SR Pick [Video]: No One Likes M. Night Shyamalan

Published 4 years ago by , Updated September 9th, 2010 at 7:49 am,

M. Night Shyamalan College Humor video spoof SR Pick [Video]: No One Likes M. Night Shyamalan

It’s no secret that M. Night Shyamalan’s career has been put under the spotlight, even more than before, ever since The Last Airbender. We even debated what happened to the man who brought us The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable. A brand new, hilarious College Humor video reenacts the strange, new world for Shyamalan.

Shortly after the generally ill-received release of The Last Airbender, a new trailer cropped up in theaters. The trailer was for Devil, a thriller that takes place within an elevator, written by Shyamalan. The trailer is riveting and intense, grabbing its audience. But when the screen shows “From the mind of M. Night Shyamalan,” nearly every theater full of movie fans erupted in moans, groans and laughs. It is true – the man behind some of the most heralded plot twist films of the last 20 years has become a laughing stock of Hollywood.

Needless to say, laughing stocks turn into hilarious video parodies pretty quickly. Now that College Humor is in on the fun, we’ve got a high quality, fully conceived short video. It focuses on M. Night Shyamalan as he deals with the strange world that laughs at his work. As he sees it, this can only be part of an epic twist – like many of his own movies.

The trailer includes a scary, bald man that haunts Shyamalan as he tries to uncover the reason behind his lost fan base. It starts off funny enough, but really gets going in the latter half. And of course, there is a twist, so stick around until the end.

The actor who plays Shyamalan actually resembles him a lot and the woman in the trailer looks almost identical to Aubrey Plaza (Funny People, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World). While the latter look-a-like is irrelevant to the humor of the video, it all goes into one of the funniest parody works of late.

College Humor is typically hit or miss with their videos, but by constantly churning out parodies and original content they hit a few great ones. No One Likes M. Night Shyamalan blows their last few videos out of the lady in the water.

Devil does look like a solid thriller, but the marketing team really should have known better when they put Shyamalan’s name in the trailer. Nobody could have predicted the public would react like they did, but that hasn’t stopped new TV spots and trailers from keeping his name on the film.

Then again, when you’ve got a movie with no big names attached, placing Shyamalan’s name on the trailer is the obvious move. Sometimes bad press is good press. At least we are talking about the movie, right?

Source: College Humor

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:
TAGS: devil, the last airbender

63 Comments

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

  1. lol

  2. great

  3. It’s funny, at one time, Steven Spielberg was a god.. then he did “1941″ and the public turned on him in as vicious and heartless a manner as they have now on M. Night Shyamalan. I’m not comparing Spielberg and Shyamalan, but rather, the fickle and cruel public who are so ready and willing to trash an artist.

    Everyone thinks they’re a critic. Everyone thinks their opinion of a film is as important as anyone else’s. Everyone thinks they know everything there is know about movies and the film industry. Well, that’s what it sounds like every time you read something like “agh, that hack Shyamalamadingdong! he makes the worst films, he didn’t do anything half decent after 6th Sense, and even that was crap”.

    • difference is, Steven redeemed himself MANY times over, M. Night has not

    • absolutely right mike!!

    • Uh, to me, he has made ONE good movie, and that is The Sixth Sense. I’m not “fickle” because I judge every movie individually, I’m not going to be like “Well, I kind of thought Lady in the Water sucked, but it’s from the director of The Sixth Sense so I’ll like it anyway.” I think fans are right to turn on him after so many horrible movies in a row. It’s called “learning.”

      • lol ken, he has yet to atone for his other “sins” and i dont think that he ever will. “sins” being his terrible movies

      • Ken…. WOW we actually agree on the something WOW.

        • @Paul

          Well, try not to make it a habit, alright? ;-)

  4. i kinda feel bad for the guy i did enjoy his past films i just think his imagination is to childish for the viewers that now of days like things more grounded in reality and probably waay better quality and it just seems like his s*** is lacking in REALISM we want to see in the lady in the water the wolf actually eating people we wanted the creatures in the village to be REAL creatures. we did not want the happening get back to adult themes filmaking his stuff has gotten to childish and to soft go back to your balls M Knight

    • Never thought about it that way, but your absolutely right.

  5. @mike e then why do we care about your opinion? everyones opinions matter because we are paying to see these films we are the minds these films are made for if we want to pay for somthing we want to pay for somthing that is good and thats worth our time that we can go back and enjoy for the rest of our lives we are tired of crap

  6. i think m night is still good. i loved signs and unbreakible is earlyer work. i liked the village(as did alot of people im my family) i also like the happening(my fam and friends did as well). sure his recent movies wernt great but i thought they were good.

    • The Village was AWFUL. I actually asked for my money back but the theater wouldn’t give it back. I have had bowel movements scarier than that piece of garbage. Shymalanahamana’s last good film was Unbreakable. Since then, the movies have been boring and lame. Devil will be the same.

      • Couldn’t agree with you more. I think what made Unbreakable so good was the pairing up of Bruce Willis and Samuel Jackson. All his other films have been trash. They just don’t seem to go anywhere with the story and then before you know it the end credits are rolling up the screen.

        • Paul not to mention Sam Jackson not acting like Sam Jackson for once. Unbreakable proved he can do some serious acting when he wants to. Also while it had a twist it wasn’t the same kind of twist M does usually. It was a little more low key and played well in to the story. It made perfect sense for the characters in that world.

  7. Wow and i thought michael cinimo had a bad downward spiral lol!

  8. I have to admit that was kind of funny. I completely disagree with it though. The idea that Shyamalan’s career is over or never began is complete rubbish. If you look at his numbers they are actually very respectable :

    Sixth Sense – budget 40MM, Gross revenue 673MM
    Signs – budget 72MM, Gross revenue 408MM
    Unbreakable – budget 75MM, Gross revenue 250 MM
    The Village – budget 60MM, Gross revenue 257MM
    The Happening – budget 48MM, gross revenue 163MM
    The lady in the water – Ok, I’ll give you that one, but actually it still basically broke even.

    These numbers don’t include DVD sales or merchandising so are also understated. TLA has now made 270M USD and is still going strong.

    So, although funny, completely wrong. I really don’t understand where people get the idea that he is not a hugely successful director – because that is in fact what he is.

    Amazing how people’s perception can be so easily altered without actually looking at the facts.

    • Where are you getting your numbers on TLA?

      http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=lastairbender.htm

      Domestic Total as of Sep. 7, 2010: $131,178,978

      Domestic: $131,178,978 51.8%
      + Foreign: $122,201,514 48.2%
      = Worldwide: $253,380,492

      And there has only been two “spikes” to the movie gaining viewers. It went down 61% after its first week and the spiral continued.

      With the price of tickets and the “Names” and or properties attached to it a movie can easily make its money back.

      Money only means financial success which does not equate to lasting success.

      His movies have been crap….. and like a bad accident people still slow down and watch them…. Funny thing is I will see Devil…. and a LA 2 if they do it… :D

      • Aknot thanks for pointing that out. I hate when people use finacial success to some how indicate that the move was good. Better way to figure it out is how large of a drop it had in attendence and how low it was rated by the viewers. High box office indicates that it sold it’s self well to the audience based on the cast attached, the posters and the trailers.

        For instance The Happening dropped 71 percent from it’s first Friday to the next. Has an Average rating of C on Box Office Mojo by the viewers,a 29% on Rotten Tomatoes by the viewers 18 by the critics, and IMDB has it rated at 5.2 out of 10.

        The Last Airbender had a 68% drop from the first friday to the next. Averaging a C+ at BOM, 4.4 on IMDB, and Rotten Tomatoes viewers gave it 43% considered Rotten the critics were much more harsh giving it only a 7&.

        Those are the things that tell you if people liked it. Box office intake tells you how much people love Mark Whalberg for example and the trailer.

        • Aknot,

          I got the TLA number from here – http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2010/BENDR.php. The others I got from boxofficemojo.com. Mojo does not seem to update as frequently.

          Well, only two spikes you say? I’m not sure if that is of any relevance, really. If a movie has a great opening weekend there may be no up spikes at all and just a steady decline. But the performance by TLA is not unusual – look at any popular film you care to name – most of them suffered intense falls after the first week, and only a few up spikes as you say. In fact TLA has done well to get two up spikes in such a short time and of the magnitude of 274% and 106%. For example, look at Toy Story 3, no up spikes and a 46% drop off the first week and downhill all the way from there, and most people consider Toy Story 3 to be a success. This pattern is repeated for many popular films.

          The argument about names could be made about any film so that does not really count either. And actually TLA did not really have any what would be considered “big name” stars except perhaps for Shyamalan himself.

          Again I disagree that his movies have been bad – I think he is a consistently good, solid director who puts out quality material on a regular basis. The arguments I have made help prove this, I think.

          And if you continue to see his movies even though you think they will be bad then you have only yourself to blame. You can’t blame Shyamalan for that!

          Daniel F,

          See my argument above about drops in attendance.

          I would argue that those who rate films on RT/ IMDB etc are a small subset of the audience who go and watch movies or they are critics, mostly. Therefore although they may give an indication, I’m not sure that it is always particularly accurate as a complete picture of what the actual audience thought of the movie.

          • “And if you continue to see his movies even though you think they will be bad then you have only yourself to blame. You can’t blame Shyamalan for that!”

            Like I said its like a wreck. I really dont want to distract myself while driving as I may get into a wreck… but I do it anyway. I smoke cigars even though I know it is bad for my health….

            I watch his movies thinking that one day he may redeem himself…. So far that has not happened… Still does not make him all of that and sliced bread.

          • As for the two spikes meaning there was an increase in viewership/dollars taken in.

            Other then that it was a steady and very large drop.

            • Yes, I know and that is what I commented on and refuted.

              • By the by, you have to take account higher priced ticket sales for the so-called ’3D’ in TLA…

                Horrible reviews and fan resentment for TLA seriously puts into jeopardy that there will be a sequel (at least spear-headed by M. Night) simply because they spent $150 million on production, $35 million on advertisement, and only made $130 million domestically and $122+ million internationally.

                This doesn’t inspire confidence for studios when you take into account that M. Night took a property that has a strong fan base and the trailer highlighted (some would argue photoshopped) the selling points, only to have the majority of people walk out the cinema scratching their collective heads, trying to figure out how they got duped yet again.

                I’m pulling for M. Night, but the quality and clarity of his films have been on a steady decline and to use the numbers of TLA as a barometer of for where M. Night is popularity wise is ill-advised.

                And for the record, everyone is right to an opinion. However, the scope of that opinion is not endless. There are standards in place and by those standards (I’ll let you pick–action, pacing, etc) TLA sucked. Hard. Just bad. Awful.

                • *you have to take into account

                  • You’re reaching a little to try and find negativity. Whatever, I guess you have to try and prove your point. I guess time will tell where it all ends up.

                    • However, I will take issue with some of your points here. Firstly, TLA is still going and has only been out a couple of months. There is plenty of time to make more money. And as I said, DVD sales and merchandising have not yet been taken into account.

                      I don’t think it is the majority of people at all – how many millions of people watch a film? How many of those bother to comment on it? It is a very small subset of the moviegoing public. For example, I’m sure most kids loved the movie – it is just the adults, who for some reason have an axe to grind against Shyamalan, who are up in arms.

                      We can disagree on the merits of the film. I thought as a good action movie aimed primarily towards kids, TLA was outstanding. The action was good and the effects were great. And that is what it was meant to be.

                    • I have a theory. Tracey is M. Night Shayamalan. The same person but with a different name da da da dada da da dada (eree music).

                • * I was looking at another movie for advertising costs, TLA cost $130 million to advertise, not $35 million. *

          • Are you seriously comparing a 46% drop to a 60% drop? 40- 50 is normal 60 is high. It’s a terrible argument.

            • Well there is not a huge amount of difference between 50% and 60%, is there? Also, if you look at Toy Story 3 it dropped off and never had any up spikes, TLA has had two. I think it is your argument that is terrible, actually.

              • Umm yes there is a huge difference between 50 and 60% a very big difference.

                Not to mention Toy Story 3 had an opening weekend of 110Mil it’s very very very uncommon for a film to open that large and have a drop lower than 40-50 Percent. TLA wasn’t even close to that opening and should of held on just as strong or stronger than Toy Story 3, but instead suffered a much larger drop.

                From Friday to the next to the next Toy Story 3 went down
                56.4%
                41.3%
                38.5%

                TLA went down
                68.6%
                57.5%
                45.5%

                I would consider all those a huge difference.

                First one is separated by 12% and the second by a much larger 16%.

                The truth of the matter is when looking at actual number even something as low as 7% is a big difference so yes 10% is defiantly a huge difference. Toy Story had a much lower drop than TLA and yet still had a much higher attended opening weekend which usually means a higher drop. However, TLA was so widely considered bad that it suffered a massive second week drop. Usually with a massive second week drop you can stabalize and have a low third week drop to compensate yet TLA had another big drop again two weeks in a row. Then it came to the next week and it had an Average drop which normally wouldn’t be a big deal, but after two massive drops in a row it’s suddenly a massive blow to the film.

                • Why does it even matter how much it made in theaters? I think the most important point of all is that The Last Airbender was just plain HORRIBLE…

                • Again, you’re reaching a little to find negativity. Fine, that is your prerogative, but I think any reasonable person would agree that steep drops after the first week are quite normal. And looking at the figures backs that up.

                  The fact is, Shyamalan is a good solid director. There is only a small number of people, as a percentage of the moviegoing public, who think otherwise. It just so happens that they are the ones who are the most vocal and for some reason have it in for him.

                  Well, I hope everybody doesn’t fall for the groupthink that you guys are trying to engender and think for themselves. Judging by the box office receipts it looks like they are judging for themselves and judging positively.

                  • Only a small percentage of the movie going people think otherwise. HA. Tracey can you pass the crack pipe on please you’ve had enough.

                    • Yeah, I’m pretty sure this is M. Night we’re talking to, so let me first say that I liked Unbreakable alot better than the Sixth Sense (which was a good movie itself).

                      The Village worked for me only because I understood your love for Hitchcock and Twilight Zone material (you should have released it as a TV movie though…ya know. Maybe next time…if you ever want the Village 2).

                      Lady In the Water needed more seasoning—a few more years in the stove.

                      The Happening worked as a one time deal. Sat through the whole thing on a date. It served its purpose.

                      Signs was alright.

                      TLA was thorough trash. I believe you intended this to get back at people for unfairly criticizing your movies and letting people like Paul W.S. Anderson pass unscathed. I get it. Next time though, can you choose another property other than Avatar to make your point (and when I say next time, I mean ten movies down the line or so).

                      Thanks M. Night, I mean Mr.Shyamalan.
                      Your movies still break even and make some profit(not like your Sixth Sense/Unbreakable/Signs days) so I guess that’s all that matters.

        • hahahahaha I KNOW YOU!…. Im a visual person so when an Avatar changes I dont correlate who it is as quick as seeing the name.. :D

          • Aknot you know me? That sounds creepy lol.

            • I too know Dan… to my dismay :(

              • Ouch Paul that’s harsh.

            • Well as in the I know you by your avatar… :D

              • I thought you were saying that you actually know me know me lol I was like where do you live? lol

    • Well here’s another way to look at the same numbers, how many times the cost the movie made back. A 2 to 2.5 times what the film cost to make is a bare minimum multiplier to judge a film a financially viable effort.

      17x first movie
      6x second movie
      3x third movie
      4x fourth movie
      3x fifth movie
      1x sixth movie
      1.7x seventh movie

      As you can see his movies started out as spectacular successes. Making back as much as 17 times what it cost to make. But that success didn’t last. His success began to falter almost immediately. Extending your tally out to include “The Last Airbender” he can’t even muster a viable cume for a popular title property! That coupled with a on-going critical slide has been sealing his fate. I’m incredibly disappointed in his performance, figuring that it was only the poor choices of subject matter coupled with his learning curve that held the man up. Experimenting in his art would eventually lead him to learn what was at the heart of success, so I thought. However with “The Last Airbender” it was like he obviously slept through movie making 101 through 201 and woke up from dreaming of making his first couple of movies to learn what was in 301, which probably accounts for his first successes. Everyone has at least one good story in them if they get through the process, it’s what they do after that, that determines how successful they will be at it.

      After mucking up something that should’ve been an easy job for an average talent it’s obvious this person has got major issues, perhaps, I dare say, irreparable ones with his chosen career path. I think that’s why he’s doing now what he’s doing. Determining where in his process he’s going wrong, by allowing others to develop his ideas. Is it all in the execution or has he truly lost his creative guiding star, so to speak?

      I’d say he better learn fast or his career as a film maker is washed up. The industry behind the creativity wants to see profitability for their continued support. Some good critical headlines couldn’t hurt either…

      • Ok, where do I start? Right, first of all, to the guys up there who I can’t reply to for some reason, I am not M Night Shyamalan. But that is a great, mature way to support and continue your argument, well done guys!

        To the old man,

        First of all, those numbers do not include DVD sales or merchandising so are understated. The impact this can have can be quite significant in some cases. But let’s leave that aside for now. So you are seriously suggesting that those multiples that you put up there are not good? 17,6,3,4,3,1,2(TLA has made 270M USD according to thenumbers.com) gives an average of 5. Highly respectable numbers and let’s not forget that they don’t include merchandising or DVD sales. Let’s also not forget that TLA is still out there so the numbers should go up.

        How can you say that the success didn’t last? The success of sixth sense was runaway – to maintain that pace would have been virtually impossible for anyone. You can’t expect to make 17x for every movie. But he then continued to churn out 3x, 4x, 6x. Those are good numbers, however much you try and paint it otherwise.

        There are no issues. People seem to be reaching for a reason to bring him down. I’m really not sure why.

        The industry behind the creativity has been seeing profitability, which is why they keep letting him make movies. Hollywood is a cutthroat business and they would have no problem dropping him if they though that was the best thing to do.

        • That success didn’t last from movie to movie. Dropping anywhere from 35 to 50% in payback? Those are incredible drops and as time and his movies have increased in number his performance has gradually slipped, after dropping from those great heights. TLA’s cume might seem impressive but the movie cost 150M to produce. It’s also murky to attribute TLA’s merchandise success on Shyamalan’s effort in light of the fact that preceding his effort was a very successful animated series about the same property. Which almost everyone agrees was superior in every way to this live action rendition. If his work was strong just the theater first run release would have garnered a 3x given all the enthusiasm for the franchise. The multiplier is at 1.7 not 2 for this movie. Your talking 300K dollars less for every Million the movie could be making.

          Believe me when I say I was really wanting to see this movie but passed because of the mangling of the story. I’ve never even seen an episode of the animated version, so I’m not stuck on comparisons between the two. However the more articles I read and feedback from average movie goers about the way the story is laid out, like the way the story proceeded from one plot point to the next without sufficient storytelling in between, sounded like a confusing mess to me. I have nothing against Shyamalan. I wanted TLA to be a strong comeback for him, especially critically. I liked his first efforts in movie directing. I especially wanted to see a followup to “Unbreakable.” Now I’m hoping he doesn’t make it, if this is the best he can do now. The operative word in that sentiment is now, because he’s definitely lost something along the way. His mojo or maybe just the strong desire to succeed, I don’t know.
          If he had an addiction issue or something it would make some kind of sense, but it looks to me like he just had some fluke success in the beginning and is with each successive movie, sputtering out.

          Furthermore, averaging those movies together seems to me to be only relevant if he made all of them for the same company, which he didn’t. That’s important from an investment point of view as he presents himself as a greater risk and not as reliable. Would studio-Y get the high performing Shyamalan that made the “Sixth Sense,” or the poor performing one that made “The Happening?” You want to hire the former performer not the latter one, but how can you be sure that’s what your getting? The old saw was your only as good as your last success, but a successful Hollywood mogul came up with another, Your only as good as your next one…

          • I have a question for you. Who, then, do you consider to be a successful director?

            I’m really not sure where you get the idea of an addiction issue. That seems a little off the wall. Again, I would argue that it is the critics and journalists who may have issues because his record is solid. I can’t see how you can say that there is a sputtering out. 17x is unrepeatable but a median of 3x is highly respectable, by anyone’s standards.

            Averaging is still relevant as it’s an indicator of overall performance.

            • I think the problem here is that your still confusing making a profit for quality. Your big thing is spouting out ~but TLA made $270 million~ and I was gonna let that go, but it seems that your feelings got hurt from the light ribbing going on so lets set the record straight.

              TLA cost $150 million to make. It cost $130 MILLION to advertise! You want the source, I’ll give you one(there are more than one by the way, but I’ll just give you this one), The L.A. Times. Look it up. These numbers are not that hard to come by because as you like to mention over and over again, this is a business that deals with alot of money. BTW, stop saying that TLA is still out there, like there is $30 million left under the table for the movie to pick up. Its peaked. At this point, the very most it may bring in is $2 million, and I’m being very optimistic there…

              I can get deeper into the mechanics of distribution fee’s in different territories as well as other costs that must be adhered to before the studio and its partners can start putting money into their respective pockets. Let me know if you want the details. (I can also let you know how much his more recent films cost to advertise as well as DVD and online video sales as well…but I’m pretty sure with your love of the numbers, you got that…)

              Lets set that aside for now, as you’d like to type in your response. Making a profit (no matter how small) does not equate great film making. I have numerous examples at my disposal for that. Off the top of my head…and go…Micheal Bay, Paul W.S. Anderson, Louis Leterrier, wait a minute, let me focus on Louis just a bit. I think he is on his way and shows promise, but that didn’t stop the studio from giving him the boot from Clash of the Titans 2.

              Why not keep him?
              Movie cost $125 million to make. $160 million to advertise. Brought in $491 million world wide gross. Take the applicable costs and percentages needed and you may be walking away with $100+ million net. From very respectable sources, the DVD sales up to 8/29/10 is sitting on $25,829,994. *as always, this is GROSS. Always take into account that you must also spend for advertising the Home market as well as creation of products…but you already knew that with your love of numbers*

              Because they (the studio) didn’t get into the game of spending $300 million to maybe make a $100 million profit. Don’t get me wrong, they’ll take it. They let him go because consensus from the public and critics alike was this movie not only could have been alot better, but should have been a lot better. Ask the guy who directed Wolverine if he knows what that means, because he’s benched from the sequel as well.

              If M. Night wants to be along those ranks, so be it. However, I don’t think he does. He, along with the media, compared himself to Alfred Hitchcock. He took cues from him. It’s not a secret. You put yourself in that space, people will want you to deliver. He’s first few movies was on pace. Lady in the Water did not make a profit, especially the basic way you think it made. The happening barely scraped even, when all tally was done. This is why he jumped on the property of TLA. Look up his interviews when he speaks about first wanting to tackle TLA. Its revealing.

              I could go on and on, but whats the point. I’ve said my peace. I am a fan of M.Night. But I won’t give him a pass on certain directions he has taken because box-office receipts ‘look’ good from the outset.

              • BTW, he is still a VERY capable filmmaker that I will blindly pay for over the Bay’s and the Columbus’ and the Goyer’s of the world. However, he is capable of so much more (at least that is my hopes).

                And if anything read like a personal attack Tracey, I sincerely apologize.

                • TLA takes in 300M USD gross – chances of a sequel?

                  • 308M USD actually! It seems to still be pulling in about 10M USD a week!

  9. Hilarious.

    Your carers been dead the whole time.

    ROFL one of the best videos I’ve seen posted here yet.

  10. I actually liked e every movie he has done till after the village (yes i liked that movie :)).

  11. Shyamalan’s career is dead? But he made such great movies! The Last Airbender and Lady in the Water were so Oscar worthy! Where is all the hate coming from?

    SARCASAM!

    • lol.

      Had to readd that twice, thanks for the chuckle.

  12. “1941″, Had a decent plot, but Speilberg just wasted John Belushi in that one.
    Belushi, just grunted and acted like his Samuri character on SNL,,,

    • Still… Akroyd as a bug always cracks me up…. and the puppet on the ferris wheel..

      Yeah I need to watch that again….

  13. Just read the title of this article. I AGREE. Getting a bit tired of all the wierdo endings in Hollywood films, and Mr M. Night is one of the main culperates, along with Shutter Island. When people stop waching their films cos they know their not gonna have a satisfying end to the film, maybe just maybe some decent script writers / directors will emerge and knock them of the frikkin perch.

  14. Everyone is behaving childishly. While Shymalan’s films may not be good, you still have to admit that enough people see his movies that studios still greenlight all of his films.

    If you don’t like a director, don’t go see anything that his name is on. Simple as that. But if you go to see his films just so you can prove your “intellect” by over-analyzing everything associated with the films, all you are proving is that you need to grow up.

    • The problem Gary is that Shyamalan’s body of work is so uneven. That’s what bothers people. If it was so clear cut perhaps your admonition would have weight, but your glossing over the circumstances and your comment seems shallow. What’s wrong with exercising ones intellect? That’s how you grow. Some people consider it fun to pursue intellectual things. Others like to exercise their body, run, jump, hit the ball. If you want to completely disconnect fine but don’t make this a requirement others have to obey.

  15. I am one of the few that enjoys M. Night films. Some better than others but I feel they all had great stories.

    TLA was an average entertaining film. It had flaws but I saw some things that was successfully done in the movie.

  16. Hey UTKtheInc do you really resemble M. Night Shyamalan…uh ?????

  17. I just can’t forgive him for ‘The Last Airbender’

    He should stick to thrillers!

Be Social, Follow Us!!