Movie: The Village

Yeah, last night, I was supposed to go see the villiage with my fiancee, but we ended up seeing the Manchurian Candidate instead. Can't say that I mind much now.

I liked it. It wasn't near as deep and thought-provoking of M. Night's other work, but it was refreshing to just sit back and enjoy watching a movie for once. The twists were still present, they were just more blunt than his other twists. No need for much explanation, nor interpretation on what happened. I would give it 2.5/4 stars.

mattboy_slim... What was the other movie you want your money back for?
Axiom... Was the Manchurian Candidate any good btw?

@spilt

well, it was a decent remake of a classic film. Denzel Washington always does well in his roles. They put a bit of hollywood spin on it, but overall, it was well worth the 15bucks in tickets and 10 bucks in Milkduds and soda.

Does anyone else find it interesting that many of those who posts on message boards is psychic, and can tell that a movie will without any failure be predictable, poorly acted or generally un-entertaining by the previews alone? Or that so many, despite the above stated conditions, choose to cast an $8.00 pittance upon the production company so as to see the movie so that the actors don't feel left out because assumably no one will see their film upon the basis that it's understandably a complete waste of time, and the producer was in error as to have spent time making it?

Why is it also a general characteristic of those who have even a mild involvement in the world of mass media to be apparently aware of exactly what will entertain the masses, and an uncanny ability to point out why a creative work was incorrectly displayed, when it was their own idea to begin with. If you, who are apparently visionaries enough as to be able to predict an entire movie's screenplay from but a few short snippets of film could be conned so mercillessly into wasting your money by seeing it, then how are we mere mortals to stand a chance in resisting them? Good thing we have you here to save us from making such a mistake.

The above being said, might I also submit the following:

To proclaim that a creative work, such as a film was somehow incorrectly done, or somehow wrong is like a member of this forum submitting an image for critique, and to have every subsequently commenting member say That sucks. Looking at it was a waste of my time . Using the same logic as so many of you above have used, you would have been able to judge that the viewing of such an image would've been a waste of your time from the text use to precede and describe said image. If you're so intuitive as to judge from a 3 minute preview of a movie that it will be so bad, then why would you spend a dime seeing it? Furthermore, if your intuition is that sharp, the you'd also be able to judge that PixelKid45739's, or whoever's image bearing a title such as car wallpaper would 'suck' also, given that they've failed apparently to sell it accurately enough, or provide enough of a new spin on it as to make it visually interesting enough as to warrant your time in viewing it, let alone issuance of a critique on it.

Basically it comes down to this:

How many times has it been said on this forum, when issuing a critique not to say 'that sucks' outright, but if you truly believe it to suck, then say 'that sucks, and here is why I think that'.

How is this any different.

I saw the movie, and I'll say what I thought about it later, but for the love of god, stop making threads for the sake of badmouthing a movie that you may or may not have seen but have made up your mind about weeks before it's actually released.

I'm willing to bet that nearly all of you who have entered your vote of 'it sucked' into the hat would've thought so whether you saw it or not. In fact, there was a thread on this very subject last week, in which a member was livid that a movie had been made which appeared to be innacurate to the story upon which it was based, and based upon such an appearance or innacuracy, they would not see it because it may not adhere to his interpretation of it based upon his reading.

Given that this was an original screenplay, there was no previously existing standard of accuracy, so to say that something in the movie was wrong is completely non sensical. You can say that a scene or concept could've been illustrated differently, perhaps allowing a better conveyance of said idea or concept, but again, you've failed to do even that.

If you're already so sure that it's going to suck, then don't spend money on it, and certainly don't complain about it afterwards.




Cha-Ching
There's the 2 cents

Someone's gonna have to break the tension somehow!

lmao @ supah.

Well said, good sir.
well said.

mattboy_slim... What was the other movie you want your money back for?

28 Days Later

but if you truly believe it to suck, then say 'that sucks, and here is why I think that'.

Because I don't think it's right to post spoilers. I would have to have told certain aspects of the movie to explain why I thought it sucked. Though I think it would have been respectful of me to save people a few dollars and spoil the ending.