Topic: M. Night should make a videogame

[Stimutacs Addict]

after watching Signs I just thought how badass a videogame would be if he wrote the story and helped with some of the elements.. maybe its not such a great idea...

talk amongst yourselves  

[Riotamus]

I thought i was the only one who thought Signs was the best film i saw last year, although i saw ATOC twice?, don't figure?. I don't know wether or not he would be a direct donor of a video game though. Sixth sense was excellence, Unbreakable was brilliant, and Signs was un-nerving, and maybe, well, i don't know about a console/pc game, interesting!.

[Hostile Creation]

I haven't seen it yet, so I wouldn't know, but I intend to watch it.

[Riotamus]

Hostile Creation, if you've got the sound system and you watch it in the COMPLETE darkness, you will get what this film is all about.

[Gharakh]

i watched it in the theatre, that was awesome. i bet he could write a cool story for a game, but there would have to be a great game to go with it.. like if he wrote the story for too human or somethin... hehe

[NickNiteQ93]

Dude if he could make something like his movies, I think it would rock like no one's bidniss.  sounds like an ED, though.  And we all know how well TAHT sold.  I loved the game, and it got NO credit, except for the few, the proud, the buyers.  :\

[deminisma]

M Night = Overrated
This thread = wrong forum.

[joshnickerson]

Yeah, your main character's special attack would be to stare at nothing for five minutes at a time and the enemies would be these lame looking aliens who look like extras in scuba suits whose legs are strong enough to leap ten feet into the air, yet they aren't able to kick down a wooden door.
...
Sorry, but I really HATED that movie.

[Stimutacs Addict]

Quote
Originally posted by: deminisma
M Night = Overrated
This thread = wrong forum.

I never said that he was the best director ever, but i think that he could bring something to gaming and catch a large portion of the casual gamers as he did so.... just think if a game is advertised as "from the director of the Sixth Sense and Signs" .. i think it could work

also... the new title is M. Night should help make a videogame (For GAMECUBE)
and since this is the GAMECUBE discussion board, i believe that this belongs here (the mods, however, may think differently)

[Jollus]

Signs is the biggest pile of bull poopy I have ever been forced to watch in my life.  You do not have aliens that are killed by water.  EVER!!!  It isn't allowed!

edit:  What?  That is the guy who did Sixth Sence?  Figures that the same person would make my two most hated movies of all time.  

[Gibdo Master]

I agree Signs was complete BS. Click here to read a funny and true cartoon about the movie and then a short review. It's from "the best page in the universe".  

[Sean]

Quite simply there is too much really great stuff going on in "Signs" for people to write it off because of the lame plot device that the aliens are killed by water.  EVERYONE who hates the movie says this!  How about getting something a little more substantial to bicker about?

I thought the movie crafted some good suspense following the old Hitchcock rules, and the writing was excellent and funny as usual from Shyamalan.  At its heart, it's a fine and entertaining movie (if flawed), but it's also got a great story about a man questioning his faith.  I for one loved the movie, and yes, I thought the water-killing-the-aliens part was lame.  So what.  

[Jollus]

Yes it was about a man questioning his faith.  But they could have made a really good movie about that without using Aliens.  Crappy Aliens at that.  I didn't find the movie suspensful at all.  I spent more time laughing then I did wondering what was going to happen next.  This movie was passable up to the point when the aliens started being shown on screen.  After that it was bad.  After we found out they were killed by WATER the movie just plain sucked.  

[Gibdo Master]

I think the problem is that M. Night knew he had a story that while good wouldn't bring in the crowds. So what does he do? He brings in aliens. I think the movie wouldn't have been quite as bad as it was if he would have allowed it to have a dark ending having the aliens win. It would have been different and fresh but of course it ends up like all alien movies with a last minute victory and an insane implausible victory at that.  

[Doppelganger]

I'm not a huge fan of M. Night; for good horror movies from last year I'd recommend "Dog Soldiers" and "Frailty" over "Signs".  

[RahXephon]

People who didn't like signs didn't understand it, it is basic philosophy.  The problem does not lie in the movie, but in the viewers ability to relate to the movie.  It is not possible to say the movie was bad, becuase it was just a bunch of events, it is how we relate and react to those events.  Those things lie in the viewer.  So all those who say they didn't like the movie show that they just lack the ability to properly relate to it, as being "bad" is not an attribute of a thing, in this case Signs, but rather put upon it.  It works the same for all types of things, art, music, books.


Well to go back to toic, M. Knight is just the most unbelievable producer i have seen.  There is a feeling that is given off by his works that go beyond anything else.  They feel real.  Would Aliens really look strange, we look like a bag of flesh with 4 appendages sticking out.  I believe it is safe to say that M.Knight, behind a game, would just totally redeffine whatever genre he tackled.

Anyway, i hope i have shown how these people who claim the Signs is bad, as people who speak without understanding of the nature of the things they talk of.  

[RahXephon]

The movie was about faith.  It was also about entertainment.  The name signs refer to both the crop circles and things which lead to faith.  And the movie wasn't horror.  It was suspense.  His method is to keep everything to the end then put it together all at once.  If in the end the aliens had won, then the movie would not have been about faith, it would have been about cheap entertainment.  M. Night attemprs to leave you with something.  I believe in signs, this thing is that even if their are terrible things that happen, they all happen for a reason.  The movie moral was actually quite religous.  But like i have said above, a large part of the problem is the viewer not understanding the movie properly.

[Sean]

Doppleganger...I really liked "Frailty," but it seems to have bombed, unfortunately.  It was also a movie about faith, but in a FAR MORE DISTURBING way.  Anyway, I won't get into that because I know the rules here about religious discussion.  It was a good movie though.  Asked good questions that give nightmares upon deep reflection...haha.

Anyway, I liked "Signs," so neener neener.  "Frailty" probably was a bit better though, even though I really liked "Signs."  "Fraily" really shocked me.

Jollus writes:

Quote
I didn't find the movie suspensful at all. I spent more time laughing then I did wondering what was going to happen next

Okay Jollus, what were you laughing so much about if the aliens are hardly even in the movie?  Up until a certain point (most of the movie), M. Night cleverly shows ALMOST NOTHING of the invasion.  This was a great touch, and I can't see how you found much laughable until the alien scene with Phoenix lamely whacking him/it with a baseball bat.  In other words, it sounds like your memory is portraying the film worse now than you actually thought at the time.

[RahXephon]

why does being killed by water have to suck.  Is it merely becuase it is to simple.  I mean it is more than scientifically possible, it is plausible.  If anyone has seen Evangelion, i believe one could say that the Aliens of signs were as pertanant as the robots in Eva.  the story was about neither, but still made it good.
No one complained when the aliens in War of the Worlds died from bacteria in the air.  And that movie was soley about Aliens.  It just seems like a juvenile thing to argue.  Would the movie had been better if Morgan only drank pepsi, and pepsi killed the Aliens.

Here is an analogy, say we one day develope space travel and we find a planet with life forms.  we find the air very suitable for breathing, and after planing, head down to make contact.  While there, it begins to rain just as on earth, but this rain eats through our skin due to the chemical composition of their water.  All of the sudden it seems to make sense, but to the aliens we visited in my fake future, it would seem childish that something as simple and harmless as their water could harm us.

There are too many people who are Humocentric.  I made the word up, but it means that we take certain things as basic truths which we don't question that our in our human lives.  Like water being harmless.

One more thing, we have supported and adore the concept of vampire for years, but all it takes is sunlight to kill them.  And there is a flaw in that in which the moon light is just reflected sunlight.

[Jollus]

RahXephon:

Sorry.  Let me restate myself.  I thought Signs was a horrible pile of slop.  Your whole post says nothing.  I could have said the same thing in one sentence. Whatever floats your boat.  There I said it.  Just because I thought the movie was bad doesn't mean I didn't understand it.  I know it was about faith.  It was supposed to inspire and all that, I still think it was bad.  An ok faith movie, with stupid aliens tacked onto it equals a bad movie in my book.

Sean: Who said I was laughing at aliens the whole times.  While the aliens were stupid, and I did laugh at them, they were not the only thing in the movie that tickled my funny bone.  The stupid antics of the kids for example.  The tin foil hat stuff.  A lot of the dialoge was funny.  The fact that anyone would believe Crop Circles are anything other than vandalisim is funny to me.  My memory is fine.  The only part of the movie which kinda creeped me out was the whole killing of the dog with a fork thing.  I mean how could you not get creeped out by something like that?

Bottom line is that I don't like the movie.  If y'all like it, fine.  Enjoy.  We sell it at the store I work at, come by and pick up the DVD.  For me the movie was stupid and had little value.  Its was a poorly exicuted faith movie with an illogical alien movie tacked on just for the hell of it.  

[Jollus]

An alien race that is advanced enough to travel the great distances of space would be smarter.  They would not need to draw pictures in corn fields in order to organize an attack.  They would be smart enough to realize that not only is 70% of the earth covered in water, but it is in the air, and humans (which they are coming to earth to kidnap or something) are made up of mostly water.  Aliens that advanced would be smart enough see these thing and a)forget about earth and find a planet where everything doesn't kill them; or b) put on a freaking rubber suit.  It is basic military tatics to scout out the battle field.  They would/should have known that water might get on them during the attack.

The fact that the aliens have no logical reason to be on the planet kills the entire move because the entire movie is about how the aliens are on the planet!

[Sean]

Jollus, note that I didn't say you were laughing at the aliens the whole time, since that would've been impossible.  What I asked was what WERE you laughing at.  Thank you for answering my question.

My personal dislike of the whole water-kills-aliens "deus ex machina" was that it's been DONE BEFORE.  I mean, it so flatly obvious.  "Alien Nation" did it, heck, even "The Wizard of Oz" did it.  It was just done and dumb.

Jollus, if you didn't like the movie great.  No one's trying to make you.  I thought I was just discussing the movie, not enforcing it.

[RahXephon]

first of all jollus, you completely misunderstand my meaning of understanding the movie.  Like i said it is philosophy.  By understanding, i mean that it makes certain connections in you.  Just like candy is supposed to taste good, the movie was supposed to make you have certain feelings.  It works in the same way.  The problem is not in your intellect, any one can understand the design and plot of Signs, it is the inability to react properly to it.  Have you ever seen the Mona Lisa.  Did it make you have all sorts of thoughts on exitence and humanity.  It was made with that pupose, yet i could not make that contact with it.  the problem was not that the Mona lisa is not stimulating, it is that I could not react to it properly.  You simplified my argument too much.

[RahXephon]

We don't know what reason they had on the planet.  How could we.  All we know is what those 4 people in that little house know and thats it.  And just because a species can attain space travel, doesn't mean that they are "super advance".  Maybe there preception of time is diffent and they can travel for long distances and have it seem shorter than it would to humans.  Or maybe there is a mineral which is a super efficeint source of fuel.  Maybe we were the first planet this race has come to, and they dont quite know hwta they are doing.  Like i said you are using to many preconceived human notions.  the really dont have to be that advance, they just need to move themselves here.  And also whenever a species is hostile, they will allways have certain illogical actions and limits to their intelligence abilities.
And these aliens probably thought that we were too inferior to be a threat, maybe they didn't even consider us logical at all.  How do you know these people taken away arent for experiments or for slavery.  There are just to many possibilities, it is not so cut and dry.

[dannyjclark]

just to chime in a little bit here...

i really liked signs, and to who ever said that signs is just a 'faith' movie with some aliens added for $$$. dead wrong. after the success of 6th sense and unbreakble, disney asked m.night to write an alien movie. it never started off about faith, it was about aliens from the beginning, but the finished product, however, was more about faith than aliens.
and since when did people become experts on aliens?

its a movie. its made to inspire us, not to have us pick it apart trying to find flaws that don't matter.