Friday, February 20, 2009

Earth for the Apprehensive


Regardless of the fact that it was a horrible film, Shyamalan's "The Happening" points to yet another interesting reflection of our relationship with the Earth. In the case of "The Happening", the director, as well as the film's marketing strategy, are as important to my argument as the content of the film itself. "The Happening" is meant to capitalize on our era's cultural fear of its own detriments to the environment.

It's an interesting idea to consider Shyamalan's mythology, his public identity as a director of imaginative horror films, in analyzing "The Happening" as a comment on our culture. He's not someone we recognize for environmental activism and yet the message of his movie warns of some apocalyptic battle with nature. What this means to me is that Shyamalan's bag-o-tricks ran short of shocking reveals. Establishing the Earth as a villain isn't a new idea, and it's especially provoking for our time period, when our effect on the natural world is hot topic. So, having already turned to aliens, the Earth seems a much more relatable impetus of suspense, and he's right - we're all afraid of Mother Nature.

Even more interesting that the film's environmental subject was kept secret in its marketing strategy. The title alludes to an idea we're familiar with, an unexplained mass-death, yet trailers for the movie never give hint to the cause, other than some kind of epidemic. Shyamalan is known for his surprise twists, which is assumedly the studio's intention for keeping it a secret that the Earth is actually the villain of the film. Then, the fact that the film was advertised firstly as a suspense thriller, with no indication of its environmental issues, reveals its cultural motivation. "The Happening" is merely a ride.

The threat is minimalized, however, when you realize that M. Night Shyamalan and his dollar-driven executive friends are hardly a vague image of Nostradamus. At the end of the day, this film is about money and fiction, rather than activism, the future, truth, or the social challenge to prevent natural destruction. Still, the fact that the film succeeded in its financial purpose (gross profits over $100 million) demonstrates a public interest, and certainly an environmental apprehension so characteristic of our time. We sat through the film because it's not far-fetched to us that the Earth might fight soon fight back.

3 comments:

  1. Oh man that movie was TEEEEERRRRRIIIBBBLLE! The iPhone commercial inserted in the middle is hilarious though.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I get where your coming from... If you are going to take a stance, then make it meaningful. But at the same time, while this movie was bad, it only seemed like it was laughing at the whole environmental issues that have become to mainstream. Ya, it's a dumb premise for a movie, and was poorly executed, but was it saying more about our society. I know that there are many skeptics that do not believe in global warming or how serious our environmental problems are. Is Shyamalan in that category.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Nah, Shyamalan is as serious as they come.
    And again, my point isn't that someone should or shouldn't take a stance, merely that they didn't.

    ReplyDelete