Warning: spoilers lie within…
i think m. night shyamalan should go into comedies. not because i find him particularly funny, but more because this film was hilarious. unfortunately, something in the writing makes it obvious the comedy aspect was unintended. and by something i mean there were no jokes or even humorous asides.
the premise is weak and full of holes. it’s supposed to be a bedtime story, but even kids would probably laugh out loud at some parts. it’s hard to explain so i’m going to do something that i’ve never done and hope never to do again. i’m going to mention certain parts of the movie as examples. if you haven’t seen it i’ll try to keep them less plot-important. if you have seen it i’m sorry. and for the select few who have seen it and enjoyed it i don’t know how you found this blog because i haven’t recommended it to you.
first there’s the stutter. there was not only no reason for the stutter, but it was horribly overacted and inappropriate. i know it was there in order to show a parallel between heep and story, but it had so little bearing on the plot it was irritating.second was young-soon choi << even the character name is epically dumb >>. her character was so stereotypically Asian it was almost painful and she continued to tell heep parts of the bedtime story at odd and prophetic times for no particular reason. her relationship with her mother is inane and trite. the worst of it is how she recognizes the story as a bedtime story her grandmother told her even when “narf” would never occur in any Korean in any form at any time ever.
speaking of her mother: third is how her mother would only tell the story to heep if he acted as incompetent as possible. what the hell is that about? that just ended up translating as ridiculous and pathetic.
fourth was the excessive use of exaggerated characters. a man who only works out one half of his body. a crossword champion. a movie critic who sees no originality in film. five Hispanic daughters. a gaggle of stoners. a superintendent who’s methodically melancholy. i mean i understand using exaggerated characters to make a point, but not to make a cast.
fifth is how shyamalan cast himself << a pretty shitty actor >> in a prominent role. how conceited do you have to be to pull that off? arrogance anyone?
sixth is heep swimming with his shoes on for roughly ten minutes without any more air than through a straw in a dinner glass. there was no reason for the haste of not taking off at least his shoes. or at least there wasn’t in the film. maybe shyamalan had that in his head.
and finally seventh is the predictability if his trademark << and cliche >> twist ending. once the necessary players are explained it’s hard to see why heep chooses the people he does.
the directing is generic and the writing dull. i understand the story is probably supposed to generate a sense of hope about the humans fate, but there’s not enough attention paid to any part of this movie to convey this intention. i would guess anyone over the age of thirteen who enjoyed this film would try to paint a grandiose picture and philosophy that shyamalan himself didn’t know how to paint. the only way to find merit in this film would be to see it as a movie for children, but the promoters unfortunately didn’t bill it as this.
the suspense is generated << and not well >>. so it was hard to get immersed in this one. maybe this was shyamalan trying to get away from his twist-ending persona, but there is such a build-up i find it hard to believe he didn’t at least have one in mind. the build-up itself is so rudimentary it forces me to be embarrassed for him.
but, on the other hand, if this is shyamalan’s first venture into the comedy genre i give him credit. because i was laughing out loud through many a sequence.
**
Tags: terrible movie