OT: M. Night's "The Villiage" - seen it? SPOILERS

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by Phatty Boombatty, Jul 31, 2004.

  1. Ok, sorry this isn't a DVD related topic, but it will eventually be on
    DVD, so it's not too far off.

    ********** SPOILERS **************

    Near the end of the movie, when we learn the "big secret" - I found
    myself to be a little pissed off that Shyamalan had lied to the
    audience by putting the date at the beginning of the film.

    It's easy to throw the audience for a loop when you have lied to them
    all along, don't you think? I wonder why he did that? I wonder why he
    felt it necessary to deceive us into thinking one thing, so that he
    could really throw us at the end...

    am I making too much of this, or does anyone else feel the same way?

    PhattyBoombatty
     
    Phatty Boombatty, Jul 31, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Phatty Boombatty wrote:
    > Ok, sorry this isn't a DVD related topic, but it will eventually be on
    > DVD, so it's not too far off.
    >
    > ********** SPOILERS **************
    >
    > Near the end of the movie, when we learn the "big secret" - I found
    > myself to be a little pissed off that Shyamalan had lied to the
    > audience by putting the date at the beginning of the film.


    Ah, so the "big secret" is that it takes place in modern times? I
    assumed that.

    --

    "One must conclude that, contrary to the established and current wisdom,
    a scenario describing the genesis of life on earth by chance and natural
    causes which can be accepted on the basis of fact and not faith, has not
    yet been written."

    --Hubert P. Yockey, Journal of Theoretical Biology
     
    Grand Inquisitor, Jul 31, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Phatty Boombatty

    Ollie T Guest

    Re: M. Night's "The Villiage" - seen it? SPOILERS

    "Phatty Boombatty" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Ok, sorry this isn't a DVD related topic, but it will eventually be on
    > DVD, so it's not too far off.
    >
    > ********** SPOILERS **************
    >
    > Near the end of the movie, when we learn the "big secret" - I found
    > myself to be a little pissed off that Shyamalan had lied to the
    > audience by putting the date at the beginning of the film.
    >
    > It's easy to throw the audience for a loop when you have lied to them
    > all along, don't you think? I wonder why he did that? I wonder why he
    > felt it necessary to deceive us into thinking one thing, so that he
    > could really throw us at the end...
    >
    > am I making too much of this, or does anyone else feel the same way?
    >
    > PhattyBoombatty


    There was a date at the beginning? I must have missed it.

    Too bad. I really wished this movie would have been better. It seems that
    Shayamalan tried to hard to come up with the "twist" ending on this one. I
    remember reading that some people were upset that Signs did not have the
    "surprise" at the end like his other couple of films. Probably tried too
    hard here.

    Bad dialog. A few of the actors are really terrible at pulling out the
    certain way the townsfolk talk in this movie. Sigourney Weaver came across
    pretty bad with the particular dialect she was trying to portray.

    People in the audience laughed at 3-4 parts that I did not think were meant
    to be intentionally funny.

    Blind girl? For the first half it just seemed she needed a walking stick
    and could see fine.

    Shayamalan also felt necessary to remind us of the story 2-3 times at key
    moments. I guess he thinks the audience cannot keep up with his story so he
    has voice overs of previous scenes show up to "remind" you of what's going
    on. Unnecessary.

    Well of course this is all my opinion. The movie was not the worst I've
    seen. I just suppose that I was expecting more from the trailers I had seen
    and Shayamalan's previous work.


    HDTV games lists and discussions
    http://www.hdtvarcade.com
     
    Ollie T, Jul 31, 2004
    #3
  4. Re: M. Night's "The Villiage" - seen it? SPOILERS

    On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 19:38:59 GMT, "Ollie T" <> wrote:

    >
    >"Phatty Boombatty" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> Ok, sorry this isn't a DVD related topic, but it will eventually be on
    >> DVD, so it's not too far off.
    >>
    >> ********** SPOILERS **************
    >>
    >> Near the end of the movie, when we learn the "big secret" - I found
    >> myself to be a little pissed off that Shyamalan had lied to the
    >> audience by putting the date at the beginning of the film.
    >>
    >> It's easy to throw the audience for a loop when you have lied to them
    >> all along, don't you think? I wonder why he did that? I wonder why he
    >> felt it necessary to deceive us into thinking one thing, so that he
    >> could really throw us at the end...
    >>
    >> am I making too much of this, or does anyone else feel the same way?
    >>
    >> PhattyBoombatty

    >
    >There was a date at the beginning? I must have missed it.
    >


    Yes, he put the date of "1897" or something at the beginning, leaving
    no room in the viewer's mind that there is any possibility of anything
    else. Then, at the end, we learn differently, and I felt like I had
    been lied to and manipulated so that he could make his big twist more
    effective.

    I actually liked the movie, but this particular point really
    disappointed me and made me lose a little respect for the director.

    PB
     
    Phatty Boombatty, Jul 31, 2004
    #4
  5. Phatty Boombatty

    Murder Guest

    Re: M. Night's "The Villiage" - seen it? SPOILERS

    "Ollie T" <> wrote in news:nzSOc.11231$Zm3.3178
    @fe2.texas.rr.com:

    > I just suppose that I was expecting more from the trailers I had seen
    > and Shayamalan's previous work.
    >



    Why he wasn't roundly declared a hack after his FIRST movie is a complete
    mystery to me. The Sixth Sense was an absurdly overwrought melodrama
    with a climactic twist that left me thinking "Well? Yeah, so what?" I
    guess he benefitted handsomely from all of the people who had never heard
    of Carnival Of Souls or An Occurrence At Owl Creek Bridge.


    --
    "There is no more foul or relentless enemy of man in the occult world
    than this dead-alive creature spewed up from the grave..."


    The Castle Monster: http://www.processionofthedamned.com/diablo.htm
     
    Murder, Jul 31, 2004
    #5
  6. Phatty Boombatty

    Murder Guest

    Re: M. Night's "The Villiage" - seen it? SPOILERS

    Derek Janssen <> wrote in
    news:410c133f$0$2819$:

    > Murder wrote:
    >>
    >>>I just suppose that I was expecting more from the trailers I had seen
    >>>and Shayamalan's previous work.
    >>>

    >> Why he wasn't roundly declared a hack after his FIRST movie is a
    >> complete mystery to me. The Sixth Sense was an absurdly overwrought
    >> melodrama with a climactic twist that left me thinking "Well? Yeah,
    >> so what?"

    >
    > Given that for most of us in the theater, the movie was about Haley
    > Joel Osmont--and about Bruce Willis playing a realistic non-action
    > character again, which he hadn't gotten the chance to do for a
    > while--remember taking The Ending pretty much in the same spirit as
    > that loopy "WTF??" tacked-on Kevin Costner ending in "No Way Out":
    > Yeah, yeah, have to add some last cheap sting for the audience before
    > the credits roll, just get it over with and make it plausible...
    >
    > Of course, then, everyone who didn't see it coming had to go back and
    > say, "Oh, yeah, the restaurant!", and so on, and that (and the
    > spoiler-trolls beating it six miles into the ground on the net) pretty
    > much upstaged any rational discussion of the film from then on--
    > Still, when taking some friends to see it, did manage to sucker them
    > in by telling them the subplot had Willis's characters' marriage
    > "breaking apart"...
    >
    > Derek Janssen (best way to preserve the artistic sanctity of the first
    > 90 minutes)
    >
    >
    >



    Yeah, I'm sorry. I don't know why I lash out like that... I'm just a
    frustrated screenwriter.


    --
    "There is no more foul or relentless enemy of man in the occult world
    than this dead-alive creature spewed up from the grave..."


    The Castle Monster: http://www.processionofthedamned.com/diablo.htm
     
    Murder, Jul 31, 2004
    #6
  7. Re: M. Night's "The Villiage" - seen it? SPOILERS

    Phatty Boombatty wrote:

    > Yes, he put the date of "1897" or something at the beginning, leaving
    > no room in the viewer's mind that there is any possibility of anything
    > else. Then, at the end, we learn differently, and I felt like I had
    > been lied to and manipulated so that he could make his big twist more
    > effective.
    >
    > I actually liked the movie, but this particular point really
    > disappointed me and made me lose a little respect for the director.


    Like the time back when we were all "wow"'ed by the Sixth Sense ending,
    and MNS went around enjoying his new O.Henry Of The 90's status, and
    joking(?) on award shows, "Oh, and btw, the mother's really dead, too..."

    Which--aside from the "Oh, she was NOT, and there's nine scenes that can
    prove it!" factor--kind of jackass-embarrassed the more open-minded
    minority of us fans who liked MNS's gloomy atmosphere in the *first*
    halves of "Sixth" and "Unbreakable", and didn't really give a crap
    whether Bruce dropped his glasses after the apocalypse or not.

    He can be a fairly good creepy-gloomy director when he isn't trying to
    show off some tunnel-visioned script goal, but nope, we just HAD to
    encourage him with obsessing over all that Bruce Willis stuff five years
    ago, didn't we?...

    Derek Janssen
     
    Derek Janssen, Aug 1, 2004
    #7
  8. Re: M. Night's "The Villiage" - seen it? SPOILERS

    Murder wrote:
    >
    >>I just suppose that I was expecting more from the trailers I had seen
    >>and Shayamalan's previous work.
    >>

    > Why he wasn't roundly declared a hack after his FIRST movie is a complete
    > mystery to me. The Sixth Sense was an absurdly overwrought melodrama
    > with a climactic twist that left me thinking "Well? Yeah, so what?"


    Given that for most of us in the theater, the movie was about Haley Joel
    Osmont--and about Bruce Willis playing a realistic non-action character
    again, which he hadn't gotten the chance to do for a while--remember
    taking The Ending pretty much in the same spirit as that loopy "WTF??"
    tacked-on Kevin Costner ending in "No Way Out":
    Yeah, yeah, have to add some last cheap sting for the audience before
    the credits roll, just get it over with and make it plausible...

    Of course, then, everyone who didn't see it coming had to go back and
    say, "Oh, yeah, the restaurant!", and so on, and that (and the
    spoiler-trolls beating it six miles into the ground on the net) pretty
    much upstaged any rational discussion of the film from then on--
    Still, when taking some friends to see it, did manage to sucker them in
    by telling them the subplot had Willis's characters' marriage "breaking
    apart"...

    Derek Janssen (best way to preserve the artistic sanctity of the first
    90 minutes)
     
    Derek Janssen, Aug 1, 2004
    #8
  9. Phatty Boombatty

    Mike Kohary Guest

    On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 10:46:40 -0700, Phatty Boombatty
    <> wrote:

    >Ok, sorry this isn't a DVD related topic, but it will eventually be on
    >DVD, so it's not too far off.
    >
    >********** SPOILERS **************
    >
    >Near the end of the movie, when we learn the "big secret" - I found
    >myself to be a little pissed off that Shyamalan had lied to the
    >audience by putting the date at the beginning of the film.
    >
    >It's easy to throw the audience for a loop when you have lied to them
    >all along, don't you think? I wonder why he did that? I wonder why he
    >felt it necessary to deceive us into thinking one thing, so that he
    >could really throw us at the end...


    Because that was the lie that the village elders were feeding the
    children and young adults. They couldn't very well put real dates on
    the headstones in their cemetary. ;)

    Mike
     
    Mike Kohary, Aug 2, 2004
    #9
  10. Phatty Boombatty

    napalm68 Guest

    Re: M. Night's "The Villiage" - seen it? SPOILERS

    I've never been terribly impressed with his films. Sixth Sense in itself was
    OK as a film, but not the groundbreaking film with a twist that everyone
    made it out to be - a victim of hype to me, it was. A twist that was in
    films before it, such as the excellent Adrian Lynes "Jacob's Ladder". Noing
    the twist in that film does not at all detract from the experience on
    repeated viewings, unlike sixth sense.

    Signs? My god now that was a travesty. I refused to let any more of my money
    go to him after that... From the enormous holes in that story, to the
    embarassingly predictable shots it was pure garbage (I was in the theatre
    next to my wife, saying "the camera is going to dolly back now and there
    will be a reflestion of the alien in the tv", and "the door will open and he
    will have his clerical gear on", etc. Bingo, bingo, bingo). I think the
    Maddox review of Signs covers everything else crap about it. .


    "Derek Janssen" <> wrote in message
    news:410c019b$0$2846$...
    > Phatty Boombatty wrote:
    >
    > > Yes, he put the date of "1897" or something at the beginning, leaving
    > > no room in the viewer's mind that there is any possibility of anything
    > > else. Then, at the end, we learn differently, and I felt like I had
    > > been lied to and manipulated so that he could make his big twist more
    > > effective.
    > >
    > > I actually liked the movie, but this particular point really
    > > disappointed me and made me lose a little respect for the director.

    >
    > Like the time back when we were all "wow"'ed by the Sixth Sense ending,
    > and MNS went around enjoying his new O.Henry Of The 90's status, and
    > joking(?) on award shows, "Oh, and btw, the mother's really dead, too..."
    >
    > Which--aside from the "Oh, she was NOT, and there's nine scenes that can
    > prove it!" factor--kind of jackass-embarrassed the more open-minded
    > minority of us fans who liked MNS's gloomy atmosphere in the *first*
    > halves of "Sixth" and "Unbreakable", and didn't really give a crap
    > whether Bruce dropped his glasses after the apocalypse or not.
    >
    > He can be a fairly good creepy-gloomy director when he isn't trying to
    > show off some tunnel-visioned script goal, but nope, we just HAD to
    > encourage him with obsessing over all that Bruce Willis stuff five years
    > ago, didn't we?...
    >
    > Derek Janssen
    >
    >
     
    napalm68, Aug 2, 2004
    #10
  11. Phatty Boombatty

    Zimmy Guest

    Re: M. Night's "The Villiage" - seen it? SPOILERS

    "Phatty Boombatty" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Ok, sorry this isn't a DVD related topic, but it will eventually be on
    > DVD, so it's not too far off.
    >
    > ********** SPOILERS **************


    I'm in complete agreement. I had heard about the potential twist ending but
    when I saw that date, I said to myself, ok, let's see how he gets out of
    this one.
    And, in the end, he doesn't and its never explained.
    I enjoyed watching the movie and felt I got my $6 worth but it ultimately
    fails in my eyes.
    Because of some personal tragedies, this rich guy is going to build his own
    little country and have the government go along with it?
    Is this any different than those religious communes like Waco?
    These elders are just crazy.
    If you had that much money, just buy an island and hire people to help raise
    your kids. You don't have to step 2 feet into the "towns". And when the
    kids are older, they can actually make up their own mind whether to brave
    that dangerous land called the USA.
    Where it really falls apart is allowing Iris to get medicine from the modern
    times, if you admit that you need that to help someone survive, why bother
    with the complicated farce.
     
    Zimmy, Aug 2, 2004
    #11
  12. Phatty Boombatty

    Zimmy Guest

    "Mike Kohary" <> wrote in message
    news:eek:...
    > Because that was the lie that the village elders were feeding the
    > children and young adults. They couldn't very well put real dates on
    > the headstones in their cemetary. ;)
    >
    > Mike


    I'm not sure if you were trying to be sarcastic but if this world is all the
    kids know, what is the difference what the date says?
    It could say 3097 and the kids wouldn't know any better.
    Unless it is just there to help the crazy elders accept their plan.
     
    Zimmy, Aug 2, 2004
    #12
  13. Re: M. Night's "The Villiage" - seen it? SPOILERS

    On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 08:43:57 -0400, "Zimmy" <> wrote:

    >"Phatty Boombatty" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> Ok, sorry this isn't a DVD related topic, but it will eventually be on
    >> DVD, so it's not too far off.
    >>
    >> ********** SPOILERS **************

    >
    >I'm in complete agreement. I had heard about the potential twist ending but
    >when I saw that date, I said to myself, ok, let's see how he gets out of
    >this one.
    >And, in the end, he doesn't and its never explained.
    >I enjoyed watching the movie and felt I got my $6 worth but it ultimately
    >fails in my eyes.
    >Because of some personal tragedies, this rich guy is going to build his own
    >little country and have the government go along with it?
    >Is this any different than those religious communes like Waco?
    >These elders are just crazy.
    >If you had that much money, just buy an island and hire people to help raise
    >your kids. You don't have to step 2 feet into the "towns". And when the
    >kids are older, they can actually make up their own mind whether to brave
    >that dangerous land called the USA.
    >Where it really falls apart is allowing Iris to get medicine from the modern
    >times, if you admit that you need that to help someone survive, why bother
    >with the complicated farce.
    >


    I wondered how this could be the first time in however many years that
    they actually NEEDED medicine this bad. I guess because this medical
    emergency was brought about by a CRIME, they finally felt it was
    justified, at least that's what I got from it. It's a little (?)
    whacked.

    Glad to hear the date business bugged someone besides me.

    PB
     
    Phatty Boombatty, Aug 2, 2004
    #13
  14. Phatty Boombatty

    Machina3317 Guest

    Re: M. Night's "The Villiage" - seen it? SPOILERS

    >From: "napalm68"

    >I was in the theatre
    >next to my wife, saying "the camera is going to dolly back now and there
    >will be a reflestion of the alien in the tv", and "the door will open and he
    >will have his clerical gear on", etc. Bingo, bingo, bingo


    Man, I'd have to punch you if I was *anywhere* near you in a theatre. Nothing
    worse than some jackass talking during a movie that I paid to see.
     
    Machina3317, Aug 2, 2004
    #14
  15. Phatty Boombatty

    JWB Guest

    Re: M. Night's "The Villiage" - seen it? SPOILERS

    "Machina3317" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > >From: "napalm68"

    >
    > >I was in the theatre
    > >next to my wife, saying "the camera is going to dolly back now and there
    > >will be a reflestion of the alien in the tv", and "the door will open and

    he
    > >will have his clerical gear on", etc. Bingo, bingo, bingo

    >
    > Man, I'd have to punch you if I was *anywhere* near you in a theatre.

    Nothing
    > worse than some jackass talking during a movie that I paid to see.


    This is why I don't go to the movies anymore. Way too many assholes.
     
    JWB, Aug 2, 2004
    #15
  16. Phatty Boombatty

    Mike Kohary Guest

    *SPOILERS BELOW!!!!*

    On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 08:47:04 -0400, "Zimmy" <> wrote:

    >"Mike Kohary" <> wrote in message
    >news:eek:...
    >> Because that was the lie that the village elders were feeding the
    >> children and young adults. They couldn't very well put real dates on
    >> the headstones in their cemetary. ;)

    >
    >I'm not sure if you were trying to be sarcastic but if this world is all the
    >kids know, what is the difference what the date says?
    >It could say 3097 and the kids wouldn't know any better.
    >Unless it is just there to help the crazy elders accept their plan.


    No, I'm not being sarcastic at all. Did you get the premise of what
    these people did? They were all victims of violent crime, and decided
    to try an experiment by going back to a simpler time and raising their
    children as if they actually lived in that time. Why would they
    choose to put some wierd date on there? They were obviously trying to
    live like psuedo-colonials, so it would only be natural to pretend the
    date was 1800s or 1700s or something along those lines.

    Mike
     
    Mike Kohary, Aug 2, 2004
    #16
  17. Phatty Boombatty

    Mike Kohary Guest

    Re: M. Night's "The Villiage" - seen it? SPOILERS

    On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 08:43:57 -0400, "Zimmy" <> wrote:

    >"Phatty Boombatty" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> Ok, sorry this isn't a DVD related topic, but it will eventually be on
    >> DVD, so it's not too far off.
    >>
    >> ********** SPOILERS **************

    >
    >I'm in complete agreement. I had heard about the potential twist ending but
    >when I saw that date, I said to myself, ok, let's see how he gets out of
    >this one.
    >And, in the end, he doesn't and its never explained.


    Yes it is. Tell me what you didn't get about it, and I'll explain it
    to you. ;)

    >Because of some personal tragedies, this rich guy is going to build his own
    >little country and have the government go along with it?


    Mostly. It's private land, so there's nothing for the government to
    go along with. As for the airspace, the security guard states that he
    paid the government off for that little trick.

    >Is this any different than those religious communes like Waco?
    >These elders are just crazy.


    Sure, those are interpretations that are up to the viewer.

    >If you had that much money, just buy an island and hire people to help raise
    >your kids. You don't have to step 2 feet into the "towns". And when the
    >kids are older, they can actually make up their own mind whether to brave
    >that dangerous land called the USA.


    Sure, but that would be another movie. Shyamalan chose this one
    instead.

    >Where it really falls apart is allowing Iris to get medicine from the modern
    >times, if you admit that you need that to help someone survive, why bother
    >with the complicated farce.


    That doesn't make it fall apart, though - that's the whole point.
    They are trying to escape the real world and go back to a simpler
    time, but in the end they find out that's not really possible. It's a
    tenuous experiment that fails on a major level - even if their village
    continues to survive after the mishap, they've discovered that they
    still can't prevent the loss of loved ones to crime and circumstance.

    Mike
     
    Mike Kohary, Aug 2, 2004
    #17
  18. Phatty Boombatty

    Mike Kohary Guest

    Re: M. Night's "The Villiage" - seen it? SPOILERS

    ***SPOILERS!!!***

    On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 08:44:41 -0700, Phatty Boombatty
    <> wrote:

    >I wondered how this could be the first time in however many years that
    >they actually NEEDED medicine this bad.


    It wasn't. The opening shot is of the funeral of a child who died
    because they didn't have the medicine with which to treat him.
    William Hurt's subsequent speech addresses the fact that some
    villagers might doubt their decision to perform this experiment of
    theirs.

    >I guess because this medical
    >emergency was brought about by a CRIME, they finally felt it was
    >justified, at least that's what I got from it.


    Yup, that was basically it. When things naturally happened, they
    figured that's the price to pay for living simply. But when someone
    was the victim of violent crime, which is what they thought their
    experiment would do away with, they felt (or at least William Hurt's
    character felt) responsibility for that person's life or death.

    Mike
     
    Mike Kohary, Aug 2, 2004
    #18
  19. Phatty Boombatty

    Zimmy Guest

    "Mike Kohary" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > *SPOILERS BELOW!!!!*
    >
    > On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 08:47:04 -0400, "Zimmy" <> wrote:
    >
    >>"Mike Kohary" <> wrote in message
    >>news:eek:...
    >>> Because that was the lie that the village elders were feeding the
    >>> children and young adults. They couldn't very well put real dates on
    >>> the headstones in their cemetary. ;)

    >>
    >>I'm not sure if you were trying to be sarcastic but if this world is all
    >>the
    >>kids know, what is the difference what the date says?
    >>It could say 3097 and the kids wouldn't know any better.
    >>Unless it is just there to help the crazy elders accept their plan.

    >
    > No, I'm not being sarcastic at all. Did you get the premise of what
    > these people did? They were all victims of violent crime, and decided
    > to try an experiment by going back to a simpler time and raising their
    > children as if they actually lived in that time. Why would they
    > choose to put some wierd date on there? They were obviously trying to
    > live like psuedo-colonials, so it would only be natural to pretend the
    > date was 1800s or 1700s or something along those lines.
    >
    > Mike


    Yea, but what does a date have to do with simplier times? Are they trying
    to convince themselves?
    What significance does 1897 have? Why not 1918?
    Did they think there wasn't any violent crimes in 1897???
    When they reach the time the phone is going to be invented, will they
    incorporate that too?
     
    Zimmy, Aug 2, 2004
    #19
  20. Phatty Boombatty

    Zimmy Guest

    Re: M. Night's "The Villiage" - seen it? SPOILERS

    "Mike Kohary" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 08:43:57 -0400, "Zimmy" <> wrote:
    >
    >>I'm in complete agreement. I had heard about the potential twist ending
    >>but
    >>when I saw that date, I said to myself, ok, let's see how he gets out of
    >>this one.
    >>And, in the end, he doesn't and its never explained.

    >
    > Yes it is. Tell me what you didn't get about it, and I'll explain it
    > to you. ;)


    Ok, explain why they felt they needed to turn back the clock to some
    arbitrary date. Why not the 1700s? Did it suite them to be in a time with
    just enough technology to make things comofrtable?
    The movie would have worked better for me if they left this part vague.
    If M.Night put a title card in the beginning that said, Walker Woods, 1897,
    would that bother you?

    >
    >>Because of some personal tragedies, this rich guy is going to build his
    >>own
    >>little country and have the government go along with it?

    >
    > Mostly. It's private land, so there's nothing for the government to
    > go along with. As for the airspace, the security guard states that he
    > paid the government off for that little trick.


    Well, the government likes income taxes and that sort of thing. I would
    think they would have a say in a group of people trying to have their own
    country. Of course, this can be explained away with the magic screenwriter
    trick, Hurt is a Billionaire and just throws money at the problem.

    >>If you had that much money, just buy an island and hire people to help
    >>raise
    >>your kids. You don't have to step 2 feet into the "towns". And when the
    >>kids are older, they can actually make up their own mind whether to brave
    >>that dangerous land called the USA.

    >
    > Sure, but that would be another movie. Shyamalan chose this one
    > instead.


    Which makes about as much sense as building a cruise ship to cross a lake.
    In my example, it achieves the same goals that I thought the movie was
    trying to convey and at much less expense and no keeping people "prisoners".

    >
    >>Where it really falls apart is allowing Iris to get medicine from the
    >>modern
    >>times, if you admit that you need that to help someone survive, why bother
    >>with the complicated farce.

    >
    > That doesn't make it fall apart, though - that's the whole point.
    > They are trying to escape the real world and go back to a simpler
    > time, but in the end they find out that's not really possible. It's a
    > tenuous experiment that fails on a major level - even if their village
    > continues to survive after the mishap, they've discovered that they
    > still can't prevent the loss of loved ones to crime and circumstance.
    >
    > Mike


    I agree 100%. It shows their Utopia failed yet they had every intention to
    keep it up. And, of course, the homicidial retard is punished conveniently
    so they don't have to deal with that.
     
    Zimmy, Aug 2, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Darth This

    Re: MATRIX RELOADED (spoilers..)

    Darth This, Jun 24, 2003, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    916
    Darth This
    Jun 24, 2003
  2. Treetop

    HULK DVD (Spoilers)

    Treetop, Oct 30, 2003, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    541
    Treetop
    Oct 30, 2003
  3. Peter Briggs

    "Matrix Revolutions" (minimal spoilers)

    Peter Briggs, Nov 6, 2003, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    451
  4. Rutgar
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    474
    kronos
    Feb 17, 2004
  5. Stan Brown

    Friday Night Lights 30 Jan (spoilers)

    Stan Brown, Jan 31, 2009, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    560
    Stan Brown
    Feb 1, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page