say something is the "worst they've ever seen" it always comes off as a knee-jerk reaction and pretty much hurts the rest of your argument. Especially if you are looking at a film down to the positions of an asthma victim. Now that is picking some nits.

comment #15

Arran says ...

To be fair to Sax, two good friends of mine - both film fans and not prone to hyperbole - have also called Signs one of the worst movies they'd ever seen. It's part of the reason I've still yet to see it.

Well, that and I didn't think it looked very good.

I will be seeing The Happening, though. The redband trailer sold me on it pretty well.

comment #16

pauly says ...

Jeff,

I'm surprised you thought Signs was a good movie...IT STINKS!...and I should have loved that movie because I love that kind of stuff (when it's good).

From the smart cute kid (which I'm convinced Night is basing on himself and has used in many of his movies) to putting himself in the movie giving away the solution on how to beat the aliens ("I don't think they like water"...but I have no clue why I think that), that movie sucked and there are many SIGNS that Nights ego is/was out of control.

...but who knows, maybe this one is better.

comment #17

Rich S. says ...

Haven't seen The Happening, so I can't speak with complete authority, but in The Day the Earth Stood Still, Klaatu doesn't kill a single sole. In fact, in implementing the plan referenced in the title, he goes out of his way to create exceptions (such as aircraft and emergency rooms) so no one will get hurt.

Gort kills a couple of soldiers when he figures out that Klatuu has been killed, but that's.

I'm also wondering. The Christ parallels were extremely overt in The Day the Earth Stood Still. Klaatu even called himself "Mr. Carpenter" when walking among us Earthlings. Violence towards Klaatu personally is a direct reflection of his message to the world at large. Is there a messianic figure offering redemption in The Happening?

Sounds to me like The Birds with a window of hope at the end. Is it Audrey II that delivers the message?

comment #18

Rich S. says ...

Sorry, that should be "a single soul."

comment #19

supertaster says ...

uh, yeah Sax...aliens visiting a planet filled with a substance poisonous to them is dumb..totally unbelievable...i guess that's why humans have never braved the crushing pressure of the oceans or the cold, lethal vacuum of space...

comment #20

pchu says ...

I will probably go see it on the weekend. This is my last shot for Night. Lady in the Water was just a bad idea.

comment #21

monsieur hire says ...

Jeff, I am shocked that you feel this way. I too saw the film and thought it was laughable, campy and unscary, and the enviro-stuff was straight out of 70s horror and just plain silly. There are scenes in this movie that get wild, unintentional laughs, like Wahlberg trying to reason with a tree, people trying to outrun the wind, a ridiculous double shooting on a porch and more. There is ZERO chemistry with Wahlberg and Deschanel and the scenes with Betty Buckley are frankly embarassing. This is near the bottom of Night's films, and it has no meance at all, no heart and a lame, silly ending. There is no sense of danger or wonder at all. We have seen ALL of this before in other films. He sets up a so-so premise then beats it to death with suicide after suicide, relying on gore like a man being mutilated by a lawnmower. This plays like a B-grade X-Files episode and does not hang together.

comment #22

actionman says ...

Sounds like reaction on this one will be mixed overall...

Still looking forward to seeing it...the cinematography looks great...

comment #23

pauly says ...

Is there a scene where Night shows up and says "I think the earth doesn't like us"?...and is there a cute precocious kid in the movie?

comment #24

Ogami Itto says ...

Jeff, I am shocked that you feel this way. I too saw the film and thought it was laughable, campy and unscary, and the enviro-stuff was straight out of 70s horror and just plain silly.

Campy 70s enviro-horror can be entertaining -- Day of the Animals, for example.

comment #25

MovieBob says ...

SPOILER WARNING

Night's problem for about two movies and (probably) counting now isn't his ego - that's ALWAYS been his problem, it just didn't really harm him until Village - it's that he seems to have lost the ability to distinguish between making a serious, meditative version of a standard genre story and merely sucking all the fun out of a standard genre story. Sense, Unbreakable and Signs are all really good "serious versions" of ghost, superhero and alien movies respectively; while Village and Lady are just dull, gloomy, pretentious versions of monster and fairytale movies. My early read is that "Happening" will be more of the same - just a REALLY drawn-out, no-fun version of Day of The Triffids or The Birds.

comment #26

berg says ...

Klaatu Barata Whoah ... this time M Night has a cameo that everyone misses, no he's not a tree. Hey Bill Bixby pops up in Hulk too. Anyway Happening, I really liked the greenhouse couple - the man reminded me of Timothy Carey with that weird stare ... the 9/11 imagery was stud

comment #27

Jeffrey Kunze says ...

monsieur hire: "....relying on gore like a man being mutilated by a lawnmower."

It's a tractor!!! Not a lawnmower. A fucking tractor!

And I'm not from middle America, I'm from Connecticut.

This is almost as bad as mistaking the cute prarie dogs as groundhogs in Indy 4!!

Jesus, where is the sophistication on this site?!

comment #28

Sax says ...

Bdbodreaux ...
your interpretation makes me hate this awful movie even more. I diidn't think that was possible. Do saints have their asthma cured by being laid flat on the floor? Was there holy water in the pantry? I'm fascinated.

comment #29

Richardson says ...

"aliens visiting a planet filled with a substance poisonous to them is dumb..totally unbelievable...i guess that's why humans have never braved the crushing pressure of the oceans or the cold, lethal vacuum of space..."

That might be a good point if the aliens were wearing protective suits to keep them from getting wet, or, indeed, had thought to bring ANY protection from water when coming to a planet where water can literally fall from the sky with little or no warning.

You know, like how humans do when entering deadly environments.

comment #30

monsieur hire says ...

"Campy 70s enviro-horror can be entertaining -- Day of the Animals, for example."

Ogami, yes I am fully aware and love Day of the Animals (and anything by William Girdler), Prophecy (sorry), Piranha and all the fun 70s toxic nature revenge films. However, this film is not in those B-movie leagues, as much as Night may try to backpeddle it there now that he knows he doesn't have a classy picture on his hands. This is one pretentious, silly and overwrought film. It overpromises and way underdelivers. Just try not laughing when Wahlberg and Buckley confront each other on the stairs. The dialogue is a hoot, and the delivery is better. There is no way this film is creepy in the least beyond its opening scene.

And Kuze, it is not exactly a tractor and it is on the lawn and has a blade. All of this is beside the point.

This film is nowhere near The Sixth Sense, Signs or Unbreakable. As much as I disliked The Village, it is certainly better than this.

comment #31

Arizona Joe says ...

If you look at that still of Marky Mark, girl and child, it's almost a cut-and-pasted scene from Signs in the farm house with different people.

I knew people were going to comment on that dumb title. It's a real anachronistic title, evoking images of the 1960s, the Supremes, Shindig, Hullabaloo, etc.

Heck, if they were going to use the title, they should have done a cover version of the song, a real dark, menacing treatment by some band like Soundgarden.

comment #32

Richardson says ...

Yeah, I've been hoping they use some version of "For What It's Worth" at some point in the movie too. I think the truly awesome way to use it would be to have the kid watching The Muppet Show at the beginning and use the clip of them performing that song... but that would be too cool and not pretentious for Night.

comment #33

Richardson says ...

"So much for that embargo, eh Jeff?"

He's not a film critic, he's a "X-factor malcontent attitude columnist" + "film lover/enthusaist".

BTW, MiraJeff, AICN firing you would actually up your credibility when you're talking about films if you dropped it from your name. Keeping it there is kind of sad, especially because, even when you still worked for them, it was sad.

comment #34

Rich S. says ...

"That might be a good point if the aliens were wearing protective suits to keep them from getting wet, or, indeed, had thought to bring ANY protection from water when coming to a planet where water can literally fall from the sky with little or no warning."

Interstellar flight, but no umbrellas?

comment #35

televisiontears says ...

Ahhh... the age old "aliens and water" argument. I never really understood it, but I hope it never ends.

I think most people fail to realize that Night doesn't owe the audience any kind of explanation about the aliens. The film is an intergalactic tale told on a human scale. The aliens are nothing more than a visual metaphor of Gibson's personal struggles, so the less specific the threat, the more it works.

If there had been some exposition explaining the aliens' strengths and weaknesses, where they came from and why they're here, it would have been a different film. I'm glad it's not.

Arguing about the water element is like watching Taxi Driver and arguing that if Travis wanted to kill all those people, he should've just bought a fully automatic assault rifle. It's trivial within the context of the film.

comment #36

DarthCorleone says ...

televisiontears>>

I strongly disagree. That is not a correct analogy.

Travis' journey makes perfect sense. He meets the gun fence through his colleagues. The fence pushes particular guns on Travis, and Travis likes those. After his assassination attempt is botched (for which his choice of weaponry makes sense - he only wanted to kill Palantine - not random innocents), his immediate impulse is to vent his violent frustration in some way and try to save Iris. It's not exactly a well-considered plan.

Regardless, Travis is coming unhinged; he's not entirely rational, and he's obviously suicidal.

Compare this to Signs, a movie in which the motivations of the aliens are discussed at length and in which we are given the final big revelatory moment accompanied by the swelling James Newton Howard score: pour the water on the alien! Pour the water on the alien!

One can't help but apply some measure of logic to this deus ex machina, *ESPECIALLY* when the director himself told us in the film that the aliens don't seem to like water and when we have the sound of a newscast telling us about the worldwide vanquishing of the aliens.

That said, I agree with you that it is a film on a personal scale, which is much more important than the aspect of the narrative related to the aliens and their logistics. I can just see how it might be considered sloppy and ridiculous.

Additionally, I am aware of the religious theorizing above; it's the first thing I point out to someone when they complain about the water, as it is a common complaint, and many viewers seem to miss the tie-in. Thus, I'm willing to give the movie more latitude than many viewers; I just found the whole last bit too hammy.

comment #37

supertaster says ...

steady Richardson, steady!! that type of libel is bound to get you banned by the free-thinking iconoclast J. Wells, a man who nurtures and cherishes diversity of opinion...

comment #38

supertaster says ...

Sax...you may not like Boudreaux's explanation, but you failed to respond to mine...assuming you agree that human's expose themselves to deadly environs all the time (deep in the ocean, out in space, etc), so there's really no issue with aliens doing the same (presuming you buy the premise of alien visitors to begin with)...

comment #39

televisiontears says ...

DarthCorleone - I concede that it was a shitty analogy, and I've always maintained that the water angle was a bit lazy. I just feel that the whole issue is blown way out of proportion. It's a small flaw, and since it came at the end of an otherwise stellar film, it seems the M. Night Haters Bandwagon latched on to it with rabid jaws and wouldn't let go.

I agree with almost everything you said, I'm just baffled as to why it became such an enormous issue for so many people

comment #40

cinemascopian says ...

it seems international exhibitors regard this one as DOA. "The Happening" is opening tomorrow in Israel, a day before the States, but in Tel Aviv it will roll out without critic screenings, almost zero billboards and is booked in the smallest cinema in the biggest multiplex, for only 2 shows on opening day, both of them early evening shows (the youngster hours, for a film classified as 16 here). Meaning, if I read the signs properly, that they know no one will show up, and they'll try to make sure it happens.

comment #41

Richardson says ...

"assuming you agree that human's expose themselves to deadly environs all the time (deep in the ocean, out in space, etc), so there's really no issue with aliens doing the same (presuming you buy the premise of alien visitors to begin with)"

Again, though, humans take precautions when exposing themselves to deadly environs. People aren't allowed to leave America for certain parts of the world without getting shots to cover every disease and virus they might get exposed to. They certainly don't go into the ocean depths or out into space without pressure suits to protect them against the things that are deadly. So it's not really comprable.

The aliens coming to this planet without any sort of protection against water is more akin to jumping out of an airplane without a parachute, or going into deep space with the ship's loading door open.

comment #42

Richardson says ...

And, for whatever it's worth, my only real beef with the deus ex machina ending of 'Signs' is that that obvious deus ex machina is used as proof to Mel Gibson that God really does exist. I always find it lazy when a storyteller creates elements within their story that thus prove that the characters and story had a creator.

comment #43

George Prager says ...

M. Night Shyamalan movies are gay.

comment #44

Sax says ...

Supertaster -- Richardson said it better than I could. Thanks!

comment #45

frankbooth says ...

And George Prager said it better than I could. Thanks!

comment #46

KeithNYC says ...

"The basic idea is what if nature, slowly dying from the greenhouse gases and all the other abuses and pollutants catalogued by Al Gore in An Inconvenient Truth, decided to get rid of us? Or at least sound a warning by getting rid of a few thousand random souls?"

I want to keep an open mind about this film but that just sounds silly.

and "Signs" was horrible.

comment #47

supertaster says ...

"The aliens coming to this planet without any sort of protection against water is more akin to jumping out of an airplane without a parachute, or going into deep space with the ship's loading door open."

....or going out on a crab boat in the bering sea without a life vest on? or working thousands of feet deep in a mine for thirty grand a year with no way out except for a 3-ft wide shaft? or scaling a skyscraper without a harness? or standing next to an erupting volcano with flowing lava without, well fuck, i don't know what protects you from that...

...people putting themselves at risk without any protection is more akin to the things i mentioned than you....

...pointless debate richie, fun though...until Wells catches a whiff of my scent and bans me again...

comment #48

moviemaniac2002 says ...

If anyone wants a damn good Mother-Earth-Has-Had-It-Up-To-Here-And-She's-Out-To-Kick-Ass
creepfest, try the "The Last Winter". Reminded
me a lot of Carpenter's "The Thing" (a motley
crew in a frozen outpost) only they're not facing
aliens, but nothing less than the wrath of
Big Green Momma herself. (After seeing it, you
could debate endlessly about whether the
filmmakers were wise in their "Curse Of The
Demon"-type ending, dropping subtlety altogether
and resorting to just-in-case-you-don't-get-it CGI.)

comment #49

Richardson says ...

"or working thousands of feet deep in a mine for thirty grand a year with no way out except for a 3-ft wide shaft?"

You win. 'Signs' is a complex anti-capitalist message about poor alien soldiers risking their life to invade a planet without the neccessary protective equipment (making it oddly prescient as well, I suppose), and it is neither sloppy storytelling nor random nor lazy at all to have water as the ultimate solution to the problem.

comment #50

hiviper says ...

I'll take it on your authority, sweetie

comment #51

Rosebudsthesled says ...

THE HAPPENING=best comedy of the year. Went to a USC screening where they just HOWLED with laughter. At the end when the virus begins to hit Paris, somebody shouted out "Sequel!"