Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

The Reviews are coming in from the 1st Test Screening of M Night's SIGNS + New Trailer!!!

Hey folks, Harry here. Last night here in Austin, Texas I had one of the great film experiences of my life, watching Woody Allen's new film with Woody Allen doing a one hour Q&A afterwards and just killing. It was astonishing to watch him and I wouldn't trade it for anything. However, if I could be in two places at once, being at this test screening of M Night Shyamalan's SIGNS would have been the other location. Folks, this summer could be the home run we've been waiting for. These reviews from SIGNS are simply breathtaking for me. Mysterio wrote me to say the movie was "I just got back from seeing this and quite frankly it's amazing! I loved this film. Hardly knew anything about it going in (never saw a script for this pass through my hands either), but by damn has M. Night has hit yet another home run with this flick." Mysterio will be reviewing the film soon, he wanted to sleep on it. In addition, there is a new SIGNS trailer which is quite nice. The reviews below are all very very ecstatic for the film. If you wish to know nothing about the film, just know that the reviews say it is great. If you want to know more, including some spoilers... Read on... It looks like SIGNS is technically a HORROR film...

Hey Harry,

I've been an avid reader of the site for sometime now and happy to be able to finally report something... I saw the first test screening of M. Night Shyamalan's "Signs"... and I gotta tell you it scared the shit outta me.... I have been a fan of Night's films. I thought The Sixth Sense was a solid movie, but was impressed with UNBREAKABLE. It wasn't so much that I liked the movie, in fact the last ten minutes alone made me never want to watch it again, but it was the first time in a long while I was able to be under the influence of a master stoyteller. It seems as though every couple of years a new filmmaker comes along that shocks the world. But with new techniques, characters, dialogue, whatever...

The main thing I dig about Night is his ability to pose simple questions with such complex answers... What if a little boy could see dead people? What if super heroes truly existed? And now.. What if there were others?...

SIGNS focuses on an family in a farming community 45 miles outside of Philadelphia ( a title card lets us know this). Mel Gibson and Joaquin Phoenix play brothers raising Mel's children. Sub-plots involve Mel's dead wife, Joaquin's baseball career gone south, and Mel's son's battle with asthma. I'd go more into detail, but learning the ticks and subtleties of this family are half the fun. The perfomances are realistic as is the setting. THE WAR OF THE WORLDS involvement with the film is played out with care and maturity. One complaint is the ending gets a bit hokey. But it's quite a ride until then. I don't want to say anymore about the film.

The print we saw looked complete, which makes the August 2nd release that much more painful.

The day will come that Shyamalan will put out a film with his balls hanging out in the air, not trying to please anyone, not trying to neatly tie things up... Just scaring people, which he quite good at. This movie scared the bejesus out of me.

Take care,

Longbaugh Parker

Now for the next review....


I caught a Signs test screening in Marina Del Rey tonight- it was great- hope you dig my review(I sent you a review of Pluto Nash way back in the day as well):

A Signs Review

By Noefresh

Signs is the story of one man's loss and subsequent renewal of faith. The man in this case is Graham Hess, played by Mel Gibson. Graham's a preacher who gave up the cloth when his wife died in a car accident. As Signs begins, Graham is trying to hold his family together- with 2 kids and his brother Merrill, played by Joaquin Phoenix.

Since this is an M. Night Shyamalan film, we expect a twist and this does not disappoint. Graham and Merrill discover crop circles cut into their Pennsylvania cornfield. Amid TV news reports of lights in the sky and little green men going bump in the night, it becomes more and more likely this is no hoax but a full scale alien invasion. The trailers make it look a bit like Close Encounter but it becomes quite clear these aliens are not friendly E.T.s. One creepy touch- Graham's son can hear what sounds like the aliens speaking on a baby monitor walkie-talkie and they sound quite irate. The family decides to make a stand in their farmhouse and fight the aliens if they have to- all the while trying to stay together as a family and renew their own faith.

Without ruining the surprises, I will say this film offers enough humor, suspense and action to satisfy.

Personally- I thought Sixth Sense was pretty good and Unbreakable a bit slow- but Signs is Night's best work. It may not have as much of a wow ending as the other two- but it is every bit as satisfying to watch- even more so. Again, Night demonstrates a mature control of story and an affinity for directing children. He makes Graham's two kids- one played by a Culkin (!) believable and endearing where they could easily have been phony and annoying. Gibson is great as the grieving father and more believably sensitive than we've seen him before. Joaquin is touching and at times hilarious such as his description of his own personal reason for having faith in god- hint- it has to do with kissing a drunk, about to be violently ill girl and a moment of lucky timing. It's too bad everyone's going to have to wait until the end of the summer to see it- but at least they can rest assured that if everything else coming out this summer sucks- we have one movie to look forward to.

and here's our last review for now... Who feels the movie is probably 5 minutes too long...

Hey Harry,

Great to hear from you. Didn't actually expect a response from you!

Just got in from checking out the screening of Signs in Marina del Rey, CA. Well, what can I say about it? Other than I think Disney has a winner on there hands. 7 out of 10. And with a little tweaking in the old editing room, mostly tighting up some shots and scenes, Signs could deserve even higher marks. But before those notoriously vicious talkbackers call be a plant or sneer "typical fanboy," I have to say that I am not a devout M. Night Shamylan fan. I liked Sixth Sense, but thought Unbreakable was OK and not that entertaining when I saw it in the theater. A subsequent viewing has led me to appreciate it more, and now I think it's his best work to date. I think most people will find Signs a more entertaining, enjoyable and easier film to watch than Unbreakable. I would expect with a late summer slot and Mel's star power for Signs to easily outgross Unbreakable.

No synopsis and spoilers from me, so here some rambling thoughts about Signs.

Best things going for it:

1. Acting - Joaquin does it again ("Joaquin, you're the bomb!"). He owned the role, thank god Ruffalo dropped out. His character is funny, naive and touching. He has a couple of scenes with Mel that make the movie. Mel as always is good . Is he ever not thoroughly watchable? And both the kids turn in solid performances. They would have had a hard time finding a more adorable girl

2. Music - James Newton Howard - The music was perfect, loved all the strings (the staple instrument of suspense films). More engaging music than most films (forget Williams' overrated Harry Potter crap)

3. Story - interesting premise that Night establishes well and is generally intriguing as what is actually happening to Mel and Co. is revealed slowly (some may argue too slowy -- but I'll save that for the disses).

4. Production Design and Photography - bottom line is Night and crew (Tak!!) created a living breathing mise-en-scene that works.

Now on to the disses:

1. Pacing - my biggest complaint about films today is no one tells these "auteurs" that they need to tighten up their films and trim them (not for a damn RATING mind you). Now I don't think a film has to be quick cuts and have a rapid pace. But I strongly feel that a viewer should never think that a film is long, and Signs was maybe 5 mins. too long. Just trim a few shots or scenes a little. Night loves static shots in which the actors aren't physically doing much or delivering expressive dialogue. He has a slow deliberate style apparent in all his films, and for this style to work he needs to be tight with all his shots and scenes. He can't afford to linger too long, and linger he does.

2. Ending - In the middle of the final climatic scene, there is flashback that completes a sequence in the past which began earlier, and part of a scene we saw earlier is repeated. This completley ruins the flow of the moment and is totally unnecessary. Night, if you're reading this I BEG YOU PLEEEEEEEASE CUT THIS REPETITIVE FLASHBACK CRAP OUT!! It may have worked in Sixth Sense with the shots of the clues repeated (I didn't really like it then either), but it wasn't as glaringly bad as it is in Signs. In Signs the flashback is not of missed clues, but just ruins the moment. The sequence in the past could be completed prior to this moment and still work within the context of the film. But the repetition of part of scene already scene is just plain old bad.

3. The Final Diss -- M. Night Shamylan the ACTOR. Stop putting yourself in your films. You are not a good actor nor good looking, so there is no reason for you to be in the film. Unless, of course you were a hot chick who shows her tits.

The Payoff: Not sure if its my expectations after the "twist" endings in Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, but Signs ending felt a little of a let down. I am NOT saying Signs needs a "twist" ending, but instead that possibly it is more fun getting there. Although I may change my opinion if they CUT THE FLASHBACK CRAP!!

All in all, great acting, music and story, but needs to really be tightend up.


Keeping my glass bowl always packed,

Green Buddha

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • April 30, 2002, 10:13 a.m. CST


    by topcad

    As Freddie Prinze might say, this summer is "looking good!" You know, just hearing about Unbreakable makes me want to go watch it again. And by the way, if I ever get to direct a movie you can be damn sure that I will be onscreen at some point! ROck on

  • April 30, 2002, 10:26 a.m. CST

    What's wrong with Shyamalan on screen?

    by Chilli Kramer

    He's barely ever on anyhow, it hardly ruins a film. Let's hope this does well, so he gets round to doing Unbreakable 2.

  • April 30, 2002, 10:34 a.m. CST

    What's wrong with Director's appearing in their Movies?

    by Conan_the_Humble

    HITCHCOCK was notorious for it. M Night only appeared as an alleged Drug dealer for about 30 seconds in Unbreakable. What was wrong with that? It was better than Peter JACKSONS burping effort in LOTR. At least M Night added something to the story, ie, it was the first time Bruce Willis tried out his 'powers.' I'm bit of a fan of M Night I must say, I thought Sixth sense was ok, and I thought Unbreakable was excellent so this movie should be alright. I didn't have a problem with the pacing in either of these films. What's the big problem with a slowly evolving story? I think a director should be applauded for his ability to maintain viewer interest with a slow pace in their film, not denigrated. Cheers.

  • April 30, 2002, 10:40 a.m. CST

    I cannot wait to see this!!

    by viola123

    Thanks for the reviews! Wow, this film sounds amazing. I can't wait to see it. Too bad we have to wait until August 2. I hope no one spoils it for us before then. As for M. Night appearing in his movies, I think that's great. That's like his thing and his parts are so small, he doesn't take away from anything. Go M. Night. As for "Signs," I loved that trailer and with Mel, Jaoquin, and M. Night -- absolutely NOTHING wrong with that!! :)

  • April 30, 2002, 10:43 a.m. CST

    I'm dying to see a good 'Alien Invasion' flick.

    by Psyclops

    I don't think SIGNS is going to be that movie but I'm still looking forward to it. Sometimes I feel like I was the only person in the world who was actually shocked by the twist in THE SIXTH SENSE (mostly because I kept predicting a different ending so the surprise had a huge impact when it came) and UNBREAKABLE was genius, a fantastic real-life superhero movie that should be studied and examined for years to come. SIGNS will most likely be just as good as M. Night's previous movies and that's fine by me, I'm just hoping for a dark and spooky thriller with some decent acting and some REAL aliens (I liked CONTACT but I really wanted to see the spacemen by the end of the movie). I'll be there on August 2nd!!!

  • April 30, 2002, 10:46 a.m. CST

    Can't WAIT!

    by kiki370

    Wow, coming off of that amazing trailer/footage that aired Sunday night and now these initial reviews...I just can't believe that I have to wait until August to see this flick! How in the hell am I going to wait that long?? So, I'm wondering how Night is going to insert himself into Signs...what do you guys think? What kind of a role do you think he's given himself in this one??

  • April 30, 2002, 10:47 a.m. CST

    M. Night -- awesome director

    by Kikstad

    Shyamalan is fast becoming my favorite director. And his little cameos don't bother me at all -- he's a better actor than some of the shmoes who get paid millions of dollars for there non-existant thespian skills. I'd like to take this moment to THANK the reviewers who've seen this movie and written teaser reviews and DIDN'T SPOIL THE MOVIE! Bravo. I feel like I know every detail of Spider-man and Attack of the Clones, it's good to go into a movie (especially an M.Night Shyamalan film with it's twists and cool plots) without knowing every single surprise the plot has in store for us. I hope everyone can keep the spoilers to themselves. One non-spoiler question though for those of you who've seen it -- does M. Night make use of one particular color in his art direction like he did for his past films? (Red in Sixth Sense, Purple in Unbreakable).

  • April 30, 2002, 10:58 a.m. CST

    Mel Gibson and Joaquin Phoenix--- brothers?

    by Aquatarkusman

    I have a feeling the hair plugs burrowed into his fevered, dingo-diddling brain. Quickly becoming his generation's Robert Redford (refuses to accept aging), although Kevin Costner refuses to go away gracefully.

  • April 30, 2002, 11:19 a.m. CST

    M. Night is sexy.

    by steef

  • April 30, 2002, 11:29 a.m. CST

    GOOD PREMISE???????

    by DannyOcean01

    Never heard of Aliens invading. How original.

  • April 30, 2002, 11:35 a.m. CST

    Maybe after Signs comes out, Chris Carter will throw up his hand

    by WarDog

    Or at the very least, one tied in with the series' alien "mythology." Hey, it could happen! I can dream, can't I?

  • April 30, 2002, 11:47 a.m. CST

    I can't wait to see Signs

    by neovsmatrix

    My favorite director right now is M. Night Shyamalan. Unbreakable is one of my favorite movies, and I really hope if he has plans for a sequel, he gets to do it. In any case, this summer looks to be the best since 1998 when the Matrix and Sixth Sense came out.

  • April 30, 2002, 12:21 p.m. CST

    Thanks to the reviewers

    by SweetSyl

    Those were nice, fairly well-written spoiler-free reviews. As for the casting, there aren't many brothers out there who have a 20 or 30 year-old difference. But it can happen I suppose.

  • April 30, 2002, 12:39 p.m. CST

    Shyamalan the actor

    by rev_skarekroe

    It's really a shame when a director like M Night Shyamalan insists on appearing in his own films when there are so many other talented actors who could use good parts, like Quentin Tarantino or Peter Jackson. sk

  • April 30, 2002, 12:55 p.m. CST

    Shyamalan's "acting"

    by Kikstad

    What's the big deal? I thought he was a believable doctor in Sixth Sense and a believable drug peddler in Unbreakable. If he's going to cameo in his films, at least the tiny roles further the plot, unlike other silly vanity cameos (like Stan Lee as a hot dog vendor in X-Men or Harry Knowles in The Faculty -- sorry Harry.) Like the "plot-twists", the cameos are a little something that a lot of us M. Night fans are starting to enjoy and expect, and if his movies didn't have them, we'd probably be a bit disappointed.

  • April 30, 2002, 1:09 p.m. CST

    The most gullible man alive

    by pedant

    Too bad anyone who's not a fucking idiot knows that crop circles are a hoax. But what do you expect from a guy who believes in ghosts and superheroes.

  • April 30, 2002, 1:14 p.m. CST

    Wow, another film with a terrible ending- what a surprise!

    by Blue Devil

    The first thing you learn in film study is: have your ending and your beginning (in that order), the rest of the film is comprised of getting you from the beginning to the end. Did these people miss that day? Do they not know that the difference between and good movie and a CLASSIC is the ending? The way the film resolves (or doesn't resolve) itself? Now, I wasn't much of a fan of The Sixth Sense (I mean seriously, Bruce Willis is walking around for a whole fucking year and doesn't realize he's dead? Come on) and don't get me started on the ending of Unbreakable. Shyamalan needs to stop the gimicks and become a more responsible filmmaker.

  • April 30, 2002, 1:25 p.m. CST

    Those complaing about Mel 's aging

    by jmb

    Those complaing about Mel not playing his age must not have seen the Patriot, in which, he had an 18 year old son. Mark Ruffalo who had signed on before Phoenix, is in his early to mid thirties, so that would not have been a problem, would it? My father is the youngest of 5 brothers and his eldest brother is 15 years older than him. So I don't really get the problem or the complaints. And if he has hair plugs, which I don't think he does, so what. I have seen him in interviews recently and he looks more bald everytime so I don't get those accusations either. I saw the footage of him at the Australian premiere of We Were Soldiers and I was shocked at how thin on top he looked. I don't think I want to see a balding Mel Gibson anyway.

  • April 30, 2002, 1:47 p.m. CST

    re: Gurn

    by pedant

    It would appear that you haven't seen the trailer, in which it is clear from the portentous mood that either a) Night himself believes that crop circles are real, or b) he expects his audience to believe that they are real, and not laugh at the idea as I did while watching the trailer. Either way, he's an idiot. ***** I wonder what's next for Night... The Bermuda Triangle? Bigfoot? An Edgar Cayce biopic? So much bullshit, so little time.

  • April 30, 2002, 1:56 p.m. CST

    Mel looks like Joaquin

    by VincentSpain

    brothers? well, it could be

  • April 30, 2002, 1:57 p.m. CST


    by Kikstad

    What stick got shoved up your ass today? Based on your posts, I guess you'll never go see any movie with a fantasy plot or a speculative fiction plot because it's "not real." There were ghosts and witches in Macbeth, I guess Shakespeare was an idiot too. Lighten up, buddy.

  • April 30, 2002, 2:08 p.m. CST

    pedant and his crop circles

    by Ernst Blofeld

    So what crop circles aren't real? So what are they crop ovals? Geometric corn patterning? Next you'll be telling me that real dragons can't talk and they're not too intelligent...

  • April 30, 2002, 2:16 p.m. CST

    "thank god Ruffalo dropped out"

    by togmeister

    Don't agree. Mark Ruffalo is 10 times the actor of "Wacky" Phoenix. Have you even seen You Can Count On Me? He deserved the Oscar nom that went to Phoenix's ludicrous Emperor in Gladiator. Other than that, i'm REALLY stoked to see this flick. Is it just me or does Unbreakable just get better and better with each viewing.

  • April 30, 2002, 2:25 p.m. CST

    Who SHOULD be in every Shyamalan movie...

    by darth_testine

    The wedding ring hottie from 6th Sense!

  • April 30, 2002, 2:26 p.m. CST

    Can he pull off the hat trick?

    by Theta

    "The Sixth Sense" was a great ghost story, if a little too sneakily New Age. "Unbreakable" is, arguably, the greatest movie about comics and comic heroes ever made. To quell argument, you have to watch it again, not to catch any "clues", but just to see how M. Night brought all the archetypes and tropes, such as the death trap (the swimming pool) and the "strong" villian (the serial killer) into the real world. Think about it; damn near everything in "Unbreakable", barring David's powers, could actually happen, including Mr. Glass. So, I'm excited for "Signs", although considering how carefully he's inserted moral uplift, I can't help but wonder if "Signs" is a new take on "Close Encounters."

  • April 30, 2002, 2:55 p.m. CST

    the evolution of talkbacks

    by Aquafresh

    Have you ever noticed that AICN talkback threads evolve the exact same way everytime? They all start with people saying "great!", move on to people saying, "suck", then some random jokey comments, then the troll comes in and says something inflammatory, followed by people flaming the troll, who then returns to defend his position. This continues ad nauseum, while someome else mentions tits or pussy in the interim. Then someone usually comments on the repetitve nature of talckbacks, and in this case that would be me. We all play a role in the magical microcosm of the Talkback universe. Maybe M. Night should make his next movie about that.

  • April 30, 2002, 2:58 p.m. CST

    re: Kikstad

    by pedant

    Hmmm... A Shyamalan/Shakespeare comparison? Are you kidding me? First of all, Shakespeare's work is good enough to evoke willing suspension of disbelief in a skeptical reader; Shyamalan's is not. Secondly, although ghosts and faeries and other mythological creatures made appearances in several of Shakespeare's plays, he did not make a career out of dwelling on the supernatural as Shyamalan seems to be doing. This is what turns me off to Night's work, moreso than the ideas themselves. He's too earnest. It almost smacks of propaganda, like he's trying to convert the world into believing. I don't get this feeling reading Shakespeare or watching FoTR.

  • April 30, 2002, 3:21 p.m. CST

    Real pedants are tiresome and hardly worth the effort, but here

    by Billy Talent

    Movies aren't real, not even movies where people just sit around talking. Documentaries aren't real. Neither is the news. In order to enjoy a movie, it isn't necessary that you believe in ghosts or superheroes or space aliens. You needn't believe in true love, you needn't believe that cigarettes cause cancer, you needn't believe your girlfriend when she says she's leaving you for someone less stupid. Rather, one suspends disbelief for a couple of hours. If you can't do that, then you're never going to get anything out of any of the arts. Have fun in your dreary grey world.

  • April 30, 2002, 3:23 p.m. CST


    by Kikstad

    Interesting observation, Pedant. By the way, I wasn't comparing Shyamalan to Shakespeare, I was merely bringing up Shakespeare as someone who used fantasy elements too in his classic works. (And Shakespeare wrote some crap too, by the way.) I can understand if you're primary argument is that you don't like M. Night's movies, since that's your entitled opinion. But your argument seemed to be along the lines of "What an idiot he is for making a movies about crop circles and ghosts and superheroes since we all know that they're all hoaxes or figments of the imagination and don't exist!" So should Spielberg not make movies about aliens? Should Tim Burton not have made Batman or Sleepy Hollow or Edward Scissorhands? I like M. Night's style because he DOES make fantasy genre movies but gives them a "reality-based" flavor so I can lose myself in the worlds he's created instead of being constantly award that I'm watching fiction. I like fantasy when done right because it's a great form of escapist entertainment -- but I don't like when people make fantasy films that look fake or have glaring loopholes because the film-maker assumes that "Hey, it's just fantasy, it's not real, so I won't try hard to make it believable." I don't want to be constantly aware of the CGI special effects and the lame technobabble. I want sometimes to see the human characters in fantastic situations that I get to see in M. Night's recent films. Also, if he decides that these are the kind of films he chooses to make, so what? Some people like John Ford chose to make Westerns, others like Alfred Hitchcock chose to make suspense thrillers, others choose to make action films or romantic comedies -- M. Night has chosen to make a certain type of film and in my opinion he's done them well. I hope he keeps on making them.

  • April 30, 2002, 3:27 p.m. CST

    Spoilers and Surprise (i.e. Gimmicky) Endings.

    by Graham_Minnesota

    Someone, anyone who has seen this film, please post a detailed scene by scene description from beginning to it's supposed "twist" ending for everyone to read. That way, people will see this not as the result of some great marketing campaign that draws potential viewers into a screening with the need to absolutely find out what the surprise ending is, but because it is a film that retains it's quality upon multiple viewings. It may be asked why is it that one would really want to know every aspect of a film prior to seeing it? This is because most people are completely fed up with paying to see outrageously over priced, over blown, and un-intelligence pieces of trash that pass for film. Ultimatley, I may not be able to speak for others, but I know that I am certainly tired of gambling on wether or not a film is going to be great (and yes, there are some truly life changing, superlative films. And no, quality is not always subjective, but for the sake of not engaging in a long, drawn out argument, I will avoid a detailed debate on aesthetics.) by wasting my time and money. I believe that audiences of all ages have evolved into rather sophistaced critics of media. Wether good or bad, their is a demand for innovative, original, strong and dynamic art. If one's enjoyment of a film is based exclusively on not just an ending, but a "surprise" ending, then it was never about the film, but one's need to be surprised. Example: "The Game." How many times can one really watch that entire film from beginning to end, and really enjoy every scene? My guess is very little. Why? This is because after seeing the ending the first time, it is known that there is no real life threatening circumstances, death, love, loss, sacrafice or personal disaster. It's just a farce where a curtain is pulled back to reveal it was all, well, a game. After a while, such gimmicks just do not pass for respectable film making.

  • April 30, 2002, 3:39 p.m. CST

    M Night

    by cityofnight

    I thought M Night was solid in Unbreakeable. He's f-in Robert DeNiro compared to Quentin Tarantino. Now there's somebody who can't act.

  • April 30, 2002, 3:47 p.m. CST

    Regarding spoilers

    by Kikstad

    But GrahamMinnesotta, do you really need a "scene-by-scene" spoiler filled plot description of a movie to know that it's worth seeing? How can a retelling of a plot capture the essence of scene that plot unfold before your eyes on the big screen in an audience-filled theater? And even so, how can you really trust others opinions/descriptions over your own? How many times have people told me to avoid a movie, but it turned out that in fact I loved it? Or how many times have people told me a movie was a masterpiece, but it turned out that it did nothing for me? Bottomline, I think spoilers RUIN movie-going experiences. I understand you don't want to waste your time or money on crap, but that's part of being a movie-buff, isn't it? Some movies will be enjoyable, some will be disapointments, and some will be those gems we carry with us forever. But I'd rather have my initial reaction of a film be TO THE FILM ITSELF instead of to pre-release-publicity or the reviews of others. Then again, that's just me.

  • April 30, 2002, 3:53 p.m. CST

    Crop Circles, Spoilers, Pacing, Etc.

    by ThePoleOfJustice

    First off Pendant, I had actually heard (warning: this may or may not be a spoiler) that M. Night was working off the premise that crop circles WERE fake, but knowing they were fake, um, what happens when one of them actually turns out to be REAL? Hence the tag line "It's not like they didn't warn us." They DID, but we were too busy crying wolf with fake versions to notice. Of course, all of the above may be just a rumor:P Also, I have no problem with spoilers, so long as they're properly labeled ahead of time. I see a film for the storytelling, the asthetics, and the craft, not for what's going to jump out at me. Granted, someone discussing what happens next WHILE YOU'RE WATCHING IT can ruin the film, but that's because they're distracting. For the record: Sixth Sense was OK, thought The Others told the same story much better. Unbreakable was great, the IDEA behind the ending was great, but it was much too rushed. This is a film which had drawn its strength from its steady pace, then it all gets wrapped up in, like, three minutes. Conceptually great, but way too jarring in execution. BTW, off topic I know, but I finally saw the animated "Metropolis" last night. What a well designed, pretty, hunk of dog crap. Would it have killed them to have a script?

  • April 30, 2002, 4:04 p.m. CST

    How many F#@$% Culkin kids are there???

    by JimmyLegs

    Something jokey. Ocho nailed it. M.Night's a great storyteller who obviously knows how to hold his audience. I liked Sixth Sense and loved the understated nature of Unbreakable, I also look forward to Signs. That being said, how many times can a director go back to the same well genre wise? It's only his third movie and hopefully he has a long career ahead of him, I'll be there for them all.

  • April 30, 2002, 4:08 p.m. CST

    M. Night in his own films...

    by Kid Z

    ...SO what? I just wanna know who the hot Indian babe was who cameoed in the jewelry store scene in Sixth Sense!

  • April 30, 2002, 4:12 p.m. CST

    M. Night's other films before Sixth Sense

    by Kikstad

    I know he did the Rosie O'Donnell movie WIDE AWAKE and lists a movie called PRAYING WITH ANGER. He's listed as writing and directing them both. Anyone here seen them? How do they compare to his recent hits? Do they have the "trademark" Shyamalan touches (surprise endings, visual symbolism, great characterization, strong children's roles, etc.)?

  • April 30, 2002, 4:30 p.m. CST

    Shyamalan knows how to tell a good story!

    by mooncake

  • April 30, 2002, 4:37 p.m. CST

    God, it must be great to have low expectations...

    by lostoptimist

    UNBREAKABLE the greatest comic book film ever? I can't believe anyone would actually say that but to each their own, I guess. Personally, I'll wager the greatest comic book film made is SUPERMAN II; if not that then STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN (which is more of a comic book film than X-MEN, DARKMAN or UNBREAKABLE) but I digress...I have issues with M Night--With UNWATCHABLE in particular. Let

  • April 30, 2002, 5:09 p.m. CST

    Unbreakable is the best Superhero film ever...

    by Fearsme

    To your complaints regarding Unbreakable: #1 - As to how the character reacts to his super powers: First off, why does everyone who gets super powers react in a positive light. The fact is, Bruce's character realizes he is different, and being different is cause to wonder "what is wrong with me." Most heroes react like the forthcoming Spiderman movie. A teenager realizes he can do great things and gets excited, then realizes that 'with great power comes great responsibility'. Bruce's character, being older, realizes this right away. Powers can be a burden. He just wants to be like everyone else. So whats wrong with showing a different side to that scenario, instead of making the character irresponsible, THEN figuring out the burden. #2 - Water is only his weakness, but it only applies to him drowning. Christ, there were 20 scenes with him in the rain, and the man didnt freak. Simply put, he had powers, but could still drown. How did you not get that? Seems to me that some of you werent paying attention.

  • April 30, 2002, 5:43 p.m. CST


    by Kikstad

    I loved Unbreakable but believe me I know plenty of people who hated it too. The above poster points out some reasons why he didn't like it, but personally, those "flaws" didn't bother me. The issue about Bruce Willis' character not knowing he had superpowers works for me -- he just lived his love, not thinking he was anything special. After that trainwreck, the first real traumatic thing to happen in his life, he starts to look back and think "Gee, isn't it strange that looking back, I don't recall being seriously injured or sick or hospitalized." M. Night makes it so "realistic" that the character just takes his good health for granted. And the super-strength is shown realisticly too -- he can't lift a tank with his pinky-finger, he exerts himself. When he starts testing his strength and lifting the weights, he's pushing himself. He probably always knew he was a strong guy, but in the real world, do you think, "Okay, let me try and lift a thousand pounds." And like other "superhero" conventional ideas, his powers probably became more pronounced as he matured. Again, it all works in the world that M. Night has established. You either liked it or you didn't.

  • April 30, 2002, 5:47 p.m. CST

    Mel Gibson Rules

    by Hate_Speech

    and he RARELY picks stinker movies to be part of.

  • April 30, 2002, 6:21 p.m. CST

    Seconds on wanting to know the big spoiler...

    by Kiyone

    Many people like going into a movie "fresh", as Frank Costanza put it, and carefully avoid reading anything about the story of a film, and that's fine. But there are also those of us, like myself, who like knowing everything about the plot before seeing the film. Different people have different ways of enjoying films; there's nothing wrong with people that want to know spoilers, and there's nothing wrong with people that don't. So, someone please put up a link to a page that tells all, or write the ending here encoded in SpamMimic ( ) or ROT13.

  • April 30, 2002, 6:27 p.m. CST


    by lostoptimist

    Okay, first let me say that I saw the movie once in the theatres and that's what I'm basing my observations on. With that out of the way, yes, I remember Bruce out in the rain but, if I recall correctly, he always had his ran slicker on so he was never 'touched' by the rain/water, thus his not being affected by water in small doses was never truly established. As for the "he's older and therefore knows the burden of having superpowers", how do you figure? I mean, I think we can all agree that Bruce's character wasn't too smart in the noggin'. I think it would be quite a reach to assume that he knows the responsibility and weight of having superpowers having never used them before--Especially from a character that came across as extremly emotionally stunted. Besides, the sense of discovery from having superstrength should elicit some joy or at least a smile even if, in the larger scheme of things, it is a burden. Also, having the ability to lift more weight than (probably) anyone in the world doesn't automatically equal a burden. It's a feat, nothing more. And if the first thing he had felt from this feat was dread then logically he would have stopped lifting the weights altogether (and become a big believer in denial) but that didn't happen so...

  • April 30, 2002, 6:33 p.m. CST

    Shade and Fearsme...

    by lostoptimist

    Okay, fine, I'll grant you the drowning thing if you want but, honestly, name me one 'other' superhero who's weakness is so narrowly defined. In any event, Bruce's character's weakness was not the main reason I disliked UNBREAKABLE so I guess, yeah, we'll just have to leave it at some people like the movie and some don't.

  • April 30, 2002, 6:56 p.m. CST

    WOW...I got chills watching that trailer...

    by Pongo

    Unlike any other trailer now, this one didn't give away the whole movie!!! I'm really looking forward to this one--putting it up on my top 3 list for this summer, right along with Attack of the Clones and Spiderman (even though I still think that's going to be worse than people think). I've been wanting another alien movie like this since Independence Day (which also had some great early trailers). Oh, and to whoever was arguing about it earlier--even though I'm not a HUGE fan of his, I'd take an M. Night movie over a Shakespeare play any day of the week...maybe it's just a different generation talking here, but being forced through the "Shakespeare Gauntlet" in high school and the first years of college didn't make me a better writer, a better person, or more appreciative of authors in any way...

  • April 30, 2002, 7:16 p.m. CST

    Shamalammadindong's a hack

    by fuldamobil

    M. Night must be the most overrated director this side of James Cameron. Why does he think he is Hitchcock? His "twists" are obvious, his scripts juvenile and the cinematography overblown. I wish he would go away.

  • April 30, 2002, 7:26 p.m. CST

    I don't get it

    by Kikstad

    Or, you can just not watch his movies and watch something else. Simple. I don't understand why some people feel a compelling urge to trash film-makers or actors or writers they dislike. It's a marketplace of ideas -- if you don't like M. Night, no one is forcing you to see his movies or discuss them. So why the hyperbolic "I wish he'd just go away." He's not a boogeyman hiding under your bed. Haha.

  • April 30, 2002, 7:38 p.m. CST

    I'm Rich! Rich!! Rich!!!

    by Billy Talent

    This is not a scam! It took me less than 142 months to gain complete financial independence. Now my only problem is that I have fourteen cars and no garage! And the best thing is that it's completely legal according Section 113 Appendix IIXVIIVIX of the Paris Peace Accord!

  • April 30, 2002, 8:30 p.m. CST

    My prediction: $120 million.

    by Christopher3

    This year's "The Others," which was last year's "Sixth Sense."

  • April 30, 2002, 8:41 p.m. CST

    Don Logan

    by Kiyone

    Thanks for the spoilers (if they're true). Isn't Spammimic the coolest form of encoding messages ever? Though, it's a little unwieldy for messages longer than a sentence or two.

  • April 30, 2002, 9:34 p.m. CST

    Green Buddha- thanks for the clarification.

    by Kiyone

    Dear Friend , Your email address has been submitted to us indicating your interest in our newsletter . We will comply with all removal requests . This mail is being sent in compliance with Senate bill 1623 ; Title 1 , Section 301 ! THIS IS NOT A GET RICH SCHEME . Why work for somebody else when you can become rich as few as 99 MONTHS . Have you ever noticed people love convenience and more people than ever are surfing the web ! Well, now is your chance to capitalize on this ! We will help you sell more and SELL MORE ! You can begin at absolutely no cost to you ! But don't believe us . Ms Anderson who resides in Oregon tried us and says "I was skeptical but it worked for me" . We are a BBB member in good standing ! DO NOT DELAY - order today . Sign up a friend and you'll get a discount of 30% ! Cheers . Dear Salaryman ; You made the right decision when you signed up for our mailing list . This is a one time mailing there is no need to request removal if you won't want any more . This mail is being sent in compliance with Senate bill 1618 ; Title 1 ; Section 303 . This is different than anything else you've seen . Why work for somebody else when you can become rich within 51 months ! Have you ever noticed people love convenience plus how long the line-ups are at bank machines . Well, now is your chance to capitalize on this ! WE will help YOU increase customer response by 200% and sell more ! You can begin at absolutely no cost to you . But don't believe us ! Prof Anderson who resides in Oklahoma tried us and says "My only problem now is where to park all my cars" . We are licensed to operate in all states ! DO NOT DELAY - order today . Sign up a friend and you get half off ! Thank-you for your serious consideration of our offer ! Dear Friend ; Thank-you for your interest in our publication ! If you are not interested in our publications and wish to be removed from our lists, simply do NOT respond and ignore this mail . This mail is being sent in compliance with Senate bill 1816 ; Title 1 ; Section 304 . This is not multi-level marketing ! Why work for somebody else when you can become rich as few as 31 MONTHS . Have you ever noticed nobody is getting any younger and more people than ever are surfing the web ! Well, now is your chance to capitalize on this . WE will help YOU process your orders within seconds & use credit cards on your website ! You can begin at absolutely no cost to you . But don't believe us . Ms Simpson who resides in Wyoming tried us and says "Now I'm rich, Rich, RICH" ! We are licensed to operate in all states . We BESEECH you - act now ! Sign up a friend and you get half off . God Bless . Dear Colleague , Your email address has been submitted to us indicating your interest in our publication ! This is a one time mailing there is no need to request removal if you won't want any more ! This mail is being sent in compliance with Senate bill 1621 ; Title 9 , Section 305 ! This is NOT unsolicited bulk mail . Why work for somebody else when you can become rich inside 86 weeks . Have you ever noticed most everyone has a cellphone plus people love convenience . Well, now is your chance to capitalize on this . WE will help YOU sell more and SELL MORE ! You can begin at absolutely no cost to you . But don't believe us . Ms Simpson who resides in Kansas tried us and says "My only problem now is where to park all my cars" ! This offer is 100% legal . Because the Internet operates on "Internet time" you must act now ! Sign up a friend and your friend will be rich too . Thank-you for your serious consideration of our offer ! Dear Professional , You made the right decision when you signed up for our club . If you no longer wish to receive our publications simply reply with a Subject: of "REMOVE" and you will immediately be removed from our club . This mail is being sent in compliance with Senate bill 1623 ; Title 9 ; Section 304 . This is not multi-level marketing ! Why work for somebody else when you can become rich as few as 51 WEEKS ! Have you ever noticed people will do almost anything to avoid mailing their bills plus nobody is getting any younger ! Well, now is your chance to capitalize on this . We will help you use credit cards on your website plus increase customer response by 190% . You are guaranteed to succeed because we take all the risk . But don't believe us ! Prof Simpson of Connecticut tried us and says "I've been poor and I've been rich - rich is better" . This offer is 100% legal . If not for you then for your loved ones - act now . Sign up a friend and your friend will be rich too ! God Bless . Dear Sir or Madam , Especially for you - this red-hot intelligence . If you no longer wish to receive our publications simply reply with a Subject: of "REMOVE" and you will immediately be removed from our club ! This mail is being sent in compliance with Senate bill 2416 ; Title 4 , Section 301 ! This is not multi-level marketing . Why work for somebody else when you can become rich within 67 weeks . Have you ever noticed most everyone has a cellphone and more people than ever are surfing the web . Well, now is your chance to capitalize on this ! WE will help YOU use credit cards on your website and increase customer response by 180% ! You can begin at absolutely no cost to you ! But don't believe us ! Prof Anderson who resides in Georgia tried us and says "Now I'm rich, Rich, RICH" ! We are a BBB member in good standing ! If not for you then for your loved ones - act now ! Sign up a friend and you'll get a discount of 70% ! Best regards . Dear Professional ; This letter was specially selected to be sent to you ! If you are not interested in our publications and wish to be removed from our lists, simply do NOT respond and ignore this mail ! This mail is being sent in compliance with Senate bill 2116 , Title 1 , Section 302 . THIS IS NOT A GET RICH SCHEME ! Why work for somebody else when you can become rich in 91 weeks . Have you ever noticed the baby boomers are more demanding than their parents & people are much more likely to BUY with a credit card than cash . Well, now is your chance to capitalize on this . WE will help YOU increase customer response by 130% plus deliver goods right to the customer's doorstep . The best thing about our system is that it is absolutely risk free for you ! But don't believe us ! Prof Anderson who resides in Pennsylvania tried us and says "Now I'm rich many more things are possible" . We are a BBB member in good standing . You will blame yourself forever if you don't order now . Sign up a friend and your friend will be rich too . God Bless .

  • April 30, 2002, 9:40 p.m. CST

    This summer's gonna be UBER-AWESOME!!

    by CoolDan989

    Oh man, I can't wait! Minority Report! Eight Legged Freaks! Men In Black 2! And who can forget...SIGNS! Oh man oh man oh man...this is too good to be true!

  • April 30, 2002, 9:41 p.m. CST


    by TomVee

    SIXTH SENSE was and remains an enjoyable little movie, even though it was easy enough to figure out what was going on, especially for anyone with a medical background. No one on this planet can get shot point blank in the gut and live to tell about it. But even though my wife and I knew from the beginning what was oging on, we saw it with some of our kids and various other relatives, and no one else had a clue. The result? The ending absolutely floored all of them, which made it much more enjoyable for my wife and me. We still watch it periodically on DVD for Willis' nuanced performance and the kid, who is a pretty decent actor. On the other hand, UNBREAKABLE was a fucking mess. The ending is totally contrived and forced. It feels rushed, like no one knew what to do with the ending. The only shock in the whole movie is knowing Jackson caused the train wreck. But in the end, who cares? What must the studio have been thinking to let the director make this turd of a movie? There is no way I would even rent his latest film, let alone see it in a theater. There is no way this director can redeem himself. And Mel Gibson? What is he doing in this drivel? Besides the fact he looks about 80 years old.

  • April 30, 2002, 9:55 p.m. CST

    Thanks For The Spoilage

    by DarkAngelCher

    Thank you for the spoilers. You shared more about the movie - with out giving away too much.

  • April 30, 2002, 10:52 p.m. CST

    Guzman Fan

    by Blue Devil

    My point about Bruce Willis is that he could not have lived on this plane of existence without realizing something was wrong. Why am I never hungry? Why doesn't anyone pay attention to me? Where do I live? Why is it I walk around and see corpses everywhere? Realistically speaking, whether he wanted to or not, he would have HAD to face the truth soon after his demise. To me, that was a cheap shot by Shyamalan that instead of making the film, ruined it for me.

  • April 30, 2002, 11:15 p.m. CST

    this is no. 3 on my must-see summer movie list. third only to sp

    by a goonie

    i looooooove the look of this movie. i love Mel. i love the teasers. i love Shyamalyn. i love what i know of the story. oh man... i can't wait.

  • April 30, 2002, 11:20 p.m. CST

    Willis in Sixth Sense

    by Kikstad

    But he was DEAD, man. That's like you or me walking around now. As a dead person, we assume that his whole view of reality is different -- their sense of time and space is different, right? But somehow, they're drawn to the kid because of the same sixth sense that enables him to see and hear them. They see only what they want to see. At least, that was my take on it. It's like the audience seeing one thing, but then at the end, after we learn that Bruce Willis' character was dead, we see all those previous scenes in a new light. Do we realize that Willis was wearing the same clothes throughout the film? Do we realize that Willis never actually communicated with anyone except the little kid? The clues were there all along. It's that kind of thing. And I think the audience was intentionally supposed to feel like the ghosts at the end of the film -- that sense of shock. Did it work for everybody? No. But I think it was bold of M. Night to try nonetheless, and for the most part I think he succeeded.

  • April 30, 2002, 11:27 p.m. CST

    that leg at the end of the trailer rules!!!

    by a goonie

    and you can barely catch it unless you play it frame-by-frame.

  • April 30, 2002, 11:31 p.m. CST

    Unbreakable was unbelievable.

    by JefferyLebowski

    And not in a good way. Just verrry hard to swallow. You're telling me a guy who used to be a football star never "maxed out" before? That he waited most of his natural life to test the limits of his own strength? And that not only had he never been sick or injured in his entire life, but he never even realized that this was in itself unusual? Preposterous. I realize this is an origin story and meant to be "fantastic" stuff, but Unbreakable gets worse every time I see it.

  • May 1, 2002, 12:06 a.m. CST


    by johanna_kurt

    Is this gag still on? Anyway, if Signs is better than both The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, then we have a fu*ckin' awesome film comin'!!!

  • May 1, 2002, 12:07 a.m. CST


    by johanna_kurt

    Is this gag still on? Anyway, if Signs is better than both The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, then we have a fu*ckin' awesome film comin'!!!

  • May 1, 2002, 12:10 a.m. CST

    I wanna see the fvcking trailer now!!!! I'm having download

    by mooniewawee

    My machine crashes just before the download finishes.. Anyone has an alternative address. THAT MIGHT BE IT 'CAUSE MY OTHER TRAILER DOWNLOADS WORK FINE??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? THIS FOOOKIING MACHINE!!!!ARGHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • May 1, 2002, 12:53 a.m. CST

    Holy Crap Balls!!

    by Ralph Wiggum

    That trailer was scarier than any movie I've seen in years!! I love that alien shit and I can't freakin' wait till this one comes out!!!

  • May 1, 2002, 1:32 a.m. CST


    by rowox

    hey dude, whenever u post here please don't write lines with no spaces in them - that'll stop people having to scroll left and right to read the messages. oh and blue devil, hav u ever been a ghost? no? well then what makes u think that u can say what ghosts perceive as reality?;P

  • May 1, 2002, 2:19 a.m. CST

    old starwars

    by ekojoyo

    i need that old starwars feelings back. i need deathstar, i need superstar destroyer, i need darth vader. i need princess leia. new starwars is good but far to inferior compared to the old ones

  • May 1, 2002, 3:26 a.m. CST

    Why was Don Logan's Spammimic message removed?

    by Kiyone

    It's not really spam; it's an encoded message that looks like spam. You cut and paste it to and it automatically decodes. I noticed it on Portal of Evil yesterday, and it's really cool, which is why I suggested it instead of just ROT13 for spoilers, but for messages over a sentence long, it's not terribly practical.

  • May 1, 2002, 3:33 a.m. CST

    HOLY MOTHER FVCK!!! I LOVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    by keisereela

    Now I officially can't wait for the movie! And the losers are officially jealous! bwahahahah!!!! Night is da man! Ok, ok, first I'm a big shamanalndingdong fan, I actually hated Unbreakable and just slowly loved it after repeated viewing, but that's ok, The Sixth Sense was just ok. So if this movie is anything but.. then I'm ready to kill to see the movie now!!! Give it a 4th of July, Christmas, Thanksgiving opening anytime and i'm there!!!!!!!!

  • May 1, 2002, 3:34 a.m. CST

    HOLY MOTHER FVCK!!! I LOVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    by keisereela

    Now I officially can't wait for the movie! And the losers are officially jealous! bwahahahah!!!! Night is da man! Ok, ok, first I'm a big shamanalndingdong fan, I actually hated Unbreakable and just slowly loved it after repeated viewing, but that's ok, The Sixth Sense was just ok. So if this movie is anything but.. then I'm ready to kill to see the movie now!!! Give it a 4th of July, Christmas, Thanksgiving opening anytime and i'm there!!!!!!!!

  • May 1, 2002, 4:22 a.m. CST

    Why I wasn't surprised by The Sixth Sense

    by DouglasAH

    At least by the ending, the rest of the film moved in directions I wasn't expecting. Anyway, if there are any filmmakers reading this, and you're thinking of surprising people by revealing that a major character is dead, here's a tip. Don't have someone shoot him 5 minutes into the film and then show him dying through the 'Ghost' cam, hovering overhead. He didn't surprise you with the ending, he surprised you with a shot of the guy apparently still alive and doing his job, and you fell for it, because you didn't put 2 and 2 together and realize you're watching a movie about ghosts. Come on, folks, you shouldn't have been fooled.

  • May 1, 2002, 4:40 a.m. CST

    People who make fun of Shyamalan's name...

    by Victor_Laszlo

    Must be retarded grade-school kids. Grow up.

  • May 1, 2002, 8 a.m. CST


    by TheAtarisFan

    Unbreakable was awesome! Sam "the man" Jackson playing someone who is not a badass, for once, and doing a fantastic job.

  • May 1, 2002, 10:43 a.m. CST

    Spoil me!

    by spider-ham

    Please let me know what the heck the movie is about. I didn't get to see Dons message before it was cut. Please email

  • May 1, 2002, 11:55 a.m. CST

    Walrus, thank you...sincerely

    by lostoptimist

    I appreciate the response and, now that I think about (again, I'm basing this on the one time I saw the movie in the theatres when it first came out), you are right about the marriage thing. I guess I forgot about that. But I still have a tough time gripping with Bruce's clairvoyance and his weakness which, if I understand it, doesn't mean he can't swim or that he's prone to drowning. It's just that he can't handle being forced to hold his breath for more than 5 seconds--Which is still a pretty silly weakness for a super-strong clairvoyant superhero but, hey, that's just me. Anyway, you got me thinking that maybe I ought to watch the movie a second time so my hat's off to you.

  • May 1, 2002, 2:54 p.m. CST


    by prowl71

    Kiyone and Green Buddha are writing in code. Basically you would need to copy their ENTIRE message (respectively) and then post in the Decode section over at if you want to view their actual post. **WARNING: they are discussing spoilers. p r o w l

  • May 1, 2002, 8:06 p.m. CST

    M.Nyghty Shamalarama-do

    by ryan2000

    Usualy directors who base their visions on other directors work (which he does with hitchcock) piss me off. But this guy is different. i can't quite explain it but his work, style, craft, is some of the best i've seen in a director. He has established himself as (in my eyes maybe) one of the best directors around and right up the with the best of all time & he's only done 2 fucking movies prior to this (not including the 2 fairly unknown ones previous to SIXTH). Old Alfred has always been my favorite director, but after watching unbreakable he has shown me that he can do this that i belive Alfred could only dream of! In other words or just to sum it up quickly...i can't fucking wait for this movie!

  • May 1, 2002, 8:53 p.m. CST

    Brown people are fucking beautiful

    by furnace404

    It's just too bad that the last reviewer didn't think so. Signed, a hot brown guy.

  • May 1, 2002, 11:37 p.m. CST


    by X7thsamuraiX

    Well, they say in life that the only certainties are death and taxes. I think we should add: you can always find someone that will bitch about anything, whether he knows what he is talking about or not. Anyway, both M Night and Gibson have both proven themselves as filmakers that know what they are doing and tell a good story. So I am not worried that Signs will be good or not. As for the pacing, I think the reviewer that said it was too slow may be a tad spoiled. There are way too many movies that take the audience on a fast paced rollercoaster ride that dazzles and wows. Often at the expense of the story and enjoyment of a deep film. Good movies take their time and unfold with viewers, not hit them over the head with it. I would rather exit a theater pleased with a good story and impressed with it, rather than waiting for my eyesight and hearing(ravaged by special effects) to return. most movies are to short, not too long. What do the rest of you think?

  • May 2, 2002, 3:17 a.m. CST

    In defense of Unbreakable

    by Kerath

    lostoptimist "UNBREAKABLE the greatest comic book film ever? I can't believe anyone would actually say that but to each their own, I guess. Personally, I'll wager the greatest comic book film made is SUPERMAN II;" Superman II is fun to watch, but the greatest comic book film ever? No way. It was a total pop-corn movie, not to mention it completely ignored the nature of Superman's powers. "if not that then STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN (which is more of a comic book film than X-MEN, DARKMAN or UNBREAKABLE)" Simply having elements in common with comics does not make a film a comic book film, nevermind the best ever. I cannot fathom how you can think that The Wrath of Khan is more of a comic book film than X-Men, Darkman, and Unbreakable. "but I digress...I have issues with M Night" As do I. The suprise ending of TSS is not coherent. "--With UNWATCHABLE" Oooh, that's original. Works for UNBEATABLE, too. "Let

  • May 2, 2002, 5:30 a.m. CST


    by Kerath

    I just realized that with the total lack of formatting, my previous post is a mess. Oh well. And Walrus, you might be right about his psychic power, it's not really explained.

  • May 2, 2002, 10:42 a.m. CST


    by Da Big Dogg

    Hey Yo! Jimmy and Head are such big dickheads. Those motherfucking assholes ain't got nothing but bad things to say about Night.They don't now a great fucking director when they see one. And anyone who thinks Night sucks can suck my big black dick.

  • May 2, 2002, 11:50 a.m. CST

    I don't like this trailer.

    by RoystonLodge

    It seems to give away too much of the story.

  • May 2, 2002, 5:06 p.m. CST

    Unbreakable and comic fans

    by DouglasAH

    Okay. If you are bashing M. Night for not being "true" to the superhero comics with Unbreakable, then at best you take your comic books way too seriously. At worst, you're in league with all the suits who insist on strict adherence to some proven formula that stifles creativity. No one is forcing you to see Unbreakable again, to buy the DVD, or to enjoy/endure another M. Night Shyamalan film, so just shut up and go fantasize about finding a near-mint Batman #14 or something in a little antique shop for 50 cents.

  • May 2, 2002, 6:03 p.m. CST

    "The kids, they call me Mr. Glass!"

    by ProzacMorris

    Movies like "Unbreakable" need that slower pacing so that you care about the characters and understand what drives them. "Unbreakable" was a beautiful film that was all about the akwardness of the father/son relationship and believing in yourself and searching for a purpose. A power. And a hero. I want to see more of David Dunne and his powers. How about you all?

  • May 3, 2002, 3:56 p.m. CST

    re: Kikstad

    by pedant

    To me, there is very little difference between the kind of film Shyamalan makes and something like "Left Behind: The Movie". Both take themselves entirely too seriously for me to get anything out of them other than a derisive belly-laugh. It really has nothing to do with the fact that it's sci-fi, fantasy, or the supernatural... I feel the same way about any film that takes a wildly speculative (or demonstrably false) premise too seriously. I have no problem with sci-fi, fantasy, and horror in general. ***** And a brief aside to the person who claims that not all crop circles are hoaxes... All I can really say is that you are doing yourself a huge disservice if you look to The Discovery Channel as any kind of authoritative source on "fringe" issues like this. Suffice it to say that credulous treatments of these topics get good ratings and sell a lot of books; skeptical treatments do not. See for a skeptical point of view; you obviously need one badly.

  • July 6, 2002, 2:11 a.m. CST

    Shyamalan Rules Over All!!!!!!!

    by Negativeaspect

    Shyamalan is this generations Hitchcock. I actually think that he has topped Hitchcock. Hitchcocks biggest problem was his inability to get personal with his characters. M. Night has taken Hitch's style and improved upon it. He is a phenomenal writer as well as a directer. He and Hitchcock will be looked back on in years to come as the Shakespeares. Vertigo is Hitch's Hamlet, The sixth sense is Shyamalan's Romeo and Juliet. AND I WILL BE THE NEXT TO CARRY THE TORCH FOR THE NEXT GENERATION!!!! One more thing that I think is awesome, Signs is released on my birthday!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • July 9, 2002, 11:22 a.m. CST

    BLUE DEVIL & Signs

    by hershyskiss87

    I would just like to say that you r jealous of M. Night and that i would like to see u make a movie even close to being as good as his! Sometimes those who keep their mouths closed r those who appear intelligent. You, however, are clearly mistaken & don't have nearly the idea what your talkng about. Oh, and I am looking foward to Signs. M. Nite is incredible and definitly belongs in the movie bizz:)

  • July 12, 2002, 10:16 p.m. CST

    Let me explain

    by Negativeaspect

    I'm not exactly sure where you got that I was jealous of M. Night. I tried to get it across that I admired the guy by saying that he was better than Hitch. To me that's more of a complement than a notion towards jealousy. Oh, and please notice the subject of my last message. And to your thought on intelligence,if i have to sacrifice passion for your idea of intelligence than I love stupidity. I think he deserves all his success, and has been my greatest insperation in film. The one goal I hope to reach in life is to get reach in life is at least have a chance to make my own film. I'd rather be a poor director that made a film(good or bad), than any other existing profession making millions a week. "My biggest fear in life is being average." -M. Night Shyamalan