|
|
|
Comment |
Sorted by
Date Written |
Maybe not "unethical" to review... (Reply to this comment)
by prettyinpink
...but certainly challenging.
You did a superior job of giving good technical and artistic commentary without giving away the surprise...a HUGE challenge!
I agree (how can I not?) about the thrill of watching a well-made thriller or suspense movie for the second time, when you can see how the denouement was developed, the clues that were there all the time but overlooked or minimized.
Wonderful!
|
Feb 26 '01
10:04 pm PST
|
|
Spoilers (Reply to this comment)
by mantis
You wrote, "If you are one of the three people that have yet to see this film, fear not, I will respect the brilliant cinematic sensibilities of The Sixth Sense and keep its cards close to my vest."
You did a fine job of that in this review, but unfortunately I was one of the three people that had yet to see this one before I read your review of Unbreakable, in which you weren't quite so circumspect. I did finally rent the The Sixth Sense a couple of weeks ago, but by then I already knew what the surprise was. I can't entirely blame you, however -- the Newsweek review of Unbreakable made the same assumption that its readers had already seen The Sixth Sense.
I think that I would have figured out the secret for the same reasons wokelstein mentioned -- or at least by the "I see dead people" conversation -- but I'll never know for sure, now. The movie did give the viewer considerably more clues than the other great twist-at-the-end suspense flick of the last decade, The Usual Suspects. (That one was also spoiled for me by a discussion of it I inadvertantly overheard -- in that case I'm fairly certain that I would not have figured it out, and even knowing what was going on, the ending still completely floored me, and continues to take my breath away on the tenth or so viewing.) In any case, I have to agree with you that The Sixth Sense is a terrific film even when you do know what's going on. I wasn't quite as impressed with Ubreakable, but at least in that case I was completely surprised by the ending.
M. Night Shyamalan's two movies so far have several important plot elements in common. In each, the protagonist has a special power which he is either unaware or afraid of, and which is adversely affecting his relationship with his family and the other people around him. Over the course of the film, he gradually comes to understand the significance of his abilities, under the influence of a mentor who at first believes in him more than he does himself. He then uses his power to solve a heinous crime in time to save some, but not all, of the victims, and his relationships with his family and the world at large take a turn for the better. Finally, there is a dark, shocking revelation about the mentor character. It will be interesting to see whether Shyamalan plays out another iteration of this formula in his next film, or goes off on some other track.
Later,
Alex
|
Dec 10 '00
7:39 pm PST
|
|
Sixth Sense (Reply to this comment)
by cinnamun
Your review of the Sixth Sense gave me a new repect for the film and its surprise ending. The role of the mother may have been under-praised, but she really wasn't in the film that much. She delivered a believable supporting role that blended superbly into the story.
|
Dec 10 '00
8:05 am PST
|
|
Re: With my hand over my heart..... (Reply to this comment)
by mangiotto
Though I'll agree that this type of twist is a thing that was popular in Chinese dramas three-centuries old as well as the majority of the Greek tragedies (issues of identity, etc) - The Sixth Sense remains for me a wholly unexpected piece of joyfully entertaining cinema that takes a simple story and tells it with a surplus of seriousness, passion, and intelligence. 'tis the nature of great art - the soft ballet of creative plagiarism and innovation.
Kudo's to you for figuring it out beforehand, though - a shame that the trailers give away the "dead people" quote where the film doesn't until the sixty-minute mark.
Alas, it is also true that my tastes diverge most often away from films that are hugely successful. Consider that Fargo, the Coens' most successful film, earned something like 1/10th of what The Grinch is going to earn in less than two weeks of release - easy to digest films that are fat, lazy, and ignorant will always do much better than films that merit study and discussion - it is suggested that Shakespeare's Titus Andronicus is a reaction to the venality of contemporary theater - sort of like Kubrick making a porno movie.
It's an old discussion - but I'll just say that sometimes movies that are super popular genuinely deserve to be to varying extents, this summer alone, several films (Mission: Impossible 2, Chicken Run, X-Men, Gladiator, etc. . .) are better than they needed to be to make the same amount of money. That being said, movies like U-571, The Patriot, Hollow Man, Perfect Storm, on and on and on, are banal and obnoxious examples of how to make a fistful of cash off human suffering, bone-headed historical revisionism, feeble-minded appeals to the basest elements of the mob, and cynical wallows in idiocy.
At least Scary Movie and films of that ilk have the honesty to admit that they're appealing to the populist lowest common denominator.
Anyhow - thanks for the vote of confidence and the comment. Although we disagree about the merit of Shymalan's films - at least we can agree that they're something intriguing and. . . exciting?
Best,
Mangiotto
|
Dec 05 '00
2:26 pm PST
|
|
|
|
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.