The trouble with reviewing a M Night Shyamalan movie is that you don’t know how to treat it. Should one look at this as one would when reviewing any other director’s film or would one look at this as the work a would-be-genius, one who is now considered to be one of the most powerful people in Hollywood? A completely objective viewpoint is almost impossible to achieve especially because of the darned fellow’s Indian roots. Nevertheless the attempt shall be made.
In this, his fourth mainstream movie, Shyamalan attempts to sneak a peek into the life of a idyllic village isolated from society by a forest, supposedly inhabited by creatures that the villagers only refer to as “those we do not speak of”. Which is funny, as most of the time, in the movie, they so just that. The village inhabitants live in mortal fear of the woods and the creatures within it, creatures only a handful of village elders claim to have seen. Legend has it that an agreement has been brokered between the village and the creatures that limited the activities of the folk within the confines of their village. The borders are clearly marked, and for years there has been no encroaching from either side. The village is thus cut off from the rest of the world, only known to most as “the towns”. The village is self-sustained, and lives a simple, honest, closed life.
Now however there is a young man who wants to change all that. Pained by the losses suffered due to the lack of access to modern amenities, Lucius Hunt volunteers to travel through the woods to bring back medicine from the forbidden towns. The elders admire his courage and sincerity, but before they can agree or deny, strange signs start appearing in the village. Livestock begin to appear dead, skinned, and on one bad night marks are made on the doors of the homes. Lucius blames himself for this, and changes his mind about traveling into the woods.
Of course, the movie cannot run on Lucius alone, even if it feels that way sometimes. Lucius is loved by all. He is a little different from the ‘other boys’, quiet, reserved, the strong-silent type. The love of his life is Ivy Walker – smart bright, beautiful, and blind. Lack of sight does not prevent her from racing up hills and recognising people from their ‘colour’, but what the heck, there has to be something special about the gal too, right? Ivy loves Lucius too, and when the zamana is also happy, what can stop this union from taking place? Well, Shyamalan finds a way, which turns out to be the only twist in this tale. The second half of the movie is like a rite of passage movie, with Ivy gathering up her courage and resolve to do all for love.
If this seems awfully like the plot of the more closer to home Bollywood potboiler, then well, yes it is. And the treatment is not that different either, so what makes this film watchable? Cos watchable it certainly is. Not as pretentious as “The Signs”, nor bleak like “Unbreakable”. Not refreshingly new or surprising as “The Sixth Sense” either, but then how many of those films can one churn out? Yes, Shyamlan is now a brand name by himself, expected to produce the best, and then the bester. You can’t keep a good expectation down, but perhaps credit needs to be given to the fact that all said and done, there are moments in all his films that will always remain in our consciousness.
The central plot is very believable, a fresh change from his extra-terrestrial and supernatural theories of yore. The photography, the entire look and feel of the film in fact, is excellently done. The isolated feeling is complete. The characterisation could have done with a little more though, and here I do feel Shyamalan getting into a bit of a rut. In every one of his films, his lead actors are shown as somnolent, dead calm (literally) individuals who were apparently carrying he weight of the world on their shoulders. Its fine as a novelty, but one tires of too much of the strong-silent types. Which is why the character of Ivy Walker comes as a welcome change. She’s as daylight-fresh as they come, and brings about a brightness into an otherwise bleak scenario. Or perhaps it was the way Bryce Dallas Howard played the character, that made it so likeable.
Which brings us to the performances. More than adequate, very controlled, perhaps a bit too controlled, another trait that has director influence written all over it. You can almost see Sigourney Weaver biting down hard so she wouldn’t break the mood as it were. Adrien Brody as the mentally challenged Noah Percy does well in his limited though pivotal character. Weaver and Brendon Gleeson (of The General fame) are wasted in insignificant, forgettable roles. William Hurt has the plum role of Edward Walker, the leader and founder of the council of elders that govern over the village, and he carries it off with exquisite charm and panache. In the character of a leader who carries the burden of a murky, troublesome past; a man living with the consequences of his actions of years ago, a silent lover, a loving father, an anguished friend, the man excels. His outburst scene where he pleads with the rest of the elders to preserve the innocence of his people is one of the highlights of the movie.
Joachim Phoenix in the standard “Night mascot” role of Lucius Hunt, looks brooding and scowls his way throughout the film. The only scene where he is asked to emote in – where he finally confesses his feelings for the perky Ms Walker - is one of those memorable ones that I was speaking of earlier. The said Ms Walker, as enacted by the talented Howard is almost jarringly spirited, and one feels that yet another star is born into the fold of the wannabes. One hopes to see more of her in future and wishes her the best.
Strange as it may seem, I am inexplicably upbeat about this movie. There are innumerable things that one could object or have reservations against (Shyamalan’s weird choice of language, for example, just doesn’t fit the period that the movie is set in); there are many things left unexplained or partly explained (who was responsible for the carcasses being strewn about the village). Be that as it may there is a certain something that is good about the movie. Maybe it’s the cautious optimism of the film, maybe it’s the way love is portrayed, maybe it was Howard’s face, maybe it the concept of a self-contained society, free from all evil, somewhat similar to the village Ewan McGregor comes across in ‘The Big Fish’. And it is well made, fairy-talish as it may seem. Shyamalan does manage to get under the skin, and despite all the morbidity, hope does shine through. Which is more than you could say for his early movies.
So, if I go back to my original question, well, I did compare this movie to his earlier ones, and yes, of all the work he’s done so far, barring the irresistible “sixth sense”, this is really my favorite. In fact I hold it at par with that movie, sacrilegous as this may seem. Not because ‘The Village’ is as good, but because, ‘The Sixth Sense’ was not that good. But that’s another review, isn’t it?