Friday, July 21, 2006
Movies That Andrew Likes That Everybody Else Thinks Andrew Is Stupid For Liking - Part 1
Directed by M. Night Shyamalan
Against the opinions of movie critics, everyone on the Internet, two of the major deities and my girlfriend's landlord's pets, I like The Village. I even saw it again recently and felt exactly the same. What could be more entertaining than reading some poor sod destroy his credibility defending a lost cause?
The film tells a simple tale of simple folk living a couple of hundred years ago in a small village bounded by thick woods that are filled with monsters. It turns out (and you've either seen it or just don't care, so please carry on reading through the spoilers) that they are in modern times, the 'elders' dress up as monsters to scare the village into obedience because they all suffered terrible loss in the modern world and so retreated into a faux-utopia of the past, away from the evils of 'the towns'.The context a film is put in and the expectations of the audience play a huge part in how the film is viewed and, consequently, judged. How many people would have forgiven the dialogue and acting in Star Wars if it didn't have laser swords? Equally, how many would be excited by a story of someone dying very slowly if it didn't have sci-fi trappings, as The Fountain does? The Village is cursed with an immense amount of baggage, some brought by the audience, some brought by its advertising and some brought entirely by itself. I believe that much of the negative reaction comes from the baggage, and the act of stripping it away reveals a different film.
I believe that the film is a fable at its heart, which is to say a moral story that comes from the aural tradition of telling. They are stories aware that they are being told and that the reader/listener is aware are fictions, their characters creations to reflect certain aspects of the moral, their actions are 'acting outs'. This is a very different style of storytelling to the modern, naturalistic approach that emphasises realism and identification with the main characters.The Village, however, does not have an obvious main character, and begins with scenes of village life, showing us various characters - William Hurt's heavy-hearted elder, Joaquim Phoenix's soulful young suitor, Bryce Dallas Howard's independent blind girl, people cleaning, farming, eating. The focus eventually settles on to Bryce and Joaquim's lovers and, finally, Bryce alone, but the film's POV remains distant almost entirely up until Bryce's character takes her climactic trip into the woods. It is this observational POV that gives the film its quiet, understated tone, what tips the hat towards this being a fable, and specifically tells us that this is not a 'twist' movie.
The 'twist' structure relies on getting the audience to identify with one character, so that they will implicitly accept that character's worldview. This means that when that worldview is shattered by the twist, it comes as a huge surprise, and the film will play entirely differently a second time as the audience is no longer watching through the character's filter. This can be seen in The Sixth Sense most clearly, but also in films such as Fight Club and Memento.The Village does not do this. Having no main character means we, as an audience, are free, from the start, to question each character's worldview. This has the effect of making all of their actions characters beats rather than a game of second-guessing narrative points and of turning the film into a story about the village itself and, as such, a fable. The distancing of the POV, and the roving around the village to settle on little scenes with different characters, sets up a narrator's voice. It is the narrator's choices that lead you from scene to scene, rather than a protagonist's choices and the film could as well start 'once upon a time there was a village in a woods'. That is doesn't is something that I shall return to.
Why doesn't Little Red Riding Hood recognise the wolf in the bed? How can a kiss wake the poisoned princess? Why would the children wander from the path? These are not questions that we would ask of a fable because we know that the characters are representations rather than people, acting out positions of innocence, wickedness or blooming sexuality. The characters in The Village are the same. Why would the blind girl be sent into the woods, how could they seperate themselves from the modern world so effectively, how could those monsters fool anyone? These questions lose their sting when you watch the film as a morality tale about the fear of loss.
As everyone will tell you, The Village simply does not work as a 'twist' film and, beyond a few tense moments, does not function as a horror or a thriller. On those terms those questions become damning. The mystery becomes obnoxious, the twist becomes laughable, the crises of the characters manipulative and unbeilevable.
But why, ignoring the fools who expected some action-ride horror-thriller, ignoring the elitists and their joy in tearing down and ignoring the monomaniacal, the know-it-alls and the gossips, why would so many see the film one way where I would see it the other?For one, because of the advertising. It is no surprise that the marketing team would try and sell it as the most mysterious, frightening and exciting film possible, nor is it unprecedented for trailers to pretend a film is something entirely other than it is.
Another reason is audience expectation. Everyone knows Shyamalan is the twist guy and so will be watching his films for that twist. That coupled with a growing determination not to get fooled by his tricksy ways means he is damned if he does or does not. There is also an expectation that a summer blockbuster will play a certain way - be thrill-packed, epic, big, important - while his films have always been very small and simple in scope. Against such expectations, dissappointment will always be the result.
The final reason, and by far the most important, is that The Village was written and directed by M Night Shyamalan. Search Defamer.com for his name and you'll no doubt find pages of examples of hubris and self-mythologising. Equally check out Moriarty's review of Lady In the Water when he goes on at length (as is his won't and right) about the crap that surrounds Shyamalan before even beginning to talk about the movie.
Shyamalan is one of the most self-aware of the modern directors, more so even than Tarantino or Kevin Smith, using his films to sell his image as a master of the art. This unfortunately clashes with his genuine desire to make great films and his obvious ability to do so (hey, at least really good ones). He knows he is known as a 'twist' director and so makes sure to put twists in, even when he is aiming at a different type of story. He wants desperately to be seen as an important director and so edits his scenes to give them a slightly heavy significance, even though he also wants to tell a very simple story. He wants to have his cake and eat it. He thinks he can do everything at once. And so The Village becomes a schizophrenic film, moving in several different directions at once.He structures his film to work against the 'twist' ending, then includes a 'twist' ending; he wants to tell a bedtime story, and yet wants the respect afforded adult dramas; He wants to tella simple, emotionally open story, yet includes plenty of slick horror/thriller tricks; he wants to tell a fable, yet doesn't start with a 'once upon a time...'.
So while most focus on the entirely broken parts and ignore that which works, I was drawn to the fable aspects and found myself very taken with the movie, finding those endlessly retrodden faults forgivable, even ignorable.
Is this because I am gullible, am incapable of actually watching a movie or have the same, albeit nascent, megalomaniacal veiw of humanity as Mr Night? These are easy answers and, as such, unsatisfying. More likely is that the film does not judge these characters and their failings. The elders' decision to seclude themselves is foolish and extreme, but bourne of the terrible and understandable fear of the loss of that which they love most. To dismiss them as loons and so dismiss a film that cares for them is to miss the film's point - which is empathy. In this the film is very humane, and far more so than the jokey cynicism of Tarantino, the jokey sentiment of Smith or the sledghammer preaching of Crash and other 'issue' movies. It is in this that his true talents as a storyteller refuse to be swamped by his ego.The Village is a film that takes a very formal, traditional form and manages to infuse its archetypes with very palpable feeling. This, finally, is why I like the film and why, on these terms, I judge it a success.
And please don't take this as a recommendation to re-watch the film. If it wound you up when you first saw it, there's no reason why it won't do so again. The best, perhaps, The Village can hope for is a re-appraisal as the shakey beginnings of his move from the first oh-so-clever 'twisty' phase of career into a later, more mature part where he embraces the simple joy of the act of telling a story. While advanced word on Lady In The Water suggests it does embrace its storytelling more fully, only after it opens will be able to tell if it is a step in towards a flourishing of his true talents, or a step further up his very talented arsehole.
Read or Post a Comment
"How many people would have forgiven the dialogue and acting in Star Wars if it didn't have laser swords?"
If it didn't have laser swords, it woudn't have dialogue about nerf-herders and sublight engines.
The acting is fine, assuming we're talking the OT. Even though people don't always forgive the acting. Hell, I think Ford and Fisher in JEDI need a punch in the arse.
I enjoyed bits of this and need to rewatch it. I do think the problem largely stemmed from people's expectations that this would be a horror movie. That's what I expected anyway.
My wife and I both liked this one alright. The ending should have arrived in the middle, though. Otherwise it's an interesting story about trying to escape violence via the establishment of a society. Notice how his life was saved by a merciful act from the world they wanted to escape. This irony is lost amid the OMG IT WUZ NOW ALL ALONGS! twist ending.