M. Night Shyamalan

July 18, 2004 7:51 PM

Anyone else see the SciFi channel thing on M. Night Shyamalan?

Anyone else see right through it? I'm calling shenanigans on it. If that was a documentary, you can kiss my fat Aunt Fanny. "Blair Witch" bitches. You feel me?

posted by ColdChef to Media & Arts (14 answers total)

Best answer: It's a scam. See also AICN.
posted by Zonker at 8:00 PM on July 18, 2004

Response by poster: I tuned in to see a "Making Of" for his new movie, but what I saw was a scripted, stilted "documentary" that claimed that all of Night's movies are really about him, because he's a walking ghost. Seriously.

And the whole thing where he "storms out?" I ain't buying it.

I like his movies. I think he's a good "filmic storyteller." But this? This was crap and he should be ashamed to be affiliated with it.
posted by ColdChef at 8:04 PM on July 18, 2004

Response by poster: Thanks, Zonk.
posted by ColdChef at 8:05 PM on July 18, 2004

...famously enigmatic...
...intensely guarded personal lifestyle...
...reclusive filmmaker...

I bet this whole thing was his idea.
posted by shoos at 8:26 PM on July 18, 2004

There's an SCTV sketch about O. Henry's later work, where he starts coming up with more and more preposterous trick endings to tag on to his stories, because a trick ending is expected.

That's kind of how I feel about Shyamalan's movies after the Sixth Sense.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 8:34 PM on July 18, 2004

His movies are crap. You can see the "holes" when the opening credits begin to roll.
posted by davidmsc at 10:21 PM on July 18, 2004

The Sixth Sense was good. Unbreakable was tolerable (to me at least, most people seemed to utterly hate it). Signs... well, I walked out of Signs. Not scary, not interesting, just dull and crap. I'd put money on The Village being awful, too.
posted by reklaw at 12:52 AM on July 19, 2004

I actually kind of like the odd fake documentary on tv, nothing like a good hoax to remind people that just because it's on tv doesn't mean it's authorative. If it wasn't well-done, it's a shame of course.

I agree wtih reklaw on his rating of the films, though I am going to see The Village just because of the really intriguing advert on IMDB (not the the banners but the other one).
posted by fvw at 1:52 AM on July 19, 2004

After watching some of the additional material that came with the Six Sense DVD, I developed a strong dislike for M. Night. He seems self-indulgent, as if one of his profs in film school told him that he was the best student in his year, and he took it to mean that he would be the best director ever.
I agree with davidmc, although I'll one up him. I knew the twist in Sixth Sense from watching the trailer (my mom did too, and it may be from watching and reading lots of mysteries)
My last word on his films: too much artist, too little art.
posted by nprigoda at 5:09 AM on July 19, 2004

But then, wouldn't it be an amazing twist if M. Night wasn't a real person at all (an actor playing him on the dvd and in the mockumentary, some one else toiling behind the scenes).
Perhaps I'm overthinking this a bit.
posted by nprigoda at 5:12 AM on July 19, 2004

nprigoda: At last, someone else! I still can't believe all the fuss over the transparent ending of 6th sense. Unbreakable was best he's done I think. Signs was just bollox.
posted by biffa at 6:39 AM on July 19, 2004

Sixth Sense was good but gimmick (in the style of memento) film-making.

The Sixth Sense came out before Memento.
posted by Danelope at 8:46 AM on July 19, 2004

There was a similar thing I saw once for the Brando "Island of Dr. Moreau." They "interviewed" the director, and he said how the setting and props and method acting made the story so real that he and the rest of the cast and crew became inhabitants of the island; they were no longer acting, but living the story 24/7. It ends with him going all feral like one of Moureau's beasts and climbing up on the table, snarling like a jungle cat, and running out of the room.

It was the most contrived piece of BS I've ever seen, so I can only imagine that the mockumentary you reference, involving one of the great directorial egos of our day, was an even greater horror show.
posted by ChasFile at 11:12 AM on July 19, 2004

I liked Sixth sense, and Unbreakable (but I'm a long-time comic book geek. ) Signs was shite.

It was pretty obvious to me from the get-go that this show was less doc and more mock. First of all, there's nothing the least bit reclusive about Night that I can see. Of all the popular film-makers out there these days, his is the most recognizable face. And furthermore, once they started getting into the "Night sees dead people" business, you have to be some kind of crank to believe there's any truth there. OTOH, my husband and I had fun watching it. It was creepy.
posted by Fenriss at 1:06 PM on July 19, 2004