Jump to content

M. Night Shyamalan's OLD (2021)


Thor
 Share

Recommended Posts

Shyamalan has been a roll in the last few years - from THE VISIT onwards. The 'going back to indie basics' philosophy has paid off, as far as I'm concerned.

 

The trailer for his new film OLD is out, and I think it looks terrific:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the premise.

 

He's moved onto yet another composer? First thing I checked was whether JNH was scoring this but I can only assume they've had a falling out or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, crumbs said:

I like the premise.

 

He's moved onto yet another composer? First thing I checked was whether JNH was scoring this but I can only assume they've had a falling out or something.

 

Yeah, Trevor Gureckis - who's done the score for the brilliant slow-burn series SERVANT with Shyamalan. He also did the recent teenage space movie VOYAGERS, which wasn't all that. But a promising talent, for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, crumbs said:

I like the premise.

 

He's moved onto yet another composer? First thing I checked was whether JNH was scoring this but I can only assume they've had a falling out or something.

That would be great. But I am afraid such an A level composer like Newton Howard would not match with the indy basics Thor mentioned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We talked about this film this week in the Upcoming Films thread if you want to see more thoughts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Thor said:

 

Yeah, Trevor Gureckis - who's done the score for the brilliant slow-burn series SERVANT with Shyamalan. He also did the recent teenage space movie VOYAGERS, which wasn't all that. But a promising talent, for sure.

 

Well, best of luck to Gureckis, but still sad to see the JNH/MNS collaboration end on such a whimper.

 

Those first 5 scores were such fertile territory for JNH (despite the uneven films they accompanied).

 

The Happening score has its moments but the film is so awful it's hard to separate the two, and I never bothered with Airbender or After Earth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, GerateWohl said:

The trailer shows way to muh of the movie for my taste.

Thanks for the warning, I won't watch the trailer then. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, crumbs said:

 

Well, best of luck to Gureckis, but still sad to see the JNH/MNS collaboration end on such a whimper.

 

Those first 5 scores were such fertile territory for JNH (despite the uneven films they accompanied).

 

The Happening score has its moments but the film is so awful it's hard to separate the two, and I never bothered with Airbender or After Earth.


Airbender is his best collaboration with Shyamalan. You should really make time for it. It’s JNH in full fantasy mode, and it rocks. After Earth is a snooze though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Taikomochi said:


Airbender is his best collaboration with Shyamalan. You should really make time for it. It’s JNH in full fantasy mode, and it rocks. After Earth is a snooze though. 

 

Thanks for the recommendation! Knew nothing about this score, I'll have to check it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Saw this today.

 

It's OK, but with some warts. The premise is excellent -- both the premise and the characters are very "Stephen King", perhaps the most King Shyamalan has been. Excellent mood. Intense chamber piece. And great sense of mystery that doesn't lose itself to its own exaggerated mysticism, Lindelof-style.

 

On the downside is the dialogue and intimate/melodramatic scenes, which were never Shyamalan's strength to begin with. His own role in the film is bigger than usual as well. Some weird dialogue exchanges and forced melodrama/actions that just seems at odds with the style.

 

Gureckis has quickly risen in fame over the last few years. I like the more melodic parts. The intense, sharp dissonance/sound design stuff works OK too, in context, but a little run-of-the-mill. Not something I'd like to listen to on its own.

 

3 of 5 stars. Enters 14th place on my list of the year so far (of 50 new films seen so far).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Thor said:

The premise is excellent -- both the premise and the characters are very "Stephen King", perhaps the most King Shyamalan has been.

Isn’t this based on a novel? So not Shyamalan’s premise or characters. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wikipedia says Old is "loosely based on the French language-Swiss graphic novel Sandcastle by Pierre Oscar Levy and Frederik Peeters."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Thor said:

Saw this today.

 

It's OK, but with some warts. The premise is excellent -- both the premise and the characters are very "Stephen King", perhaps the most King Shyamalan has been. Excellent mood. Intense chamber piece. And great sense of mystery that doesn't lose itself to its own exaggerated mysticism, Lindelof-style.

 

On the downside is the dialogue and intimate/melodramatic scenes, which were never Shyamalan's strength to begin with. His own role in the film is bigger than usual as well. Some weird dialogue exchanges and forced melodrama/actions that just seems at odds with the style.

 

Gureckis has quickly risen in fame over the last few years. I like the more melodic parts. The intense, sharp dissonance/sound design stuff works OK too, in context, but a little run-of-the-mill. Not something I'd like to listen to on its own.

 

3 of 5 stars. Enters 14th place on my list of the year so far (of 50 new films seen so far).

I saw nothing Stephen King like in Old. I had fun. The gore was fun. The ending was nice.

As you said the premise, a spot on earth where time accelerates, is intriguing. it was very similar to an episode of ST, and Voyager regarding being in accelerated time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Koray Savas said:

Isn’t this based on a novel? So not Shyamalan’s premise or characters. 

 

The credits read "written and directed by" Shyamalan, and then the "based on" credit after that. I don't know which elements are from the novel, and which Shyamalan created. But it's still the most King he's ever been -- especially the Rufus Sewell character, but also the whole premise.

 

Not a spoiler, but right before Sewell's character has....well, issues, he keeps wondering which film starred Jack Nicholson and Marlon Brando. It nags on him, to the point of obsession. Nobody answers him, even though he keeps bringing it up. I wanted to shout THE MISSOURI BREAKS through the screen, just to ease his obsession, LOL! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Thor said:

The credits read "written and directed by" Shyamalan, and then the "based on" credit after that. I don't know which elements are from the novel, and which Shyamalan created. But it's still the most King he's ever been -- especially the Rufus Sewell character, but also the whole premise

But that premise if from the graphic novel! Based on loose googling, since I don’t want to be spoiled, seems like the only difference is his ending.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could be, I've never read the book. But Shyamalan certainly makes it his own; plenty of his trademarks in it. It's fun to see him roam about in Stephen King-like territory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again you keep.mentionig Stephen King and as a diehard King fan I just do not see it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, JoeinAR said:

Again you keep.mentionig Stephen King and as a diehard King fan I just do not see it. 


I’m a diehard fan too, and I found the King elements so obvious they basically jumped out of the screen.

 

Those Sand Castles guys have no doubt read their King.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

I liked parts of this but overall it fell flat.

 

True to form with Shyamalan, the acting/dialogue is atrocious (he's seemingly incapable or unwilling to write natural dialogue). Delivery/performances are similarly stilted. Some scenes make Wahlberg's acting in The Happening look Oscar-worthy by comparison.

 

The concept was definitely unsettling and gruesome, but the film rarely delivers on that potential (wasn't shocked to see it was rated PG-13 afterwards). It really deserved some unsettling R-rated violence to convey the sheer horror of what was happening to their bodies, yet most of the deaths are tame or off-screen. The baby sequence is the most perverse moment of the film but, like all the other wasted potential, it's immediately abandoned.

 

The soppy "twist" ending didn't land for me either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Koray Savas said:

The camerawork was just flat out bizarre. So many things and characters out of frame. I began to wonder if it was because the graphic novel was drawn that way. 

 

Yeah I started wondering if my copy was cropped or something. I guess he was trying to be, err, creative?

 

Or yeah, maybe a tip of the hat to the graphic novel.... but it was more distracting than stylish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That’s fine for an occasional shot or scene. But when the whole film takes place out of frame it’s frustrating.

 

There were some weird long takes as well where the camera is constantly spinning while zooming in and out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Koray Savas said:

There were some weird long takes as well where the camera is constantly spinning while zooming in and out. 

 

Are you talking about the long, "searching" takes? That's a trademark of Shyamalan's, and I love it. Was put to good use in OLD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn I definitely think I should watch it a second time because each time I read this thread it's like most have seen an abomination.

I don't recall at all that there was a weird framing nor that the movie was bad, I find it okay like most Shyamalan who never moved me more than this (I didn't watch all his movies though, maybe that's why)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m a Shyamalan apologist and this movie was pretty awful. Makes The Happening look Oscar-worthy. Dialogue and acting are some of the worst I’ve ever seen.

 

I thought the concept was great and even liked the twist. Just executed like an amateur filmmaker. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Koray Savas said:

I’m a Shyamalan apologist and this movie was pretty awful. Makes The Happening look Oscar-worthy. Dialogue and acting are some of the worst I’ve ever seen.

 

I thought the concept was great and even liked the twist. Just executed like an amateur filmmaker. 

Ugh!  "Makes The Happening look Oscar-worthy" :lol:  That film was stunningly bad.  So MNS gets a blank check to create crap because of an early success or two.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Thor said:

 

Are you talking about the long, "searching" takes? That's a trademark of Shyamalan's, and I love it. Was put to good use in OLD.

 

I liked those long "searching" shots personally, it was particularly effective during the birthing sequence. I just found the unusual cropped framing in other places a bit jarring. It's certainly got his trademark visual stamp all over it. 

 

The film wasn't an abomination by any stretch, I just thought it wasted the potential of its concept. For something that looked low budget, I'm surprised it wasn't a hard-R that indulged in the grotesque body horror.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, karelm said:

 So MNS gets a blank check to create crap because of an early success or two.  

 

Well, his movies are relatively cheap to make and horror sells well.

 

For the record, unlike Koray and Thor, I'm not a Shyamalan apologist but I really enjoyed ...

 

103374.300.jpg

 

... which critics seems to hate as much as Old and The Happening

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AC1 said:

For the record, unlike Koray and Thor, I'm not a Shyamalan apologist but I really enjoyed ...... which critics seems to hate as much as Old and The Happening

 

Fan, yes. Apologist, no.

 

THE VISIT -- which is a great film indeed -- was actually well-received by most critics. Most seemed to agree that by going back to indie roots, he was getting back to form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Visit was great! Easily his best film in years, mostly because he stripped away all the nonsense and just focused on a streamlined story.

 

I think that's where his strengths lie. The more convoluted his narratives, the worse the films.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, karelm said:

Ugh!  "Makes The Happening look Oscar-worthy" :lol:  That film was stunningly bad.  So MNS gets a blank check to create crap because of an early success or two.  

 

The only good thing I have to say about The Happening is JNH's superb score. When saw it way back, it was ok as some background nonsense, but the silliness of the story and the pretty bad acting restricts it from being anything other than a silly B-movie.

 

IMO Night's last good mainstream film was The Village. LitW is an interesting experiment that didn't really result in a very engaging film, and the less said about Last Airbender and After Earth the better (I feel that even JNH had started to lose his spirit by that point).

 

Back on topic, just watched the trailer above, which starts well but ends badly, and I suspect contains some of the stupider lines ('we're here for a reason'). I read the wiki page as I had no intention of watching this, and the twist actually sounds rather interesting, but it sounds from this thread like the execution is poor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.