Links to M. Night saying it was a B-movie

I have changed my mind...it  was a romance. M. Nut Shamalamadingdong was so in love with his "directing" talents that he made this piece of crap and beat up a few million movie goers with his hubris. Sadly, I was one of them. Happily, I've managed to erase most of The Village from my consciousness, apart from the actual plotline as accurately summarized above by Michaels.

The romance elements in this film were so minor that they really aren't important; as I have noted previously, almost every movie ever made has some romantic subplot. BUT, that doesn't make The Wizard of Oz a romance just because The Scarecrow and Dorothy stirred up some sexual tension. That was complicated into a triangle by the lesbian attractions of the The Wicked Witch of the West and her weird foot fetish directed also at Dorothy. We won't even discuss those flying monkeys.

It could very easily be argued by anyone with any sort of artistic eye that the fact that there were few scenes that actually featured the monsters in order to create tension and suspense for when they were there. Was that not the reason that the story was meant to be interesting? Is the reason for the audience to watch that there was a subpar love story going on amongst a group of people who are trapped in an indistinct time period who dress funny and have weird rules? Or was it the consequences of not following those rules that was the conflict of the story?

Those are all important questions, but there is a much bigger one to answer: Why are we wasting so much time debating a movie that missed its mark so?