After Earth and the M. Night slide apparently continues

[aTOMiC]

Yep. I really liked the Sixth Sense. Not just for the surprise reveal but because to me it was a very well crafted piece of cinema that was fairly fresh at the time it was released.
I was on board with Unbreakable, Signs and to a lesser extent The Village.
Then Lady in the Water came along and it was only the fact that I am a Paul Giamatti fan that I was able to squeeze any entertainment from the film.
It was at this point that I began to really fear for Mr. Shyamalan's career but I was still able to justify LITW as a one time only vanity pic.
Then the Happening came along and I was left scratching my head wondering where the directorial competence had gone. Deliberately choosing bland performances from actors isn't unheard of. Take a look at the Star Wars prequels and you'll see great actors (and some not so great actors) directed to perform with little or no dimension...on purpose. So I began thinking is M. Night trying to purposefully create a film style I simply don't understand and can't appreciate?
Then the Last Airbender comes along and I find myself witnessing some of the most painful acting since...well...the Happening.
I knew After Earth was directed by M. Night. I knew that in advance but somehow I figured with Will Smith involved it might just break the losing streak at last. However after seeing the trailers and reading reviews (no I haven't seen the film and I am not even sure I'll watch it when it hits Netflix) I am disappointed that nothing seems to have changed. Even before I began reading reviews I found the trailers to be very annoying in that I simply cannot abide fake CGI characters anymore, in this case supposedly threatening forest animals.

I'm just wondering if there is just no hope at all left for M. Night Shyamalan. Is he done? Even if he isn't I think I am which is a shame.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

I want to see this film just to see if M. Night has managed to rediscover himself and recapture that little spark that set him apart early in his career. If After Earth flops--which it will, regardless of the quality of the film--then perhaps he should quit trying to direct and focus only on scriptwriting.

Honestly, I think he is trying too hard to remake his early films. Not every film has to have a twist that reframes the previous 90% of the movie. If he were smart, After Earth will be a story about a father and son managing to reconnect with one another despite the external problems that plague them.

You mentioned Mr. Giamatti in LitW which reinforces a point I have made about movies before: a talented actor can help turn a mediocre movie into a good one through a strong performance.

[wayfriend]

I haven't seen it, but I checked out a scather on AintItCool just this AM. aTOMiC is not alone here.

BTW, I *loved* Signs. There, I may be alone.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

BTW, I *loved* Signs. There, I may be alone.

No, you are not. Signs was a better and more developed story than The Village and, in all honesty, considerably better than Lady in the Water. LitW would have made a much better short story in print than it did a movie, I suspect. Signs was vastly superior to The Happening, which had an interesting premise but I don't think he knew quite where to go with it which is why it limped along to its lackluster ending.

To date, his best movie is Unbreakable because the premise is better--the protagonist does not know why the things that happen to him (or don't happen to him, as the case may be) are occurring plus Mr. Jackson brings a certain something extra to the characters he portrays. This is a shame because I like Ms. Colette (the mother from Sixth Sense); she is a talented actress and is enchanting to watch on the screen.

I have not seen, and will not see at any point in the future, The Last Airbender. For the most part, I ignore movies based on any children's cartoon series. Those movies are often aimed at the target audience--children--and I have a difficult time relating to children despite us having two of them.

Can you tell that I enjoy my movies and often take them seriously?

[I'm Murrin]

Unbreakable is a great film, yes. I don't think very highly of Signs; all I can really remember of watching it, though (apart from the final baseball-bat confrontation and the water), is how utterly laughable I thought the aliens were when they first were shown.

[sgt.null]

I love M Night but will likely never see Airbender. and already had decided not to see the Will Smith film without knowing it was M Night.

mainly because I don't need Will's kid forced on me.

[High Lord Tolkien]

Signs....... so bad.....

I was able to suspend my disbelief until the end.
Then the stupid rose up and choked me.

The aliens were sent away because of some middle eastern chant or ritual??
WHAT.... THE..... F#CK?

[dANdeLION]

I liked 5th Sense and Unbreakable, but the others were progressively weaker, and by yhat time I was expecting the twist......so yeah, I basically agree with the rest of you.

[I'm Murrin]

www.startribune.com/entertainment/movies/209517811.html

The only positive effect of “After Earth” is that it has improved the reputation of “The Wild, Wild West,” previously the worst movie of Smith’s career.

[Billy G.]

www.startribune.com/entertainment/movies/209517811.html

The only positive effect of “After Earth” is that it has improved the reputation of “The Wild, Wild West,” previously the worst movie of Smith’s career.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

The aliens were sent away because of some middle eastern chant or ritual??
WHAT.... THE..... F#CK?

That isn't what drove them away. Did you watch the same movie as the rest of us?

Anyway...Signs wasn't about the aliens at all. The aliens were simply a McGuffin.

Given Shyamalan's tendency to portray water as an enemy or a power to be feared, Lady In The Water still strikes me as a little odd for him. In this movie, water is not the enemy and is, in fact, the means through which the protagonists help her

[Cail]

Signs was a wonderful throwback to '70s pulp sci-fi films, and it had a compelling performance from Mel Gibson.

Unbreakable was just fantastic.

I haven't really cared for anything else he did, though The Village had promise....Great premise, horribly executed.

[High Lord Tolkien]

The aliens were sent away because of some middle eastern chant or ritual??
WHAT.... THE..... F#CK?

That isn't what drove them away. Did you watch the same movie as the rest of us?

That's what the TV news guy said.
What drove them away?

[Hashi Lebwohl]

They were vulnerable to water, or at least things in the water--it burned their skin. 70% of the Earth is covered with water and that water averages at about 5000m deep so they figured they should look elsewhere. Enough people throughout the world had already figured out that water hurt the aliens so they were already fighting back.

[aTOMiC]

They were vulnerable to water, or at least things in the water--it burned their skin. 70% of the Earth is covered with water and that water averages at about 5000m deep so they figured they should look elsewhere. Enough people throughout the world had already figured out that water hurt the aliens so they were already fighting back.

This plot device reminded me of Alien Nation where salt water bodies affected the alien characters like acid. I don't remember the specifics in great detail however in the case of the aliens depicted in Signs it either didn't seem to matter what kind of water or if it was only fresh water as simple tap water was used in the finale.
I'm not sure why an space-faring alien species would be interested in a planet covered by the aforementioned 70% of water which produces a fairly unpleasant water vapor content in the atmosphere. You'd think the aliens would be forced to wear protective clothing constantly.
I'll admit that Signs' focus falls more in the personal, emotional journey the family goes through as opposed to hard science fiction but it seems M. Night had little interest in telling an accurate and believable alien invasion story.

[I'm Murrin]

They were vulnerable to water, or at least things in the water--it burned their skin. 70% of the Earth is covered with water and that water averages at about 5000m deep so they figured they should look elsewhere. Enough people throughout the world had already figured out that water hurt the aliens so they were already fighting back.

The funny thing is that simple spectroscopy could have told the aliens the earth was mostly covered in water long before they got anywhere near the place.

[wayfriend]

I'll admit that Signs' focus falls more in the personal, emotional journey the family goes through as opposed to hard science fiction but it seems M. Night had little interest in telling an accurate and believable alien invasion story.

I think you have to give Shyamalan a little bit more credit. (Not a lot, just a little.) The water angle, while implausible, nevertheless provides the characters an opportunity to defeat the alien in their house. You can say that it would have been more credible if the aliens had been susceptible to a 6.02x10²º frequency burst of gamma radiation - but the Hess family wasn't likely able to muster that.

More importantly, the water angle ties in with Bo leaving half-filled glasses around the house, which, along with Merrill's history playing baseball and Morgan's asthma, creates a scenario where it seems like fate "lined everything up" for that one moment. Which is what Signs is actually about.
(It's not actually about aliens.)

So I don't raise the implausible alien criticism, except just to say that if it jarred people out of their 'willing suspension of disbelief' then the concept was imperfectly accomplished.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

Precisely. The aliens are actually incidental to the main plot. I suspect this is the same in After Earth--the story is supposed to be about a father and son, not space travel or weird CGI animals or Jaden Smith's squinty glare or anything else.

I also suspect that many movie critics are simply going with the herd of M. Night haters rather than analyzing the movie in and of itself. The fascinating part is this: when we talk about movies we usually either reference the movie itself (its title, plot, etc), the main actor (whether the hero or villain), or the director. If I say "Sixth Sense" the first thing that pops into your mind is "I see dead people" follwed by "M. Night". If I say "Resident Evil" the first thing that pops into your mind is "Milla Jojovich". hrm....Milla Jojovich. If I say "Paranormal Activity" the first thing that pops into your mind is "found footage". The point is this--we know M. Night and people talk about him; no one talks about the director of films from the Resident Evil or Paranormal Activity films--quick, without looking can you name one? I can't. In short, he is simply a director that people love to hate.

I wouldn't put it past him to make a film "bad" by movie critic standards just to get them to talk about him. The only people worse than movie critics are fans who think they are movie savvy but who in reality simply regurgitate opinions they read other movie fans write on the Internet.

[peter]

The thing is M Night Shyamalan has the capacity to direct great films - but just seems to keep f*****g it up. You can feel the guys ability, and as mentioned, on occasion it has worked really well; the question is whether he will get another chance or not. I predict he will, but in a lower buget (maybe 'indie') style of thing - and further I predict that he will deliver the goods. You heard it here first .

[RaceFinisher]

He's done. Last Airbender was ... it's hard to find words. My family loves the series (though the third season fell flat for me). It might be the worst film ever made.

I loved Sixth Sense, liked Signs and Unbreakable, the Village was okay, actually thought Happenings was decent though I saw what disappointed everyone. I won't see AE.

He has the coolest name any director ever had...but now it's dead.