Official RAZZIE® Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > FORUMS on 29th ANNUAL RAZZIE® NOMINEES > M. Night Shyamalan's THE HAPPENING
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: FAQs on The Happening *SPOILERS*
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Calendar   Register Register  Login Login

FAQs on The Happening *SPOILERS*

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
Michaels View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 12 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2848
Post Options Post Options   Quote Michaels Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: FAQs on The Happening *SPOILERS*
    Posted: January 01 2009 at 9:11am

Originally posted by moviewizguy

You finally sound like a sane person! You won't believe how many people hated this movie. They would even go as far to say it's the "#1 worst" film of this year...probably because they wouldn't watch those spoof movies in the first place.

Mind you, I'm not saying "The Happening" is a good movie. No. I'm just saying that it's not on the same level of crap as Seltzerberg and Uwe Boll's works that were released this year. "Happening" could end up on the final voting ballot, but if it will win is a tough call.

Back to Top
moviewizguy View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: January 23 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2137
Post Options Post Options   Quote moviewizguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 31 2008 at 1:49am

You finally sound like a sane person! You won't believe how many people hated this movie. They would even go as far to say it's the "#1 worst" film of this year...probably because they wouldn't watch those spoof movies in the first place.

Back to Top
Michaels View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 12 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2848
Post Options Post Options   Quote Michaels Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 31 2008 at 1:20am

Although "The Happening" was bad, I don't know if it will be the biggest contender for this year. Clearly anything by Uwe Boll and Seltzerberg are instant front-runners, even if there's a fear that they want us to razz them just for the free PR. After them are the so-called comedies "Meet Dave" and "Love Guru", than the Paris Hilton driven mess that was "Hottie and Nottie", and lastly, "High School Musical 3". And of course, given Stallone's history with the Razzies, "Rambo 4". That's a total of 9 top contenders, I'm not sure if there is room for "Happening". Last year was all "I Know Who Killed Me" and "Norbit", but this year is more complex, and I think very worthy movies might get away razzie free while other movies will sweep. We'll have to wait two more months to find out.

Back to Top
Michaels View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 12 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2848
Post Options Post Options   Quote Michaels Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 27 2008 at 5:48pm

Originally posted by moviewizguy

At least it tries to be something different. You should really read the script.

If it was such a good script, it should have translated into a good movie. Just stop defending a lost cause. Like Stallone's "Rocky 1", Shyamalan will always have "Sixth Sense", but every movie after has been subpar. There's a difference in an original movie and a GOOD original movie. 

Back to Top
moviewizguy View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: January 23 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2137
Post Options Post Options   Quote moviewizguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 27 2008 at 2:48pm
Originally posted by Michaels

Originally posted by moviewizguy

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: I realize this may be redundant to what others have already posted but -- Why doesn't it occur to you that a movie requiring as many explanations as you have offered in order for movie-goers to simply comprehend it (let alone appreciate it) is inherently a weak (one might even say "badly made") movie??  It certainly looks to me as though your extreme admiration for Shyamalan has gotten in the way of your ability to judge the man's work objectively. And while I'd admit that THE HAPPENING isn't as spectacular a cinematic trainwreck as LADY IN THE WATER was, it does rank among M. Night's lesser (and less than successful) efforts...

Thank you, HeadRazz, that's the point I keep trying to make. If you have to explain the movie to people in order for them to understand it, let alone like it, it's a poorly made movie.

At least it tries to be something different. You should really read the script.

Back to Top
Michaels View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 12 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2848
Post Options Post Options   Quote Michaels Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 05 2008 at 3:53am

Originally posted by moviewizguy

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: I realize this may be redundant to what others have already posted but -- Why doesn't it occur to you that a movie requiring as many explanations as you have offered in order for movie-goers to simply comprehend it (let alone appreciate it) is inherently a weak (one might even say "badly made") movie??  It certainly looks to me as though your extreme admiration for Shyamalan has gotten in the way of your ability to judge the man's work objectively. And while I'd admit that THE HAPPENING isn't as spectacular a cinematic trainwreck as LADY IN THE WATER was, it does rank among M. Night's lesser (and less than successful) efforts...

Thank you, HeadRazz, that's the point I keep trying to make. If you have to explain the movie to people in order for them to understand it, let alone like it, it's a poorly made movie.

Back to Top
moviewizguy View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: January 23 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2137
Post Options Post Options   Quote moviewizguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 01 2008 at 11:28am

I originally posted my FAQs on the IMDb, and then decided also to post them here. I'm not trying to change peoples' opinions (although it might seem like it to some people). I mean, many people had these questions and posted them on IMDb -- and I assumed some people on here were also confused by some elements of the film. 

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: I realize this may be redundant to what others have already posted but -- Why doesn't it occur to you that a movie requiring as many explanations as you have offered in order for movie-goers to simply comprehend it (let alone appreciate it) is inherently a weak (one might even say "badly made") movie??  It certainly looks to me as though your extreme admiration for Shyamalan has gotten in the way of your ability to judge the man's work objectively. And while I'd admit that THE HAPPENING isn't as spectacular a cinematic trainwreck as LADY IN THE WATER was, it does rank among M. Night's lesser (and less than successful) efforts...

 

Back to Top
Michaels View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 12 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2848
Post Options Post Options   Quote Michaels Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 01 2008 at 2:21am

My answers to some of your questions... 

1. Why does it suck: it's contents. Not peoples' expectations, but it's bad acting, plotholes, etc. The meer fact you have to go onto message boards trying to explain it to people proves how poorly done the movie was. It's not a good thing for everything to be explained in a DVD behind the scenes feature, the movie itself is suppose to do that. Do you really think "The Godfather" would be considered one of the greatest movies of all time if it had plotholes all over the place, but then all would be forgiven if those plotholes were explained 30 years later on a DVD? Sorry, movies don't work that way, and someone should have told Shyamalan that.

2. That's just poor marketing. Sell your product for what it is, camp, not a great horror. When your ads are comparing this movie to your past work like "Sixth Sense" and "Signs", but this movie is not on par with those movies, you messed up. This works against you because that WILL effect people's expectations, and then they see a movie that is the polar opposite of what they came to see; word of mouth will destory the movie, which it did. Mind you, not everything Shyamalan has done has been thriller. He also co-wrote the first "Stuart Little" movie. Yeah, not kidding.

3. Shyamalan's movies have been noted for good acting, but since this movie lacks that, Shyamalan will get blamed for losing his touch with getting actors to give great performances.

4. Who asked you these questions in the first place?

You can type all you want about this movie until your fingers are raw, it won't change the fact people think it was one of the funniest accidental comedies of the year. It will get Razzed no matter what. Just let it be. Do yourself a favor, become a Voting Member, and vote for something else... 

 

Originally posted by moviewizguy

Why did this film suck? I was so excited to see it!
Well, the generic answer would be it sucked because you didn't like it. Another answer would be because you were expecting something like The Sixth Sense. Another reason is that Shayamalan wanted this to be a B-movie. Google search "The Happening" and "B-movie."

If this was meant to be a B-movie, why did Shayamalan state in an interview it was supposed to be scary? Why did the trailers show this being a serious film with horrofic deaths and scary scenes?
First of all, during the making of The Happening, which can be seen in the DVD, which was probably months before his interview for this film, M. Night Shayamalan and several other filmmakers when shooting the film stated this film was supposed to be a throwback on the 1950's-'60s B-movies, like The Birds and The Invasion of the Body Snatchers so don't beleive the rumor that M. Night was just saying that after seeing the bad reviews from this film the day after it was released. So why did he say it was also supposed to be scary? Who ever said a B-movie can't be scary too?

Second, Shayamalan's films were always marketed as suspense, horror flicks, especially for The Village and Lady and the Water. Never judge a book by its cover, people would always say.

This film have many good actors. Why did their performances suck (or weird)?
Some theories provided by people was that the horrible performances were intentional because the movie was a B-movie. If you refuse to believe this theory, another reason might be because its an M. Night Shayamalan flick. If you don't know by now, his films are weird and different from the norm. However, that doesn't mean the performances suck, especially from Mark Wahlberg.

Well, I'm still not satisfied with these answers!
Ok. It's not my problem.

 

"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)
Back to Top
moviewizguy View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: January 23 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2137
Post Options Post Options   Quote moviewizguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 30 2008 at 11:12am

Why is this movie called The Happening?
At first, M. Night Shayamalan called this movie The Green Effect, talking about plants taking fighting back. However, the longer Shayamalan made this movie, the event that happens in the film starts to become less known and more ambiguous.

What causes this event?
At first, it's the plant but as stated earlier, as Shayamalan continued to shoot his script, the event becomes slightly more unknown. That's why the film doesn't provide a full explanation on what causes this event. Theories include plants, the government, and toxic chemicals in the air.

Why did this film suck? I was so excited to see it!
Well, the generic answer would be it sucked because you didn't like it. Another answer would be because you were expecting something like The Sixth Sense. Another reason is that Shayamalan wanted this to be a B-movie. Google search "The Happening" and "B-movie."

If this was meant to be a B-movie, why did Shayamalan state in an interview it was supposed to be scary? Why did the trailers show this being a serious film with horrofic deaths and scary scenes?
First of all, during the making of The Happening, which can be seen in the DVD, which was probably months before his interview for this film, M. Night Shayamalan and several other filmmakers when shooting the film stated this film was supposed to be a throwback on the 1950's-'60s B-movies, like The Birds and The Invasion of the Body Snatchers so don't beleive the rumor that M. Night was just saying that after seeing the bad reviews from this film the day after it was released. So why did he say it was also supposed to be scary? Who ever said a B-movie can't be scary too?

Second, Shayamalan's films were always marketed as suspense, horror flicks, especially for The Village and Lady and the Water. Never judge a book by its cover, people would always say.

This film have many good actors. Why did their performances suck (or weird)?
Some theories provided by people was that the horrible performances were intentional because the movie was a B-movie. If you refuse to believe this theory, another reason might be because its an M. Night Shayamalan flick. If you don't know by now, his films are weird and different from the norm. However, that doesn't mean the performances suck, especially from Mark Wahlberg.

We are always used to seeing Wahlberg playing as an action hero that many of us don't feel comfortable seeing him play as a regular human being. In fact, this is how Wahlberg speaks in real life. Have you seen him in that SNL skit? His recent movie is Max Payne, in which he also plays an action hero. It's like Harrison Ford. He also plays many action characters in his life but in Blade Runner, he does not. Maybe that's one reason why that film recieved many bad reviews when it was first released. The thing you need to learn is that you should never expect actors to play what they always play.

Why did the happening not affect some people?
This is answered in the script more clearly. The plant affects people who give off "bad energy," like getting rid of the bad side of a bacteria, but keeping the good bacteria. Like the first time the wind caught up to the group, they didn't get affected. The girl in the beginning, nor did the construction workers, nor did the guy in France, and nor did many other people didn't get affected. It's probably because they gave off "good engery."

What's with the mood ring? They never explained it!
Going back to the question above, the mood ring was to show that the characters never gave off bad energy. That is why they didn't get affected.

What's wrong with that old lady?! She is one crazy person! What's with the doll?!
Yes, she is a crazy person. So you want to know her past, why she turned up like this? Well, there's a small backstory stated in the making of this film in the DVD. She lost her husband in a war years ago so she decides to isolate herself from society but turns crazy and suspicious after. The doll? No idea. Use your imagination! This character was also in the film to foreshadow how Alma (Zooey Deschanel) could turn out if she continues to do what she does (not showing her emotions, isloating herself from her husband, etc.).

What was with John Leguizamo saying "DON'T TAKE HER HAND UNLESS YOU MEAN IT!" to Zooey Deschanel?
Zooey Deschanel's character, Alma, kinda regretted her decision to marry Wahlberg's character so Leguizamo's line meant that she should only take his child if she means it. Not really hard to understand.

What's with Leguizamo's penny question? Did he talk like that because he was affected by the toxins?
If you had a penny for Day 1, 2 pennies for Day 2, and 4 pennies for day 3, you would end up with over 10 million dollars in 31 days. Here's the math:

Day 1 $0.01
Day 2 $0.02
Day 3 $0.04
Day 4 $0.08
Day 5 $0.16
Day 6 $0.32
Day 7 $0.64
Day 8 $1.28
Day 9 $2.56
Day 10 $5.12
Day 11 $10.24
Day 12 $20.48
Day 13 $40.96
Day 14 $81.92
Day 15 $163.84
Day 16 $327.68
Day 17 $655.36
Day 18 $1,310.72
Day 19 $2,621.44
Day 20 $5,242.88
Day 21 $10,485.76
Day 22 $20,971.52
Day 23 $41,943.04
Day 24 $83,886.08
Day 25 $167,772.16
Day 26 $335,544.32
Day 27 $671,088.64
Day 28 $1,342,177.28
Day 29 $2,684,354.56
Day 30 $5,368,709.12
Day 31 $10,737,418.24

Where was M. Night Shayamalan's cameo?
He was the voice on the phone, Joey, the person Alma was cheating with.

What was the twist ending?
There was none! Just because it's another Shayamalan film doesn't mean it should have a twist ending. Lady in the Water didn't have one either.

Why did the happening just ended? I mean, is Shayamalan serious?
Like stated earlier in the movie, the happening will start and suddenly reach a peak point, which will end the happening immediately after. It's like an exponential growth, which would eventually die down after reaching a peak. I know it's so random and boring and uneventful.

Well, I'm still not satisfied with these answers!
Ok. It's not my problem.

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down