Oh, how I love it when a film stirs up strong feelings. As I mentioned in Tuesday’s column, I’m a fan of M. Night Shyamalan’s Unbreakable. Even now, a few days after seeing the film, I keep thinking about it, dissecting it, finding more to love about it. But, believe me, there are plenty of roughcut.com readers who do not share my admiration. I respect that: This is not a movie for everyone. The second page of today’s Civilian Voices focuses on Unbreakable, and there are comments and mini-reviews from those who hated the film and those who liked it. Some of these contain spoilers, so if you haven’t seen the film yet, you might want to read the second page of today’s column later. (Also, you should see the film fresh, before your brain is filled with other people’s opinions -- good or bad.)

Before we get to Unbreakable, let’s see what you had to say about other great topics. Susan starts today’s column with a correction about the language in Billy Elliot...

"I saw Billy Elliot over the weekend and question whether Woodge (from the weekend Civilian Voices) has actually seen the movie. ‘One or two stray F-words,’ as Woodge stated, is so far from the truth. I know the accents were a bit thick, but it was easy to grasp that word after hearing it a few times. Every man, woman, and child (I consider 13 year olds to be children) used the F-word in almost every conversation. It was everywhere. I loved the movie and do think it is suitable for teenagers without parents, but I just had to dispute Woodge’s representation of the language usage." -- Susan

Shawn F has seen The Family Man and it’s ... well, read on…

"I saw a screening of The Family Man Monday night in Boston and, while it was not quite as horrific as the trailers made it out to be, it certainly wasn’t anything special. Nicolas Cage, returning from the zombified stupor of Gone in 60 Seconds, turned in a decent performance here, and Téa Leoni gave some solid support. Aside from that, the script was as misguided and as overbearing on the sap as Brett Ratner’s directing was. "Still, it looks like the problems I had were not shared by the rest of the audience. The folks I talked to afterward seemed to have enjoyed it quite a bit, which should guarantee that Universal has a holiday hit when the movie comes out December 22. "I also recently saw the trailer for Cast Away, and I have to wonder: Why did the filmmakers give away so much of the third act? Is it impossible to keep anything under wraps anymore? That major fault aside, the film looks great and I hope the positive buzz I’ve been reading about the movie will ring true." -- Shawn F Cambridge, Massachusetts

I, too, was a little disheartened when I saw the Cast Away trailer. I wanted to go into the film without knowing some of the plot points the trailer seems to give away. Now that I’ve seen the trailer a number of times, though, I have grown a little more curious about the film. Is it Survivor with Tom Hanks, as I first suspected, or is it something much, much more? I hope the trailer is letting me know that it’s the latter. How about the rest of you? Does the Cast Away trailer give you too much information, or does it make you more interested in seeing the movie? How much is too much in a trailer? And while we’re on trailers, what’s the most misleading one you’ve ever seen?

Moving on. Joe C. talks About a Boy...

"Nick Hornby raved about how wonderful it was to work with John Cusack and his crew on High Fidelity. He even said that he wanted Cusack to turn all of his books into films. So I read with shock and dismay that Chris and Paul Weitz will be adapting Hornby’s About a Boy to the big screen. "One second you think the guy wants the Graham Greene–Carol Reed connection. But I guess he wants that American Pie magic to slice into his book. "One can imagine how the brothers will attempt to make the main character into Big Daddy Jr. And I can also imagine the author complaining how Hollywood just doesn’t get his type of fiction... "Worst film of the year adapted from the best material -- Rated X (which, ironically, is rated R)." -- joe corey

It is very rare that a film is better than the material from which it was adapted. What is the worst film adaptation of a novel you’ve ever seen? What is the best? I’ve become a huge, and I mean huge, Harry Potter fan recently, and I am terrified of what will become of my beloved wizard when Chris Columbus brings him to the big screen. Anyone else out there fearing for the well-being of Harry and friends? Which director do you think would best adapt Harry Potter? I’m voting for Tim Burton, although Columbus did write The Goonies, so I don’t completely lack faith in the man.

Frequent contributor L Wright has a question for everyone, as well as a comment on Tuesday’s discussion of the filmmaking process…

"Just wondering: What will be nominated for Best Song by the Academy? I have not heard one decent song from a movie this year. No "My Heart Will Go On" or "I Will Always Love You." Where is the Best Song? Um, just asking. "As for the ‘too many cooks’ comment, I totally agree. That’s why Shyamalan will be a leading director for the next few years. He writes, directs, and produces, and he does not seem to need a lot of rewrites and retakes for his movies. He seems to be a very efficient moviemaker. And efficiency is something the studios do not practice." -- L Wright Chicago

Where are all the good tunes? I can’t name one. Can you? As for Shyamalan, he admits to doing multiple rewrites. He keeps each draft on his shelf to remind him how long it takes to get things right. As a writer-director, he has more control over his films; they’re not passed on to multiple writers. (Just wanted to share that info.)

Speaking of M. Night Shyamalan, it’s time for your thoughts on his latest film, Unbreakable. I received so many great comments on the movie that I decided to put them on a separate page. As I said above, some of these contain spoilers. If you don’t want to know the movie’s secrets, stop reading now. I invite more of you to send me your thoughts on Unbreakable. If you loved it or hated it, I want to know why. Unlike some fans of the film, I don’t think that people who didn’t enjoy it -- according to comments I saw on another site’s bulletin board-- "are stupid" or "don’t like to think." The pacing and subject matter of this film are very specific. It isn’t for everyone. And I respect the opinions of its detractors...

PAGE TWO: Talk about Unbreakable >>>

 

Send your submissions to civilianvoices@roughcut.com

No purchase necessary. Void where prohibited. Must be age 16 or older to submit a story. Stories will be edited for length and content by representatives of Roughcut. Not all stories will appear online. By submitting this story you agree that Roughcut has the perpetual right to use the submitted story, in any and all media, without limitation, as Roughcut may determine in its sole discretion. You also acknowledge that you will not receive any monetary compensation for the use, if any, of your story.