Review of The Village (2004) by Lars-Erik D — 24 Mar 2015

I feel bad for directors like M Night, because whatever films they make are always compared to the ones that came before it and they never seem to escape phrases like, 'well it wasn't as good as x', 'maybe it'll be better than y', because I feel like 'The Village' had an overall mixed reception just because of people's expectations, which are a huge problem in this world, and the trailers didn't help as they only coloured people's expectations further. I just watched a film that I had wanted to watch for a long time and had no expectations and was ready to just accept the film for what it was and I have to say that I was very pleased with what I saw. I saw a filmmaker trying to do something a little bit different whilst still working to his strengths and I like that, even if the majority didn't seem to like something they didn't expect. This film immediately has an eerie atmosphere and everything about the setting is excellent, something is very clearly wrong with the scenario our characters are in and the sense of dread is always present. We actually get to see the creatures a little bit during about a quarter of the way through and they do shock and are very well designed, even if their faces appeared to have changed by the end. We also get to hear them at the start of the film as well as during the film and, once again, it is quite eerie; even if, considering how the film ends, I don't know how the noises could have been made.

Shyamalan either brings out the best or worst in actors but he does a fantastic job here and actually put the actors through a 19th century boot camp in preparation for the film. The absolutely huge cast is such a grand thing to see, they all do great jobs and make everything all the more convincing and I liked how subtle it was. There are big named actors in here, but if their role is small, they stay small, it isn't just a chance to have their faces seen as much as possible, and it's all SAG worthy, even if, oddly, Sigourney Weaver is top billed on the imdb app for some reason, but that website always messes up cast order. I won't name everyone because the whole review would just be names but: Bryce Dallas Howard, in her first lead role, does an absolutely fantastic job and is really believable; she really got me invested, especially at the end and I think it would have been pretty bold to reveal she was blind right at the end. After seeing her excellent performance, it's really hard to imagine Kirsten Dunst in the role, not because she is bad but just because Howard was phenomenal and it's amazing to find out how the key part of the film was brought into production so late. Her father is a talented director and she is a talented actress, it's great when everything works out like that. She should have gotten a Golden Globe for New Star of the Year, even though they discontinued that years ago, or a BAFTA Rising Star Award, even though they didn't do that yet- I'm joking but just, the point is, she was incredible. It'd be an interesting and funny coincidence if James Newton Howard was related in some way. Joaquin Phoenix made her the walking stick that she uses throughout the film and speaking of him, Joaquin Phoenix's character was written for him and it feels like it, it also feels like a slight variation on his role from 'Signs'. William Hurt does a very good job like usual and is very believable in his role and when the twist is revealed as well as when the film is coming to a close, you really feel for his character. Adrien Brody was quite interesting in a very unusual kind of role, and whose hands look like they have been used on one of the film's posters, and we got to see a very early Jesse Eisenberg here, even if wasn't in it very much. We also get to see Frank Collison before he became the infamous 'hotdog guy'. And Sigourney Weaver had nightmares for two weeks after reading the script!

One thing that really satisfied me is that it pretty much answered all of the questions I had whilst I was watching it, which is always great for a film like this and doesn't let anything just trail off. Why and how did this start? How come no one has found the village? Why keep someone like Adrien Brody's character around? (Besides the fact that it would be cruel to just get rid of him anyway) and many more. The only thing I didn't really understand was, why red? They explain that it's 'the bad colour', but why? But okay, maybe I'm focusing on it too much because if it had been blue or pink or something I'd be asking the same question, I guess I just wanted some sort of explanation, which I do think they mention at one point that it is an evil colour as well, but, like the characters, I just have to believe it. It also doesn't help matters that the creatures wear red, but I think that's part of the point, that red attracts them because that is what they wear. However, if the safe colour is yellow then why can't they go in the woods all the time and just wear yellow? We see characters walk into the woods whilst wearing yellow but bad things seem to happen to them anyway, there are also a few characters that say that they have seen things in the woods but given how the film concludes, that couldn't have been. They also never do the three paint strike that we see on the poster, and unless I missed something, they only ever do one. And couldn't they have just told them that 'the towns' didn't exist and because I knew that they were a concept, I already had an idea of what the twist would be already. Also, magic rocks? Seems like they're just pulling at straws at that point, especially after the twist is revealed, a character even mentions that they haven't even seen them before, but again, that works well into the deceptiveness of the twist. I also questioned how Bryce survived as long as she did, she is said to have an 'Aura' about her but given how the film develops that doesn't even make any sense whatsoever. I questioned why she would be sent on a task with people that were obviously going to give up and even if they didn't all they would have to do is wait for her whilst she got what she needed but that works fiendishly well into the twist, which I actually liked. True, I did feel a little underwhelmed at first and I had a scrunched up look on my face when it happened but thinking about it, it's actually quite smart, very subtly executed and different. Looking back on it, I also like how there are very small hints to what it could be all throughout the film, Shyamalan was always very good at doing that; even if someone's curiosity of looking inside the black box could crumble the whole thing or if someone came up to them at the end whilst they were looking inside of them, I don't know why they didn't hide those things better, but again, it makes sense for what they are trying to convey. Also true, that when the end credits rolled around I just laughed but that is just because of how 'out there' this film truly was but that's great about it; it's very unique. I'll admit that I had heard a tiny little bit about this film before going in but it was never enough to spoil the experience as it is layered, but I will say, that what I thought was going to happen would probably have been a lot better received than what we got, even if it was just a few variations on what actually happened, like, they were being tricked by an outside source or being studied by someone, (which, now doing research, was actually not that far off what happened in a similar book, whose authors felt like this film plagiarised). I did like that the twist made sense, though, and actually fits in with the events before it, for the most part.

Around the last 25 to 30 minutes of the film, it felt very odd, it seemed like the film didn't really know what to do after introducing the twist and just kind of faffed around for a few minutes before getting back on track shortly after, it was just weird and strange for a little bit. And the ending just leaves things open for the whole village to just crumble as it heavily implies it will be found and maybe that was the idea but I don't really understand how the village could even happen anyway, given the twist, I don't see how it could happen, people can't just do things like that. It also has M Night show up, like usual, and he just gives a big exposition bomb at exactly the right time. He explains a lot even if it asks the audience to accept a lot. So... I guess after all that, I still had plenty of questions, but just after the fact. However, that is unless I missed something huge about the questions I have brought up but I have been reading a lot and making sure I don't ask anything that did, in fact, have answers. Like usual, M Night has a good idea and puts everything together very, very carefully but doesn't think about a few key things and then those parts of his script have holes so big you can drive a truck through them. I will admit that it might appear that I might be looking too literally at the film as what the village and characters introduced at the end, like M Night's and Kevin are supposed to represent are very well done, the film is very smart. I heard one complaint with regards to how the characters dressed and talked, given the twist, but I don't agree with that because the way they dress and talk is how they want it to be because they liked those times. It is also very interesting to think about what could happen to the village after the credits roll, given who tells what to who, they know a secret that nobody else, besides the Elders, knows and even though they said that they were based on legends they had heard at the time, it could cause something huge to happen. I think they were told just so that person would feel safe in the woods, as that is why they discard what they have been given, and then it leads into showing us the reveal but they had to be told like that, so we would know anyway. I'm being vague here as well as in the rest of the review but that is because I don't want to spoil anything.

My only complaint with the craft of the film is the cinematography, which feels like a crime to say because Roger Deakins did it, but it just isn't that good in this film. I thought the reason he didn't get an Oscar nod is because of the average reviews but clearly not because it didn't affect the achingly beautiful and hauntingly beautiful soundtrack that got a very deserved Oscar nod, that 'Finding Neverland' soundtrack had better be something really outstanding to beat something as beautiful as this, and after watching the film, I see why it didn't for the very simple reason that I could tell someone was behind the camera. True the contrast between colours was beautiful and he gets amazing shots like always but every single panning shot just seemed so sloppily done whilst feeling rushed at the same time and it wouldn't have mattered as much if it wasn't used that often, but it is. I could very clearly see the point where he got up from his crouch, moved around the character and then crouched again, it was just so bad! I can't believe it! It also has some very, very unnecessary slo-mo that just makes it cheesy. Also, the final part of the film through the woods was poorly filmed, one minute she is walking one way toward to camera to show her going on her journey and the next, after a scene back in the village, it just changes sides and I had assumed for a little bit this was to show that she had already got what she needed off screen. Why else would the position of the camera keep changing? It just messes with continuity. But hey, he did get one award, so that's something, even if he did get nominated for an Oscar; he would only get snubbed once more, sadly. I also wanted to skip the celebration scene just because I felt like I didn't need to see it go on so long but, like usual, as soon as I thought it was going on too long, it ended. That scene also has a character wearing red, smart.

Rumour has it that M Night went a little crazy after he heard that this film didn't get the obvious desired response that any filmmaker would want and I guess it shows as his next films wouldn't be as well received as his films prior and it's a shame. If people hadn't of had expectations and were more open to a little experimentation, I wonder if things would have turned out differently, and wow did his reviews scores just drop from this film onwards. But as it is, I like the film and I certainly think it's the kind of film that could be watched a second time to great effect, like most of M Night's films. In a world of an overabundance of remakes and reboots and sequels, it's good to see original stories being told, true they might not work to great response but that's part of the nature of experiments. But as usual, he makes a film that gets people talking and I am glad to see that more people are starting to appreciate this film for what it is now. It's just a shame, 'The Sixth Sense' was just too amazing for its time and every film he makes is just going to be compared to that. I found this film to be very memorable and it is so unique and I just love that about it. It's a character study, like most of his films, and the ending really stayed with me. It's perfectly put together and has an excellent sense of dread and tension that it carries perfectly throughout the whole film and by the time it actually ends, I really felt moved and quite sad. It's a very deep and heartbreaking character study and it's quite powerful if you think about it. I also love how the credits say, 'the players' as that fits very well with the old setting of the film. The film can be enjoyed on a basic level, even if it appears that many haven't liked it because of the trailers but that is their problem if people haven't realised that trailers lie to generate interest, as that is their whole point, but there is also something very deep and personal hidden away in this film for those willing to look for it. The way the final long shot of the film ended was really haunting and it stuck with me. Saying that, regardless if you're watching this on a basic level or looking for something deeper, I still think the twist is clearly divisive and I really feel like this twist will just click with you or it really won't. Finding deep meaning within the film isn't me trying to make excuses to make the film seem smarter than it is, or to make up for flaws in the script or something, because I don't need to do that as the film is smart.

'The Village' is blisteringly original, regardless of the plagiarism controversy, even if they have similar concepts, hauntingly beautiful, elegantly told and has a very unexpected twist, which is something to be applauded because when you expect a twist in a film and it still surprises you anyway, that's great. And I wonder what everything would have been like if this didn't have a twist at all? This is probably my favourite of his films that I have seen so far; I absolutely love it and think it is something truly special. (I haven't seen 'Unbreakable' or 'Lady in the Water' yet, just for the record). M Night Shyamalan is a total enigma and is an absolutely fascinating director to follow, and like I said, I am glad that this film is getting more of a deserved following an appreciation now. I am glad that I liked it, hell, loved it as much as I did because it really tips the favour to films of his I like to don't at 4 to 2. (I didn't like 'Last Airbender', (but who did?) and as bad as 'The Happening' was, I still kind of love it in its own way, it's such a strange entity. This review is very long but I had a lot to say and it just emphasise just how much I love it. I'd love to go in even more depth, spoilers and all but a) I don't want to spoil it for anyone, b) I'm sure many have already done so and c) this review is already long eno.