list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around The Sixth Sense on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/The_Sixth_Sense/134478/default.aspx Title: The Sixth Sense
Year: 1999
Director: M. Night Shyamalan
Plot: In this tense tale of psychological terror, Dr. Malcolm Crowe (Bruce Willis) is a child psychologist whose new patient has a problem far outside his usual area of expertise. Cole Sear (Haley Joel Osment) is six-years-old and claims to see the spirits of dead people all around him. It seems that Cole has psychic powers and can channel the ghosts of those who were troubled. Cole doesn't understand his powers, and he has little control over them; he's constantly terrified by what he sees, and Dr. Crowe is the only one with whom he feels he can share this secret. However, as the doctor digs deeper into Cole's strange powers, it leads to strange and unexpected consequences for both of them. M. Night Shyamalan, who wrote and directed the film, has a small role as Dr. Hill. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 68
Number of Lists: 107
Number of blog posts: 13
Number of discussion threads: 17
SpoutRating: 4
]]>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 07:55:20 GMTThe Sixth Sense1999M. Night ShyamalanIn this tense tale of psychological terror, Dr. Malcolm Crowe (<a href="/players/P____76618/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Bruce Willis</a>) is a child psychologist whose new patient has a problem far outside his usual area of expertise. Cole Sear (<a href="/players/P___215938/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Haley Joel Osment</a>) is six-years-old and claims to see the spirits of dead people all around him. It seems that Cole has psychic powers and can channel the ghosts of those who were troubled. Cole doesn't understand his powers, and he has little control over them; he's constantly terrified by what he sees, and Dr. Crowe is the only one with whom he feels he can share this secret. However, as the doctor digs deeper into Cole's strange powers, it leads to strange and unexpected consequences for both of them. M. Night Shyamalan, who wrote and directed the film, has a small role as Dr. Hill. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide68Tag Target (>10)10713174http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t16790wc25o.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/The_Sixth_Sense/134478/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/the_mow/archive/2009/5/7/42163.aspx Post By: The_MOW
Post To: The_MOW Blog
Post Date: 5/7/2009 9:46:45 PM
Body: "Dr. Malcolm Crowe" (Bruce Willis), a psychatrist shot months ago by a former patient who broke into his house, is coming to the aid of a disturbed child (Haley Joel Osment). His case is not unique at first, but "Dr. Crowe" slowly brings out what has been eating at the kid -- the kid has the ability to talk with people who died, but have not crossed over. In layman's terms, the young boy is a psychic. "Dr. Crowe" begins to look at the case of the man who shot him months ago, and discovers some similarities with his current. Now, the psychiatrist must become a spirit guide until the young boy is comfortable with his situation. However, the boy helps him out with an unusual problem he has. First of all, do you know how hard it is to write a synopsis without giving any clues to a movie that has hidden clues pointing to the true nature of a main character? The movie is pretty slow and has, in my opinion, some quite tame scares throughout. In fact, this movie isn't really a horror, but a mystery that the audience is given blatant clues that don't seem to be clues at the time they appear. These clues, specifically one in particular, are hidden nicely, but they are shown to the audience. Willis and Osment put forth strong performances. Osment is pretty freaky in the scenes where the audience is not shown the ghosts who are speaking with him. A really spooky performance is former New Kids On The Block singer Donnie Wahlber, who you won't recognize until you see his name in the closing credits. Other performers in this movie also has good performances, but are not seen much on screen or their character is not well developed. The music is pretty typical for movies. It is used to build tension or to help with scaring you. Because I have some knowledge in television production, I know that music can be used to help build tension, so the music clues me in that something is going to happen before it does. The special effects are mostly make-up on the actors who portray the ghosts. Some are a bit shocking, but there's nothing too over the top. M. Night Shamalan (I'm pretty sure I butchered that name) must have channeled the spirit of Alfred Hitchcock, because this has the feel of the movies made by the "Master of Suspense". He expertly mixed in the clues to the true nature of one of the characters, which I won't reveal because it might just tell you the surprise twist. I would have to say to put this as a strong second choice on the "Must See" list the next time you go to your local video rental place or log onto Netflix.
]]>Fri, 08 May 2009 01:46:45 GMTThe_MOWThe_MOW Blog5/7/2009 9:46:45 PM"Dr. Malcolm Crowe" (Bruce Willis), a psychatrist shot months ago by a former patient who broke into his house, is coming to the aid of a disturbed child (Haley Joel Osment). His case is not unique at first, but "Dr. Crowe" slowly brings out what has been eating at the kid -- the kid has the ability to talk with people who died, but have not crossed over. In layman's terms, the young boy is a psychic. "Dr. Crowe" begins to look at the case of the man who shot him months ago, and discovers some similarities with his current. Now, the psychiatrist must become a spirit guide until the young boy is comfortable with his situation. However, the boy helps him out with an unusual problem he has. First of all, do you know how hard it is to write a synopsis without giving any clues to a movie that has hidden clues pointing to the true nature of a main character? The movie is pretty slow and has, in my opinion, some quite tame scares throughout. In fact, this movie isn't really a horror, but a mystery that the audience is given blatant clues that don't seem to be clues at the time they appear. These clues, specifically one in particular, are hidden nicely, but they are shown to the audience. Willis and Osment put forth strong performances. Osment is pretty freaky in the scenes where the audience is not shown the ghosts who are speaking with him. A really spooky performance is former New Kids On The Block singer Donnie Wahlber, who you won't recognize until you see his name in the closing credits. Other performers in this movie also has good performances, but are not seen much on screen or their character is not well developed. The music is pretty typical for movies. It is used to build tension or to help with scaring you. Because I have some knowledge in television production, I know that music can be used to help build tension, so the music clues me in that something is going to happen before it does. The special effects are mostly make-up on the actors who portray the ghosts. Some are a bit shocking, but there's nothing too over the top. M. Night Shamalan (I'm pretty sure I butchered that name) must have channeled the spirit of Alfred Hitchcock, because this has the feel of the movies made by the "Master of Suspense". He expertly mixed in the clues to the true nature of one of the characters, which I won't reveal because it might just tell you the surprise twist. I would have to say to put this as a strong second choice on the "Must See" list the next time you go to your local video rental place or log onto Netflix. http://www.spout.com/groups/HORROR_MOVIES_101/Re_Top_25_Horror_Films_of_the_Modern_Era/222/38907/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: mciocco
Post To: HORROR MOVIES 101
Post Date: 12/28/2008 9:58:27 PM
Body: I'm a little surprised to see the Descent that high, but then, I don't really object to it either. I don't object to Blair Witch that high either. It's clearly been an influential film, and I personally like it a lot. I do think it's kinda strange to see The Ring instead of Ringu, which I still think is the superior film. The Mist seems a little high as well. Fine film, but not better than some of the others on the list... Dog Soldiers is a fine film, but there are some other deserving films that should probably make the list. And I agree about Eyes Wide Shut - not a movie I ever considered horror, though I guess it gets a bit tense there... Some stuff not on the list that I might have contributed: Jacob's Ladder, High Tension (personally, liked this a lot more than Inside, though they're both flawed films), Slither, In the Mouth of Madness, and Grindhouse (full double-feature experience!). Some others I'd consider, but am not sure about: Candyman, A Tale of Two Sisters, Evil Aliens, The Sixth Sense, and I'm sure I'm forgetting a hundred others.
]]>Mon, 29 Dec 2008 02:58:27 GMTmcioccoHORROR MOVIES 10112/28/2008 9:58:27 PMI'm a little surprised to see the Descent that high, but then, I don't really object to it either. I don't object to Blair Witch that high either. It's clearly been an influential film, and I personally like it a lot. I do think it's kinda strange to see The Ring instead of Ringu, which I still think is the superior film. The Mist seems a little high as well. Fine film, but not better than some of the others on the list... Dog Soldiers is a fine film, but there are some other deserving films that should probably make the list. And I agree about Eyes Wide Shut - not a movie I ever considered horror, though I guess it gets a bit tense there... Some stuff not on the list that I might have contributed: Jacob's Ladder, High Tension (personally, liked this a lot more than Inside, though they're both flawed films), Slither, In the Mouth of Madness, and Grindhouse (full double-feature experience!). Some others I'd consider, but am not sure about: Candyman, A Tale of Two Sisters, Evil Aliens, The Sixth Sense, and I'm sure I'm forgetting a hundred others. http://www.spout.com/groups/HORROR_MOVIES_101/Re_M_Night_Shyamalan_Relevant_Talent_or_Played_O/222/37874/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: GradysGhost
Post To: HORROR MOVIES 101
Post Date: 12/2/2008 11:16:22 PM
Body: [quote user="indieabby88"] I don't think there's much to think about here, in my opinion. Shyamalan (or as my mother likes to call him, "shyamalama-ding-dong") had already outstayed his welcome when "Lady in the Water" came out (anyone else see the lame accompanying picture book?), and "The Happening" was just a joke. It seems this guy thinks he's the next great director--I guess all that buzz about Hitchcock that came out around "The Sixth Sense" went to his head about as fast as a hit of heroin--and, actually, I think this may be the case. However, I wouldn't compare him to Hitchcock. Not in the least. If anything, this guy is a George Lucas. He's got concepts, yes, as well as a good visual sense. But can he write? No. Can he accept the fact that he can't write? No. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. [/quote] Abby, I couldn't agree more. I would add that his "style" is self-replicating. He doesn't bother exploring, only allows himself to keep doing the same damn thing he did last time. But he's running out of ideas. Regarding his plot twists, the fact that it has become a trademark, the fact that we as the audience expect them to happen, give an overtone of condescension. It's like he's holding it over our heads that he knows something we don't, and it's gotten to the point where even watching a trailer for a Shyamalan movie makes you feel like you're stupid for not getting the twist. By extension, if you don't like the movie, then you just don't "get" it. This makes his movies (which are pretty difficult to like to begin with) even harder to enjoy. That and the gaping plot holes. [obligatory]Yes, we're aliens who are allergic to water, and it's quite likely that we're only here on Earth to consume its resources because we've already consumed all of our own, so we chose to come to this planet whose most abundant resource is water, so that we could die naturally just standing around in humidity.[/obligatory] In brief, Shyamalan's a hack, always has been, always will be. None of his movies have blown me away just yet (though his first two popular ones were bearable), and I would be flat-out stunned if any future movie of his ever did.
]]>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 04:16:22 GMTGradysGhostHORROR MOVIES 10112/2/2008 11:16:22 PM[quote user="indieabby88"] I don't think there's much to think about here, in my opinion. Shyamalan (or as my mother likes to call him, "shyamalama-ding-dong") had already outstayed his welcome when "Lady in the Water" came out (anyone else see the lame accompanying picture book?), and "The Happening" was just a joke. It seems this guy thinks he's the next great director--I guess all that buzz about Hitchcock that came out around "The Sixth Sense" went to his head about as fast as a hit of heroin--and, actually, I think this may be the case. However, I wouldn't compare him to Hitchcock. Not in the least. If anything, this guy is a George Lucas. He's got concepts, yes, as well as a good visual sense. But can he write? No. Can he accept the fact that he can't write? No. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. [/quote] Abby, I couldn't agree more. I would add that his "style" is self-replicating. He doesn't bother exploring, only allows himself to keep doing the same damn thing he did last time. But he's running out of ideas. Regarding his plot twists, the fact that it has become a trademark, the fact that we as the audience expect them to happen, give an overtone of condescension. It's like he's holding it over our heads that he knows something we don't, and it's gotten to the point where even watching a trailer for a Shyamalan movie makes you feel like you're stupid for not getting the twist. By extension, if you don't like the movie, then you just don't "get" it. This makes his movies (which are pretty difficult to like to begin with) even harder to enjoy. That and the gaping plot holes. [obligatory]Yes, we're aliens who are allergic to water, and it's quite likely that we're only here on Earth to consume its resources because we've already consumed all of our own, so we chose to come to this planet whose most abundant resource is water, so that we could die naturally just standing around in humidity.[/obligatory] In brief, Shyamalan's a hack, always has been, always will be. None of his movies have blown me away just yet (though his first two popular ones were bearable), and I would be flat-out stunned if any future movie of his ever did. http://www.spout.com/groups/HORROR_MOVIES_101/Re_M_Night_Shyamalan_Relevant_Talent_or_Played_O/222/37090/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: indieabby88
Post To: HORROR MOVIES 101
Post Date: 11/7/2008 8:08:27 PM
Body: I don't think there's much to think about here, in my opinion. Shyamalan (or as my mother likes to call him, "shyamalama-ding-dong") had already outstayed his welcome when "Lady in the Water" came out (anyone else see the lame accompanying picture book?), and "The Happening" was just a joke. It seems this guy thinks he's the next great director--I guess all that buzz about Hitchcock that came out around "The Sixth Sense" went to his head about as fast as a hit of heroin--and, actually, I think this may be the case. However, I wouldn't compare him to Hitchcock. Not in the least. If anything, this guy is a George Lucas. He's got concepts, yes, as well as a good visual sense. But can he write? No. Can he accept the fact that he can't write? No. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
]]>Sat, 08 Nov 2008 01:08:27 GMTindieabby88HORROR MOVIES 10111/7/2008 8:08:27 PMI don't think there's much to think about here, in my opinion. Shyamalan (or as my mother likes to call him, "shyamalama-ding-dong") had already outstayed his welcome when "Lady in the Water" came out (anyone else see the lame accompanying picture book?), and "The Happening" was just a joke. It seems this guy thinks he's the next great director--I guess all that buzz about Hitchcock that came out around "The Sixth Sense" went to his head about as fast as a hit of heroin--and, actually, I think this may be the case. However, I wouldn't compare him to Hitchcock. Not in the least. If anything, this guy is a George Lucas. He's got concepts, yes, as well as a good visual sense. But can he write? No. Can he accept the fact that he can't write? No. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. http://www.spout.com/groups/HORROR_MOVIES_101/Re_M_Night_Shyamalan_Relevant_Talent_or_Played_O/222/37086/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Dr_Gor
Post To: HORROR MOVIES 101
Post Date: 11/7/2008 7:28:16 PM
Body: I liked Signs a lot and The Sixth Sense wasn't that bad. The Village was pretty creepy but ENTIRELY predictable! I saw that ending coming from about 100 miles away! I have yet to see "Lady In The Water"... or "The Happenning" ...
]]>Sat, 08 Nov 2008 00:28:16 GMTDr_GorHORROR MOVIES 10111/7/2008 7:28:16 PM I liked Signs a lot and The Sixth Sense wasn't that bad. The Village was pretty creepy but ENTIRELY predictable! I saw that ending coming from about 100 miles away! I have yet to see "Lady In The Water"... or "The Happenning" ... http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/11/6/37036.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 11/6/2008 5:01:07 PM
Body: While watching Zack and Miri Make a Porno, it is possible to occasionally forget that you are watching a Kevin Smith movie. Mainly because he doesn’t show up in the film, a rare and appreciated move for the guy who has played “Silent Bob” in 6 out of the 8 theatrical releases he’s directed. Then there’s the cast that is involved, which makes Z&M seem like the offspring of Judd Apatow and John Waters. But there are a number of things that do make it clearly a Smith joint, such as the obligatory employment of Jason Mewes — in the role he was born to play, even moreso than “Jay” — and the potentially pitying use of Jeff Anderson, who may have been the only actor to agree to receiving that accidental Hot Carl. And then there’s the most recognizable element: Smith’s inability let the poop jokes go in order to concentrate on his characters, and the relationships between them. It’s the filmmaker’s Achilles heel, and it’s one of five we at SpoutBlog have noticed are holding back the esteem of five would-be better directors. Director: Kevin Smith Achilles Heel: Interest in sex and shit over character and story Contrast often creates comedy, and in Z&M Smith acquires some of his best, most shock-inspired laughs when two significantly saccharine moments are interrupted by some incredibly foul scenarios. But despite the comedic benefit of pushing the contrived rom-com plot points to the back burner in favor of scat and scrotum, Smith proves that he doesn’t really care about what is going on with his characters, and so neither may his audience. The irony is that one of the major themes in Z&M is the triumph of love over meaningless sex, yet Smith doesn’t love his characters; he simply uses them as tools for his tasteless jokes and gags. And he’s been doing this since the beginning, though he has made two distinct attempts at giving more attention to characters than crudeness (Chasing Amy; Jersey Girl), which resulted in differing effectiveness. After eight features, it seems to actually be best for him to continue concentrating on the sex and shit and leave all his need to be sweet behind. Unfortunately, he’s too nice a guy to go completely balls out (like his friend Mewes), and anyway if he left all care for his characters behind, he’ll just seem like a second-rate John Waters. Director: Michael Moore Achilles Heel: Self-satisfying need to be comedic and important When Michael Moore began making documentaries, his brand of first-person, subjective non-fiction narrative was fresh and satisfying as far as the subject matter of Roger & Me is concerned. And his comedic touch was much appreciated, because he seemed more humorist than activist. But as he kept expanding his scope to more objective issues that are more important or significant to his audience, and as he seemed to become more interested in changing the world, he should have put the jokes up on the shelf, to some extent anyway. Compared to something like The Daily Show, Moore’s films are more intent on presenting an argument than comedy, and they’re sold as more documentary than The Daily Show is sold as actual news. Therefore, Moore should make up his mind. He’s good at humor, and he’s also good at serious documentary — look at a lot of the stuff in Bowling for Columbine in which Moore’s need for self-importance is pulled back. He can keep on mixing the two together, but he’s not going to win any arguments when he’s twisting facts for the benefit of a gag. Director: M. Night Shyamalan Achilles Heel: Last-minute reveals There’s nothing wrong with twist endings, or twists in general. But the way Shyamalan works them, they come off as punch lines to really long jokes. And most of the time, such as with Signs, The Village and The Happening, the whole movie ends up a joke (in the bad sense) in retrospect after knowing. Even The Sixth Sense, which does still have its supporters (and its Oscar nomination clout), is difficult to rewatch once you’re conscious of how it ends. Shyamalan’s best film, Unbreakable, disappointed many for having a relatively anticlimactic ending, but that’s because the twist wasn’t as much of a reveal as it was a logical direction for the story. Shyamalan should go back to that sort of reveal while also learning that a story (and movie) should be more about the road than the destination. Director: Cameron Crowe Achilles Heel: Writing manic, pixie dream girls as female leads Watching a film by Cameron Crowe, it’s possible to wonder just how he sees his own leading lady, rocker Nancy Wilson. Is she a dumb, obnoxiously flaky girl, like most of the female leads in his movies? Does she say cute but idiotic things like “We peaked on the phone,” “You had me at hello,” and “I’ll tell you in another life, when we are both cats”? I doubt she’s anything like those female characters from Elizabethtown, Jerry Maguire and Vanilla Sky, because otherwise Crowe wouldn’t have been married to her for 22 years. He would have realized after a week that she’s only exciting from a distance, or for as long as an interesting story arc that will later be nestled into one’s past, because she’s too insane, too desperate, too irritating, and not dependable enough to stick with. It might be interesting to see a sequel to any one of Crowe’s films, because it’s hard to believe any of the couples he’s written have lasted long past the credits. Director: Uwe Boll Achilles Heel: Doesn’t care what anybody thinks of his movies It’s understandable that true artists don’t need to please anyone but themselves. But even Boll would likely agree that he’s no artist. So, then is he an entertainer? Nope, he’s not that either, because he clearly isn’t interested in pleasing his audience with entertaining movies. It’s doubtful that Boll could be a good let alone great filmmaker if he started listening to his critics and improved on his flaws. However, by learning from his mistakes he could at least make action movies that could pass with the standard of Hollywood fare these days. Maybe that’s not what he wants. It would surely keep him out of the public consciousness to no longer be “the worst living filmmaker in the world.” But one day the money is going to run out for his brand of film production, and if he truly wants to be a movie director, he’ll have to eventually display some kind of talent for the work. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 22:01:07 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com11/6/2008 5:01:07 PMWhile watching Zack and Miri Make a Porno, it is possible to occasionally forget that you are watching a Kevin Smith movie. Mainly because he doesn’t show up in the film, a rare and appreciated move for the guy who has played “Silent Bob” in 6 out of the 8 theatrical releases he’s directed. Then there’s the cast that is involved, which makes Z&M seem like the offspring of Judd Apatow and John Waters. But there are a number of things that do make it clearly a Smith joint, such as the obligatory employment of Jason Mewes — in the role he was born to play, even moreso than “Jay” — and the potentially pitying use of Jeff Anderson, who may have been the only actor to agree to receiving that accidental Hot Carl. And then there’s the most recognizable element: Smith’s inability let the poop jokes go in order to concentrate on his characters, and the relationships between them. It’s the filmmaker’s Achilles heel, and it’s one of five we at SpoutBlog have noticed are holding back the esteem of five would-be better directors. Director: Kevin Smith Achilles Heel: Interest in sex and shit over character and story Contrast often creates comedy, and in Z&M Smith acquires some of his best, most shock-inspired laughs when two significantly saccharine moments are interrupted by some incredibly foul scenarios. But despite the comedic benefit of pushing the contrived rom-com plot points to the back burner in favor of scat and scrotum, Smith proves that he doesn’t really care about what is going on with his characters, and so neither may his audience. The irony is that one of the major themes in Z&M is the triumph of love over meaningless sex, yet Smith doesn’t love his characters; he simply uses them as tools for his tasteless jokes and gags. And he’s been doing this since the beginning, though he has made two distinct attempts at giving more attention to characters than crudeness (Chasing Amy; Jersey Girl), which resulted in differing effectiveness. After eight features, it seems to actually be best for him to continue concentrating on the sex and shit and leave all his need to be sweet behind. Unfortunately, he’s too nice a guy to go completely balls out (like his friend Mewes), and anyway if he left all care for his characters behind, he’ll just seem like a second-rate John Waters. Director: Michael Moore Achilles Heel: Self-satisfying need to be comedic and important When Michael Moore began making documentaries, his brand of first-person, subjective non-fiction narrative was fresh and satisfying as far as the subject matter of Roger & Me is concerned. And his comedic touch was much appreciated, because he seemed more humorist than activist. But as he kept expanding his scope to more objective issues that are more important or significant to his audience, and as he seemed to become more interested in changing the world, he should have put the jokes up on the shelf, to some extent anyway. Compared to something like The Daily Show, Moore’s films are more intent on presenting an argument than comedy, and they’re sold as more documentary than The Daily Show is sold as actual news. Therefore, Moore should make up his mind. He’s good at humor, and he’s also good at serious documentary — look at a lot of the stuff in Bowling for Columbine in which Moore’s need for self-importance is pulled back. He can keep on mixing the two together, but he’s not going to win any arguments when he’s twisting facts for the benefit of a gag. Director: M. Night Shyamalan Achilles Heel: Last-minute reveals There’s nothing wrong with twist endings, or twists in general. But the way Shyamalan works them, they come off as punch lines to really long jokes. And most of the time, such as with Signs, The Village and The Happening, the whole movie ends up a joke (in the bad sense) in retrospect after knowing. Even The Sixth Sense, which does still have its supporters (and its Oscar nomination clout), is difficult to rewatch once you’re conscious of how it ends. Shyamalan’s best film, Unbreakable, disappointed many for having a relatively anticlimactic ending, but that’s because the twist wasn’t as much of a reveal as it was a logical direction for the story. Shyamalan should go back to that sort of reveal while also learning that a story (and movie) should be more about the road than the destination. Director: Cameron Crowe Achilles Heel: Writing manic, pixie dream girls as female leads Watching a film by Cameron Crowe, it’s possible to wonder just how he sees his own leading lady, rocker Nancy Wilson. Is she a dumb, obnoxiously flaky girl, like most of the female leads in his movies? Does she say cute but idiotic things like “We peaked on the phone,” “You had me at hello,” and “I’ll tell you in another life, when we are both cats”? I doubt she’s anything like those female characters from Elizabethtown, Jerry Maguire and Vanilla Sky, because otherwise Crowe wouldn’t have been married to her for 22 years. He would have realized after a week that she’s only exciting from a distance, or for as long as an interesting story arc that will later be nestled into one’s past, because she’s too insane, too desperate, too irritating, and not dependable enough to stick with. It might be interesting to see a sequel to any one of Crowe’s films, because it’s hard to believe any of the couples he’s written have lasted long past the credits. Director: Uwe Boll Achilles Heel: Doesn’t care what anybody thinks of his movies It’s understandable that true artists don’t need to please anyone but themselves. But even Boll would likely agree that he’s no artist. So, then is he an entertainer? Nope, he’s not that either, because he clearly isn’t interested in pleasing his audience with entertaining movies. It’s doubtful that Boll could be a good let alone great filmmaker if he started listening to his critics and improved on his flaws. However, by learning from his mistakes he could at least make action movies that could pass with the standard of Hollywood fare these days. Maybe that’s not what he wants. It would surely keep him out of the public consciousness to no longer be “the worst living filmmaker in the world.” But one day the money is going to run out for his brand of film production, and if he truly wants to be a movie director, he’ll have to eventually display some kind of talent for the work. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/groups/HORROR_MOVIES_101/M_Night_Shyamalan_Relevant_Talent_or_Played_Out/222/37021/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Phantasma-gore-ia
Post To: HORROR MOVIES 101
Post Date: 11/6/2008 12:37:36 PM
Body: After The Sixth Sense, it seems to me that M. Night Shyamalan's popularity star has been progressively and steadily dimming. Unbreakable and Signs and were greeted well but, reception to The Village was notably acrid and vicious, Lady in the Water was largely balked at and now The Happening has been in many viewer's crosshairs. Is M. Night Shayamalan a voice still worth listening to with valuable contemporary insight or is he a antiquated relic who needs to be put out to pasture?
]]>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 17:37:36 GMTPhantasma-gore-iaHORROR MOVIES 10111/6/2008 12:37:36 PMAfter The Sixth Sense, it seems to me that M. Night Shyamalan's popularity star has been progressively and steadily dimming. Unbreakable and Signs and were greeted well but, reception to The Village was notably acrid and vicious, Lady in the Water was largely balked at and now The Happening has been in many viewer's crosshairs. Is M. Night Shayamalan a voice still worth listening to with valuable contemporary insight or is he a antiquated relic who needs to be put out to pasture? http://www.spout.com/groups/HORROR_MOVIES_101/Re_M_Night_Shayamalan_Relevant_Talent_or_Played/222/36999/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: divinemsjunebug
Post To: HORROR MOVIES 101
Post Date: 11/5/2008 3:07:09 PM
Body: It's been so hit and miss with him, mostly misses lately. I thought Lady in the Water was atrocious but my best friend who likes a lot of those magical etheral movies just loved it. Now in the Happening I couldn't believe how HORRIBLE the acting was, which I have to blame on the direction - you know, let's be wide eyed and disbelieving and talk really slow throughout the movie...BUT I have to say that I liked a lot of individual scenes in the movie. There were parts of it that were really cool, the ending was a bit cheesey but I thought overall it wasn't too bad. I am going to be the optimist here and say that he has a couple more really good films left in him but I am hoping he will surprise us again with something different. So we will see. I think they are letting him still do what he wants because even when the movies are "bad" they still bring in quite a bit of money. June [quote user="Phantasma-gore-ia"] After The Sixth Sense, it seems to me that M. Night Shayamalan's popularity star has been progressively and steadily dimming. Unbreakable and Signs and were greeted well but, reception to The Village was notably acrid and vicious, Lady in the Water was largely balked at and now The Happening has been in many viewer's crosshairs. Is M. Night Shayamalan a voice still worth listening to with valuable contemporary insight or is he a antiquated relic who needs to be put out to pasture? [/quote]
]]>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 20:07:09 GMTdivinemsjunebugHORROR MOVIES 10111/5/2008 3:07:09 PMIt's been so hit and miss with him, mostly misses lately. I thought Lady in the Water was atrocious but my best friend who likes a lot of those magical etheral movies just loved it. Now in the Happening I couldn't believe how HORRIBLE the acting was, which I have to blame on the direction - you know, let's be wide eyed and disbelieving and talk really slow throughout the movie...BUT I have to say that I liked a lot of individual scenes in the movie. There were parts of it that were really cool, the ending was a bit cheesey but I thought overall it wasn't too bad. I am going to be the optimist here and say that he has a couple more really good films left in him but I am hoping he will surprise us again with something different. So we will see. I think they are letting him still do what he wants because even when the movies are "bad" they still bring in quite a bit of money. June [quote user="Phantasma-gore-ia"] After The Sixth Sense, it seems to me that M. Night Shayamalan's popularity star has been progressively and steadily dimming. Unbreakable and Signs and were greeted well but, reception to The Village was notably acrid and vicious, Lady in the Water was largely balked at and now The Happening has been in many viewer's crosshairs. Is M. Night Shayamalan a voice still worth listening to with valuable contemporary insight or is he a antiquated relic who needs to be put out to pasture? [/quote] http://www.spout.com/groups/HORROR_MOVIES_101/Re_M_Night_Shayamalan_Relevant_Talent_or_Played/222/36984/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: seely
Post To: HORROR MOVIES 101
Post Date: 11/5/2008 11:17:22 AM
Body: I feel like Shammy has been living in the wake of popularity generated by The Sixth Sense, which was a legitimately good film. Signs was well greeted, but I've been noticing that there has been a lot of fallout since it was initially released, with a lot of spoofing and derision of the film's many plot flaw, which were initially glossed over. Unbreakable was pretty good, at least a B- effort, so I feel like that helped keep up the Sixth Sense hype factor as well. I recently saw Lady in the Water and I have to say, it was awful. The storyline was terrible, the acting was terrible, there was no development and it was one of the cheesiest 'thriller/suspense' films I have ever seen--apologies to anyone who may have liked it, but it sucked. Shammy should never, ever be allowed to be in one of his own films again. Shammy's films have become very formulaic, with some big reveal/twist that you KNOW is coming. Once you get the Shammy formula down, you sit anticipating the big plot twist, and its no longer fun. I will confess to having not seen his latest, and The Village, but having seen the rest of his films--I don't feel like I really need to. [quote user="Phantasma-gore-ia"] After The Sixth Sense, it seems to me that M. Night Shayamalan's popularity star has been progressively and steadily dimming. Unbreakable and Signs and were greeted well but, reception to The Village was notably acrid and vicious, Lady in the Water was largely balked at and now The Happening has been in many viewer's crosshairs. Is M. Night Shayamalan a voice still worth listening to with valuable contemporary insight or is he a antiquated relic who needs to be put out to pasture? [/quote]
]]>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 16:17:22 GMTseelyHORROR MOVIES 10111/5/2008 11:17:22 AMI feel like Shammy has been living in the wake of popularity generated by The Sixth Sense, which was a legitimately good film. Signs was well greeted, but I've been noticing that there has been a lot of fallout since it was initially released, with a lot of spoofing and derision of the film's many plot flaw, which were initially glossed over. Unbreakable was pretty good, at least a B- effort, so I feel like that helped keep up the Sixth Sense hype factor as well. I recently saw Lady in the Water and I have to say, it was awful. The storyline was terrible, the acting was terrible, there was no development and it was one of the cheesiest 'thriller/suspense' films I have ever seen--apologies to anyone who may have liked it, but it sucked. Shammy should never, ever be allowed to be in one of his own films again. Shammy's films have become very formulaic, with some big reveal/twist that you KNOW is coming. Once you get the Shammy formula down, you sit anticipating the big plot twist, and its no longer fun. I will confess to having not seen his latest, and The Village, but having seen the rest of his films--I don't feel like I really need to. [quote user="Phantasma-gore-ia"] After The Sixth Sense, it seems to me that M. Night Shayamalan's popularity star has been progressively and steadily dimming. Unbreakable and Signs and were greeted well but, reception to The Village was notably acrid and vicious, Lady in the Water was largely balked at and now The Happening has been in many viewer's crosshairs. Is M. Night Shayamalan a voice still worth listening to with valuable contemporary insight or is he a antiquated relic who needs to be put out to pasture? [/quote] http://www.spout.com/groups/HORROR_MOVIES_101/M_Night_Shyamalan_Relevant_Talent_or_Played_Out/222/36975/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Phantasma-gore-ia
Post To: HORROR MOVIES 101
Post Date: 11/4/2008 8:40:15 PM
Body: After The Sixth Sense, it seems to me that M. Night Shyamalan's popularity star has been progressively and steadily dimming. Unbreakable and Signs and were greeted well but, reception to The Village was notably acrid and vicious, Lady in the Water was largely balked at and now The Happening has been in many viewer's crosshairs. Is M. Night Shyamalan a voice still worth listening to with valuable contemporary insight or is he an antiquated relic who needs to be put out to pasture?
]]>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 01:40:15 GMTPhantasma-gore-iaHORROR MOVIES 10111/4/2008 8:40:15 PMAfter The Sixth Sense, it seems to me that M. Night Shyamalan's popularity star has been progressively and steadily dimming. Unbreakable and Signs and were greeted well but, reception to The Village was notably acrid and vicious, Lady in the Water was largely balked at and now The Happening has been in many viewer's crosshairs. Is M. Night Shyamalan a voice still worth listening to with valuable contemporary insight or is he an antiquated relic who needs to be put out to pasture? http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/death/MemberTagFilms.aspxdeath
Number of films tagged: 4306

Number of people who tagged: 140

Number of times used: 526

]]>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:27:13 GMT4306140526Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/brilliant/MemberTagFilms.aspxbrilliant
Number of films tagged: 179

Number of people who tagged: 137

Number of times used: 285

]]>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:28:43 GMT179137285Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/overrated/MemberTagFilms.aspxoverrated
Number of films tagged: 152

Number of people who tagged: 106

Number of times used: 240

]]>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 23:37:37 GMT152106240Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/suspense/MemberTagFilms.aspxsuspense
Number of films tagged: 129

Number of people who tagged: 66

Number of times used: 189

]]>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:28:43 GMT12966189Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/obsession/MemberTagFilms.aspxobsession
Number of films tagged: 1134

Number of people who tagged: 64

Number of times used: 136

]]>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 15:00:49 GMT113464136Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/personal-classic/MemberTagFilms.aspxpersonal-classic
Number of films tagged: 180

Number of people who tagged: 64

Number of times used: 274

]]>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 11:21:00 GMT18064274Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/ghost/MemberTagFilms.aspxghost
Number of films tagged: 1219

Number of people who tagged: 58

Number of times used: 137

]]>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:30:06 GMT121958137Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/original/MemberTagFilms.aspxoriginal
Number of films tagged: 77

Number of people who tagged: 52

Number of times used: 94

]]>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 02:02:07 GMT775294Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/haunting/MemberTagFilms.aspxhaunting
Number of films tagged: 79

Number of people who tagged: 46

Number of times used: 103

]]>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:30:05 GMT7946103Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/twist/MemberTagFilms.aspxtwist
Number of films tagged: 32

Number of people who tagged: 43

Number of times used: 54

]]>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:08:15 GMT324354Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/boy/MemberTagFilms.aspxboy
Number of films tagged: 1318

Number of people who tagged: 36

Number of times used: 60

]]>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:02:48 GMT13183660Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/child/MemberTagFilms.aspxchild
Number of films tagged: 2821

Number of people who tagged: 32

Number of times used: 99

]]>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 15:19:37 GMT28213299Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/fear/MemberTagFilms.aspxfear
Number of films tagged: 461

Number of people who tagged: 31

Number of times used: 90

]]>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:28:42 GMT4613190Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Changed-My-Life/MemberTagFilms.aspxChanged-My-Life
Number of films tagged: 46

Number of people who tagged: 27

Number of times used: 60

]]>Tue, 12 Jun 2007 03:22:35 GMT462760Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/paranormal/MemberTagFilms.aspxparanormal
Number of films tagged: 212

Number of people who tagged: 23

Number of times used: 31

]]>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:30:29 GMT2122331Tag