IMDb trailer a single mother finds that things in her family's life go very wrong after her two youn

IMDb

Trailer

A single mother finds that things in her family's life go very wrong after her two young children visit their grandparents.

Is there any actual hope left for M. Night Shyamalan? Honestly, I’m such a huge fan of this director and his unique style. I love his work so much that even The Happening (2008) counts as a bit of a guilty pleasure for me, but I have to admit, I started losing faith after > and > in the way > version went. And while I’ve never really been one to get hooked on American animated series, by extension, this trailer didn't quite grab me either; I actually had a bad feeling about > right from the jump. But this new project... even though it’s rated PG-13 (which, let's be real, describes most > films anyway), it somehow gives me a little spark of hope that he might finally be returning to his classic roots.

Does Hockel want a plot twist or what? 😂

Looks pretty interesting, definitely adding 👍
to my watchlist!
I don't get why everyone is always hating on Shyamalan, honestly. Personally? I think all his movies are solid.

Richard Wilson4 said:Does Hockel want a plot twist or what? 😂

It’s honestly looking pretty likely! To be totally fair, I think I’d actually be pretty disappointed if we didn't get one at the end. 🙂

I’ve never really been a fan of that Unknown. Although, I guess I have a bit of a guilty pleasure with Signs, even if it’s pretty flawed in a lot of ways.

If the director actually had the guts, it would be such a cool concept to pepper the whole movie with clues pointing toward some massive, obvious twist, only to pull the rug out at the end and have absolutely nothing happen. Just total silence.

vivideagle7 said:I’ve never really been a fan of that Unknown. Although, I guess I have a bit of a guilty pleasure with Signs, even if it’s pretty flawed in a lot of ways.

If the director actually had the guts, it would be such a cool concept to pepper the whole movie with clues pointing toward some massive, obvious twist, only to pull the rug out at the end and have absolutely nothing happen. Just total silence.

As someone who lives and breathes cinema, you don't even dig his visual style? I get it—there are probably plenty of other directors out there using similar tricks—but personally, I absolutely love how he frames a shot. For instance, during those tense scenes where two or more characters are talking, he’ll just hold the camera on a single person... or he’ll tuck the other character away in a corner, letting us catch their expression only through a reflection in a mirror or some other shiny object. To me, those little stylistic touches are exactly what make his work so captivating! 🙂

Well, I guess I was speaking broadly when I said his movies aren't really my thing. It’s not that I have an issue with his framing—or whatever you call those technical directorial touches—because he clearly knows his stuff there. My real struggle is with his writing. For instance, things like *Occurrence* or *Lady in the Water* just felt... off to me, kind of silly, I guess 🤷 The whole thing with the twist in *The Sixth Sense* was actually pretty engaging, but since then, his twists haven't really landed for me. As for his most recent films, I won't even get into them 😬

Wayward Pines is a relatively recent discovery for me. Guilty. I suppose there’s a certain pleasure to be found in an Unknown production—though if I'm being honest, that pleasure is often fleeting and leaves you feeling somewhat empty. It isn't exactly peak cinema, but it isn't a total disaster either, so I'm holding out hope that this latest release will actually be top-tier. However, we have to address the elephant in the room: a film like this simply cannot function without a proper twist. To strip that away would be like watching a Quentin Tarantino film stripped of his signature snappy dialogue, or attempting to appreciate a Stanley Kubrick masterpiece without that intense, singular focus where everything converges into a single point. That element is his unmistakable trademark, isn't it?

I think you've got it wrong. While Stanley Kubrick had a signature style he executed perfectly, M. Night Shyamalan doesn't need constant twists—he just forces them on the audience, and he's been overbearing for a long time now. His directing is weak, too. I haven't seen a worse director who manages to stay this popular. Sure, Christopher Nolan can fall into that trap, and Quentin Tarantino does too, though Tarantino lacks a true signature because he just steals from other movies. Yeah, all great artists steal, but with Tarantino, it feels different.

So, Shyamalan is easily one of the worst directors to emerge in the last twenty years. Wayward Pines was an absolute embarrassment. I don't buy the "guilty pleasure" excuse.☕

bluenomad2 said:I think you've got it wrong. While Stanley Kubrick had a signature style he executed perfectly, M. Night Shyamalan doesn't need constant twists—he just forces them on the audience, and he's been overbearing for a long time now. His directing is weak, too. I haven't seen a worse director who manages to stay this popular. Sure, Christopher Nolan can fall into that trap, and Quentin Tarantino does too, though Tarantino lacks a true signature because he just steals from other movies. Yeah, all great artists steal, but with Tarantino, it feels different.

So, Shyamalan is easily one of the worst directors to emerge in the last twenty years. Wayward Pines was an absolute embarrassment. I don't buy the "guilty pleasure" excuse.☕

Does the fact that he borrows necessarily mean he isn't injecting his own soul into the work? To me, his identity is unmistakable, specifically through that highly distinct way he crafts dialogue.

Look, if you refuse to embrace guilty pleasure, then guilty pleasure certainly won't have any faith in you. 😛

I think guilty pleasures actually exist. To me, they’re those movies that just don't have any real quality, but they end up being hilarious and fun specifically because they’re so bad. At least, that's how I look at it.

"Guilty pleasure" is one of the worst phrases in the English language. It’s a total fabrication. All this nonsense about "guilty pleasures" and similar garbage... As someone who genuinely loves trash cinema, hearing someone call a bad movie a "guilty pleasure" feels like an insult. I won't accept it. ☕

I know we’re technically off-topic here, but I really think there’s a massive distinction between a "guilty pleasure" and something that’s just mindless brain rot. For me, it’s like when I mentioned Signs earlier. It definitely has its flaws, and I wouldn't go calling it a "good" movie by any objective standard, but I still find it genuinely fun to watch. There’s a difference between that and pure trash or something totally mindless—and honestly, I love a good trashy flick, but this isn't that. 🤷 Maybe I'm just getting my wires crossed.

You probably aren't confusing the two, but since I don't believe in "guilty pleasures," we clearly view things differently.

I haven't even sat down to watch it yet, but honestly, the ratings alone show there's a massive, night-and-day difference between this flick and the last few piles of garbage we've had to deal with...

M. Night Shyamalan is back🙂
Great little movie.. just walked out of the theater feeling pretty good about it...🙂

I had far too much fun with this one. There were moments that genuinely creeped me out, and others that were just pure comedy. Finally, he’s actually made something worth watching.

What a total disaster of a movie.
Absolute bottom-of-the-barrel garbage.
That hack shouldn't be allowed near a camera, let alone a film set.
I saw the twist coming the second the grandpa sat down for the interview.
Terrible.
Save yourself two hours of your life and just go hang out with your family instead.

Yeah, I’m feeling pretty skeptical about this too. Ever since that Unknown era, his career has been on a serious downward slide, and everything he's put out since then has just been total garbage.

Honestly, this thing is a total joke. I’m actually hoping it was meant to be a comedy, because there’s no way those scenes were botched by accident—they have to be intentional.

The > is so obvious you can see it coming after just 20 minutes, but honestly, who cares?

The movie is decent enough, but it felt a bit meh to me since they went for a horror > instead of leaning into the humor. I kept thinking how much better it would’ve been if they had played up the absurdity—like, maybe having elderly actors playing the roles of young girls or some other ridiculous gag... it would’ve fit the vibe so much better, especially since the movie isn't even scary to begin with.