Considering The Career Arc of Writer-Director
Many people have strong opinions about the work of writer-director M. Night Shyamalan, and I’m certainly one of them.
While at times it may seem like critics are just waiting for Shyamalan to fail, I have been a big fan of his work for years (I even liked The Village!).
But he started to lose me around the time of Lady in the Water, and then…well you can just read on.
The Sixth Sense
This is quite simply a fantastic movie.
Here you really see Shyamalan’s strengths, and the reason people liked his work in the first place.
There’s the faith subtext, the very deliberate pacing, the precise and tight camerawork that evokes tension from stillness as much as anything, the somber tone, it’s all there.
But it’s backed up by a high-concept idea that actually holds internal logic. At the end, when the famous twist comes, you say “OH!” instead of “BOOO!”.
Unbreakable
Another high-concept idea from Shyamalan, and really a very ambitious one, that people have been trying to do for years.
Tell a superhero story without the flash, and with a level of psychological realism. Watchmen is acclaimed for doing something similar, as is The Dark Knight, but Shyamalan stripped things down way more than those two.
Once again, it kinda made sense. It held together. And so Shyamalan’s trademark foreboding mood and slow pace worked.
The movie was not the huge smash The Sixth Sense was, but did fairly well.
Signs
This is where the trouble really started.
Signs was a huge hit for Shyamalan, and once again the faith subtext really worked. Mel Gibson gave one of his better performances, the tension was working, and the humor actually was effective and appropriate too.
But, the end comes apart under the slightest scrutiny. Shyamalan based his premise on the idea aliens would invade a planet covered with water, despite being essentially allergic to water. Apparently it must not have rained the day they arrived. Tough luck huh? It’s pretty ridiculous.
Nonetheless the movie was extremely succesful.
The Village
By this point, Shyamalan’s affection for twist endings had become such an integral expectation of his work that people attended his movie as detectives.
The Village is a reasonable example of where Shyamalan’s artistic tendencies can get him into trouble without a solid story backing them up.
If everything makes sense, the story is logical, the settings and characters believable, then Shyamalan’s somber mood and the equally somber dialogue and acting seen in most of his films works. It plays as tension.
But if the viewer feels any artifice in the presentation, doesn’t buy the set-up, thinks it’s kind of silly, etc. then all of Shyamalan’s typical touches come off as silly too, self-serious, and ultimately make the viewer feel like he is in on a joke Shyamalan doesn’t know.
For me, The Village worked. I bought it. But it was not the case for other people, and the amount of critical bashing Shyamalan was taking probably had worked a toll on him.
Lady in the Water
To me, this is where Shyamalan kinda lost his cool a little.
He said, “Screw everybody, I’m doing my own thing.”
And he wrote a story about a creature from a magical land appearing in a swimming pool.
We never see the magical land, though apparently all the danger is coming from it. Instead of seeing the threats manifest (with the exception of one visit from a monster) we are told about them, repeatedly.
This is quite simply poor writing, it is not dramatic, particularly in the visual medium of film, to be told something instead of shown it.
Shyamalan also cast himself as a writer whose work would change the world, and put in a movie critic to be killed off.
The movie did not perform very well. It played very silly. I love much of Shyamalan’s work, but this movie was a misstep.
The Happening
Recall what I said about artifice? The Happening played perfectly well with its creepy opening scenes, but Shyamalan made the unfortunate mistake of making the villain the wind.
There are literally shots of grass swaying ominously.
Because of this the whole movie falls apart. All the serious elements become laughable. Even the actual attempts at humor feel forced and awkard.
There was a really nice love story inside this movie, but without a tangible villain, it just looked far too silly.
That said financially it seemed a bit of a comeback for Shyamalan after Lady in the Water.
Now What?
Well, next Shyamalan is doing something called The Last Airbender, which I believe is an animated kid’s film, though I could be wrong.
I think it’s fair to say it won’t really be a “Shyamalan movie” at least not in the sense of his usual films.
But what if Shyamalan did want to make another “Shyamalan movie”? How could he make sure he put something together that was effective?
My Suggestion
Shyamalan has a way with visuals, I think even some of his more vocal critics would agree. There are stunning shots in The Happening, in The Village, in really all his major movies that I have seen.
And he is not a terrible writer. He can work an effective faith subtext, he specializes in writing wounded men, and has done that well several times (Sixth Sense, Signs, Unbreakable).
The problem is Shyamalan is willing to let himself go out to the stratosphere, and it appears there is no one around to tell him, “Hey, this doesn’t make any sense.”
A veteran co-writer, known for grounded, logical stories, would work wonders for Shyamalan.
I personally would suggest John Logan, screenwriter of The Last Samurai, Gladiator, Any Given Sunday and The Aviator.
John has turned out a number of strong scripts, or at least been involved in them, and the stories connect emotionally and make sense.
Shyamalan needs someone to rein him in, otherwise loving fans of his work like myself will continue to have to defend him (at the showing of The Happening I saw the crowd literally booed out loud).
It’s getting harder to do so.
–Dan Benamor