The Happening

Not rated yet!
Director
M. Night Shyamalan
Runtime
1 h 31 min
Release Date
11 June 2008
Genres
Thriller, Science Fiction, Experimental, Underground
Overview
When a deadly airborne virus threatens to wipe out the northeastern United States, teacher Elliott Moore (Mark Wahlberg) and his wife (Zooey Deschanel) flee from contaminated cities into the countryside in a fight to discover the truth. Is it terrorism, the accidental release of some toxic military bio weapon -- or something even more sinister? John Leguizamo and Betty Buckley co-star in this thriller from writer-director M. Night Shyamalan.
Staff ReviewsAround the Web ReviewsAudience Reviews

Check back soon when the reviews are out!

Or why not join our mailing list to stay up to date?

 

SIGN UP!

Box office recaps sent twice a month (maximum).

( ̄^ ̄)ゞ (☞゚ヮ゚)☞ No spam! ☜(゚ヮ゚☜)




 ✍🏻  > 🗡️   Want to join our team? Email us!  
Kyle Smith6
National Review



(Reviewers' Site/Bio)

  • Review: "The Happening"
    NON-EVENT Kyle Smith review of “The Happening” 1.5 stars out of 4 91 minutes Rated R (graphic violence) When a malicious breeze begins to blow in “The Happening,” fear sets in: the fear that the only thing that will occur is the Shyamalan hitting the fan. Someday this movie’s principal claim to fame will be that it inspired an episode of The Simpsons’ Treehouse of Horror (“The Crappening”?). Let’s review the oeuvre of M. Night Shyamalan since “The Sixth Sense”: stupid ending, stupid ending, stupid ending and, in a change of pace with his last film, “Lady in the Water,” stupid all the way through. For his latest trick this back-room-of-the-Ramada magician has given us: no trick at all. “The Happening” has no ending. I count that as an improvement over “The Village” and “Unbreakable,” each of which concluded with one of the fastest audience stampedes out of a theater I’ve ever seen. “The Happening” is about unexplained outbreaks of mass suicide in several northeastern cities. Shyamalan has a lot of fun imagining cool ways you could kill yourself if you weren’t afraid of pain. Drive your jeep into a tree? Too obvious. How about lying down in front of an industrial-sized lawnmower or punching out a window with your skull? A pair of schoolteachers (Mark Wahlberg, John Leguizamo) and the wife (Zooey Deschanel) of the Wahlberg character try to guess what’s happening as the background boils with speculation. Could it be terrorism? Does it have to do with bees? How about chemical weapons seeping out of the CIA? Since we’re (as always, with M. Night) in Pennsylvania, there are unique potential sources of toxins to worry about, such as Three Mile Island and Philadelphia Eagles fans. There is a lot of chatter about global warming, about science, about geometric progression, about ecological disaster. “Calculus, calculus, calculus!” someone mutters, but if those are the only remaining options, I’d just as soon saw my neck open on the nearest broken window too. As in “The War of the Worlds,” rumor takes over and people’s immediate reaction is to flee somewhere, anywhere, shooting whoever gets in their way. But the story isn’t a puzzle in which scene yields more pieces that the audience tries to learn how to put together. It’s just setup, setup, setup, the end. When Betty Buckley turns up as a bitter off-the-grid loner, such is Shyamalan’s dismal track record that you suspect right away that she serves no purpose except to pad the running time. Shyamalan has hit on something, though, and he does set up an IV drip of tension. The moment is right for a movie like this. Eco-unease and terrorism are in the air, both of them (for many) carrying the stink of our own sins as a plausible root cause. It wouldn’t take much to persuade today’s audience that the answer blowin’ in the wind is that a hard rain’s a-gonna fall. With a slightly brainier imagination at work “The Happening” could have been a spooky little art film whose purpose wasn’t so much to tell a linear story as to strum on our inner sense of looming catastrophe, the unanswered questions adding to the dread. That would call on skills Shyamalan has not shown since his only good movie: making characters interesting and dressing up dialogue with something other than plodding functionality (“Whatever is happening is happening to smaller and smaller populations”), red herrings (“We had tiramisu together. That is it!”) or dull jokes (“I’m talking to a plastic plant.”). Laying down a witty or ironic subtext, as Stanley Kubrick would have, is not within Shyamalan’s powers. Kubrick’s films are made to be pondered over repeated viewings. No one will watch any of Shyamalan’s recent films twice. A movie that features Wahlberg suggesting everyone try to outrun the wind can barely be watched once. ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • "The Happening": Hollywood Death Cult?
    A WSJ opinion piece on “The Happening” frames the film as relentlessly pro-death; rarely have moviegoers ever spent two hours in the dark being informed that we all to deserve to die. Says Joseph Rago: But “The Happening” is no “Kangaroo Jack.” It’s appalling all right, not as entertainment but in the literal sense of genuine moral obscenity. Few major studio releases are so thoroughly pro-death, so deeply anti-human. We have arrived at a strange moment in American pop culture when movie-goers spend two hours in the theater being informed that we all deserve to die. ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • "The Happening" Isn't
    Movie City News reminds us that just a couple of years back, M. Night “the Sham” Shyamalan was being touted as the next Spielberg in Time magazine (key difference: Spielberg made more than one good movie). Today everyone but Shyamalan has to be wondering how much longer he’s going to be allowed to make his corny 5-page story ideas into massively promoted big-screen releases. I’ve seen “The Happening” and can report that this is yet another movie that, like his other recent efforts, will never be watched twice by anyone and will inspire audiences not to leave the theater so much as stampede angrily out of it like a herd of wounded mastodons. SPOILER ALERT: The surprise ending is…. there is no surprise ending! The movie just trickles out, go home, thanks for your money, suckers!]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • M. Night Falls: The Decline of M. Night Shyamalan
    (”The Happening” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    M. Night Shyamalan’s “The Happening” appears almost certain to be his second straight flop, after “The Lady in the Water,” whose script was so bad it was rejected by his longtime partner studio Disney. My dart-throwing colleague Sara Stewart, in a long piece in yesterday’s Post, points out that his other hits, “The Village” and “Signs,” were also stinkeramas, compares him to Lucy Van Pelt (“Just give the old ball a kick. I promise I won’t move it this time”) and psychoanalyzes the sources of his staggering arrogance: “He’s isolated himself,” says Movie City News analyst David Poland. “He lives in Pennsylvania.” Says Shyamalan: “I’ve made profit a mathematic certainty. I’m the safest bet you got.” Sham-a-lan! “Lady in the Water” lost tens of millions for Warner Bros, which was not eager to work with him again. Two studios burned, four left! Thus the Mark Wahlberg film “The Happening” is happening at Fox. It’s rumored to be some sort of global-warming groaner. Fox seems prepared for the movie to underwhelm but Stewart finds an exec who reasons that Night’s films don’t cost more than $50 or $60 million, so the risk is slight (though “s–tty reviews” seem to be expected). Translation: people will see the movie before word gets out about how stupid the twist is. Says Lou Lumenick: maybe audiences aren’t going to continue to be that gullible. Fox still hasn’t announced when they are screening the film, opening next Friday, meaning a possible pre-birth burial of holding no critics’ screenings whatsoever, though the last time I reported that, on the Ewan McGregor-Hugh Jackman flop, “Deception,” they reversed course a day or two later. Meanwhile, M. Night is in full damage-control mode, giving the standard I’m-a-misunderstood-genius but I’ve learned humility Times interview that is guaranteed not to change anyone’s mind. (Unintended laugh line from the interview: it says Shyamalan “broke off his relationship with Disney,” which is a bit like saying Jennifer Aniston broke off her relationship with Brad Pitt.) ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • Hulk Sorry!
    (”The Happening” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    No doubt about it, the performance of “The Incredible Hulk” was an incredible disappointment over the weekend. Five years ago a drippy arthouse Hulk saddled with banal Eric Bana in the lead made $62 mill in its opening weekend; “Hulk” 2.0, despite five years of inflation, fell well short of that with $54 million. Let’s play select-an-excuse! Could it be that: a) Moviegoers are finally tiring of comic book franchises? b) Four-buck gas (and four-month-after-theatrical-release DVD windows) is making America cut back on nonessential trips such as those lengthy missions to suburban megaplexes, especially to see something they’ve seen before? c) Edward Norton is not having fun in this movie, and neither is the audience? I’m leaning towards (b)–but keep in mind, those geniuses at Fox have yet again managed to make a rose parade out of a stink bomb. The folks who delivered up “Alvin & the Chipmunks” (unseen by me but given zero stars by my trusted colleague Lou Lumenick) and “What Happens in Vegas,” both of them sources of general embarrassment, both of them large moneymakers, somewhat sheepishly put “The Happening” out there this weekend, and though its fortunes soon will, like nearly all M. Night Shyamalan flicks, plummet like mortgage-backed securities, it cost a small fraction of “The Incredible Hulk” while doing almost as well. A financier friend of mine who was considering (not seriously) investing some of his hedge-fund money in movies said his contact in New York took him through the movie business and admonished him, “First, don’t invest in any studio that isn’t Fox!” (Still, my favorite studio is Warner Bros. due to the no-games-played policy of their publicists, who usually screen a movie on the Monday before opening, in the afternoon, in their cozy screening room, instead of forcing us to wait until Wednesday night to watch the thing with a mob of pushy and seething cineplex yokels recruited from the ranks of Z-100 listeners.)]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)

PJ Media Staff8
PJ Media



(Reviewers' Site/Bio)

  • After Earth: The Shyamalan Hits the Fan Once Again
    Ed Driscoll Will Smith's After Earth is reviewed by Kurt Loder at Reason:Not since John Travolta kicked the tires on Battlefield Earth and pronounced it good to go has there been a big-name sci-fi flameout quite as disastrous as Will Smith’s After Earth. The movie is dull and talky and fundamentally misconceived. The whole point of putting Will Smith in a picture is to light it up with his warmth and witty line readings -- with his world-class charm. Here he plays a grim-lipped buzz-killer who never cracks a smile. And while the presence of director M. Night Shyamalan might once have promised saving grace, this film is just another sad token of the man’s decade-long artistic decline.The story -- hatched by Smith, co-scripted by Shyamalan -- is set way in the future, a thousand years after the inhabitants of Earth fled their eco-ravaged home to set up shop on another planet. Here, Smith plays Cypher Raige (one of the movie’s several silly names), a space-fleet commander so focused on his job that he has neglected to bond with his son, Kitai (Jaden Smith, Will’s own son). So Cypher agrees to take the boy along on his next space mission. Unfortunately, their vessel is knocked out of the heavens by one of those pesky space storms and plummets down onto a hostile planet that we soon learn to be -- yes, Earth.Huh, yet another depopulated Shyamalan movie. Shyamalan's 2008 film The Happening was described by James Kirchick -- in the leftwing New Republic of all places -- as “The Most Morally Abhorrent Film Ever Made:”As with most of Shyamalan’s films, The Happening has an intriguing plot: centuries of human pollution has prompted nature to retaliate against us by form of a noxious gas released from trees, plants, grass — it’s never really clear. The toxin is first emitted in Central Park, smack dab in the middle of one of the most densly populated places in the United States. First, victims lose their critical faculties. Then they freeze. Then they killl themselves. From New York City “The Happening” spreads all along the east coast, from Boston to Washington. Shyamalan leaves little to the imagination in depicting man’s nature-inflicted suicide. We see a woman stab herself in the neck with a hair pin. A man runs himself over with a lawnmower. On can’t help but leave the theater thinking that Shyamalan derives a sick, masochistic pleasure in showing the deaths of all his bit characters, hopeless rubes are these human beings. They drove their SUVs for too long and had a big carbon footprint and now they’re going to pay.After 90 minutes of this, the culling of humanity ends. We catch a brief television news segment in which a scientist warns us that what the Northeast just experienced was akin to a terrestrial occurrence of oceanic “red tides.” The earth warned us, but thankfully we get another chance to amend the errors of our ways. Like the end of An Inconvenient Truth, we’re left with some hope that environmental catastrophe is not a foregone conclusion. Buy a plug-in car. Use public transportation when available. Turn off the light when you leave a room. An unoffensive, and indeed positive message. The second to last scene depicts the female lead waiting nervously in her bathroom to read the results of a home pregnancy test. To her delight, she is with child. Her husband comes home, they embrace. Humanity soldiers on. What a warm feeling after so many scenes of horrific death.But Shyamalan is obsessed with conceits at the expense of every other aspect — the script, character development, and most importantly, good taste. He lives by the conceit, and, in this case, dies by it. After the pregnancy scene, the screen goes dark and we find ourselves in Paris, the Jardin des Tuileries to be exact. It’s eerily reminiscent of the film’s opening, with two men walking, engaged in pleasant conversation about their plans for the evening. A gust of wind! One of the men starts to stutter. People freeze. Screams. Mon Dieu!. Roll credits.This isn’t just radical environemntalist fare; it’s perverse and anti-human. Shyamalan cuts immediately from the natural joy of pregnancy to its consequence: mass, nature-inflicted murder. It’s not carbon output, styrofoam cups or the clearing of the rain forests that so angers Mother Earth and, thus, her self-appointed human spokesman. It’s us.In the Wall Street Journal, Joseph Rago reviewed The Happening and wrote, “We have arrived at a strange moment in American pop culture when movie-goers spend two hours in the theater being informed that we all deserve to die.”Between The Happening and After Earth, given that Shyamalan apparently would like to see a world without people, should he really be disappointed that the theaters showing his movies are increasingly devoid of them? class="pages"> https://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2013/6/1/the-shyamalan-hits-the-fan-2/ ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • Eco-horror flick coming at ya
    PJ Media Didn't we all learn something from the debacle that was "The Happening?"That 2008 "horror" movie told us what would happen if we don't stop abusing the environment - we'd see arguably the lamest shock film of the past decade. Even star Mark Wahlberg disowned it (after the film's release, of course).Now, fading auteur Barry Levinson of "Rain Man" fame is prepping a new eco-thriller for 2012. The project, according to SlashFilm.com, is called "The Bay" and will show the results of a viral outbreak along the Eastern seaboard.When two biological researchers from France find a staggering level of toxicity in the water, they attempt to alert the mayor, but he refuses to create a panic in the docile town.Wonder if the Mayor will sport either a Sarah Palin or Fox News T-shirt during a critical scene?Levinson could once do no wrong, witness a string of hits from "Diner" to "Good Morning, Vietnam." But he hasn't made a great film in ages. Will "The Bay" mark his comeback? The thought of another bloodless eco-horror romp scares me, frankly, but not in the way intended. class="pages"> https://pjmedia.com/blog/eco-horror-flick-coming-at-ya/ ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • Academia's Endless Doomsday Cult
    Ed Driscoll Now that global warming is increasingly a discredited meme, at least outside of epistemically closed feedback loop of academia and the newsroom, is zero population growth returning to be the chief "progressive" doomsday cult?It's an equally hoary old Malthusian meme, which like environmentalism dates from the dawn of the 1970s, the nadir of the second half of the 20th century. We already mentioned the epic meltdown of Peter Singer's, Princeton University's Professor of Bioethics in the New York Times earlier this month, where Singer suggested that mankind turn out the lights on the way out:The 19th-century German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer held that even the best life possible for humans is one in which we strive for ends that, once achieved, bring only fleeting satisfaction. New desires then lead us on to further futile struggle and the cycle repeats itself.Schopenhauer’s pessimism has had few defenders over the past two centuries, but one has recently emerged, in the South African philosopher David Benatar, author of a fine book with an arresting title: “Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence.” One of Benatar’s arguments trades on something like the asymmetry noted earlier. To bring into existence someone who will suffer is, Benatar argues, to harm that person, but to bring into existence someone who will have a good life is not to benefit him or her. Few of us would think it right to inflict severe suffering on an innocent child, even if that were the only way in which we could bring many other children into the world. Yet everyone will suffer to some extent, and if our species continues to reproduce, we can be sure that some future children will suffer severely. Hence continued reproduction will harm some children severely, and benefit none.Benatar also argues that human lives are, in general, much less good than we think they are. We spend most of our lives with unfulfilled desires, and the occasional satisfactions that are all most of us can achieve are insufficient to outweigh these prolonged negative states. If we think that this is a tolerable state of affairs it is because we are, in Benatar’s view, victims of the illusion of pollyannaism. This illusion may have evolved because it helped our ancestors survive, but it is an illusion nonetheless. If we could see our lives objectively, we would see that they are not something we should inflict on anyone.Here is a thought experiment to test our attitudes to this view. Most thoughtful people are extremely concerned about climate change. Some stop eating meat, or flying abroad on vacation, in order to reduce their carbon footprint. But the people who will be most severely harmed by climate change have not yet been conceived. If there were to be no future generations, there would be much less for us to feel to guilty about.So why don’t we make ourselves the last generation on earth? If we would all agree to have ourselves sterilized then no sacrifices would be required — we could party our way into extinction!The Weasel Zippers blog catches a similarly-themed article published in England's Daily Mail, about an Australian professor who sounds like he's living in Dorthy's version of Oz:As the scientist who helped eradicate smallpox he certainly know a thing or two about extinction.And now Professor Frank Fenner, emeritus professor of microbiology at the Australian National University, has predicted that the human race will be extinct within the next 100 years.He has claimed that the human race will be unable to survive a population explosion and ‘unbridled consumption.’Fenner told The Australian newspaper that ‘homo sapiens will become extinct, perhaps within 100 years.’‘A lot of other animals will, too,’ he added.‘It’s an irreversible situation. I think it’s too late. I try not to express that because people are trying to do something, but they keep putting it off.’Since humans entered an unofficial scientific period known as the Anthropocene – the time since industrialisation – we have had an effect on the planet that rivals any ice age or comet impact, he said.Fenner, 95, has won awards for his work in helping eradicate the variola virus that causes smallpox and has written or co-written 22 books.And that's on top of these earlier doomsday prognostications on this topic we linked to a couple of months ago:But think of the cross-promotional opportunities! Microsoft could launch their own version of Apple’s “Think Different” campaign featuring Margaret Sanger and H.G. Wells, or George Bernard Shaw. Perhaps new Windows PC could ship with a director’s edition of M. Night Shyamalan’s 2008 film, The Happening. Or at least a PDF file of this “classic” work by Obama science czar, John Holdren.So which is it, fellas? Should mankind deliberately choose to wind things up and "party our way into extinction?" (Party? Hey, don't be a stupid, be a schmarty!) Or will it happen automatically?Talk amongst yourselves, work out your stories and get back to me. OK? Thanks!Elsewhere, while Newsweek the home of the "We're All Socialists Now" and "Friedrich Hayek? Who?" pundits is pooh-poohing the concept of life extension, at least they're not, for the moment at least, calling on the death of humanity, unlike their brethren in punditry at the other end of the Northeast Corridor. (Maybe a fear of the terminal moment hits too close to home.) class="pages"> https://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2010/6/20/academias-endless-doomsday-cult/ ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • Is Man of Steel the Year's Best Sci-Fi Film?
    (”The Happening” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    Lifestyle var dataLayer = window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; dataLayer.push({ 'videoName': 'Man of Steel - "Fate of Your Planet" Official Trailer [HD]', 'videoType': 'Curated' }); In an interview with IGN, director Zack Snyder cheerfully affirms the description of his recently released Man of Steel as “a full-on science fiction film.” Indeed, the comic book movie may prove to be the year’s best science fiction film despite other high-profile efforts which land more overtly within that genre.Good science fiction uses fantastic but plausible alternative realities to posit profound philosophical questions. What does it mean to be human? Are we alone in the universe? Is there a god and, if so, what’s he like? Bad science fiction telescopes its agenda, attempting to answer its own questions with unearned authority in an attempt to proselytize.M. Night Shyamalan has offered examples of both. His alien invasion tale Signs, offered from the perspective of a family struggling with faith as they mourn the passing of a mother, artfully asks whether providence exists. A later effort, The Happening, attempts unsuccessfully to make horror monsters out of plants and preaches with such sanctimony that it might as well be a promotional video for the Sierra Club.There were echoes of The Happening in this year’s science fiction release from Shyamalan starring Will Smith and son Jaden. Essentially a shipwreck story, After Earth takes place in a future where everything on Earth has evolved to kill humans. Because, you know, we’re so destructive that the planet had to immunize itself against us.The other big science fiction release this year was the Tom Cruise vehicle Oblivion, which was apparently so bad that it prompted NPR to call it “the most incoherent piece of storytelling since John Travolta's Battlefield Earth.” That was until people saw After Earth, which also warranted comparisons to the infamous Scientology-inspired commercial bomb. class="pages"> https://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2013/6/21/is-man-of-steel-the-years-best-sci-fi-film/ previous Page 1 of 2 next   ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • Apocalypse Then
    (”The Happening” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    Ed Driscoll There's a sucker punch at the end that Glenn Beck fans won't enjoy, and it's worth noting that however pessimistic Alvin Toffler was about the future at the start of the 1970s, he had made quite an about-face a decade later in the surprisingly hopeful sequel to Future Shock, The Third Wave. But otherwise, this is a fun video look from Matt Novak of the PaleoFuture blog at the doomsday Malthusians of the early seventies: var dataLayer = window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; dataLayer.push({ 'videoName': 'paleofuture.tv [episode 00001: apocalypse]', 'videoType': 'Curated' }); Novak's video echoes a point I made last March: today's global warming fear mongering is tomorrow's late-night camp TV:A 1930s scare film such as Reefer Madness was seen as high camp by liberals by the time the 1970s rolled around, as were Jack Webb's anti-communist efforts of the late 1950s. But seventies liberals, perhaps spurred on by the title of Alvin Toffler's 1970 book Future Shock, if not the actual contents, had plenty of fears of their own, and wanted you to share the cold sweat of their own brand of paranoia.Recall the horrific slate of politically-oriented science fiction films that Hollywood churned out in-between 1968's 2001: A Space Odyssey and 1977's Star Wars. Films such as Soylent Green, Silent Running and ZPG were obsessed with the Malthusian nightmares of overpopulation and deforestation that dominated the overculture of the time. Rollerball depicted a world controlled by giant corporations, at precisely the same time that Steve and Woz were cobbling together the first Apples in their Bay Area garage. They were followed by Leonard Nimoy's cheesy synthesizer-scored In Search Of TV series a few years later, which explored Global Cooling, Killer Bees, Deadly Ants, and other '70s obsessions.Today, these '70s efforts are seen as equally campy as Refer Madness became three or four decades after its release. The eco-doomsday films of the naughts, such as The Day After Tomorrow, M. Night Shyamalan's The Happening, and Al Gore's own An Inconvenient Truth are well on the way to becoming late night camp TV themselves, and at much faster rate as their equally schlocky predecessors.Perhaps someone can recut Al's film and dub it "Climate Madness." Maybe hire William Shatner to cut an exaggerated Jack Webb-style parody opening.Who knows: "Climate Madness" could eventually even have the same impact on its genre as his wife Tipper's efforts to curb raunchy lyrics in pop music. Perhaps that's why, as Stacy McCain notes today, Malthusian predictions are increasingly of the "if we don't act now, the world will come to an end in 200 years" variety, as opposed to the "if we don't act now, the world will come to an end in 20 years" style that were a staple of the schlock documentaries that Novak pokes fun at in his video:“Population Bomb” hoaxer Paul Ehrlich made a laughingstock of himself by predicting what he expected to happen in five, 10 or 15 years — and all his disaster scenarios proved false. As Reason magazine’s Ronald Bailey says, Ehrlich has never been right about anything.Other doomsayers have learned the lesson of Ehrlich’s example. Nowadays, the purveyors of climate-change “consensus” talk about what will happen in 50, 100 or 200 years. The beauty of putting Doomsday in the fairly distant future is that your prediction cannot be falsified any time soon. By the time anyone can determine whether your forecasts were accurate, you’ll be mouldering in the grave.And while I don't watch Glenn Beck very often, it's worth noting that his message is the exact opposite of Malthusianism, which seeks an ever-growing number of regulations to fight the imagined horror of the day. As a libertarian, his goal is to expand freedom, not strangle it. I suspect he wouldn't complain much if we look back in 20 years and find his predictions about a future diminished by over-regulation and top-down government planning (QED) are wrong -- it would indicate that his notion of renewing America was a success on some level.Finally, speaking of bad doomsday documentaries, after 20 years of being trapped in a thousand cable TV shows telling us that global warming would lead to their demise, a hearty group of unpaid and exploited extras finally decided to strike back: var dataLayer = window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; dataLayer.push({ 'videoName': '', 'videoType': 'Curated' }); (H/T: Virginia Postrel) class="pages"> https://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2011/1/1/retro-shock/ ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • Today's Global Warming Fear-Mongering Is Tomorrow's Late-Night Camp TV
    (”The Happening” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    Ed Driscoll At Big Hollywood, James Hudnall has a Climategate-related question. He asks,  "What Will Television Do With All Their Scare-Programming?" Read the whole thing; there's too much for me to quote to do it justice. But here's the pith of the gist of the marrow, as James Lileks might say:But two things happened last year that shot an arrow in the heart of the beast; one of the worst winters on record and Climategate. And the hits keep on coming. Now it turns out that NASA, who claimed for years that their data proves Global Warming is real, was actually just using CRU data all along. And the CRU couldn’t back up any of its data. In fact, they “lost the records” when they were forced to produce them. Oops!So now these news channels who’ve been trumpeting the story as fact, all those cable networks who spent millions on documentaries hyping it, all those TV shows hawking green as the in color; they all look like fools. Or worse, they look like they were in on what will go down as one of the biggest scams in human history.What would you do if you were in their position? It’s not hard to understand why they’re carrying on like Climategate never happened. They have a president in the White House as clueless as they are, pushing the Cap and Trade agenda as if those darn glaciers are just about melted. We have to do something fast! Not a moment too soon, kiddies.The climate scam is worth trillions of dollars and who knows how many millions, if not billions have been spent to win over the public. Too bad the public is losing interest fast. People are increasingly saying it’s all made up or at best, exaggerated. You can’t put toothpaste back in the tube. The proverbial genie is out of the bottle, The cat has left the bag. There’s no going back to the lies and spin. But our friends in the media are still living a lie. It’s like they threw a party and only their mom and a few friends showed up. What was once a hip thing to be a part of, like smoking, is fast becoming a loser tattoo on their foreheads.The public’s trust is evaporating and it’s not helping that many in the media are circling the wagons. As their ratings drop and their Nielsens tank, as the suits upstairs start laying off staff, they’re going to have to deal with reality. Something they’ve tried to deny all these years. Yes, folks. The warm-mongers are in fact the deniers.The economy is in a down-spiral. Telling people they need to cut back is like rubbing salt in their wounds. Promising them “green jobs” is like telling a 40 year old Santa Claus is coming to town.A 1930s scare film such as Reefer Madness was seen as high camp by liberals by the time the 1970s rolled around, as were Jack Webb's anti-communist efforts of the late '1950s. But seventies liberals, perhaps spurred on by the title of Alvin Toffler's 1970 book Future Shock, if not the actual contents, had plenty of fears of their own, and wanted you to share the cold sweat of their own brand of paranoia.Recall the horrific slate of politically-oriented science fiction films that Hollywood churned out in-between 1968's 2001: A Space Odyssey and 1977's Star Wars. Films such as Soylent Green, Silent Running and ZPG were obsessed with the Malthusian nightmares of overpopulation and deforestation that dominated the overculture of the time. Rollerball depicted a world controlled by giant corporations, at precisely the same time that Steve and Woz were cobbling together the first Apples in their Bay Area garage. They were followed by Leonard Nimoy's cheesy synthesizer-scored In Search Of TV series a few years later, which explored Global Cooling, Killer Bees, Deadly Ants, and other '70s obsessions.Today, these '70s efforts are seen as equally campy as Refer Madness became three or four decades after its release. The eco-doomsday films of the naughts, such as The Day After Tomorrow, M. Night Shyamalan's The Happening, and Al Gore's own An Inconvenient Truth are well on the way to becoming late night camp TV themselves, and at much faster rate as their equally schlocky predecessors.Perhaps someone can recut Al's film and dub it "Climate Madness." Maybe hire William Shatner to cut an exaggerated Jack Webb-style parody opening.Who knows: "Climate Madness" could eventually even have the same impact on its genre as his wife Tipper's efforts to curb raunchy lyrics in pop music.Related: Zombie observes some camp Malthusian performance art on the Streets of San Francisco, here. class="pages"> https://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2010/3/17/todays-global-warming-fear-mongering-is-tomorrows-late-night-camp-tv/ ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • The 5 Biggest Box Office Flops Coming This Summer
    (”The Happening” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    Lifestyle Each spring, the showbiz hype machine talks up the excitement level of the summer blockbuster slate. In fact, despite a big May, Summer 2013 is looking like one of the dreariest and most useless summers ever, loaded with sequels to movies that weren’t worth seeing in the first place, lame vanity projects, overdone epics, and dull retreads.Forget the summer’s biggest hits. What will the biggest flops of the season be? Here’s an educated guess based on advance buzz. var dataLayer = window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; dataLayer.push({ 'videoName': 'After Earth Official Trailer #1 (2013) - Will Smith Movie HD', 'videoType': 'Curated' }); 1. After Earth (May 31)This is a movie that goes wrong early. Really early. In the credits. “Story by Will Smith”? Huh?Starring the top-billed Smith son Jaden Smith, who is no longer the adorable little kid he was in Pursuit of Happyness and The Karate Kid but is now a sullen teen? Directed by notorious hack M. Night Shyamalan, he of The Happening and The Lady in the Water and The Last Airbender, the guy who hasn’t made a movie that wasn’t laughed out of theaters in a decade?Despite all of these obvious problems, plus the additional worry that the similar Tom Cruise movie Oblivion came out in April and fulfilled its title’s destiny almost instantly, After Earth is somehow managing to underperform expectations, causing early viewers to wonder why the former biggest star in the world, the elder Smith, spends most of the second half of the movie injured and stuck in a chair giving his son long-distance pep talks after the two crash-land on Earth to fight monsters a thousand years in the future. And why do both of them talk like they’re from New Zealand? This one is headed for the Bad Idea Hall of Fame, and the Stale Prince’s stock is plummeting after Men in Black III and Seven Pounds. var dataLayer = window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; dataLayer.push({ 'videoName': 'The Pursuit of Happyness Trailer', 'videoType': 'Curated' }); class="pages"> https://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2013/5/31/the-5-biggest-box-office-flops-coming-this-summer/ previous Page 1 of 5 next   ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)

Soiled Sinema3
Soiled Reviews



(Reviewers' Site/Bio)

⚠️ EDGY 🔥 CONTENT 🔥 WARNING 🔥 (NSFW?) ⚠️

🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻


  • The Happening
    For me, It appears that M. Night. Shyamalan is the most under appreciated director of our time. He has given us an incredible "comic book" f...
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • The Last Winter
    (”The Happening” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    *Spoilers* An unknown friend mentioned this Weinstein produced Blockbuster exclusive and the idea of this seemed so familiar. I do rememb...
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • Max Payne
    (”The Happening” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    What better way to bring back noir sentiments than with Max Payne - A long overdue adaptation that hit me in the liver for featuring an out...
    ...
    (Review Source)

Kelly Jane Torrance1
The Weekly Standard



(Reviewers' Site/Bio)

  • Just not 'Happening'

    M. Night Shyamalan is in that select club of name-above-the-title directors. The India-born, Philadelphia-raised auteur's name is usually in even bigger type than that of the big names - Bruce Willis, Mel Gibson and now Mark Wahlberg - who headline his films. Published June 13, 2008

    ...
    (Review Source)

Christian Toto1
Hollywood In Toto



(Reviewers' Site/Bio)

  • That Shocking ‘Glass’ Reveal Is a Big, Fat Nothing
    (”The Happening” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    glass review james macavoy beast

    M. Night Shyamalan hit a pop culture nerve with “Unbreakable.”

    Few filmmakers took comic book movies seriously back in 2000. An even smaller group dropped these figures into the real

    The post That Shocking ‘Glass’ Reveal Is a Big, Fat Nothing appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

    ...
    (Review Source)

The Federalist Staff3
The Federalist



(Reviewers' Site/Bio)

  • In 'Split,' M. Night Shyamalan Finally Aims Creepy In A Better Direction
    (”The Happening” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    M. Night Shyamalan—a name that inspires fear in the hearts of moviegoers everywhere—is offering a new horror thriller called “Split.” Perhaps I should clarify: Shyamalan’s name doesn’t inspire fear in the way Hitchcock’s does. It’s not that his movies are super scary: they’re usually super awful, a truth to which anyone who’s been unlucky enough to see one of his movies in the last 10 years can testify. Does anyone really want to sit through “Lady in the Water” again? Do you remember groaning at the end of “The Happening”? Did anyone even bother to see “The Last Airbender”? After the huge flop of “After Earth,” I thought to myself, “Why are people still giving him money to make films with?” It seems that Hollywood came to the same conclusion, and Shyamalan had his allowance taken away. Shyamalan supposedly made “Split” for less than a tenth of what it cost him to make “After Earth,” and you know what? It pretty much works. “Split’s” not perfect, but it’s good. This Film Offers a Creepy Yet Powerful Story Shyamalan is still Shyamalan, and all his movies, to a greater or lesser extent, suffer from his self-important style. But his trademark tight camerawork complements his script, by forcing the audience to focus on the idiosyncrasies of the human personality. Yes, the end of the film has a significant plot hole. But perhaps one could argue that every horror thriller needs a good plot hole. Working with a small budget again has forced Shyamalan back to what he’s good at: creative psychological storytelling unencumbered by special effects. In “Split,” James McAvoy plays Kevin, a young man who suffers from Dissociative Identity Disorder. Kevin has 23 different personalities residing in his body. Twenty of the personalities are benign, but three are sinister. When the three sinister ones get the upper hand, they kidnap three girls, so they can have sacrificial victims ready for the emergence of a malevolent 24th personality. Let’s all say it together: That’s not how Dissociative Identity Disorder works. But it’s okay, because it’s just a movie. “Split” is McAvoy’s movie, and his performance (should I say performances?) is wowing critics. Don’t worry about getting too confused, only eight different personalities manifest themselves in the film. I’ll admit that McAvoy deserves a great deal of credit for the film’s success, but I’m not going to pretend that this performance showcases the range of his acting ability. ‘Split’ Considers the Power Of Pain and Suffering McAvoy might change his accent from personality to personality, but he stays consistently creepy. When he’s the no-nonsense “Dennis,” he’s just a creepy guy. When he’s nine-year-old “Hedwig,” he is just a creepy guy with a lisp. When he’s prim-and-proper “Patricia,” he is just a creepy guy in a skirt. I didn’t see a compelling and nuanced performance. I saw McAvoy convincingly portray one creepy guy who likes to play dress up. Even though McAvoy’s acting has been over-hyped, the movie’s pretty good, in a creepy way. “Split” isn’t going to appeal to everyone. But fans of Shyamalan’s early work, especially “Unbreakable,” will enjoy it because he returns to some of the themes he’s explored successfully in the past. In Shyamalan’s world, pain and suffering can unlock our true potential and bring about greatness. Honestly, the characters’ dialogue on this theme can get a bit tiresome, but it’s a thought-provoking idea. The audience is confronted with the question of how one achieves perfection. To what extent does life conform to Darwin’s idea that the trials of our environment propel an evolutionary process? Or to what extent do our trials have a more transcendent purpose? Do our scars save us, and what does it mean to be saved in the first place? We Can Become What We Believe We Are Another idea that Shyamalan offers in “Split” is that we can become whatever we believe we are. Given America’s recent kerfuffle over bathroom rights, this question “Can we become whatever we believe?” seems a particularly relevant one. Shyamalan answers the question with a “yes.” Our human minds are more powerful than our bodies, and unlocking the potential of our minds is the key to progress. The body must follow wherever the mind leads. But before the left-leaning existentialists begin to rejoice too loudly, let me point out that “Split” is also a cautionary tale. Just because you can become anything you believe, this doesn’t mean that everything you believe is right. If you believe wrong things, you will become that which is wrong. The personalities in Kevin’s mind believe they can become “the Beast” without thinking about whether they should become “the Beast.” Kevin becomes Nietzsche’s übermensch, whose ability to act justifies his actions. Kevin’s therapist feels sympathy for him but celebrates his illness. She believes that maybe Dissociative Identity Disorder makes Kevin a better Kevin, but the audience knows that he’s just creepy. Our society has plenty of people who, like Kevin’s therapist, celebrate attempts to transcend our humanness, but once we deny our human finitude, we might become demons rather than angels. Overall, the movie exhibits a fairly conservative worldview. Suffering refines us, but it doesn’t necessarily expose a heart of gold. Suffering might drive some people to seek power, but the suffering cannot justify their actions once they’ve attained that power. Humans have freedom to act, but acting contrary to our nature brings evil. And perhaps the most important lesson of “Split” is that faith matters. If we put our faith in the wrong thing, we will become monsters. ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • 'War Room' Is Just As Cheesy As All Kendrick Brothers Films
    (”The Happening” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    Christians across America are gathering in movie theatres to see “War Room,” the latest film written and directed by Alex and Stephen Kendrick. The two brothers’ movie tells the tale of how an old woman’s teaching about prayer changes the lives and marriage of Tony and Elizabeth Jordan. While this story may sound like your average feel-good Christian film, there’s more going on. What we’re seeing is the culmination of ten years of the brothers’ work. Alex and Stephen Kendrick (who are not related to “Pitch Perfect’s” Anna Kendrick) started their filmmaking career in 2002, when Alex, a pastor at Sherwood Church in Georgia, saw a Barna Group study on how film and entertainment influenced culture more than politics or journalism. This inspired Alex to work with Stephen to write the script for “Flywheel,” their first film. “Flywheel” was made for less than $20,000 and relied heavily on volunteers from Sherwood. The film was released directly to DVD and received very little in sales. But it was the start of a long media career for the brothers. Since then, they’ve written, directed, and released three additional films to theatres and attracted mass-media attention. Many of these films were box-office successes, showing there is an audience for faith-based films. Alex and Stephen even received awards from Movieguide and from the San Antonio Independent Christian Film Festival commending their dedication to filmmaking and the faith. When “Facing the Giants” hit theatres in 2006, media critics saw it as the start of something big, of a strong Christian media market that would “change the culture.” But were these predictions true? The answer is a bit complex. Yes, the Kendrick brothers did change culture; they just didn’t change the major one. All they actually did was introduce a new generation of Christian filmmakers to a low standard of storytelling. The Kendrick Brothers Wrote the Book on Christian Film While Christian films are hardly a new phenomenon, Sherwood showed how a small, independent, religious company can make a significant box-office hit. After “Facing the Giants made more than $10 million in the box office, other filmmakers decided they wanted to get in on the action. Groups like Pureflix Entertainment and Erwin Brothers began following the Kendrick brothers’ footsteps, creating family friendly media for a Christian audience that became significant in its own way. It was clear that Alex and Stephen Kendrick were leading the way towards a new kind of filmmaking However, in clearing the way, the Kendricks ended up standardizing a series of literary devices, or “tropes,” in the Christian film industry. These include: The Kendricks ended up standardizing a series of tropes in the Christian film industry. Preaching to the protagonist and audience: Kendrick films seem to be written more as a cinematic sermon than a fully fleshed-out story. Certain Christian characters take a significant amount of time to present the main character and audience with an argument for either the Gospel or a moral lesson about marriage, parenthood, sexuality, etc. In “War Room,” all the protagonists’ problems are fixed after A) accepting Christ and B) setting up a prayer closet. While this is clearly the end goal of the film, it ends up causing the non-teaching parts of the film to not resonate with an audience that may not agree. Simplistic character archetypes: These films tend to write protagonists in a very one-note fashion. Either the protagonist is a Christian with few character flaws whom God helps get through his struggle, or he’s a non-Christian whose conversion helps him conquer everything without the potential for future struggle. In the same way, non-Christian characters are either openly antagonistic to the expression of faith, there to be converted by the believers, comedy or realism relief, or all of the above. Telling, not showing: Instead of taking time to show a character’s backstory or problems through visual representation, the films tend to rely on characters explaining their problems to the audience. For example, let’s look at the drug subplot in “War Room.” According to the movie, Tony Jordan, the husband, was fired from his job because he “padded his numbers” and stole samples from his employer. However, the film doesn’t attempt to show him doing this (outside of a single gesture in one scene that you’d miss if you blinked). Instead, it relies on external characters telling Tony (and the audience) what he’s done. This is an unhelpful method of storytelling; especially for one that’s supposed to be visually driven. The films tend to rely on characters explaining their problems to the audience. Keeping it excessively clean: While the Kendrick brothers clearly want to deal with issues like fatherhood and marriage, they seem to go out of their way to avoid certain “thematic elements” in order to maintain a family-friendly standard. The most notable example of this in the Kendrick brothers’ work is “Fireproof,” where the main couple (played by Kirk Cameron and Erin Bethea) spend a lot of time talking about the husband’s problem with pornography. However, the film never takes time to A) actually show the husband using it, and B) never uses the word pornography! Now, these aren’t new tropes in Christian film and literature, and some of them aren’t exclusive to Christian media. Films like “The Happening” and “San Andreas” also have their problems. However, the Kendricks’ work unintentionally cemented a framework for Christian media where viewers have learned to frown on departing from “making this to present a truth.” Movies Will Save You But why is this bad? After all, the Kendricks themselves have said in past interviews that their main goal in making these films is to save souls. But is that really happening? And is that the sole goal of the film? The Kendrick brothers’ box-office ‘success’ is driven by a select number of religiously motivated consumers who are interested in art that advocates for their view. While Alex and Stephen have mentioned multiple times in past interviews that their films have inspired others to make first-time confessions of faith, that doesn’t necessarily mean that’s what the market is using them for. A recent Lifeway study revealed that the vast majority of Christian media consumers are self-proclaimed Christians. If you add the recent data points from Christian media advocacy group Faith Driven Consumer to the equation, it becomes clear that the Kendrick brothers’ box-office “success” is driven by a select number of religiously motivated consumers who are more interested in art that advocates for their view than in art that is aesthetically excellent. Some would defend this economic framework by arguing that if a film saves a single soul, it is completely worth the time. However, this seems far too pragmatic. First off, the primary function of a film isn’t to act as a sermon or to save a soul; it’s to tell a story in a visually interesting and enjoyable way that will help the viewer empathize and realize things about the world around them. This is best done through an intelligent professional mixture of technical forms, cultural ideals, economic interests, and content. Don’t Challenge Me, Just Confirm My Beliefs However, recent shifts in how American Christians view art has caused them to overemphasize the moral or religious content in a piece of art at the cost of aesthetic and cultural excellence. This is why argument- or sermon-focused films like “God’s Not Dead” made more than $60 million in the box office while more artistic films like “Noah” or “Calvary” were either derided for their more “creative” approach to a biblical story or received little attention from the faith-based consumer market. The Kendrick brothers have changed the face of Christian media in more ways than one. They inspired a new generation of Christian creators to express their faith in the cinematic medium. However, their work also cemented the notion that Christian media should be used to save and teach. While this might seem like an effective way to spread Christian ideas, it only empowers a select group of Christians who mostly seem interested in promoting content they already agree with. ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • In ‘Split,’ M. Night Shyamalan Finally Aims Creepy In A Better Direction
    (”The Happening” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    M. Night Shyamalan's films are often horrific, but for all the wrong reasons. With 'Split,' he offers audience something different and interesting.
    ...
    (Review Source)

Steve Sailer1
Taki Mag



(Reviewers' Site/Bio)

  • Get Low: Stellar Cast, Shoddy Screenplay
    (”The Happening” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    Get Low, a dramedy starring venerable elders Robert Duvall, Bill Murray, and Cissy Spacek, is promisingly based on a prime slab of Old, Weird Americana: the true 1938 story of an elderly hillbilly (played by Duvall) who hired an undertaker (Murray) to throw him a huge funeral before he died. The Southern period setting is reminiscent of two of the most imaginative films of the last decade: the Coen Brothers’ O Brother, Where Art Thou? and Tim Burton’s Big Fish. Not surprisingly, Get Low has garnered 100 percent positive ratings among Top Critics on RottenTomatoes.com. Teddy Roosevelt’s daughter Alice said of her spotlight-loving father, “He wants to be the bride at every wedding, the corpse at every funeral, and the baby at every christening.” In this same spirit, the illiterate Tennessee codger Felix Bushaloo Breazeale decided to enjoy hearing his own eulogy. Breazeale’s whim captured the fancy of the nation. Soon, he had a publicity agent and newspapers were treating the faux funeral like the biggest news in Tennessee since the Scopes Monkey Trial. About ten thousand people from 14 states swarmed the festivities. A two-mile long traffic jam left Uncle Bush late for his own funeral. The “living corpse” savored every moment of the “doin’s and goin’s on,” chuckling “Folks, I’m tellin’ ya, this business of having your funeral before you die beats sparkin’ in a buggy.” Afterwards, he autographed fans’ programs with his “X.” The 74-year-old backwoodsman then went to New York and appeared on Ripley’s Believe It Or Not Radio Show, but reported back that big city “victuals weren’t worth a dern.” He lived on another half decade, entertaining his numerous visitors by having his mule (named “Mule”) perform tricks. The one thing you shouldn’t do in filming this tale is leave out all the Appalachian absurdity to render it tasteful, subdued, bittersweet, quasi-tragic Oscar-bait. Unfortunately, that’s exactly what first time director Aaron Schneider and the various screenwriters attempt. ”Get Low fails like a recent Shyamalan movie at the basic blocking and tackling of putting the camera in the right place, cutting shots at the right moment, and swelling the right chords.” The 79-year-old Duvall is being talked up for a second Oscar, based, apparently, on the Commutative Property of Film Appreciation. See, last year Jeff Bridges got his first Oscar in Crazy Heart, another ornery coot movie in which Duvall played the best friend. So, this must be Duvall’s turn, right? He might indeed win for Get Low, because Duvall here delivers Acting for the Sake of Acting in the tradition of Al Pacino in Scent of a Woman. If you read beyond the critics’ blurbs, though, you’ll notice the strain of talking themselves into liking Get Low. Reviewing movies—making the basic Thumbs Up or Thumbs Down call—isn’t a terribly difficult trade … because making good movies is. Compare the execution of the last two Christopher Nolan movies, Inception and The Dark Knight, to M. Night Shyamalan’s The Last Airbender and The Happening. You may not understand what’s going on in Nolan’s movies, but you’re obviously in more capable hands. Therefore, when reviewers uniformly overrate a film, it’s typically due to either politics—as with the mediocre lesbian sitcom The Kids Are All Right, which critics praised as if it were the second coming of It’s a Wonderful Life to heroically stand up to the Mormon Media Juggernaut—or respect and nostalgia. Get Low fails like a recent Shyamalan movie at the basic blocking and tackling of putting the camera in the right place, cutting shots at the right moment, and swelling the right chords. Those aren’t weakness that we reviewers can explain in 800 words, though. The screenplay’s faults, however, are more easily explicable. Duvall’s character is turned into a recluse with a mysterious backstory, which the tortured soul feels the need to confess to the assembled mob, Jerry Springer Show-style. Another anachronistic touch is turning the presiding minister from white to black. I kept expecting the 1938 Tennessee crowd to react like the Western townsfolk eagerly awaiting their new sheriff in Blazing Saddles, but nobody notices. (Veteran character actor Bill Cobbs shows self-respect by playing his silly Magic Negro role with a strong note of contempt.) Murray’s portrayal of a shady Chicago car dealer who has washed up in rural Tennessee as a funeral director starts out strongly. After whining about the unanticipated local death dearth, he hears that Duvall has hitched up his mule and come to town flashing a roll of cash. The salesman exclaims with avaricious expertise, “Ooh, hermit money!” But Murray’s character slowly fades. Murray is that rare phenomenon—a low energy movie star, the anti-Tom Cruise. In Lost in Translation, he flourished as the still, sad center of swirling Japanese wackiness. In Zombieland, he floored audiences in his cameo as a golfing Bill Murray in living dead drag. Yet, pairing the minimalist actor and the minimalist director Jim Jarmusch in 2005’s Broken Flowers inevitably sputtered out. Similarly, Murray is ultimately undermined by Get Low’s overarching flaw: lack of incident. googletag.cmd.push(function() {googletag.display('div-gpt-ad-1456852648633-0');}); if(display_ads_server){document.write('');}; SIGN UPDaily updates with TM’s latest // delete this script tag and use a "div.mce_inline_error{ XXX !important}" selector // or fill this in and it will be inlined when errors are generated var mc_custom_error_style = ''; var fnames = new Array();var ftypes = new Array();fnames[0]='EMAIL';ftypes[0]='email';fnames[1]='FNAME';ftypes[1]='text';fnames[2]='LNAME';ftypes[2]='text';var err_style = ''; try{ err_style = mc_custom_error_style; } catch(e){ err_style = 'margin: 1em 0 0 0; padding: 1em 0.5em 0.5em 0.5em; background: ERROR_BGCOLOR none repeat scroll 0% 0%; font-weight: bold; float: left; z-index: 1; width: 80%; -moz-background-clip: -moz-initial; -moz-background-origin: -moz-initial; -moz-background-inline-policy: -moz-initial; color: ERROR_COLOR;'; } var mce_jQuery = jQuery.noConflict(); mce_jQuery(document).ready( function($) { var options = { errorClass: 'mce_inline_error', errorElement: 'div', errorStyle: err_style, onkeyup: function(){}, onfocusout:function(){}, onblur:function(){} }; var mce_validator = mce_jQuery("#mc-embedded-subscribe-form").validate(options); options = { url: 'http://takimag.us1.list-manage1.com/subscribe/post-json?u=0ba7696a8a378946b7e688500&id=f7706afea2&c=?', type: 'GET', dataType: 'json', contentType: "application/json; charset=utf-8", beforeSubmit: function(){ mce_jQuery('#mce_tmp_error_msg').remove(); mce_jQuery('.datefield','#mc_embed_signup').each( function(){ var txt = 'filled'; var fields = new Array(); var i = 0; mce_jQuery(':text', this).each( function(){ fields[i] = this; i++; }); mce_jQuery(':hidden', this).each( function(){ if ( fields[0].value=='MM' && fields[1].value=='DD' && fields[2].value=='YYYY' ){ this.value = ''; } else if ( fields[0].value=='' && fields[1].value=='' && fields[2].value=='' ){ this.value = ''; } else { this.value = fields[0].value+'/'+fields[1].value+'/'+fields[2].value; } }); }); return mce_validator.form(); }, success: mce_success_cb }; mce_jQuery('#mc-embedded-subscribe-form').ajaxForm(options); }); function mce_success_cb(resp){ mce_jQuery('#mce-success-response').hide(); mce_jQuery('#mce-error-response').hide(); if (resp.result=="success"){ mce_jQuery('#mce-'+resp.result+'-response').show(); mce_jQuery('#mce-'+resp.result+'-response').html(resp.msg); mce_jQuery('#mc-embedded-subscribe-form').each(function(){ this.reset(); }); } else { var index = -1; var msg; try { var parts = resp.msg.split(' - ',2); if (parts[1]==undefined){ msg = resp.msg; } else { i = parseInt(parts[0]); if (i.toString() == parts[0]){ index = parts[0]; msg = parts[1]; } else { index = -1; msg = resp.msg; } } } catch(e){ index = -1; msg = resp.msg; } try{ if (index== -1){ mce_jQuery('#mce-'+resp.result+'-response').show(); mce_jQuery('#mce-'+resp.result+'-response').html(msg); } else { err_id = 'mce_tmp_error_msg'; html = '
    '+msg+''; var input_id = '#mc_embed_signup'; var f = mce_jQuery(input_id); if (ftypes[index]=='address'){ input_id = '#mce-'+fnames[index]+'-addr1'; f = mce_jQuery(input_id).parent().parent().get(0); } else if (ftypes[index]=='date'){ input_id = '#mce-'+fnames[index]+'-month'; f = mce_jQuery(input_id).parent().parent().get(0); } else { input_id = '#mce-'+fnames[index]; f = mce_jQuery().parent(input_id).get(0); } if (f){ mce_jQuery(f).append(html); mce_jQuery(input_id).focus(); } else { mce_jQuery('#mce-'+resp.result+'-response').show(); mce_jQuery('#mce-'+resp.result+'-response').html(msg); } } } catch(e){ mce_jQuery('#mce-'+resp.result+'-response').show(); mce_jQuery('#mce-'+resp.result+'-response').html(msg); } } } ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)

Want even more consensus?

Skip Rotten Tomatoes, they’re biased SJWs too afraid to criticize things like the Ghost Busters reboot. Avoid giving them ad revenue by using the minimalist alternative, Cinesift, for a quick aggregate:

 🗣️ Know of another conservative review that we’re missing?
Leave a link in the comments below or email us!  

What’d you think? Let us know with a video:

Record a webcam review!

Or anonymous text review:

Submit your review
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Submit
     
Cancel

Create your own review

Average rating:  
 0 reviews
Overall Hollywood Bs Average rating:  
 
Anti-patriotism Average rating:  
 
Misandry Average rating:  
 
Affirmative action Average rating:  
 
LGBTQ rstuvwxyz Average rating:  
 
Anti-God Average rating:  
 

Buy on Amazon:
⚠️  Comment freely, but please respect our young users.
👍🏻 Non PC comments/memes/vids/links 
👎🏻  Curse words / NSFW media / JQ stuff
👌🏻 Visit our 18+  free speech forum to avoid censorship.
⚠️ Keep your kids’ websurfing safe! Read this.

Share this page:

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail