M KNIGHT's The Happening

c.g._eads said:
Okay, if you want to get technical you can bring in ditribution and marketing fees, which are huge. Distribution itself, how after that first weekend, the theatres get a 50/50 split of the profits. You can talk about legal fees and Night's probably huge backend participation. Blah blah blah. But even if for some reason you can defend a 75 million dollar take for a summer movie, the reality still stands. This is the only reason why Night is still able to make films. Because his movies, comparitively, don't cost as much. That is why they won't give him 130 million dollars to make a Airbender. It's too big of a gamble for a director of his ability.

no, I wasn't saying you needed to see the movie to talk about the business aspect. What I said was: you pointed out that I seemed like I was out to get him. I was merely saying that if you saw these movies, you'd understand better why. They really are *that* bad.
Click to expand...
theatres don't get 50% of the ticket sales on opening weekend. it's much lower. closer to 5%. New Line demanded 99% on the Lord of The Rings films. that's why your popcorn costs so much. it evens out to 50% around the sixth week.

I already understand why you're out to get him. it's gratifying to sh*t on someone who once had been held aloft as a do-no-wrong filmmaker. it brings him down to our level, right?
 
Zak Forsman said:
theatres don't get 50% of the ticket sales on opening weekend. it's much lower. closer to 5%. New Line demanded 99% on the Lord of The Rings films. that's why your popcorn costs so much. it evens out to 50% around the sixth week.

I already understand why you're out to get him. it's gratifying to sh*t on someone who once had been held aloft as a do-no-wrong filmmaker. it brings him down to our level, right?
Click to expand...

i said after the first weekend. not on.

i wish it could be as simple an argument as jealousy. But then how do I explain my love for Cameron? For Spielberg? My respect for Tarantino, Fincher, Linklater, Soderbergh? All guys who exploded onto the scene and then *proved* that they blonged there. Why do I not bring them down?

I love film. And because I love film, it inspires intense reactions from me - good and bad. I know it's hard for you to believe, but I bring down Night because he makes bad films. It's kind of silly to debate this with someone who doesn't watch his work. But they're bad enough to inspire an intense dislike of the films and the man who so adamently attaches his image to them. That's all I can tell you. Go rent Lady In The Water or The Village tonight. Separate yourself from the personal relationship you have with the man. You'll see what I'm talking about. Then we can have a real discussion.
 
the theatres get a 50/50 split of the profits
Click to expand...

50 percent? Where did you pull that number from? We look at huge costs on the distribution and exhibition end thanks to the Paramount Decree. The whole vertical integration and oligarchy stuff from the Big 5 back in the day.

Essentially theaters and exhibition spaces get hardly any money from the films they screen. Not even close to the amount they need. Which is why the "Digital Cinema Revolution" is never going to fully fly. But I digress. Exhibition places never get that much percentage.

Bad is a relative term. One ex might say you are bad in bed. The other says your great. Who is right?

But then you speak of major budgets. Need I remind you about the Halo catastrophe? Ever wonder why the Halo franchise was never moved into production? 185 million for the film before people pulled money. And that is simply because of percentages. That film would easily do amazingly. It wasn't the director or the concept. A doesn't necessarily equal B.

Just some things to think about from the legal aspect, the relative aspect, and the economic aspect.

Cheers!
 
c.g._eads said:
i said after the first weekend. not on.

i wish it could be as simple an argument as jealousy. But then how do I explain my love for Cameron? For Spielberg? My respect for Tarantino, Fincher, Linklater, Soderbergh? All guys who exploded onto the scene and then *proved* that they blonged there. Why do I not bring them down?

I love film. And because I love film, it inspires intense reactions from me - good and bad. I know it's hard for you to believe, but I bring down Night because he makes bad films. It's kind of silly to debate this with someone who doesn't watch his work. But they're bad enough to inspire an intense dislike of the films and the man who so adamently attaches his image to them. That's all I can tell you. Go rent Lady In The Water or The Village tonight. Separate yourself from the personal relationship you have with the man. You'll see what I'm talking about. Then we can have a real discussion.
Click to expand...

:huh: haha, was this a debate about the work? i thought we were talking about the branding and marketing of shyamalan and the public's perception of an out-of-control ego and whether the two were connected. or was that not a REAL discussion? :grin:

as strange as it might sound, i don't need to rent these films. i lived them -- i know the story, i know how it was shot, i know most of everything that went into making it. i know what was cut. i can probably tell you more about them not having seen them. in fact, i think there's an example earlier in this thread where i did.
 
i thought it was too. but you keep bringing up that I'm just out to get him cause I'm upset or something. I'm merely pointing out that his last three movies have been terrible. That's where the majority of my dislike comes from.

The funny thing is, that's kind of the point. It's impossible to talk about M. Night's movies without bringing him into the conversation (because of the branding and marketing and control he has over every aspect of his movie). He simply won't let us.

As for not needing to see the films to know what they're like, that's kind of a silly statement. I don't know how long you worked on the making-of (if it was up to the actual release of the film), but he changed the movie quite a bit from his original version (as documented in "The Man Who Heard Voices"). Still, you of all people should know that a movie can be changed, turned around, twisted, made better, made worse, in the editing room.
 
Saw the film - did not like it. Nobody I went with liked it. It just didn't live up to it's potential or the ticket price.

Just seemed to be a half-effort...
 
Saw the movie. Seeing The Hulk before it didn't help. The movie was boring. It's like he took the plot of the movie and started it AFTER his twist. It's like the movie felt like a really long 3rd act. I felt if there was more build up with the characters and that if Wahlbergs character was a real scientist trying to find out "why the bees were dieing." and then he found out why, and than it starts happening to humans. It may have had better build up. I'm not saying that was the way to go, just that it could have done a lot of different things. Watching the trees grow arms and legs and go after the characters would have been more interesting. This movie must have been cheap to make. I could have got together a group of 10 and made this movie with a dvx and few pizzas.
 
saw it today, thought the first 25 mins were awesome, then it got boring, my man mark walhberg didnt have a very interesting character, his wife was weird (like her intro when she kept looking at the cellphone ringing and making those silly faces) and it felt like it couldve done more. at the end we still dont know what the fu^% was happening or why it was happening, it just happens out of nowhere and people start dying, lol.

i was a fan until this movie. after the ending of the village, lady in the water and now this....i kinda look at him as an average film director where as at first i had him placed in my top directos category. i still love his writing though, all his scripts are very easy reads. i use them as reference when i write, he's got awesome wordplay.

all in all i coulda caught this one on payper view.
 
I agree. It started off good, then got boring. The acting was not that great. Mark is usually pretty good, but his character started to get annoying after a while. The idea was awesome but the execution could have been better. It was Perfectly Pointless.
 
c.g._eads said:
i thought it was too. but you keep bringing up that I'm just out to get him cause I'm upset or something. I'm merely pointing out that his last three movies have been terrible. That's where the majority of my dislike comes from.

The funny thing is, that's kind of the point. It's impossible to talk about M. Night's movies without bringing him into the conversation (because of the branding and marketing and control he has over every aspect of his movie). He simply won't let us.

As for not needing to see the films to know what they're like, that's kind of a silly statement. I don't know how long you worked on the making-of (if it was up to the actual release of the film), but he changed the movie quite a bit from his original version (as documented in "The Man Who Heard Voices"). Still, you of all people should know that a movie can be changed, turned around, twisted, made better, made worse, in the editing room.
Click to expand...

yes, and we were there documenting the film's evolution every step of the way. in the edit bay, at the scoring session with james newton howard, etc.
 
Wow, the M Night hating for 5 or so pages has grown tiresome. I had to weed through all that crap for like 4-5 reviews of the actual film? I just wanted to know how my peers liked it.

Anyway, just got back from the theater. Alright, so I'm a bit of an M Night fanboy. I've loved all of his films... I even enjoyed Lady in the Water. Apparently, I'm the only one who did? I even bought the DVD. :tongue:

That said, I thought The Happening had a cool concept, but failed miserably in the execution. Seriously, why did he have to spell out the reveal in Act 1... then reiterate it in Act 2 and 3? It wasn't even a reveal! You can't have a reveal if everyone in the audience already knows what it is. Maybe he wasn't going for a reveal, I don't know. I was just so disappointed when this ended... I started coming up with a mental list of how I would have wrote it/made it. The concept has potential!

Even though I disliked this, I haven't lost faith in M Night. Everyone's allowed to have a stinker. I'll still go see his next films. :)
 
I've liked all of his films except Lady in the Water.

I'll probably check this out in the next few days.
 
I gotta say that this was a horrible movie. I cannot remember the last time I sat in a theatre and felt embarrassed for the filmmaker.

The Audience was laughing AT the movie. At the end some one did an ironic clap and people were openly saying for others to hear that the movie was terrible.

I cannot believe how bad it was.

Awful.

Wait for video.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top