The Village (2004): M. Night Shyamalan’s moody, atmospheric mystery is an underrated gem in his divisive filmography

Christian’s Grade: B+

M. Night Shyamalan’s film career is a bit of an oddity. He’s a writer/director with a filmography that’s a pretty 50/50 split between the good and the bad. When he’s good, he’s really good, as with his breakout hit The Sixth Sense (1999). But when he’s bad, we get something like Lady in the Water (2006) or The Happening (2008). I know that’s a 1:2 comparison, but I really feel those two stand out as two of his worst. However, I strongly feel that there is one Shyamalan movie that got a lot of undeserved hate dumped on it due to critics and audience misconceptions. The Village (2004).

The movie is set in a small village built outside a large forest in Pennsylvania in the 1800s. The inhabitants are a group of isolationists who have purposely built a communal life away from larger towns to escape the crime and violence. All seems peaceful there until it’s revealed that the village has a truce agreement with a race of frightening creatures that live in the woods. The villagers don’t cross into the woods; the creatures don’t enter the village. When a series of animal and livestock killings are discovered in the village, it’s suspected to be the work of the creatures delivering some kind of warning. But why? Has someone in the village broken the pact? Do the creatures mean to harm the villagers? How can the village council reestablish the peace before things get out of hand? That’s the overarching plot, but that’s not really the story.

The real focus of this movie is a love story set amongst all the scariness. A love story of a blind girl named Ivy Walker (Bryce Dallas Howard) and a boy named Lucius Hunt (Joaquin Phoenix), both raised in this village, whose parents are among the founders. The danger posed by the creatures of the woods brings Ivy and Lucius closer together. While Lucius is a bit introverted, he cares very much for the village, the people who live there, and Ivy in particular. He realizes the forest acts as a barrier between them and the local towns, and their isolation cuts them off from modern developments that might make their lives better or even save them from harm. He asks the village council for permission to enter the woods and break the pact in order to venture into the next town in search of supplies. His request is denied, but as the situation with the creatures escalates, he becomes more protective of Ivy and begins to notice the elders are keeping secrets that may have as much to do with the creatures as with their rejection of the broader population. 

It’s at this point that an act of violence within the village may cost Lucius his life. Out of love and desperation, Ivy decides to brave the dangers of the woods to make her way to the town to get help that will save Lucius’ life.

Upon repeat viewings, I’ve been amazed by two aspects of this film. First, the cinematography was extremely effective at creating a feeling of isolation and tension that permeates every frame. Director of photography Roger Deakins graced this movie with a talent usually on call for Denis Villeneuve, Sam Mendes, and Coen Brothers’ projects. The Village was the only film Deakins and Shyamalan worked on together. To give you an idea of what a DP of his caliber brings to the table, Deakins’ resume contains The Shawshank Redemption, Fargo, O Brother, Where Art Thou?, No Country for Old Men, Doubt, Revolutionary Road, Skyfall, Sicario, Blade Runner 2049, and 1917 to name a few. Establishing the story setting, creating tension, and building character through photography are the foundations of his skill set. And while Shyamalan has worked with several very talented cinematographers, if you were inclined to do a direct comparison of his movies, you’ll see that The Village stands apart from the rest.

The second aspect I love is the stellar casting. Shyamalan has always been able to pull together some very high-profile actors for his projects. But here, everyone really seemed to be on their game. Particularly Joaquin Phoenix, William Hurt, and a very young and fresh Bryce Dallas Howard, who did not have many credits to her name at this point in her career. The way the story unfolds, it’s easy to think Joaquin Phoenix is the focal point. But in truth, Bryce Dallas Howard is the star, and she really brings the character of Ivy to life in a real and beautiful way. She expertly uses each of her scenes to reveal different facets of her character and make her motivations clear. William Hurt plays her father, and the two of them are so utterly watchable. In dissecting the writing, the lines in this script aren’t always easy to deliver. But it never seems more natural than when these two actors are speaking them.

If I pick out my favorite moments in this movie, I inevitably come back to the scenes where Ivy and Lucius are speaking directly to each other. The chemistry between them feels so real and is heightened by her blindness and his introverted nature. Both the characters and the actors seem to have a special connection that brings out the best in each other whenever they’re together. Their love story is driven by the way they communicate their feelings. Not just verbally but in their actions. And in these moments, enhanced by the way the scenes are shot, their love feels very real.

It’s worth noting that despite the largely unfavorable reviews, this movie was not a flop. Riding high off the success of Shyamalan’s previous films, Signs (2002) and The Sixth Sense five years earlier, The Village made money. What it suffered from was the expectation that this was going to be another horror thriller due to the marketing and an inability with many viewers to change their perception of what was presented. I can’t downplay the thrilling and creepy nature of how this story is presented. It’s so effective that it’s easy to lose the real focus. But halfway through the movie, it becomes clear that in spite of everything going on, Ivy and Lucius are the story.

Then there’s the issue of the twist ending. Shyamalan’s signature in just about all his movies. It’s something that has evolved from a cool surprise to an anticipated story element to an easy target of criticism because audiences felt it was predictable. I’ve heard several negative comments on the ending, but it serves a very important purpose. SPOILERS!!! They’re not in the 1800s. They’re living in modern times, the creatures are fake, and it was all a made-up legend meant to keep the young villagers from venturing out into the real world and possibly exposing the community to the society they worked so hard to escape. 

That’s why their speech wasn’t completely accurate to 1800’s America. That’s why the village founders never indulged in talk of anyone leaving. The ending addressed why no one from the outside world ever stumbled upon their community and why there were never any planes flying across their piece of sky. Importantly, it also gave pieces of each founder’s story about the violence and tragedy that brought them together to build that place.

But that wasn’t the real twist to this movie. It was that audiences were teased with a horror movie and what they got was a very touching love story. The entire film is about love. Everything the people of that village did was for love, in one form or another. If that doesn’t work for everybody, fine. I found it to be a very interesting entry in the early arc of this filmmaker’s career.