Welcome to My M. Nightmare

What follows is a piece I wrote in July of 2006, when my blog was in its anonymous infancy. I posted it briefly, circulating it mostly to friends and family, then removed it from the site. But with the release tomorrow of M. Night Shyamalan's latest unintentionally hilarious love letter to himself, The Happening, I figured it was time I truly went public with this little tale of my morning with Night.

FADE IN:

INT. LARGE OFFICE BUILDING CAFÉ

Light streams in through the giant floor-to-ceiling windows of a large office building in Midtown Manhattan. The sun creates long, ominous shadows -- cast from the various ominous cafeteria-style chairs which are scattered about the large room. In the distance we hear the ominous sounds of workers going about their morning routine. There is a sense of foreboding all around -- heightened by the ominous tones of two or three drawn-out notes composed by James Newton Howard, apparently in his sleep. This single shot goes on -- uninterrupted -- for another five minutes. Don't argue. This is art.

Slowly the camera pans over and when it finds THE FRUSTRATED NEWS PRODUCER seated, it begins a fixed-field dolly-in/zoom-out shot -- because this is a completely unimaginative first-year film student trick. THE FRUSTRATED NEWS PRODUCER, a quiet and mysterious everyman with an obligatory dark secret, hears a sound off-camera and slowly glances up from the floor. The sense of foreboding is now palpable. James Newton Howard draws out a fourth or fifth note.

INT: END OF LONG HALLWAY LEADING TO CAFÉ

A door opens slowly -- ominously. The camera follows the feet of THE BIG-TIME MOVIE DIRECTOR who walks through the door; behind him the multiple feet of his ENTOURAGE can be seen following closely, eager to be in the presence of such artistic greatness. The horde of feet moves slowly down the hall -- possibly in slow-motion, because that'd look really, uh, ominous -- toward THE FRUSTRATED NEWS PRODUCER.

INT: LARGE OFFICE BUILDING CAFÉ

THE FRUSTRATED NEWS PRODUCER -- having already figured out the incredibly obvious ending of this story -- simply shakes his head and sighs, wondering to himself why he didn't choose a more noble profession -- such as peep-show attendant. He speaks in an ominous whisper as James Newton Howard's sixth note rises to a crescendo.

FRUSTRATED NEWS PRODUCER: "I see arrogant people."

FADE TO BLACK

It's a Hollywood cliché that's as old as Joan Rivers's first face, but if there's any value left in it then it may be safe to say that I'll never work in this town again.

This morning, I pissed off M. Night Shyamalan. Pissed him off to the point of getting a condescending lecture from him. A lecture which could better be described as a humiliating public chewing-out. A humiliating public chewing-out as in a questioning of my qualifications as a news producer and more than likely a human being in general. I could go on and on until I'm reduced to the size of a dust mite, but I assume you get the picture.

It happened after the taping of an interview with him, Paul Giamatti and Bryce Dallas Howard -- all of whom are wisely busting their asses to promote Shyamalan's latest cinematic insomnia cure and last-ditch chance at cultural relevance, Lady in the Water.

Before I explain the details, let me rewind. (If this were a Shyamalan movie, it'd be in the form of a nebulous flashback which would hint at the film's final silly twist).

For the past couple of months, I've remained pretty steadfast in my inclination to never divulge my place of employment, nor ever to write about anything that goes on there. I have no problem pontificating on the media in general, but when it comes to the day to day specifics of my job or my opinions of them, I'd rather keep my big mouth shut. I have New York City rent to think about; the less I put my income at risk, the better. But I'm willing to bend the rules ever-so-slightly in this case for several reasons which include, but aren't limited to (A) the fact that it's a really hysterical and infuriating story, (B) the fact that it proves unmistakably what Shyamalan's detractors have been saying about him for years -- namely that he's a raging egomaniac, (C) the fact that there's still enough subversive punk left in me that I'd love to exact a small amount of revenge, even if it's simply by discouraging one person from seeing a Shyamalan film, and most importantly because (D) if I don't say something, the world will believe that this man was all sweetness and light to both me and my network -- since I already know for a fact that our completed story will portray him favorably, and that pisses me off.

Let's flashback a little further; it's a ridiculous parlor trick that I'm sure Shyamalan would appreciate.

The story behind the making of his new movie, Lady in the Water is the stuff of Hollywood legend. It's well documented in the painfully awful new hagiography The Man Who Heard Voices: How M. Night Shyamalan Risked His Career on a Fairy Tale. The short story is that Shyamalan ("Night" to his friends, of which I obviously can't count myself one) pitched the idea to his personal di Medici family at Disney, only to have them express reservations about the idea of turning a bedtime story he told to his kids into a multi-million dollar investment. During the "Creative Process," it's said that Shyamalan threw a fit when Disney studio chief Nina Jacobson wasn't at home to personally receive a hand-delivered script as if it were the lost five commandments. It's also said that in spite of Disney's reservations, they were fully willing to green-light Shyamalan's pet project based solely on their faith in his vision (and keep in mind, this was the same vision that gave us The Village, a movie whose final twist I actually figured out from watching the commercials). Still, Shyamalan wasn't feeling the love, and petulantly walked across the street -- taking his script about pool-nymphs and grass monsters to the more trusting suits at Warner Brothers.

I've seen the result. The movie is average at best.

I should probably mention that I never thought The Sixth Sense heralded the arrival of the next Spielberg. I figured out the ending about fifteen minutes into it, and although I admired the clever construction and willingness to allow the plot to simmer rather than boil over, I never understood why a series of static shots and a sleepwalking Bruce Willis constituted such a laudable achievement. I actually think it says something about the film industry as a whole that a guy like Shyamalan can be considered a visionary auteur. I often wonder what our collective opinion would be if we didn't have Michael Bay and Rob Cohen to compare him to. Shyamalan gets popcorn bucketfuls of credit for a style that Kubrick perfected a generation ago.

Since his breakout hit, Shyamalan has yet to prove himself to be anything more than a self-important myth created by none other than Shyamalan himself.

Lady in the Water does little to change that. It boasts a fantastic performance by Giamatti, but that's become as common in Hollywood as tiny dogs in handbags. Howard meanwhile is asked to do little more than meet the necessary standard of "mysterious luminescence." The supporting cast is composed of fine actors who do their best to buy into Shyamalan's fairy-tale mythology; how they keep a straight face most of the time is beyond me. The movie also takes Shyamalan's legendary self-indulgence to unparalleled heights; he casts himself as a writer whose destiny is to change the world, and he literally eviscerates a film critic in a sequence which is no doubt supposed to be funny and clever, but instead winds up looking like the celluloid tantrum of an upset child.

On the plus side, if you completely suspend logic and disbelief -- seemingly a requirement for most Shyamalan movies -- you might not regret spending the ten dollars. Once again, it's got Giamatti; it can't be all bad.

So now we flash-forward to this morning. See what a simple trick that is?

I was saddled with the task of setting up and producing the interview with Shyamalan, Giamatti and Howard, and rather than do the usual, boring in-studio thing, I wanted to show a little vision myself. My initial plan was to shoot the interview in the screening room theater within my office building; unfortunately it was booked. My backup plan was to shoot it outside with the city as a backdrop; unfortunately it was too damned hot. So we went to plan C.

Plan C involved setting up a table at the edge of the café within our building; it's relatively quiet at the hour we needed it, and has a massive window with a beautiful view of Central Park. My hope was for the interview to look less like an interview and more like a casual conversation. There would be coffee. There would be a roundtable discussion. There would be three Hollywood heavy-hitters just relaxing. I even made arrangements to make sure that the entire interview was shot with handheld cameras -- cinema verité-style.

After sitting down and being mic'ed up, it took all of about ten seconds for Shyamalan to begin voicing his displeasure. At first it was done in the form of not-so-subtle jokes.

"This is really where we're doing this?"

"Don't your big anchors actually get sets?"

"Hey, can I get a tuna fish sandwich? This is a cafeteria right?"

I smiled and played along, stunned at the level of professionalism I had unwittingly adopted at some point during my career -- a career which was at that moment flashing before my eyes, as a man who makes his living directing films was picking apart my production techniques. This was of course immediately followed by the realization that in reality, nothing would be cooler -- or more personally beneficial in the long run -- than to have M. Night Shyamalan get me fired.

Over the next twenty minutes, the jokes turned to open hostility.

"This is like high school."

"This is ridiculous."

And my personal favorite:

"Somebody's gonna get railed when this is over. I just want you guys to know that. I just want to warn you that it's coming. You've never seen me on a movie set, but you're gonna."

I can call M. Night Shyamalan a lot of things -- "hack" and "asshole" immediately come to mind -- but I suppose I can't call him a liar. As promised, the moment the cameras stopped, the bitching started.

Shyamalan pulled me and his Warner handler (a man with the apparent patience of Job) aside, and basically did his impression of the shark in Jaws during the final clash with poor Quint. Once again there were accusations of unprofessional work: he was distracted by noises in the next room; he didn't like the look of the shots; we obviously didn't care enough to take this interview seriously. He then pulled an argument out of his ass that was so transparent, you would've thought it was the first half of The Village.

"Look, I don't care about me. You can do what you want with me. But these are good actors and they deserve better."

It's a testament to Shyamalan's oft-maligned acting skills that he actually managed to project something akin to genuine concern for someone other than himself. I fought the urge to applaud. What I did do though, was smile; I smiled the entire time. The thought which kept that grin glued to my face was simple: thank God this guy knows nothing at all about me, otherwise he'd be speaking to my boss right now; if he understood anything at all about who he was talking to, he'd be too worried about leaving here on a stretcher to actually be taking this shit up with me.

As he continued to rant, I noticed that he was either delusional or narcissistic enough to believe that everyone around him adhered to his personal point of view unquestioningly (and you wonder why the leaps of logic in his movies). He flat out said that both the anchor conducting the interview, and the video crew taping it had told him that they agreed that the shoot was shit. Suffice to say I suffered through the tapes of the interview several times during the course of the afternoon. He apparently really is hearing voices.

The most cringe-inducing part of this story however, will be the final insulting act. In a day or two, this interview will hit the airwaves. Once edited and post-produced, it will be exactly as originally advertised. It'll be a blow job for the movie, and its pig-headed director will look positively golden. All day I've grappled with this journalistic dilemma -- one that I admit is relatively silly in the great scheme of things (although even Murrow thought celebrity journalism represented all that is unholy in this business). The issue is this: we went into this story with the mindset that we were going to -- at least peripherally -- ask a director about his own personal issues which may have stood in the way of getting a movie made. During the interview, he proved every single negative comment we had heard about him to be unequivocally true. What's worse, he knew that it didn't matter how he behaved, because he arrogantly -- although probably correctly -- assumed that we would paint him in a rosy light either way. Once again, it takes either self-delusion bordering on sociopathy, or messianic conceit to believe that no matter what you say or do, the television crew who can make or break you with a single edit will somehow fall in line and heap adoration on you.

This is the why M. Night Shyamalan isn't a visionary so much as a megalomanical bully. I now know that first-hand.

FADE IN:

INT. LIVING ROOM AT NIGHT

THE FRUSTRATED PRODUCER sits at his computer typing away furiously. The camera pans around to show the computer screen. On it is a website. A closer examination reveals that it is a MySpace site -- specifically the official profile of THE BIG-TIME DIRECTOR.

THE FRUSTRATED PRODUCER hits the "FRIEND REQUEST" key.

The camera zooms in on THE FRUSTRATED PRODUCER'S face. An evil smile spreads across it.

THE FRUSTRATED PRODUCER laughs hysterically.

FADE TO BLACK

Follow Chez Pazienza on Twitter: www.twitter.com/chezpazienza

Comments

[Sylvarose]

Well I enjoyed Sixth Sense even though I figured it out about half way. I liked all the "clues" along the way. Signs I was VERY disappointed in as one poster already commented on why would these aliens come to a planet that was 70% toxic to them?

The Village was OK ,if easy to figure out. Unbreakable didn't make sense if you thought about it too much but I enjoyed it because if you went into it thinking of it like a comic book it worked.

The Lady in the Water was Ok. I'm interested in seeing "The Happening". Shyamalan has an interesting style.

Of all the films I'd watch over again it would be Sixth Sense and maybe Unbreakable. I guess that says a lot about Shyamalan as a director. I mean with Spielberg, as difficult as the subject matter is, I could watch "Schindler's List" or the "Color Purple" repeatedly (and have). I have watched "Alien" (Scott) and "Aliens" (Cameron) several times. "Blade Runner" (Scott), I've watched more than once as well as Indiana Jones 1 and 3. Peter Jackson's "The Frightners" is still fun after the 3rd viewing.

"Fargo (Cohen)," Raising Arizona (Cohen)," "The Abyss (Cameron)," "Terminator (Cameron)," and "Terminator 2 (Cameron)" are all movies to watch over and over again.

So maybe the better way to judge a movie is how well it is enjoyed and viewed repeatedly. If that's the case, then Shyamalan maybe is not as great...at least in my book.

sr

[freshnotbitter]

I loved Lady in the Water and The Village because of all the people who liked Sixth Sense and were irate that they were not getting Seventh Sense, Eighth Sense.......

I love that there is actually a film director out there that gives film critics a hard time. I would love to have had the opportunity to be berated by Night. What a gas.

I love that there is actually somebody in America who dares to be different, to be an outright a-hole.

How refreshing. I loved how bad Night's acting was in Lady in the Water. I loved the Bob Dylan songs and the ensemble casting. Night is at the cutting edge of the neo-sixties. I haven't seen The Happening yet but I am giving it a rave review before seeing it. Five Stars.

[strifeknot]

Shyamalan is to filmmaking as Coldplay is to music.

[windyindie41]

For those who LOVE UNbreakable, go back and watch it again. This time, actually pay attention to what's going on, and you should soon realize one simple fact: THE MOVIE DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE!

Okay, from what I remember after watching the overhyped, overrated movie all those years ago, you have Sam Jackson as "Mr. Glass", who goes around secretly causing horrible accidents that cause thousands of people to die just to find one person who has superpowers who will survive unscathed. This was the only cool, orignial idea in the whole movie. Here's where the problems start.

First, Mr. Glass based his crimes on the idea that if he had a disorder that made his bones very fragile, then there must be some superstrong, super powered person out there to "balance" the scales. What scales? There are millions of people born with some kind of disease or disorder, and Mr. Glass didn't even have the most extreme case of his illness. Then you have Bruce Willis, who apparently has always had these powers, even though it's never explained how he got them, and he somehow manages to go through his whole life ignoring all the superpowers he has. The worst is how he can be psyhic by just touching a person, but apparently the power only kicked in when he was in his 40's. I could go on, but it's really not worth my time or yours to continue.

[Dimikats]

I remember enduring that flick years ago as well. After about 20 minutes I wanted nothing more than to get out of the theater but I was in the middle of the row and didn't want to bother anyone by making them leave their seats to let me out (southern, polite woman training). When anyone says they loved it, I have to bite my tongue to keep from asking them how idiotic they could be. It was a horrible experience, a completely ridiculous movie that made absolutely no sense. The Village was so easy to figure out that I'm not surprised you got it from the commercials--but at least, for me, I learned that perhaps Joaquin Phoenix could act after all. As for Lady in the Water, eh, it had good actors, just like Chez said.

[soonerdru]

Maybe he was a dick in the interview because he knew Lady in the Water was a stinker. If Lady even shows up on my cable I will flee from the room screaming like ET did when he was found in the closet by the mom. I had hoped to find a review of the happening on here to verify whether or not it was wise of me to avoid this film. Night baby, you're acting like Prince did, that whole 'I'm the mysterious artist crap.' Get over yourself.

[django707]

Applause to you for having the guts to give us some truth about the tantrum throwing child-bullies who run Hollywood and shame on you for being part of the machine that sells these delusional dimwits as visionaries.

This is why movies are pathetic. Nobody in power seems to know what makes a good film anymore. And nobody will out these naked emperors.

Screenwriting 101. The big twists that climax Mr. Night's films, besides being painfully obvious in the first ten minutes, are first act crises. The story is supposed to kick in after this reveal. Not end there.

The Sixth Sense is about a guy who is too stupid to realize he's dead. Anybody paying attention should have seen that. But here's the problem: That's a great place to start a story.

Once Bruce Willis realizes he's dead, what does he do besides stagger like a schnook who's just been given a pink slip?

Same with all of the Night Man's movies. The Village? What happens when the children of that village learn they've been lied to and are living amid the modern world? Interesting place to start.

Not in Mr. Night's films. He's made an industry of that one sophomoric twist upon which he hangs entire film scenarios. Nothing interesting happens.

But when the public buys that hyper-marketed crap, sycophantic studio heads anoint you as the messiah and, well, you know what happens when you're anointed as a god: you demand worship.

[gretchenart]

Personally, I never understood the raves "The Sixth Sense" got compared to the rather mediocre reviews for "Unbreakable", which I actually thought was better. I see dead people indeed! Maybe Night is one of them.

[fetacheese]

this was thoroughly entertaini­ng--thanks­!

[Cuzn]

Ditto. Thoroughly enjoyed this post. Again, Chez gives us a look inside that other world few get to experience.

[kathy001]

There are people who only have a couple of great books or a couple of great pieces of music, or what-have-you, in them and then everything else they do is pretty much uninspired re-hash. I won't name names but I bet most people can think of one or two people like this without even trying.

I pegged Shyamalan for one of these as soon as I saw The Village. Although, I have to admit that I had a pretty good idea that the film would suck when I saw that SciFi Channel promo that was poorly disguised as a documentary about Shyamalan. Remember that farce? Signs, The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable were really good but I think that's all he's got in him. That's fine. I'm really not interested in a lifetime supply of movies like that. I won't ever bother with another one of his films because I don't like feeling cheated out of 10 bucks.

So, apparently, he's a 3-hit wonder and an a**h***, to boot. After that SciFi Channel fiasco, why am I not surprised?

[thebirdstheword]

you're describing 99% of people who work in creative professions.

i personally wouldn't refer to "Signs" as "really good". it was ridiculous. aliens who are intelligent enough to master space travel stupidly decide to come to a planet that is 70% water- their one weakness. a first-year film student would see that flaw.

[kathy001]

Actually, I never really look for scientific accuracy, etc., in a piece of entertainment like "Signs." What I look for is entertainment, which is what I got. It was a fun movie and I was more than willing to suspend disbelief for that short period of time. "The Village," on the other hand, required a much effort on my part to suspend disbelief and it did not offer nearly the entertainment value.

As for 99% of creative people only having 2 or 3 good pieces in them, I just have to disagree.

[sisterdebmac]

I've liked all of Night's stuff so far. Not loved, liked. The Sixth Sense is the only one that I really love and Signs is my second favorite because the performances are so fun and quirky. In fact, that's what I enjoy about all of his movies --- the whacked-out, entertaining performances of the people he populates his films with. Including himself. Yeah, I know he's a jerk. Eh, who cares?

But I will say this, I am terrified of The Happening. It looks like poo. It looks like it's absolutely no fun at all. I'll wait for cable. Sorry, Night.

[alsm9]

I like The Sixth Sense and Signs, although with the latter, I felt it's message was a bit condescending and yet childish at the same time. But everything else I've really disliked. He sounds charming though. Can he really be this much of an a-hole???

[PhilD]

I thought that Unbreakable was his best effort, but maybe that's just me. After his first 2 films, it's been a steep decline into irrelevance.

[Clarke]

Nope, not just you. Liked The Sixth Sense, loved Unbreakable, thought Signs started out okay but fell apart pretty quickly (and that's apart from it being a despicably anti-intellectual screed), and guessed the twist to The Village as soon as I heard him say in an interview that his next film was going to be a period piece set in the woods. I'll see Lady in the Water if it ever comes on TV, provided I'm paralyzed and nobody's around to switch the channel.

[mexamerican]

saw "the happening" last night. and i was thoroughly creeped out. i've never thought of night as a genius. i've seen him as a competent and sometimes inventive movie maker who has a good sense of the atmospheric and who can unsettle the viewer. that's good enough in an era of crap "scary" movies like "saw" and "hostel."

[leopoldmozart]

I totally agree. Shyamalan has several peculiar artistics statements to make to the world (e.g. that humankind is actually two species intermixed: the good and the irredemably bad, the importance of David Mamet style understatement in certain acting situations, the intermixing of the magical and the scientific, etc.), and he made them best in Unbreakable. I loved that movie, even more than the 6th sense.

Concerning the overlong tantrum written above, I have to say that "Chez Pazienza" (I assume that's her "nom de guerre") comes off as a narcissist of mediocre talent raging about a narcissist with great talent.