I only watched CinamaSins' version of The Last Airbender and I'm still offended...
I liked the 6th Sense. Lady in the Water was ok, mostly because I like Paul Giamatti, and I actually liked The Happening, mainly because I <3 Mark Wahlberg. Signs I thought was totally the worst, with The Village as a close second.
Hmm... I don't know. I don't particularly like Mel Gibson, but Joaquin is fine. I guess in Signs I just thought the creatures were completely anti-climactic, which made the whole movie annoying. But yeah, maybe the leads in those movies just didn't have the redeeming value of Giamatti and Marky Mark.Was that because you don't particularly like the stars (like Joaquin Phoenix or Mel Gibson, et al.. since your liking the stars in the other movies seems to drive your appreciation of the movies), or was there a different reason?
Hmm... I don't know. I don't particularly like Mel Gibson, but Joaquin is fine. I guess in Signs I just thought the creatures were completely anti-climactic, which made the whole movie annoying. But yeah, maybe the leads in those movies just didn't have the redeeming value of Giamatti and Marky Mark.Was that because you don't particularly like the stars (like Joaquin Phoenix or Mel Gibson, et al.. since your liking the stars in the other movies seems to drive your appreciation of the movies), or was there a different reason?
I cited for the village because the plot was stolen from a children's book I read a few years before I saw the movie.
While the twist wasn't ripped from Goosebumps per se, it seemed reminiscent of something from one of the lamer books.
That being said, the villains in The Happening are trees. That makes it very easy to make a decision.
Wow, that seems like pretty blatant plagiarism.
I liked Lady in the Water, but a problem with both it and Signs is why did they waste so much money on CG character shots if most of them are gonna be reflected on a TV screen or a washing machine?
Lol. I wish MNS had stuck with alien reflections in "Signs." It would have been better for the movie.
Meh.
The book seems to have a lot of things the book does not, and the movie has focal points (such as the critters) that the book doesn't. Even the purpose of the community is different.
The basic overlap is that it's a closed community emulating a past time period, where a girl has to go get medicine, but even the plot order is different. In the book, running for medicine is the first part of the plot that leads to the rest, while in the movie it's the end of the plotline. It's not even a "unique" plotline; if you were writing a story about a closed antiquated community in modern times, the need for modern medicine to save a life is probably one of the first brainstorm ideas that would be raised.
Unless there is some smoking gun with specific ripped off characters and the like, I think the plagarism charge is a little much. It's like saying a book is a complete ripoff of Tolkien just because it has dwarves and elves in it and there's a nasty evil bad guy who wants to take over the world. It's likely the author knows of Tolkien, but it doesn't mean it's plagarism.