Just read "The Man Who Heard Voices," an account written by Michael Bamberger, about Shyamalan's difficult journey to make "Lady in the Water." We meet Shyamalan as he readies himself to sell his latest screenplay to Disney, his partner for 4 hugely successful films which had grossed several billion dollars. Unfortunately for him, Disney is not confident about his latest opus and we are left to watch him struggle with self doubt. At times unflattering, we follow Night through all aspects of the filmaking process, from sale of the script to Warner Brothers, to the final screen tested edit. Amazing read, pick it up if you would like to visit the world of high budget film making. Hard not to become an even bigger fan of Giamatti after reading it.
Book- M. Night
- Thread starter bosindy
- Start date
Paul Coleman
Veteran
I've also read this and I agree with bosindy. The only thing I would have liked to know more about was the post production...though I assume Bamberger wasnt around for as much of this. But...theres alot that can be learned about Shyamalan. How he refuses to shoot coverage.....worrys constantly to the point of harming the film....and other tics. Quite a good read...i'd reccomend it.
bballplaya283 said:
Beyond the fact he was off book before anyone else in the cast, always accommodating to requests, (including a few weeks where he thought he would need to wear a ridiculous wig) quick with a dry sense of humor; there was no ego about the man. He naturally fit in as just a another member of the crew, and "was complimented to be confused as a grip or electrician." This was coming off some very big success for him (sideways, splendor), refreshing he did not put on any "star" crap.
Also, given you get the feeling that most on the shoot were operating on faith in Night alone (or not) at times, Giamatti became a partner rather than a source of doubt. The story was hard to conceptualize and it began to wear on many. Add to that, Night hired a cinematographer named Chris Doyle, though brilliant, is a raving lunatic with a drinking problem, (He shows up for the first day of shooting smelling of alcohol in a boxers robe) Giammati was still able to be brilliant in his work.
Weston said:
I found that interesting as well, he goes through great pain to storyboard every second of the shoot, then when filming begins he starts taking huge risks. No coverage, Doyle, shooting dark causing focus issues.
It was almost that in writing the screenplay, hubris had taken over (the ceremony behind giving the 3 disney execs the scripts). But when the people close to him for the first time rejected his work he became reckless in the search to prove them wrong; almost as a high stakes gambler, down quite a bit, starts doubling his bets to get even. In the end, although I'm not the biggest fan of his work, I admire the brave attempt it was and will see the film, where before I had no plans to.
Last edited:
Cheesesailor77
Veteran
this sounds really interesting, I'll have to pick it up.
bosindy said:
That is interesting how he just throws caution to the wind...though I guess he probably feels if he prepared himself good enough...all that preparation will carry him through. (just following story boards and not needing coverage) Though its mentioned that the whole goal of this film for him was to leave his comfort zone.
Boy I had forgotten all about the chris doyle stuff. He is off his rocker. After reading it and seeing the movie I think if I was a big name director I'd want to work with him but I'd be afraid of doing it on a big project. Night was lucky the cinematography turned out to be one of the good aspects of the film. The Chris Doyle stuff was probably my favorite part of the book. That and the section where M Night confronted the kid who sent an early review into AICN.
I think the press has been overly harsh with this book. People who have criticized it say its egotistical of Night to consider himself at the level of Michael Jordan ....but in the field of filmmaking. I dont think M night considers himself to be that at all....but its a dominance and level of excellence he strives for. I think alot of reviewers were prepared to hate the book before reading it.
Another thing I would have liked to know was what questions he asks his test audiences and what method he uses to get numbers out of the answers.