DISQUS

efrain · 1 year ago

i don't think the environmental message is the only focus; shyamalan was also trying to
convey the simple story of love - and the commitment, the "personal responsibility" that
it must become when relating to each other and the environment.

i also don't think that the plot has to be explained. Why must everything have a rational
and logical explanation in movies? Sure most fantasy/horror/monster movies have some
type of explanation for the phenomena, but why? Shyamalan hearkens to an era of
filmmaking where the movies just told a story and gave a message to audiences without
having to explain every friggin detail in accurate modern science. I mean, c'mon, there
have been plenty of movies made in recent years that don't have scientifically accurate or
adequate explanations, but people watch them and it doesn't really matter (Jeepers
Creepers, The Mist, even Shyamalan's own Signs).
Besides, it's a movie containing fantasy elements - why must it be confined to the
limitations of reality?

Okay I'm blabbing, but I liked The Happening, and I love how he isn't afraid to put blatant
messages among the moviegoer-loving thrills. Because his movies are never really
about the big unreal catastrophes or spooky elements; they're always about the very real
human drama and personal conflict.

TopDogHoncho · 1 year ago

This movie was terrible. Talk about over-doing it with the exposition. Because M. Knight is so know for twists that he has to hammer it down the audiences' throats that the plants did it, the plants did it. after the 5th time, my eyes rolled so much I became momentarily blind.