Reviews

Users keep using the word "entertain" in discussing this film, and I don't understand it simply because this movie was not meant to "entertain." Unlike many movies these days, it is meant to inform. Another claim I've read: "If you can get past the violence, it is a great film." Well here's a thought: you're not supposed to "get past" the violence. It is presented in such a way that makes us grateful for every second of our stupid American lives. If you want to be entertained, see Casino Royale. If you want to change the way you think about your own life, then see Blood Diamond. It will make you feel grateful for the life you live, and make your heart start pumping for the right reason. Blood Diamond will make you want to get involved in any organization that supports peacekeeping for conflicts like Sierra Leone.

I believe what it comes down to is that Shyamalan is brilliant at storytelling. He can make you believe the unbelievable, and take you to places you rarely think the mind can enter. He's not afraid of long sequences, because he knows it will just make his audience lean in for a closer look. His writing style brings a new meaning to the word elegacy. If you have not discovered this brilliant director, you must do so now. I myself am writing screenplays and am about to direct an ameautur film. He is truly inspirational on this account. Many complain about how disappointing they thought "The Village" was, but that's because they are not allowing their minds to do what it wants the most: to learn, to see, to expand boundaries. Sure, the village might not be a horror flick. But Night's flowing script lets the audience think in new and unexpected ways. Signs taught me to keep my eyes open to the possibility that "there are no coincidences." And The Village might be nominated for Best Picture, as the word is getting around,

which speaks for itself.