Whatever Happened to Hitchcock's heir?

from Jacob Kelly's Funeralopolis Vol. 2 Issue 2: Fish Out of Water-A Trip to The Millennium

The Battle of the Science Fiction Nepo Babies

Should I have known that liking M. Night Shyamalan's recent wave of efforts postAfter Earth would eventually come back to haunt me? First, we had the low budget horror The Visit, which the director had to put in 5 million from his own pocket due to the failings of The Last Airbender and After Earth. Although far from perfect, a return to roots away from blockbuster territory was a well-timed clever move. Our story starts here.

2015 was perhaps a little late to be jumping on the found footage train. One must remember we were on Paranormal Activity 6: The Ghost Dimension by this point. Technically the 7th if you count the Japanese spin off, Tokyo Night. Some would say the franchise already felt stale by the second one. About all number 2 has to offer that the first doesn't is a few extra cameras and so for better or worse becoming an assortment of clips compiled together like a YouTube video. Whether that's art or a mindless recreation of culture, who's to say? Whilst the post-911 surveillance themes are maintained, gone is the domestic abuse allegory. This is nearly tolerable as it suggests it will carry on with the McMansions theme and on this outing add in racial elements and class politics. However, this is soon abandoned.

The world building is about strong enough to allow for a third film. Being the one I saw in cinema, I do have some nostalgia for it. They abandon exploring a lot of found footage rules and limitations, which on its best day can make the genre so exciting. Thus opposing its generic and repetitive reputation stemming from the fact the cheap cameras required are highly accessible. In this area, the only trick up its sleeve technically speaking is putting the camera on a fan so that it can create a panning shot effect. Easy to downplay it but I admire the DIY like approach and how it allows the suspense to build with a smooth camera movement in a way that's rarely seen considering stationary static shots or shaky cameras too often dominate in found footage. Also, if like myself you love 70s paranormal horror like The Amityville Horror and Poltergeist there's a similar warmth with the family involved. Near Spielbergian this time with the atypical unit presented. He actually was heavily involved in the distribution of the first so don't be fooled by the grass roots illusion.

Paranormal Activity 4 was like being put in the walls of Jericho. I think we all tapped out at that point. Took me years to come back to complete the series. Pure sloppiness by this point with the found footage package being made to serve its audience more than its characters. Extreme laziness with zero justification for its own existence. When cameras keep on rolling after video calls it's time to give up. Strong defenders will mention the Xbox Kinetic effect, which is merely pretty and never used for any decent set pieces. Honestly, I could almost move on from the poor writing and lack of substance and accept this as made for fans utilising an assortment of typical genre scares. I know I champion slashers without substance but the difference is the kills tend to be creative each time. Paranormal Activity 4 is already boring due to there being a lack of narrative but it can't even boast a decent set piece to keep you entertained.

What came next is a familiar franchise move. You've seen this one in Black Panther and very recently in the Creed series. How to fix a failing franchise? Stick a few ethnic minorities in there and people will forget the inherent problems and tiresome genre aspects. Liberals will be on their knees like, "Oh my God, this is so progressive. A black superhero. A black boxer. This is insane. This has never happened before". Ironically, this leads to films like the entertaining Shaft, which is even less challenging to bureaucracy than the right wing Dirty Harry. It's a crazy world.

We can criticise cheap studio tricks all we want but there's no point if we're going to keep falling for them. Won't lie, I was very approving of the cultural addition to Paranormal Activity 5: The Marked Ones because in going 'ghetto' (someone must have said this series needs to come back to the streets) it swerved off white middle class shit and gave us a couple of Latino gangsters rolling up to the house from the third film, ready to blow up some demons and cults with the shotty. Absolute banger of a third act just for that. Some critics write about the adolescence angle which is really just poor re-hashings of Chronicle and Project X. Yes, the found footage genre branched out in to superheroes and teen comedies during its popular phase.

Finally, we get to Paranormal Activity 6: The Ghost Dimension. Sense of realism and shock, totally disappeared and more invisible than the ghosts. Logic is out the window and it should be one of the worst of the series but at the same time it's also not. All criticisms are valid and irrelevant at this point. Why? Because we've entered the banter era. That's past testing patience and into the utterly absurd realms of unintentional parody. Literally, any score you give this out of 5 is fine and entirely appropriate. Defies all rating systems.

Genuinely, the only thing more baffling than its logic is how this is not deliberately mocking itself. They're so out of ideas, half the plot is watching tapes from the third film. Unexpectedly, it's also a Christmas film so next time the season comes, go get festive with The Ghost Dimension! Comes complete with a ghost Santa haunting the hallways. They really switch the formula on this accepting that the majority of people get bored by the waiting game and all the activity being saved for the final few minutes. Therefore, this gets cranked up to a 11 from the first act. Fascinatingly, it is as though they are aware that subtle stuff like slow moving furniture isn't going to cut it any more, they've grown accustomed to the activity and so the filmmakers are pumping it up from the outset. Knock on effect on the characters is quite frankly insane. These people are even more passive observers than we are with their refusal to leave the house. It's like watching any other film from the series at 10x the speed and tripping balls. At this point, I don't even know what's going to shake them.

Here comes the smart/dumb part. This time the camera technology enables them to capture the ghosts visually. A last ditch stab at the intellectual, which is really just stupid. More than ever, it'll have you wondering, do these guys even watch back their footage anymore? Absolutely no excuse for staying in the house. That isn't wind, there is literally black blobs moving in your house. We may be the rent generation and decent properties hard to come buy but surely you value your life enough to leave and look for a new home? Paranormal Activity 6: The Ghost Dimension, an accidental masterpiece in exposing the state of the housing economy and the cost of living crisis. People would rather share their houses with dangerous entities than have to pay higher prices.

Not an entirely random detour in to the Paranormal Activity series. Following the franchise through its flaws generally captures the public perception of found footage at any point in time. You can track the genres developments or rather decline with each passing film. In summary, by The Ghost Dimension the series and the genre was in self-parody mode and so it only goes to illustrate the risk Shyamalan was taking in going to that genre for a career revival. In some ways, it changes a minor success in to quite an impressive one. Was risk the right word? Is it risk when you have no other options? The dude had exhausted all connections in the industry and was really beginning to lose his audience with his dumb Hollywood spectacles.

On The Visit, everybody generally agreed whilst it wasn't great, it was a step in the right direction. A back to basics that won him some respect and credibility. What was it he did differently? Avoided the absurdity of where critically panned found footage films had gone. Brought back some actual logic and achieves a sense of gritty realism by reincorporating the home invasion thriller, which is what the genre originally leant in to. Instead of ghosts and existential discussions on death, he went for this raw set up of mistaken identity. Here we get the familiar Shyamalan twisterooney. What if as kids you went visiting your grandparents and they weren't really your grandparents? This premise allows Shyamalan to reverse the formula of the home invasion thriller from external forces to internal forces. What if the intruder is already in the house and has been since the moment you arrived? Almost meta like from the big man in that he's pulling the strings from the start. He's not the guest wanting to break in, he's the host.

Is there something to be said for the way it has children as the main characters and their use of the technology available to them? A generational nod to the accessibility and understanding of hand held camera equipment and its ability to record the faults of the previous generation? Exposing the history that is always trying to be hidden? How far you can take this I'm unsure but there is something youthful and fresh about the project that just clicks. A low key hit.

What do we think of Split? Open to anyone's thoughts on that. Consider me 'split' on it. Indisputably, it turned out to be quite a success both commercially and financially, operating at the right level of disturbing to become a household favourite. When taking this in to account, one could consider it 'Dinner Table Horror', that genre made up by myself that I'm always ranting on about. Tend to like those movies but this one does make me feel a little uncomfortable. Surprises me how it has been so accepted by audiences. It's more questionable than people give it credit for.

Shyamalan's view of mental health is not intentionally appalling but rather clumsy. On the one hand, it's too dumb to take seriously, with him seeing it as something to be vilified. A superhuman force to be attributed to his super villain. Opposite end of the spectrum you have The Predator, released a couple of years later, which was trying to treat autism as a superhero quality. Whether positive or negative dealing with mental health and disabilities in this way is just bizarre. Half of you wants to champion it as an alternative approach to the current trend of superhero movies by injecting some kind of realistic aspect to explain their strengths and weaknesses. Other half remembers how much better Unbreakable was at tackling grief and trauma. Now he's just operating in pure pseudo-science.

Aside from this it's hard to not be stunned by Shyamalan's formal precision on Split. A point I'd always make to the films detractors. Aligning it with old exploitation thriller films it holds up well for sustaining atmosphere and tension. No-one could pretend it isn't entertaining. James McAvoy is on full power as an actor switching between all these personalities in seconds. Usually, I'd often stupidly defend the controversial elements of an exploitation film because whatever direction taken it tends to open up criticism and invite discussion.

Strangely, I struggle to do that on Split, which is not a respectful statement on its ability to shock but rather a declaration of its stupidity. What am I going to do sit here and talk to people about Shyamalan's belief that super powers could come from mental health disorders? Virgin shit, come on.

Let's be honest about this, the main reason Split got us excited was its ending promising the return of David Dunn. Not the former Blackburn Rovers attacking midfielder but Bruce Willis's character from Unbreakable. It proposed the question of how would Shyamalan even combine these two movies? One was a tense thriller, the other more of a slow character study drama. Unbreakable operated somewhat near realism. Ok there's a little leap but it only explores the extreme sides of human strength and weaknesses in that X-Men style mutation way. On the other hand, Split is a massive leap into the ridiculous but not without its fun. Regardless, we had our villain and we had our hero. Took us about 16 years to get them but we sure got them. Was a man in his 30s really going to take on a 60 year old man? Ageist! Absolute bully that Kevin Wendell Crumb or whatever his name is meant to be. Brucey was going to have to go full Charles Bronson on this shit. Find his inner Eastwood. Or was this going to be a Roger Moore situation?

Consequently, we got Glass. Ultimately, something of a disappointment, mainly for the reasons given. In the third act, it has the big Shyamalan twist and reveals this anti-superhero unit. Literally rams that shit down your throat late on. You're just like hold on, isn't this the movie now? Hasn't it just begun? An outrageous manoeuvre from Mr Shyamalan and one I somewhat respect. For all its flaws, Glass wasn't as bad as it was made out to be. Whilst it isn't successful, there is some fun to be had in how you're watching it find its footing. Essentially, Shyamalan testing out some ideas in a well-worn genre. I'll take that any day over Marvel's laziness. That's exactly how I'd explain it, a lot of misses but big risks. Big admirable risks.

M. Night Shyamalan is a man who takes big risks. The ultimate swinger. Always said this but they need an academy award for biggest swing of the year. Needs to be sussed out year on year who's got the biggest balls. Naturally, this goes without explaining but this should be separate to quality. A booby prize for just being a god damn nutcase. No stigmatism involved, no jokes, no embarrassment. Just a big thumbs up from everybody and cries of "fair fucking play!". If there was such an award, well let's just say Mr M. Night Shyamalan would need to buy some gargantuan cabinets.

This notorious swinging that my man has in his arsenal brings us straight in to Old. The phrase 'mixed reviews' is often overused but this one certainly polarised its audience. To this day, I will never understand how Peter Bradshaw felt the need to give it 5 stars. Whilst, it sure is audacious, there's no way this is a masterpiece. Not in the perfect sense of the word anyway. However, at the same time, I can't say I side with the haters on this one. Throughout, it seems to navigate this tight line of genuine intrigue and laughably silly. Forever, you wonder is Shyamalan going to lose you on this project. That thrill could well be my interest in it all.

Dialogue in Old is regularly quoted as clunky but that actually adds to its air of weirdness. The fact it doesn't flow well is not particularly a hinderance. Both are broken up and played around with in a suitable manner for what the film is going for. Therefore, it is not out of place. Also, the acting gets its fair share of criticism too. Well, we're dealing with this psychedelic melodrama, you don't really tend to get realism here, I'm afraid. Everything is led forwards on an emotional basis rather than logical acting. We're dealing with a movie about the progression of time, where people age rapidly over the course of a day. When you've got an existential film like this one, which is covering such huge shifts over a small time, why would it ever have a pragmatic style?

Testament to Gael Garcia Bernal and Vicky Krieps, there is material within Old about the aging process that could be considered profound. Say what you want about the experience but as an excuse to see the impact of time on a family like this in such a surreal manner has a strange beauty.

Being unsure about the twist is easy to comprehend. Old invites comparisons with The Twilight Zone and many have rightly pointed out that those earlier episodes worked better at shorter length. Placing Old more in the category of the later longer episodes that weren't as well received. Begs the question of does a film like Old need an explanation? Does it lose its power without the mystery? Could it have been sharper as a short film or television episode? These are all legitimate questions.

In a gimmicky silly Shyamalan manner, the preposterous twist does have its appeal. On a personal level, it does grab my attention. As I'm sure it would for anyone who either themselves or their family has underlying medical conditions. No doubt a better director would have delved further in to the ethical problems presented by the set up but no our boy Shyamalan isn't one to get distracted in such nonsense. He's here for the thrills. He's about dressing up the overall package. And sorry nerds, on the whole I like it!

It exists in the same realm as The Beach, location wise and critically, which is to say in a sort of post-quality. A pop cultural phenomenon where it simply doesn't matter whether one considers it good or bad. It crosses that line and not in that so bad its good bullshit. We're talking about transcending the two to enter the big swing arena. Too often, we've been led to believe as part of this capitalist culture that we must embrace the good and disregard the bad. As though someone else wants to drip feed us movies, so we don't have to put in the work. Tackling film in this way kills off criticism. Sometimes, can we not just appreciate a movie because it's fascinating aside from being good or bad? What happens when a film does that which is considered 'bad' and still achieves some unexplainable success or approbation? This is what the big swing is about baby! If a movie entices you in a way you don't understand when everything tells you it is a bad movie, then go explore that. You might just find the undiscovered good in it or even new forms of film appreciation along the way.

Old is another bizarre entry in Shyamalan's rocky filmography. On this occasion, cementing him in my mind as firmly the guy who directed The Village. To this day, I cannot decide whether that's a good movie. Yet, like Old I'm drawn to it. Half of me thinks it's moronic, other half is captivated by the blatant originality. This then screams Shyamalan's style from 2015 onwards. He's not here to hit the mark. He's here to challenge and confuse in equal measure. A man who comes armed with near implausible twists and a cameo every time. An auteur. A reliable household name for mischief. Good or bad, nobody does it like M. Night.

His latest effort, Knock at the Cabin , seemed like an absolute home run in the flamboyant department with a very on brand trailer. Who could resist Batista and Ron Weasley turning up at a same sex couple's cabin with their Asian daughter and announcing the apocalypse? About the weirdest spin on the home invasion thriller ever conceived. On paper, a campy thriller for fans of Evil Dead and The Cabin in the Woods. The comedic alternative to The Last of Us in regards to the new, uncharted and undefined genre: gay men in the apocalypse. Until 2023, not something I'd really considered or devoted enough time to. However, you can file it with 'pegging' as things we need to see more of in cinema by request of Jacob Kelly.

Knock at the Cabin has been met with an unusual level of acclaim for recent Shyamalan with some ranking it among his top shelf. Unfortunately, I would be unable to do the same. Whole thing was so jarring coming straight off Old. I thought I had this director aligned in a certain way and boxed in. Yet, there is a distinctive lack of weirdness missing from Knock at the Cabin. In this area, the only thing that really delivers is the repeated use of KC and The Sunshine's Boogie Shoes and Batista reviewing children's cartoons during a worldwide crisis.

This film evidently has something that has been missing from the majority of his movies over the last 10 years. An element of quality. Make no mistake, it's a pretty neat thriller and on a technical basis, potentially his best movie since Signs. Don't get ahead of yourselves folks because even though this is true, I still don't think it's as interesting as what he's been giving us the last few years. Every time without fail, critics will flock to quality. Rarely do they look to whether the quality aspects actually impedes the film and is unsuitable for the material involved. In some scenarios, hamming it up or going trashy is the way to go. A respectable style in the battle against repetitive middle of the road blandness.

That's not to say he had to pick that route. He doesn't. Instead, it's just a nearly movie. Worst part is it reminds me of how this man started his career. New kids may not be aware and older guys may have forgotten but after The Sixth Sense, Unbreakable and Signs, this guy was considered hot shit.

After 3 films, he was labelled the 'heir to Hitchcock' and I fully support that. A real master of suspense. As a boy of about 9, The Sixth Sense scared the living shit out of me. No movie ever freaked me out as badly as some of the scenes in that movie. Namely when the kid says "Hey, come on, I'll show you where my Dad keeps his gun" and turns round to reveal gaping hole in the back of his head. Cue the chilling James Newton Howard score. Or the suicide ghost who flashes out her cut up wrists and screams, "look what you made me do!". Also, the now iconic "I see dead people" confession. Finally, that image of the dead dudes hanging. It's enough to make you creep to the toilet after dark. As soon as the opening credits emerge, you can feel the temperature in the room drop just a few degrees.

Of course, there have been those who attempt to disconnect Signs from the top shelf. Any hands that try to take it down will be met with a wank hand ending karate chop from myself. Do you really want to engage in chopsocky with myself? Thought not, so put it back or next time you won't be so lucky. Yes, I agree the ending is weak with the lazy deus ex machina of aliens pathetically being intimidated by water. Raising the obvious question of why would extraterrestrial life forms come to a planet mainly covered in water. We'll skip that part. A typical common genre problem when facing extinction and the impending apocalypse. The writers always have to come up with their quick fix. Is the genre best suited to television where you can do the whole thing justice?

Getting side-tracked. Back to the main point, when it comes to Signs one should not forget the eerie scenes such as Joaquin Phoenix watching the Brazilian Video in the basement. His look of absolute horror and James Newton Howard's score get me every time. I kid you not, that shits me up. That'll have you bringing out the phone torch light whenever vision is even slightly restricted. You can't take any chances. Still not convinced by Signs greatness? Please don't say you're a Nope fan? We got a way of dealing with those kinds of people round here. That's it, "Swing away Merrill!"

Hitchcock and Shyamalan are not just linked in their technical wizardry and ability to generate suspense. Both have a perverted attachment to their chosen themes. They gravitate towards death. For Hitchcock, it's murder and the erotic pleasures of the taboo. For Shyamalan it's life after death and beyond our galaxy. The pair of them favour paperbacks and dime store novels. What's magical is their frequent tendency to incorporate their kinks in to routine genre work. That's what makes them special.

Over the years, I'd made my peace with the promised potential of Shyamalan's early efforts. Clearly, he picked a road of silliness, which I was perfectly ok with. As I mentioned, there has been some fun in this method, once you accept the illogical twists and ridiculous ruses. In a sense, you have two auteurs. The M. Night Shyamalan between '99 and '02, who is respectably talented and the M. Night Shyamalan between '15 and '21, who is respectably shit. Knock at the Cabin does not really fall in to either and thank fuck it doesn't fall in to whatever he was doing between '08 and '13.

Imagine my surprise though, when I'm getting these amazing scenes in Knock at the Cabin of Batista trying to break out a locked bathroom and planes falling from the sky. The former a reminder of his gifted artistry for tension and the latter, wow. Lost for words on the latter. Never again, did I think I would bear witness to such Shyamalian fears. The cinema screen room might have dropped by a degree or two. The ultimate measure of a good M. Night Sequence. Perhaps, my response to this should have been, oh how wonderful it is to get that spine tingling terror back but it just didn't go down like that. Instead, all I could think was alright let's drop the reputation he's gained in recent years and go back to his form he began with. If he's still got it in the locker, time to stop fucking around. Making this admittedly a rather frustrating trip to the movies.

All things considered then, Knock at the Cabin can only be positioned as a weaker version of his better films. I don't mind which way he goes, respectably talented or respectably shit, I know which I'd prefer but either's ok. What's worse than these two then is a film like Knock at the Cabin, which plainly and boringly falls in the middle.

An improvement that could have easily been made here to go in the serious direction is tying the cults in with contemporary movements and maybe having something more to say on the subject. Either that or on the trashier route make the same sex couple thing campier and play around with that angle. Remake Traynor's Death Game but you switch out the feminism. Rather than have two females teaming up against a chauvinist pig, make it two gay men taking on the insanely built Batista. Now, that would have been a big swing.

To my fellow Batista stans, when it comes to his turn to kill himself in Knock at the Cabin could be his greatest acting yet. To his doubters, I say this guy could really turn out to be something. A Schwarzenegger in the '80s being the perfect front man for high concept sci-fi action movies. Just needs to pick the right projects, which it seems like he's doing after recently discussing his disappointment with the 'Drax' character in the MCU. My mans realised they're not going to explore any back story there so it's just minor comic relief. We continue our support and wish Mr Batista all the best.

Let none of this deter you from watching the film. Those seeking a solid thriller will be pleased. My disappointment mainly lies in Shyamalan semi-reminding me he's still got a few set pieces left in him but not making a great movie out of it and also a desire to express why this is not, as has been reported, top tier from him. There are those though that defend The Happening as this jarring experience with nods to eco thriller B Movies and moments of genuine terror amongst the silliness. So maybe even in all his weaker works there is evidence of greatness that we must come to terms with. My advice to him would either be to take his own advice and "Swing away" or get back in the saddle. As Marty Robbins once said, "something is dreadfully wrong, for I feel a deep burning pain in my side. Though I am trying to stay in the saddle, I'm getting weary, unable to ride". Does Mr Shyamalan have it in him to make it back to Felina? One little kiss and Felina, goodbye?