IMO his movie with Bruce Willis and the kid... Anyhow it was barely a digression from much of the themes and heart-strings of typical Bollywood, in English not Hindi. We didn't invent ghost-stories, that's a thousand-year old genre, and we didn't invent story-telling either -- but not every storyteller hits a home-run, and money can drive people crazy and take them out of the game. And he's not Satyajit Ray either, and RD Burman's not Henry Mancini (but it's a closer link)-- that's a whole different cosmos of movie-making.
What director-type people come here for (besides money=legitimacy) is the technical expertise and end-to-end production values. That's getting exported now, some always has, but like Silicon Valley the engine, drivers, and momentum are still here. Anyhow whatever.

There was a huge 2 page spread in, I think, the NY Post last week - detailing the war between Disney and their once-golden boy Shamalyan - and how they turned down the script for The Ho-Bag in the Puddle. Amazing - they played hard ball. They said No. Disney - who had pampered him to death - actually had the balls to say: "Uhm. No."

Unbelievable!! So then - what does M Night do? Writes the character of the film critic (played by Bob Balaban - one of my favorites) - who is supposed to be the evil villain of the whole piece - and casts himself as a writer whose book is going to literally change the course of humanity. However that will work I have no idea ... but it's all just so ... I don't know - I am EATING UP this story.

It's got all the cool elements: hubris, a large fall, failure, gladiatorial posturing on both sides - it's awesome!!

Finally Warner Brotehrs stepped up and took on the film - trying to salvage the situation. You could feel their increasing desperation in the ad campaign.

It's ugly - I love stories like this. It's like that awesome book I know I've told you about before - The Devil's Candy.

It's really interesting to watch someone de-rail. There are object lessons there.

Did you read the piece in the Post, Emily? I swear, I could FEEL that war with Disney in the hackneyed previews and commercials for the film, which seemed to change their attitude and mood every other minute ... I thought: "Hmmm. Something is not right here." This whol thing is actually really big news - he's been so untouchable, really - and Disney is so powerful. It's fascinating.

I kind of need to see it - the dude who's sitting in for Roger Ebert while Ebert recovers wrote a HILARIOUS review of it. I'm curious.

In case you haven't read it, Emily - here's the piece.

Just remember, in Hollywood, you fail upwards...

Dirtcrasher,
I'm not sure I made much sense from your comment or what you were getting at. There isn't really a Shyamalan Bollywood connection. He was born in India, but was raised in the US.

Sheila,
Thanks for the link. I'll have to read it later. I'm pretty mesmerized by this whole mess too. Like, I cannot believe that somebody could be such a HUGE egomaniac. When twenty people are telling you your movie sucks and you refuse to believe them, and then write it all off as having "rarified tastes"...puh-LEEZE. There's a difference between sticking to your guns and ignoring the advice of EVERYBODY around you. I know a lot of good movies wouldn't have been made if some writers and directors hadn't stood up to executives without vision, but this is not the case with Shyamalan's films. Instead of reading what critics have to say and look at it as an opportunity to improve his work, what does he do? He mauls one in his next movie like a spoiled child throwing a temper tantrum. I'm not saying critics can't necessarily be clueless, but give me a break. His movies have gotten worse and worse as he progressed and he is actually sitting there with the attutide that it's US and not HIM that's got it wrong. For fuck's sake, people who eat poop have "rarified tastes" but in the end, it's still SHIT.

God, you have no idea how angry this makes me. You should see how madly fast I was typing this. I am a maniac.

And Sheila,
If you haven't already, make sure you click on the rotten tomatoes link because there's a lot of funny reviews there as well, a la Battlefield Earth savagery.

hahahaha

Are you kinda like this little guy right now??

heh heh heh

It is a mesmerizing story - I love it. And you definitely get the sense that not a lot of people are unhappy about this comeuppance he's getting. It's weird. Nobody is really defending him. Which says a lot - because, my God - here was the dude whose picture that didn't even really have a marketing budget became one of the hugest grossing films of ALL TIME. I mean - hollywood will do ANYTHING for people like that, who make them shitloads of money!!

Think about someone like Quentin Tarantino - who is another one of those hugely successful dudes - who somehow - has escaped the M Night Shyamalyan fate - he's kept it real. And man, does Tarantino have his defenders - you know? Whether or not you like his work, it can't be denied that Big People in High Places will go to the mat for him.

Shamalayan doesn't have that anymore. Fascinating!!

I'd love to read an expose of what went on here. Like a really good indepth Vanity Fair piece or something - I bet it's a really interesting corporate battle to read about.

From the Chicago Sun-Times review that I think Sheila referred to: "there is an ancient race of narfs....They live in water and are desperate to communicate warnings to Man, but Man has forgotten how to listen. They are sort of like amphibious Al Gores."

I'll go check out Rotten Tomatoes, Emily - I'm thinking I need to go see this bomb, I'm way too curious. It's like I HAD to see Battlefield Earth - I HAD TO.

I'm seriously considering seeing it as well, Sheila.

But he does have some defenders. Check out some of the people here who say things like he's just getting a hard time because everybody expected him to make The Sixth Sense over and over and over again and he didn't do that. Um, yes, that's exactly what he did and exactly why I have a problem with his shit movies.

That, and ever since I saw an interview with him shortly after SS where he basically sat and congratulated himself on the subtle genius of his work, I've just really had it in for the guy. It would be forgivable if he made good movies. Lots of directors are egomaniacs. It's a trait that attracts them to becoming directors in the first place. But this guy basically is letting his egomania ruin his career.

Yes, I am like that little cartoon guy. I'm THIS FAR from banging my head bloody all over my keyboard....Grrrr. I guess I should probably skip that afternoon cup of coffee.

And Tarantino has major movie stars who are still waiting to see what he will do next, to see if they can be in one of his movies. Or Soderbergh - he's another one. Or PT Anderson. Actors COURT these guys. They make actors look GOOD. And so actors just wait to be asked to be in one of their movies. I don't sense that kind of goodwill with Shamu the Killer Whale here.

Uhm - Paul Giamatti, an Academy-Award nominated actor - WELL beloved by many - was eventually cut out of the commercials for the film - obviously in a desperate attempt to ratchet up the fear factor, figuring they don't need Giamatti to sell the film.

You just don't do that. Or - you do - but you then piss a TON of people off. Giamatti would be right to be FURIOUS. I mean, he has no control over stuff like that - but it is obvious he was not treated well at all. Bob Balaban seems to be the only one who has salvaged a performance for himself out of this.

And please - can I just say right here how much I love Bob Balaban???

I think considering the shit material they're working with, especially in The Village (exploding veins in forehead in 4...3...2...), actors do pretty well in his films. I'm especially sad to see Bryce Dallas Howard working with him again. She was like the one bright spot in the Film Title That Shall Not Be Mentioned and I think she showed so much promise to have a great career. I hope she still does and that this crap doesn't end up dragging her down.

But yeah, Giamatti's a pretty hot commodity right now. Why in the WORLD would they leave him out of the previews. I can't remember if I saw him in the trailer I watched the last time I went to the movies, but even then, in the movie theater, just the mention of Shamu's name at the beginning, my blood began to BOIL. Like, as much as I had hoped he'd learned from the stupidity of his last few films, I know that he had written this one and that it was going to be TERRIBLE because of it. The thing is, he really could be great if he worked with someone else's script. I read somewhere he was interested in doing the next Harry Potter movie and you know what? As long as he had NOTHING to do with the story, he'd probably do a terrific job. He's obviously got a very visual talent. He's WASTING it because he cannot admit to himself that his stories are shit. That kills me.

Sheila,
Me too. When I heard he was in this all I could think was "what the fuck? Why God, WHY??!?!?"

//He's WASTING it because he cannot admit to himself that his stories are shit. //

Yup.

Hubris - I'm tellin' ya!

Hubris is right. I hate people who refuse to recognize their own limitations. I know I would suck at writing a historical period piece. I probably couldn't pull off action, either. I know this and just don't go there. It's okay if it's not all about YOU, M. Nighty-night, m'kay? You don't have to do it all.

OH gawd, another thing that bugs me is the way he names his characters. The lead character in Ho In Da Bath is called "Story." As in, like a story! And the kid who sees dead people is called "Seer." I think that's one of the "subtelties" he patted himself on the back for, of all the nerve, like audiences need to have this pointed out to them. Get it...he's named Seer and he SEES DEAD PEOPLE? I HATE writers and directors who treat the audience like they're stupid.

I've seen one preview with Paul Giamatti in it.

(HOW did I not know he was former-commissioner-of-baseball Bart Giamatti's son? HOW DID THIS ESCAPE ME?!)

I didn't know that either, Lisa, and I surely did not connect the dots. Aint like there are a lot of Giamatti's out there. Sailed right over my head.

Lisa - I DID NOT KNOW THAT EITHER! What???

And I wish I had kept notes on all the different commercials I've seen for the film - the previews all started with Giamatti - the first one I saw had Giamatti in his little guard house staring out at the creepy pool - but then at some point, they re-cut the commercials and he disappeared from them. I think they figured that Giamatti wasn't enough of a draw even though he has a huge (albeit indie) following.

I loved Sixth Sense. I loved Unbreakable. I loved Signs up until the point where they revealed how to stop the aliens -- then I went on an M. Night HATE FEST!!! How dare he think that's a deep and intellectual plot? How dare he waste two freakin' hours of my time only to come up with the stupidest freakin' ending of all freaking time?

Cullen,
I can't remember where I read it, but someone slammed the ending of Signs by writing something like "why would a race of supposedly intelligent aliens that can be killed by water invade a planet that's covered over 3/5ths by it? That's like Planetary Invaision 101."

I have written that myself. But I probably stole it from someone.

I know Indians who were born and raised outside India who still consider India their home and visit family there - they just hapen to live here, and for them being raised here has more to do with affect then effect. One friend from the UK goes "Home" to Bombay every year - so I made an assumption about overriding cultural influence, an assumption I will probably always make with regards to someone from India.

Chick in the pool?

Listen, strange women lying in ponds is no basis for a movie plotline.

I don't know - a chick lying in a pond did okay for Shakespeare. Although she was dead, of course.

You can get away with anything if you believe in the story - if you tell a good story. From what I hear, Shamalyan doesn't even really believe in it himself. Which is the main difference between himself and his idol Hitchcock.

Think of the plot of To Catch a Thief. How on EARTH is any of that plausible? Whatever - nobody cares about plausibility when they watch the film because everyone involves totally believes in what they are doing. It's a blast to watch. YOu forget the implausibility.

Shymalyan has forgotten so many lessons taught by that great master - a man he continuously compares himself to.

Idiot. It's not just about tricks - and giving the audience a cheap "a-HA" moment. You have to weave an entire 3-dimensional world - and you have to bleieve in that world totally.

I don't care if it's midgets running around with torches, singing Hava Nagilah - if somehow the director and everyone involved believe - and they somehow make me suspend my disbelief, then they can do whatever they want.

I saw "Cars" the other day, finally. It continually amazes me that Pixar makes more human stories in movies with no humans whatsoever on screen, while M Naught Chakakhan can't get it right with some of the finest actors working today.

He cast himself as a writer! Heheheheh. His story will save humanity! BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Did his ego get its own trailer?

Excellent comparison with Tarantino, BTW. You should hear Robert Forster talk about him. Great quote here on IMDB about it (scroll down a tad).

And O/T - if I see that "John Tucker Dating Quiz" commercial one more time, the moviemakers shall join Mr. Tucker. I'll sic Martin Blank on them.

PS - yes, I re-used the Chaka Khan joke.
PPS - You know, with the beard, I didn't recognize Giamatti at first; I thought he was Richard Dreyfuss.

I hvent read through the comments yet, and Im sure some or several have already given you good links, but have you seen the Libertas blog?

http://www.libertyfilmfestival.com/libertas/?p=1948

One could have fun coming up with a film that combines the worst of various directors. Swimming pool nymph (M. N. Shyamalan), disembodied Martians (J. Carpenter), sandworms (D. Lynch), scuzzy-haired aliens ($c1ent0l0gy), strippers (P. Verhoven), global warming (K. Costner), JFK assassination (O. Stone), Mossad (S. Spielberg), Godzilla (R. Emmerich)...

OMG, Nightfly...that IMDB link for Robert Forster talking about Tarantino! Hahahaha.

He's as good a guy as I have ever worked with. He screened movies once a week for his crew. One of them was American Perfekt (1997), a recent indie film I did.The last week of production he threatened to screen it for the crew and I said to him, "Listen, there's a tiny bit of 'adult content' in this, so I don't want to hear any catcalls. I don't know if it this is the right thing to screen." He got on the walkie-talkie and said "Hey, anybody who wants to see Forster naked come on in!"

Alan,
I'd not only watch it, I'd buy it and build a shrine to its hideous glory!

Nightfly - hahahahaha that is such an awesome link!!!

And right ON about the Pixar films. Amazing, right? I have to say that A Bug's Life (maybe not their biggest hit) was one of my most favorite films of the last 10 years. Seriously - I never get tired of it.

Hey. I love Dune.

"strange women lying in ponds is no basis for a movie plotline"

Don't tell that to Monty Python. (Although they did call The Lady in The Lake a "watery tart"...)

:-)

There's a race called Narfs?

Do they go to war with the Poits?

"Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?"

I liked Signs, but it is the only of his movies I have bothered to see.