4 Comments


  1. ·

    but…he’s the writer who’s going to change the world!

    lol.
    lady in the water was…soggy.

  2. G. Van der Graaf
    ·

    um… smiley aside, this strikes me as plagiarism.

    How dare you backdate a blog entry and then try to make it look like Dargis was cribbing from you?


  3. ·

    Dan, I know some plagiarism stories from direct experience that’ll make your hair stand on end. One of these days I’ll have to blog about it.


  4. ·

    so did you get to see this yet? i understand why this film doesn’t appear to work as a typical narrative hollywood film, though i don’t undertsand why the negative reviews are so vehement.

    i think the story does work like traditional passed down through oral tradition story, and the kind of preposterous premises set forth here are no different that the preposterous premises set forth in many a traditional fairy tale. and we as a society allow for these leaps in realism, so why all of a sudden have folks become such hardcore realism fascists about this crazy, improbable story?

    i think also that all artists suffer from a very wrought sense of self-importance, and m. night is no exception (understand of course i say this as an artist as well). i think though that what arrogance we allow other filmmakers, ehem, the megalomania of coppola, peter jackson’s LOTR obsessiveness, and then the dominance and utter perfectionism of someone like kurosawa who is of color but worked almost completely within a japanese context etc, we just can’t or won’t allow in those particularly foreign-ized others in an american context.

    i hope this makes sense.

Comments are closed.