Discuss: Your Thoughts on 'The Happening'
Filed under: Sci-Fi & Fantasy, New Releases
Well, my defense of M. Night Shyamalan certainly struck a nerve last week. The thread generated the expected disagreements and the occasional vaguely racist mocking of the man's last name but it also, as a commenter pointed out, served as a sort of support group for the strong minority who admire his recent work. There was enough interest in the conversation that I thought I'd follow up by offering this space to discuss this weekend's The Happening, which looks headed for a respectable $30 million-ish opening despite predictably middling reviews. Our James Rocchi liked the movie, and I offer my abbreviated thoughts after the jump. If you haven't seen it, beware of spoilers.
The bottom line: I thought it was okay. As is always the case with Shyamalan, the movie offers a lot of moments that are creepy, beautiful, occasionally even breathtaking. I won't soon forget Mrs. Jones' head going through the window, or the trek of the policeman's gun, or the way a gust of wind became a portent of doom. James Newton Howard comes up with another masterpiece of a musical score, a creepy piano theme entwining with heartwrenching violins to create something gorgeous and frightening. I liked the film's environmentalist bent -- its conceit may not be plausible, exactly, but it is, in a weird way, logical. And I found Shyamalan's dogged insistence on a love-conquers-all message oddly moving.
At the same time, parts of The Happening are so clunky I had trouble believing that this is the same man who wrote Unbreakable and The Village -- two elegant, subtle, impeccably constructed films. There's an abundance of awkward, lazy exposition: Drawn-out talk show explanations, godawful lines like "Hurry up! You don't want to be late for the first day schools are open!", explicit spelling-out of Shyamalan's pet anti-science themes. The entire second act and most of the third basically has the movie spinning its wheels. Mark Wahlberg gives the worst performance of his career, stilted and wooden; how could the director have thought it was acceptable? The Happening gave me the impression that Shyamalan was asleep at the wheel, with just enough of his talent emerging to make the movie watchable, and barely worthwhile.
Does this mean I need to eat my words from last week? I don't think so, but you tell me. One request: Please only post if you've seen the film. If your response is "I refuse to see The Happening because I'm sick of M. Night Shyamalan," we've already hashed that out over here.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
6-15-2008 @ 9:17PM
Rodney said...
I thought that it was a little too political at the end, but besides that, I thought it was really entertaining. The scariest part for me was when you see the people in Princeton who hanged themselves. Overall, the whole movie was pretty strange, although entertaining.
Reply
6-15-2008 @ 9:28PM
Mary said...
I enjoyed it, but I was highly disappointed in the political agenda that was pushed. It did its job and entertained me for an hour and a half, but it definitely makes me hope that Night's career hasn't already crested.
Reply
6-16-2008 @ 1:39AM
uforeader said...
Since when is "let's not destroy the Earth" a political issue? I think everyone, no matter their political leanings, can agree that pollution is not a good thing.
6-15-2008 @ 9:31PM
Jordan M. said...
personally, i thought it was pretty awful, but i'm not going to lose any sleep over it. some people seem to want to take up arms and burn shyamalan's house down (it wouldn't burn down though because shyamalan's ego would guard it from the gates- just kidding! don't kill me MNS fans!). it's no worse than any other crap movie that comes out. though i will agree that wahlberg's performance was....beyond terrible. i think if the lead had been good, the movie might have been a little better. and is it just me, or is zooey deschanel the most boring actress on the planet?
i think if shyamalan's perceived personality itself weren't so obnoxious, his movies wouldn't be nearly as hated. it's the same reason why tom cruise could make a perfectly wonderful film, but people will hate it, because TOM CRUISE is in it.
Reply
6-15-2008 @ 9:44PM
Luke said...
Ugh, it was terrible. It does break the downward spiral of each successive film being worse than his last (it wasn't as bad as "Lady In The Water") but that's not saying much.
It was just clumsy and sloppy. You're right, Mark Wahlberg's performance was amateurish, and although I'm not his biggest fan, I've seen him do better so it must come down to the direction.
The relentless, awkward, dialog was exhausting. In addition to Eugene's apt "first day schools are open" line there was "She's gone to the town of Princeton." It might seem like a small thing, but convincing dialog is made up of the small things people actually say. Nobody says, "the town of Princeton."
There are giant, annoying plot holes but no matter what explanation you decide on, David Poland summed it up perfectly by asking who or what made the wind blow? The movie has to at least be respectful of the world it's created and that question can't be answered satisfactorily. It makes the entire thing feel bungling and manipulative.
Thankfully, I went to the cheap early show. But M. Night still owes me six bucks.
Reply
6-16-2008 @ 12:48AM
Eugene Novikov said...
>>>>There are giant, annoying plot holes but no matter what explanation you decide on, David Poland summed it up perfectly by asking who or what made the wind blow? The movie has to at least be respectful of the world it's created and that question can't be answered satisfactorily.
Well that's kind of stupid. The wind made the wind blow. It also carried the toxins that the plants released. Hence, portent of doom.
6-15-2008 @ 9:51PM
techstar25 said...
I enjoyed it. My wife did too.
I overhead some college guy on the way out say "I can't believe that was rated R. It wasn't even scary." and then his friend say "We shoulda went to Hulk, damn it". So not everybody liked it.
I liked it for all the reasons Eugene mentioned. I didn't have a problem with the dialogue or Wahlbergs performance. I thought he was fine, just very different than what we're used to from him. I think too many people are just quick to typecast him as the bad-ass and didn't find he character believable. I had no problem with him as a teacher.
While this was certainly not M. Night's best work. It was good. I really liked it. I can't wait to see what he does next.
Reply
6-15-2008 @ 9:51PM
Joe said...
I thought it was pretty awful as well. I think it had a pretty solid opening, but went downhill from there. My major faults with the movie, were:
1. The characters never seemed like they had any sense of urgency or real fear... if they did, it didn't start until way too late in the game (ie. Alma to Elliot "I'm Scared Elliot", really? Now you're scared?) I kept thinking of 9/11 mostly because the horror started in NYC. I think back in 2001, people all over the country, even the world had a real sense of fear...something this movie lacked.
2. The acting was pretty bad. I'm a big fan of Mark Wahlberg and Zooey Deschanel, so I don't think it was really their fault. Possibly it was the terrible dialogue they were given.
3. Plants? Really? That's the best you could come up with? I'm sorry, but I just didn't buy it. It just seemed way too hokey.
4. No payoff... they had guessed what it was mid-way through the movie (just about the time I was ready to walk out) and it never elevated to anything else. The rest of the movie we were waiting to see how our "heroes" would get out of it... and then it was nothing.
It's the first time in a long time I've felt so strongly negative towards a movie.
Reply
6-15-2008 @ 10:20PM
Bob Dole said...
The Happening, what sucks is..it happened
BOOM!LOL!
yes old, but i will use this from now till the end of time..or until the dvd is out
Reply
6-15-2008 @ 10:26PM
porcalina said...
I really liked it. I don't know why but I usually leave his movies wondering just why so many people seem to vehemently hate them/him so much.
Reply
6-15-2008 @ 10:43PM
soulpopped said...
Man, it was really bad, but funny even though it shouldn't be. I'm not upset because I got free tickets from a Circuit City purchase, and my friends and I were able to enjoy ourselves throughout.
Whoever was the casting director for that film should not ever get to work again. Choosing Wahlberg to be a weak, frightened science teacher goes against everything he's built up as an actor.
The only real character I felt the film had at all was Mrs. Jones. Some of the scenes in her house felt legitimately creepy and seemed to have premise, but then Night would incorporate some cliché twist or line and essentially and inadvertently break the fourth wall and take me back to the poor writing of the movie.
It's been said already, but much of the writing was way too long. Had he taken a less-is-more approach (which I'm sure he can do) and described things more through visual cues and less through cringe-worthy dialogue, I think the film would have played much better. But with the cut that is in theaters, it's almost as if he's saying his audiences aren't bright enough to pick up on any subtle clues within the film and that he has to lay it all out for everyone.
Reply
6-16-2008 @ 9:50PM
Jonathan said...
I am a fan of M. Night, and I was slightly disappointed in this film. However, I do not criticize the acting because I really thing it must have been a purposeful and careful choice. It reminded me of old horror films with cheesy lines and acting, and I'm pretty sure that is the direction he wanted to go with this film.
I was trying to look for more meaning in the film than the environmental message because I refused to believe he'd make a film on this issue. I might have to accept that there was no other meaning, but I won't give up yet.
The thing that disappointed me most was that I caught the boom coming into the picture when they are in the model home around the table. I was horrified. Shocked. Really? Could that happen in one of HIS films?
I loved the music and there were beautiful images like in all his movies. I also loved that M. Night continues to try new things. His methods always seem to shock his audience. Most the time people respond negatively to his methods. His choice in acting style and dialog here may be different for us, but I'm not going to completely through them out. I have to see it again when it is released on dvd and think it over some more.
Reply
6-15-2008 @ 11:00PM
Peter Martin said...
'The Happening' didn't even meet my lowered expectations. It kept threatening to develop momentum and tension, and then M. Night (the director) allowed the pace to slacken so we could listen to M. Night (the writer) express his feelings through characters too wooden to care about.
The basic premise was promising, though it was done better and with much more bloody gusto in the Japanese film 'Suicide Club' a few years ago. The environmental angle didn't work at all -- at heart, it's just too silly on a big scale to imagine a coordinated attack by plants.
And what was up with all those looming, huge, way too tight close-ups? I thought I was gonna get sucked up somebody's nose ... Otherwise, beautiful photography by Tak Fujimoto.
Reply
6-16-2008 @ 12:49AM
Eugene Novikov said...
>>>>The environmental angle didn't work at all -- at heart, it's just too silly on a big scale to imagine a coordinated attack by plants.
If by "too silly" you mean "too awesome," then I agree. Seriously, since when is "silly" a demerit for a genre film, even a political one?
6-15-2008 @ 11:20PM
The Freak said...
You can read my review of this at http://www.minnesotamoviefreak.com/thehappening.htm.
Reply
6-15-2008 @ 11:36PM
Angelo said...
Eugene, I completely agree. "The Happening" isn't as terrible as everyone's making it out to be. It's mediocre at best, but certainly not "Lady in the Water" bad.
The critics are getting hung up on Wahlberg's acting and the abysmal dialogue. There are some brilliant moments that save the film from a "0 star" rating. Mrs.Jones' scene was great (the camera work actually reminded me of "Signs", one of his better films). My favorite, though , was watching the construction workers jump and land. That scene was beautifully shot.
We have to commend Night for taking bold risks with his films. His stories may not always turn out quite like "The Sixth Sense", but at least he's always trying something new. Few writer/directors working with the studios can do that.
Reply
6-16-2008 @ 12:18AM
lou mal jr said...
i just saw the happening and i have to say that it's trash. i can't beleive how bad this was . 0 stars. the acting was bad,the plot,bad ,and the direction was bad. people have said that his first few movies were great i agree,than the last few sucked, i agree. they even said that even hitchcock had his great and bad films , but this guy is not hitchcock. m. night has lost it .
i want my money back . this and last years wicker man have to be the worst films ive ever saw .
Reply
6-16-2008 @ 1:33AM
Joaquin said...
It is NOT, by far, Shyamalan's best film. I have to agree with one of the posts written earlier in the week that describes some of the characters reactions and decisions as "illogical". I did feel some of the characters were a little over the edge.
I must also felt that in certain moments, as Mr. Eugene puts it, the director "laziness" got in the way and certain important details in the movie were revealed through the sloppiest way possible. Let me explain: why did the woman (Mrs. Jones) mention the pipes and the communication between the houses? She just did, nobody asked there... the pipes weren't even in the scene. No action motivated this reaction. A movie is a story told with pictures... dialogue should be the last "convenient" way to "show" the audience something... and I believe that in this case images would've done the job.
Now, don't get me wrong, I still enjoyed the movie very much and I believe that Mr. Shyamalan is a genius because he took a premise like "revenge of the killing plants", a kind of movie that you know is going to be pathetic right from the start (for example: "the killing machines" in Virus with Jamie Lee Curtis), and actually made it credible enough to create tension instead of laughter when the wind appeared. That is brilliant...
But hey, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong, he he.
Reply
6-16-2008 @ 1:33AM
uforeader said...
hmmm... seems like most people missed the fact that it is an intentional B-horror movie.
I liked it, but I can see why other people didn't. It's supposed to be corny, funny, entertaining, and creepy.
My one complaint is that Night didn't turn up the B-movie factor until about 30 minutes in. The tone of the opening sequences was pretty dark, but it lightened up later in the film (really once the train stopped). I think that likely confused people, so once he turned up the B-movie factor, they were caught off-guard and were likely confused. I've heard people say "I laughed in places that weren't supposed to be funny." I GUARANTEE you that a large portion of the film was meant to give you a smile. With the exception of a few of the deaths and the old woman (Mrs Jones).
Once again, Night did an INCREDIBLE job with cinematography. And he really knows how to play the audience using the sound, camera, and music.
Reply
6-16-2008 @ 3:13AM
massedgadgets said...
Cinematography was crappp. a bunch of close ups of bad extras reacting to a horrible script. i honestly like all his films even the village and lady in the water but i really dont understand where he was going with this one. Was he really trying to be cheesy on purpose? The worst of all was the acting. Mark Wahlberg's performance reminded me of Brock Landers in Boogie Nights. I dont understand if this is M Night playing a joke on us or what but i do know that ive defended him for awhile now but i wont defend this movie at all. All in all it was very weird because ive never seen all three main actors (mark w. zoey deschanel, and john leguizamo) act sooooo bad. It was almost as bad as Clerk 2... and 1 even.
Reply