"Devil"
- Thread starter Trekker4747
- Start date
Now it's just seen as the 'hip' thing to do now that the clip has made the rounds. Uwe Boll made horrid movies and if any director deserved to be laughed at when his name appeared it would be his and yet it didn't happen. No reported mass laughter at trailers or just his name appearing.
Laughing at M.Night has just become some trendy fad to do now.
I've seen the trailer twice and not once witnessed any discernable vocal reaction from the crowd. I haven't seen it in about a month so I'm curious to see if the fad will have finally infiltrated Nashville audiences next time I see it.
Besides USAToday rates him on a comeback with Airbender(an A- grade), sorry to rock the boat of the haters.
I don't think it necessarily has anything to do with the clip itself. The first occurrence I observed was at a midnight premiere of Inception, and the next two were within a matter of days after that. For my part, the laughter induced eye rolling and irritation.
Ok... so I've seen the trailer a few times over the past couple months.. Never groaned nor heard anyone else groan.. Just sayin'..
however, I did notice this past weekend when I went to the The Expendables, the "From the mind of M. Night..." was gone.. Only mentioned in the ending trailer credit.
Maybe someone got the message.. LOL
however, I did notice this past weekend when I went to the The Expendables, the "From the mind of M. Night..." was gone.. Only mentioned in the ending trailer credit.
Maybe someone got the message.. LOL
It's too late to use the "Serial Killer is actually working for God" twist. It was already used in
Frailty.
I love you, man I do but you're swinging from this guys tip way too hard.
Dude, it's not a fad.
I was a big fan of his as were many, many people but we've all seen his films steadily decline. After such shit-tastic films like "The Happening" & "Air Bender", I myself can't find anything about his work worth defending. I'm starting to believe a one(or two) hit wonder was all he ever was.
It's not a fad, we've given up on him for a good reason.
^^^
I was only saying the 'fad' was the laughing during the trailer for Devil.
I wasn't saying anything about his movies the last 3-4yrs. I know some gave up on him awhile back. I wasn't trying to counter that only saying the fad was this recent trend of laughter during the Devil trailer.
Although Happening is really the only film of his I didn't outright like.
I was only saying the 'fad' was the laughing during the trailer for Devil.
I wasn't saying anything about his movies the last 3-4yrs. I know some gave up on him awhile back. I wasn't trying to counter that only saying the fad was this recent trend of laughter during the Devil trailer.
Although Happening is really the only film of his I didn't outright like.
I apologize.
I misunderstood.
I took what you were saying a a general statement, not one of a singular focus.
Yep. Airbender is his "comeback."
It has a 7% Rotten Tomatoes with 10 positive reviews out of 140. (2 out of 29 on the "top critics" tab.) Don't like Rotten Tomatoes? Think it's too skewed? Okay, Metacritic gives it a "naturalized" score of 20 out of 100 points with one positive review out of 33!
The "user" rating is at 3.1 (average of 290 pollsters) and has 45 out of 151 positive user reviews.
On the financial front the movie's domestical total has yet to, and likely will not, meet the movie's production budget (likely be to half again larger when any advertising is factored in). The world wide total right now stands at around $250m which "at best" means the movie, after production and advertising costs, has broken even. (Box Office Mojo)
So it may not be strictly a "flop" it's Box Office success isn't great at all and when all is said and done after DVD sales the movie will turn a modest profit, but won't blow anyones skirts up. Given the movie's critical backlash, as well as fan backlash, it is hardly a "hit" either financially, critically, or from the Airbender Fandom (which from what I have seen have pretty much said the movie doesn't do the source material proper justice) I wouldn't say the movie is a comeback for M. Night in any way whatsoever.
When the guy first came on the scene majorly with Sixth Sense in 1999, yeah, the guy was awesome. I thought Unbreakable was okay and wasn't a huge fan of Signs. Word of mouth alone pretty much prevented me from seeing his other movies and the stuff I heard about them didn't really impress me much. The guy is hardly the next, or current, Spielberg, Hitchcock, or any of the other great movie makers. Making one, big, movie that had everyone talking in ten years, two others people mostly shurg at and say "had flaws but was good", and then like three or four others where people face-palm just thinking about them (trees, what the fuck?!) and now to the point where people think a movie is worth not seeing just because your name on it hardly makes you a great film-maker.
In all honest. He has one good movie he's made in 10 years that still stands up as good but, really, only if you don't know the twist in it.
Re: Exodus
Cool, same page now.
Cool, same page now.
See, I never understood the love in the first place. Sixth Sense worked (once - when you know the twist the movie loses a lot of its interest), Unbreakable was mildly fun if you're a giant comic book nerd like me - but even being a giant comic book nerd like me, I was unsatisfied with the superhero's "weakness". Signs was ludicrous with about 15 minutes of genuine suspense. The Village also was mildly interesting - but anyone who didn't see the twist coming a mile and half away I have to wonder about. Lady in the Water was literally laughable (as in I giggled in disbelief repeatedly at its ridiculousness). You couldn't have paid me to see The Happening. The Devil trailer seems to promise more of the same schtick - attempts at suspense, salted with story logic that defies suspension of disbelief.
All in all, he's always seemed to me a film maker of mediocre talent who attempts to build a mystique around his work but ends up having the air of a self-important 20-year-old would-be heir to Hitchcock, which would describe about 85% of the nerdy guys in film school over the last 25 years. Several of whom I worked with at a movie theater in college. Proving once again that who makes it in Hollywood often has more to do with dumb luck than anything else.
You upset with USA or the messenger?
Anyone that's read my posts the last 7yrs knows I don't buy into RT or any other critic site.
Staying with the theme lets not just look at the Critics score of 7% vs the RTCommunity(avid moviegoers) score of 43%. Yes I know that still isn't fresh but it is way more closer(60% for fresh) than the critics opinion, here is the point though. That is a huge disparity. You're much more likely to get a 'meh' out of Joe Regular on his opinion of TLA than those visiting RT. The hate just isn't there.
I work in a tech office with 14 people, men&women. Of those 12 really like movies. Know how many have a RT account, who care enough to go in and vote on it so people like you can use it as a barometer....ZERO. I am the only one with an account.
I say know yourself and see what you know you like. Critics be damned. I'll say that its box office to date is no doubt due to some negative word of mouth by Joe Average Moviegoer at the office/church but too many people put their trust in the 7% to decide for them.
What I find interesting is that they have pegged it a 'comeback' film. The reality is that its only his scond film(LITW) to not make back production budget in US theatrical run.
2004-Village: bud-60m, US-114m,WW-256m
2008-Happening: bud-48m, US-64m, WW-163m
If anything he's had inconsistent B.O. return compared to his first 6yrs vs the last 6yrs, quality can be left to subjective analysis.
I am curious about Devil. An interesting thing will be to see if the movie achieves now that his name is being downplayed. Akin to a 10yr old saying they don't want to try something cause they know peas are in it vs not knowing then finding they like it anyway.
I know I'm probably coming off as some M.Night fan club president to some but I'm not. I'm the Sargent at Arms
.Once you know the twist/plot/surprise in any movie does it not lose interest? Playing devils(pun intended) advocate here but how does it apply different to his movies than others? I still watch Goonies, SW, my Treks, VforVendetta etc countless times even though I know how they unfold. Is Kirk dead at the end of Kahn? Oh, I wish I knew. Will the Fratellis catch the kids and bury them at sea?
Just to surprise those who might still think I totally and unabashadly love MNS I only own 1 of his movies.
Why is Shyamalan getting ripped for Devil when he didn't direct it, and someone else wrote the screenplay based on his story?http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0796117/
Because Shyamalan's stories are terrible. Someone else scripting it might save the dialogue (which has been poor since Signs--Signs sucked, but it's dialogue was workmanlike), but everything since Unbreakable has included major flaws that would be visible from something as bare-bones as a one-paragraph synopsis.*
*Maybe not The Village, which on paper might look okay. Signs, The Happening, and to a lesser extent Lady in the Water would all look back in summary, forgetting the bad execution.
*Maybe not The Village, which on paper might look okay. Signs, The Happening, and to a lesser extent Lady in the Water would all look back in summary, forgetting the bad execution.
His name was featured very prominently in the first trailer. The studio wants to sell this movie on his name. His name which, really, isn't worth much anymore and probably hasn't been for some time now. So, yeah, sorry we're going to judge the movie on his name and if I were the screen writer or director I'd be pretty pissed.
You know the real M. Night problem?
That he keeps getting the title cards in previews and ads.
His agent probably thinks that's a great idea, and it's not.
The groans are 90% for the pretentiousness of continuing to insert those title cards when you've had a string of flops.
Just direct a film. Let people see the film. Stop insisting you're part of the marketing focus for the film. Then, if it's any good, maybe people will stop groaning.
Frankly at this point I think people are underrating his films because of the "...from the mind of..." nonsense. It irritates people now and they immediately deduct half a star.
That he keeps getting the title cards in previews and ads.
His agent probably thinks that's a great idea, and it's not.
The groans are 90% for the pretentiousness of continuing to insert those title cards when you've had a string of flops.
Just direct a film. Let people see the film. Stop insisting you're part of the marketing focus for the film. Then, if it's any good, maybe people will stop groaning.
Frankly at this point I think people are underrating his films because of the "...from the mind of..." nonsense. It irritates people now and they immediately deduct half a star.
One outright flop. Not a string.
M.Night Shyamalan movie list shows his movies, even the still at theaters Last Airbender, shows only one disaster financially speaking and that's Lady in the Water. Which even after worldwide receipts only pulled in a fraction over the films production budget. Meaning the studio netted a sure loss at the box office. I doubt it made the ground up on DVD's. His other films don't have that problem.
I agree they should take his name off the lead title card. For his first few movies the media was quick to label him and place him in conversations with the likes of Spielberg, Hitchcock and some of the greats. It was really unfair and no doubt helped him early on but that time has past.
Maybe if he made better movies he wouldn't be laughed at. He's laughable now because that's what he has devolved to. I have a hard time defending or being sympathetic toward someone that gets paid millions of dollars to do movies on huge budgets and yet still makes crappy films. It would be one thing had he made one film that was so-so, but he's on a steady decline and his films just keep on getting progressively worse.
Laughing at him isn't a "trendy fad" so much as it is the accumulation of doing consistently bad films to the point where audiences can't take you seriously anymore. I will admit that some audiences are really judgmental and hard-to-please, but at the same time M. Night has gotten himself into this situation by continuing on his streak of declining quality. I mean, it got to the point where after the monstrosity that was The Happening that I swore never to see another film by M. Night ever again. At least not one that I willingly pay to see. It was that bad of a movie.
I think if anything people are upset and irritated that they keep on having faith in him and giving him another chance and he keeps on blowing it and making yet another horrible movie. At some point his clout is going to wear off and audiences are eventually going to just stop seeing his movies. As a consequence, I think Devil is going to flop hard.
And while I know M. Night just produced the film, and I feel bad for the filmmakers who have to deal with the bad press associated with the film based on M. Night's horrible declining reputation, I won't feel bad if and when it does flop. The trailer itself was pretty laughably bad, and I think M. Night needs to face the consequences of his bad creative decisions over the years. Or someone needs to stop footing the bill for his creative "genius". Maybe if he's forced to work on a shoe-string budget maybe he'll get creative again. But I doubt it.
Similar threads
