The Happening

My sister and I have diagnosed what we describe as "First Single Hit" syndrome. It's when a singer - notably Natalie Imbruglia - releases their first single and it is absolutely incredible to the point where everything s/he does after that comes up just a little short. "Torn" was so good that everything Natalie releases is always "well, it's good, but it's not Torn, is it?" M Night Shyamalan suffers from the same thing. The Sixth Sense was a kick-arse film; so good with an absolutely brilliant twist and fuck off to anyone who
claims they saw the twist coming. The thing about that movie is that the audience works out the twist a microsecond before Bruce Willis' character does, and that is the best way to do a twist (or indeed a really, really good joke). The audience doesn't feel cheated, they feel a little intelligent, but because they didn't work it out just until the moment the character does, there's no anti-climax. An "A+" film.

But ever since then, "well...it's good, but it's no The Sixth Sense, is it?"

Unbreakable...great film, not critically acclaimed. Signs...great film, not critically acclaimed and didn't have a twist which left the audience a little disappointed because by now they had conditioned themselves to expect a twist. The Village...great film, not critically acclaimed (although for some reason the twist didn't surprise me at all because I was under the impression it was set in present day - have no idea why I thought that). And then there's The Lady In The Lake which is just a little off beat.

One of the great things about Shyamalan's direction is that the actors always conform to what Shyamalan wants. Usually an actor bends the style of the film to fit him/her, but that never happens in a Shyamalan film. And want he wants from his actors is a kind of styalised, distant form of acting. It's perhaps most noticable in Signs with Mel Gibson, and although he is the chief example of this, Mark Wahlberg is, I think, the next most obvious example of it. Unfortunately, it doesn't always suit Wahlberg as it seems, more often than not, that rather than being distant he has simply forgotten his lines and Shyamalan hasn't called for a retake. This isn't helped by Zooey Deschanel (and I love this actress to bits, she is criminally underrated) who seems to be playing her character in the same styalised style but is coming across more as a "deer caught in the headlights" startled lady. Usually this kind of performance suits what Shyamalan is trying to do, but in this film it just seems a little too over the top. Conversely, John Leguizamo
actually fits the bill perfectly and his performance is perfectly judged, bringing a real pathos to his character and the ultimate end for this poor maths teacher is quite heart wrenching.

The movie itself centers around a single fundamental idea - there are some things that are acts of nature that we will never fully understand. This is a great concept actually, but it's bound to split an audience (particularly an American audience) the majority of whom usually want everything cleared up and explained completely. What we have is a movie where a number of disturbing suicides take place, a number which then grows larger and larger before suddenly stopping. We are given a lot of theories; the idea that the plants are behind it being the one that is the most popular; but ultimately we are not told at all precisely what caused the suicides, why it suddenly stopped and how often it is likely to happen - a scene at the end showing us it is certainly going to happen at least one more time.

This movie is far more in the style of Signs, rather than any of the others in that a group of people are at the periphery of a series of events they have no control over, but through some fluke manage to survive. Essentially, if you liked Signs you'll like The Happening, otherwise...well, it's no The Sixth Sense.

"B"