OK, everyone, gather round. What seems to be the problem here? Where's the love for The Village? In the parlance of our time, what's with all tha' playa' hatin'? Roger Ebert, a critic that gives absolutely everything at least two stars only allotted one for this. The film was stuck with a substandard 47% approval rating over at Rotten Tomatoes. If you're all willing to go absolutely nuts for a piece of pop trash like Shrek 2 you should be covering your homes in M. Night Shyamalan paraphernalia as we speak.

The film divvies up an all star cast, excellent cinematography + plenty of political and religious allegories ripe for discussion along with a fantastic twist ending. Yes, fan-tas-tic. Is it the occasional jarring edits that have put you off? A few minor, unresolved plot threads? The director's cheesy cameo? Was the ending "too out there"?

From what I read online, ranging from professional critical disdain to discussion board mud slinging, most viewers are unable/unwilling to buy The Village's big twist. If you haven't seen the movie and plan on doing so, you may want to turn away at this point. I wont' give it away but I'll be dropping some not-so-subtle hints.

I assume that most people went in expecting a brainless monster movie instead of two hours of heavy-handed ethos. The conclusions is obviously a parable for America's current political climate and the allusions to Arthur Miller's The Crucible are so obvious everyone in the film may as well have had the surname "Goody." It's far cry from the warm/fuzzy spiritual reawakening in the director's even more implausible Signs. The Village's conclusion is cold, cruel and very, very, how do you say, liberal. This isn't the sort of film for those among us that still suspect there's WMDs buried beneath Baghdad.

To all those who mock the ending, what would you have prefered? The villagers dumping water on the monsters ala Mel Gibson? Or a baseball bat? Puhleaze.

That's not to say The Village isn't without its fault. Much of the dialog is blandly stilted and one minor plot twist at the end is unbelievably ridiculous (see below). It's a potential masterpiece dogged by a series of minor problems. As with Signs, M. Knight is his own worst enemy. It's widely reported that, since he directs, produces and writes his films, he has complete creative control and doesn't have to answer to anyone during the creative process. As such, plot holes and lapse in logic marred both Signs and this one.

A quick prediction: The Village earned $50 million in its opening weekend but word of mouth will prevent it from topping $100. Years from now, it'll be discussed in college level poli sci classes as an apt metaphor US politics at the dawn of the 21st century.

Er, something. I'm not willing to put money on this.

But wait, there's more! I can't end this thing without ripping into the plot twist above. So, through the miracle of Inviso-Text, that's where I'm going from here. If you've seen the movie, highlight the text below. If you haven't, don't.


OK, so the village elders hid one of the monster costumes in the floor boards beneath the solitary confinement cell? Wha...? Not only does this require an enormous leap of faith from the audience, Noah's (Adrian Brody) motivation makes little sense. Why would he decide to steal the costume and run off after Bryce Howard/Little Yellow Riding Hood? Furthermore, how could he possibly track her down and why didn't anyone notice his escape earlier? Ugh. To make the attack scene more plausible, she should have been attacked by a bear (it was a wildlife refuge, after all) or one the elders, miffed over her leaving, should have taken a costume to scare her into turning back. Anyway, it's amazing how five misguided minutes can drag a film down several notches.