User Score
5.4 out of 10

Mixed or average reviews- based on 507 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this movie

  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. May 5, 2013
    2
    There was a time when the name M Night Shyamalan was effectively a synonym for the new generation of writing: plots that could turn on a dime, characters that were interesting, and generally movies that could be counted on to be interesting and a good use of your time. Well, that era appears to be over. So let's run down The Happening. On its positive side (and there is a considerable positive side), it is a unique execution of an uncommon premise: the environment has turned on us. But unlike most previous versions of the plot, this isn't about animals rising up en masse against us (whoops, sorry James Patterson...but Zoo was a real piece of cheese), but rather nature subliminally convincing us to do the dirty work for it. So, neat twist on a not-new idea. Unfortunately, though, Shyamalan's "new approach" completely wrecks what could, should have been an outstanding movie. Remember that in all of great works...and Shyamalan's early stuff...that they held to a basic maxim: tension is built most by not letting the audience see. Keep them guessing and off-balance. knew it, and Signs did it, too. (So did The Village, but a little less so.) The Happening? Total screwup. Where the camera should cut away, it doesn't. Shyamalan completely jettisoned any hope of creating an atmosphere that keeps the audience off balance. Instead, the film goes for splatter-gore shock value, and it goes way over the top. Where there used to be finesse in these films, all that is present in The Happening is the most pedestrian, hamfisted attempt to rattle the audience. What should have been a shocking nature-doesn't-like-us film ended up being Maximum Overdrive with trees. The sad part is that the plot had some actual ability to work; it didn't have to be a self-parody, but the absolutely classless, talentless writing doomed it. Characters were wooden and unconvincing, but NOT because Mark Wahlberg or Zooey Deschanel did a poor job; they did well with what they were given. The problem is that they were given drivel. Wahlberg was, well, Wahlberg. He really doesn't have a lot of gears as an actor, but he is dependable. Deschanel turned in a surprisingly touching and believable performance which was quite out of place in this pile of junk. (Allow me to clarify: the surprise was not that Zooey Deschanel could turn in such a performance; we know she can. What's surprising is that she was able to do that with this bucket of sludge script.) So, frankly, when you get right down to it, you do not watch The Happening because you want a cerebral, atmospheric thriller. You watch it because...well, frankly, I can't think of a reason to watch it deliberately. Maybe if you're a fan of splatter-horror. But for everybody else, there are much better things to watch. Much better. A sorely disappointed 2 out of 10 for the total misfire that was The Happening. Expand
  2. Mar 17, 2013
    3
    The Happening is haunted by a lacklustre performance on everyone's part, a weak script filled with what could be considered several major plotholes and far more distasteful suicide scenes than necessary to get the point across. The Happening is a weak movie built on an interesting premise that should have been in the hands of a more capable director and writer with a much stronger message. Apparently the movie had a 48 million dollar budget but it felt like it was thrown together by art-students on a budget barely large enough to pay for next week's pizza delivery. Expand
  3. Mar 9, 2013
    1
    In The Happening Shyamalan doesn't only stomp on his career, he tries to stomps on Wahlberg's as well. This film tried to be creepy and I'm pretty everyone who saw this afterwards said to him or herself what the hell did I just watch.
  4. Jan 20, 2013
    1
    This is what you call a joke. Mark Wahlberg was absolutely terrible. The story was disgraceful. Bad cast, story feels long and drawn out for a 90 minute film. The Happening is just another flop from M Night
  5. Dec 8, 2012
    3
    It has an eerie premise, but turns into nonsense. The best (worst?) part is when Mark Walhberg asks for the permission of plastic plants to enter their home.
  6. Nov 8, 2012
    1
    This is one of the worst movies I have ever seen. The plot, once you figure it out, is so stupid you will not believe that someone actually approved this to be made into a movie. The movie moves along at a droning pace, just like most M. Night Shyamalan movies. Usually, this is acceptable to me because the payoff is worth it, like The Sixth Sense. In this case I was painfully bored until I figured out the ridiculous plot twist and by that time I was ready to call it quits.

    Mark Wahlburg is generally an okay actor but in this film I think even he realizes how stupid it is and just gave up. The rest of the acting doesn't really matter because you will have lost interest long before judging it.

    The only reason I even gave this movie a 1 is because I actually endured it till the end, otherwise it would have been a 0. You will miss nothing by not seeing this movie, except for the regrets of wishing you had not wasted 2 hours of your life on it.
    Expand
  7. Nov 8, 2012
    5
    The Happening could've been so much more than it was, but Shyamalan cuts it down to 91 minutes and leaves us still hungry.
  8. sLm
    Sep 30, 2012
    8
    I don't get why so many bad critics xD the movie was good! No special effects needed, just nature to scary us. And also there were funny moments followed by creepy ones. It was definitely NOT a bad movie.
  9. Sep 21, 2012
    7
    It may be no finer a horror film than other similar distinguished works, but it worked for me. The acting may have been a little off-par, but Shyamalan has produced something that is worth watching. The actors were well matched and the way events were anticipated through the wind in the trees and grass disturbed me thoroughly. Not only that, but the acts themselves alongside the atmospheric music almost scared the living daylights out of me. I think this film effectively posed a message towards the sceptics out there, of a growing problem that we need to face before it's too late, even if nobody else thought so. Expand
  10. Aug 4, 2012
    0
    MovieBoozer Rating: Six-Pack. Do not watch this movie sober!

    I would almost recommend watching this film just to revel in the sheer awfulness of it. Just sit back and laugh at all the millions of dollars and months of people
  11. May 3, 2012
    1
    The downward slope, which I suspect is deliberate, continues: yes it's even worse than Signs. Thankfully there's no "twist" this time unless you the twist is that every element of the film is terrible, the awful plot is revealed very early on and then really does continue as the actual plot long after you've stopped laughing at it.
  12. Apr 5, 2012
    5
    A pretty pathetic attempt at a horror story. It was bizarre and creepy at times, but most of it was pretty stupid with some weird acting from a weird script. Interesting concept that was poorly done.
  13. Mar 27, 2012
    5
    One of the funniest bad movies I have ever seen and in my opinion, it's up there with The Room. This film is just dumb, dumb, dumb. The premise, plot and its logic don't make any sense, the concept and execution of the neurotoxin or plant or whatever it is that makes people commit suicide is laughably bad, the actors are dull and boring and it's not scary at all. In fact, it's absolutely hilarious. If you don't take this film seriously , you might get many hilarities when there's a really dumb or over the top moment. In a broader prospective, it's Shyamalan at his usual worst. A very stupid film. Expand
  14. Feb 24, 2012
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. When Mark Wahlberg (who is playing a High School science teacher in this movie *begins to chuckle*) started having a conversation with a plastic plant and referenced a song he rapped about back when he was Marky Mark, I just about threw up in my mouth. I'm far from kidding. Seriously. The concept behind this "horror" film was somewhat savvy but was POORLY executed by director M. Night Shyamalan to a point where you honestly wouldn't be called crazy if thought this film was a comedy. Stay far away and watch something else! Expand
  15. Nov 5, 2011
    6
    This became a dull film with a really bad plot, and confusing - but Wahlberg's performance was a little So and So with his character in The Happening. This film isn't what you might expect for a disaster film. It's a confusing film (for understanding what the film is about), and I think it wasn't showing any suspense or thrills in this sci-fi film.
  16. Aug 23, 2011
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This movie was not very good. I enjoyed few parts but the plot line was terrible and the acting sucked. Mark Wahlberg is not one of my favorite actors but I was surprised about Zooey Deschanel. I usually enjoy her acting but in this movie she was just horrible. The whole thing was horrible! The whole plants having a conscious and that it reacts to human stimulus or whatever. It was stupid. I had thought when I went to see this it would be good, but I was wrong. M. Night Shyamalan just doesn't have the touch that he had in his older work (Sixth Sense, Unbreakable). Now with Devil out too, I'm only thinking to myself, "when will he stop." All his movies are now is just incredibly horrible storylines with stupid and effortless twists, like in this movie. This stupid end of the world action drama had no storyline terrible twist and is a waste of time and money and I do not think you should see it. Also to M. Night Shyamalan, STOP!!!! Expand
  17. Jul 7, 2011
    5
    While this movie doe s pose an idea that could have been made into something interesting, M. Night Shyamalan fails to tell us a compelling story with characters that don t make you want to slit your wrists every time they open their mouth, or do anything. Mark Wahlbergs acting is horrible, the little girl acting was better. The suicide scenes become distasteful. The character actions are unbelievable to the circumstances. M. Night Shyamalans earlier work was good, this is not. Pass. Expand
  18. May 13, 2011
    1
    Did anybody see the awful 2010 children's comedy "Furry Vengeance"? Well this is just like a botanical version for grown ups with more laughs. Ridiculous plot, bizarre acting. The only "Food for thought" this will give you is "is this meant to be a spoof?"
  19. Nov 18, 2010
    8
    Some people on here have an agenda. They are strictly trying to ruin Mr. Shyamalan's career with negative reviews any which way. I saw Lady in the Water. Yeah, it was weird and I wasn't impressed. But The Happening? I watched it yesterday expecting the worst, after reading all the bad press surrounding it I thought it would be an absolute disaster. 90 minutes later I walked away feeling I have just watched a very original and thoughtful movie. Mark Wahlberg and the ever beautiful Zooey Deschanel act their way through this strange premise and it's not bad at all. I've seen much worse movies that weren't thrashed nearly as badly. I say watch it and see for yourself. It's by far not your typical script and the story weaves in an uneasy way. Good job Mr. Shyamalan!! Expand
  20. Oct 26, 2010
    2
    Shyamalan, what happened? This movie had a great concept, great actors, and decent plot. But the execution is so unintentionally flawed. These actors weren't even trying. You can tell from Mark Wahlberg's infamous "What? No!" The what-was-supposed-to-be scariest scene had me bored to tears and wasn't scary. There was only one scene that disturbed me a bit, but now i can watch it without being disturbed. This isn't even a fun movie, joyless, and serious. You can find this movie fun, if you find it unintentionally funny, as most people do. If you find this movie enjoyable and scary, then hooray for you, you don't mind the flaws. I try to give Shyamalan some slack, he's in a rut, but this movie is an embarrassment to his career. Expand
  21. Oct 17, 2010
    2
    Just want to start out by saying I was one of the few remaining M. Night fans still out there up until this. I actually enjoyed Lady In The Water, but this movie really pissed me off. I am a huge fan of Marky Mark Wahlberg too, and he was disappointing too. He wasn't even close to the problem though. The plot of this movie kept me going, and then at the M. Night just craps on us. I don't know if that was his best idea, or it was just laziness or what, but that wasn't an okay ending. Go back to your twists, they did you good. Expand
  22. Aug 27, 2010
    0
    More proof that M. Night Shyamalan is, indeed, a one-trick pony that relies on the same techniques in every film. Whereas some of his other movies occasionally have good acting and cinematography to pick up the slack, this movie has nothing. It's just crap.
  23. Aug 23, 2010
    1
    Central Park NYC, people start standing still then killing themselves, media blame it on terrorist attacks, spreads to Philadelphia, people evacuated to the countryside, gets worse, love can save the day.
    If I had to describe this film in one word it would be "ridiculous". It's sort of a cross between The Day After Tomorrow, Day of the Triffids & a reverse War of the Worlds.
    The acting is
    pretty bad, dialogue not much better & the whole story is just plain & simple nonsense. Expand
  24. IsaacC
    Jan 3, 2010
    10
    Finally Score = Planet 1, Humans 0, I see Genius where humans took a back seat and you can tell by these ignorant reviews how lost we really are and sensitive to the possibility of nature being sensitive and defensive too. Truly a masterpiece and respects to all participants in down playing humans and upscaling the breathing breeze.
  25. DominickO
    Dec 10, 2009
    1
    I hate when people gives films 0 and 1 on this site because normally they are taking it too far. But I make an exception in this case. The worst acting, worst directing and worst script I have ever seen in a "blockbuster" film - bar none. A good premise and exciting first five minutes followed by 90 minutes of the worst cinema I've ever witnessed. 5 people around us got up and left the cinema. Expand
  26. SergioO.
    Sep 23, 2009
    9
    There's something everyone is missing, even Mr. Shyamalan. Despite the fact the plot sounds so strange (but not impossible if you read a little about what plants can do when they're in danger), and most people I've watched this movie with ended so shocked, this is a movie about love. Call me a complete fool, or idle, but for me this is the most romantic movie ever made. My point is, this is not a love-movie, but shows what love can do. And maybe this is what people are not seeing, that we need more love to get through these rough times. In the end, this is what love is all about: being confused, being mad, sad and happy. That's why love here seems so real! This is a great movie because it grows by itself. Expand
  27. RichieF.
    Aug 11, 2009
    7
    I just saw this movie and didn't know what to expect because of all the negative reviews. Me, not being an avid M. Night Shyamalan fan, actually enjoyed it. However, there were a few flaws, I think. For one, I wish there was more evidence against the plants for releasing the toxins, although it is a smart idea. Another thing is that I thought they shouldn't have so easily come to the conclusion that larger groups were more susceptible to being killed. However, it was a smart idea to have the main character a science teacher and another important character be a plant expert, although a convenient pair. But other than that, I thought the movie was very intriguing. The camera angles were great and they really caught the effect of the film. The music was solid and of course the actors were alright. I especially liked Zooey Deschannel's performance as the wife. For the most part, this was a very good movie. It was a good idea that was executed well. I would definitely recommend this film to many people. Expand
  28. SimonP
    Jul 29, 2009
    1
    Perhaps we just have to face the fact that this guy had only one good film in him. I remember seeing the trailer for this and thinking it looked worth seeing. I was wrong. It fails on numerous levels, not least by drawing some really bad performances from some reasonably good actors. Wahlberg and Deschanel are painful to watch. The plot's full of holes and there simply isn't anything shocking, scary of moving about the whole thing. Imagine taking a generic zombie film but removing the threat posed by the zombies by having them kill only themselves. Scary? Fun? Nope. It might just be redeemable if it conveyed its message about Man's destruction of the environment in a meaningful or thought provoking way, but it doesn't; it's crass and patronising to anyone with half an ounce of intelligence. It would have been so much better to have donated the millions that went into producing this compost heap of a film to an environmental charity. Expand
  29. JoeD
    Jul 22, 2009
    3
    I expected better from this movie. Turns out it was the best unintentional comedy I've seen. If your looking for a laugh watch this.
  30. JamesN
    Jul 21, 2009
    0
    Quite possibly the worst film I've ever seen. Wahlberg's acting blends in well with the trees and blows much harder than the deadly breeze he runs from.
  31. SameerS.
    Jul 9, 2009
    9
    I am a Shymalan Fan. But all of his movies do require one to see what was the thought behind the project. shyamalan is eeriely positive person. This is evident in 6th sense when the spirit redeems itself by helping the boy, unbreakable where Bruce is the positive force, Village where love wins, Lady in water where there is happy ending, signs where gibson returns back to faith and happening where love and belief wins over odds. I loved the happening movie He is brilliant where he leaves the audience thinking pondering and hungry for his next creation. His movies are 3D where the third dimension is thought. Expand
  32. JaggedReviews
    Jun 22, 2009
    8
    A great movie? No. A bad an utter steaming pile of crap? Certainly not. The Happening is twist thriller M. Night Shymalans most recent film as well as his first R rated film. For those who try and see this as a return to the days of The Sixth Sense, which i personally did not enjoy, then you will probably be disappointed but i you treat this as a fun thriller B movie then believe me youll see the lightwer side of things. The movie moves up and about as a group of New Yorkers flee from NYC from a invisible force that has the New Yorkers offing themselves. The film gives us a few chills and thrills bt never reaches its full potential but then again these days not very many films do. I enjoyed the film but thought once again Shymaln failed to shock m with his signature twist ending. The film comes off touching and thought provoking at moments but t does fail at some moments. The side plot of Elliot and his soon to be at the beginning seems to have been thrown in along with the cheating part. The film is Shymalans best work certainly since Signs and i recommend it for a look. Expand
  33. SeanG
    Jun 14, 2009
    3
    I can't believe that a well-respected director like M. Night Shyamalan would make something this incredibly bad. You know that Shyamalan is intending the movie to be a horror/thriller type of movie, and that is what you would expect, but that is not the case in this film. As many others have stated, the acting truly is laughable, at points similar to acting in movies such as Scary Movie and other parody films. What makes it even more funny is the lines that are used which always seemed like the most obvious lines you could think of. The only thing that came close to keeping me on the edge of my seat was the camera shots throughout the movie that built suspense for me multiple times. Other than that, and overall, the acting was bad, the script was bad, the storyline didn't go anywhere throughout the movie, and the ending didn't give off any second thoughts or any additional thinking (as I saw Shyamalan's Sixth Sense). When it's over, all it seems to be is an unrealistic movie with a plot that never went anywhere and parody-like acting. Expand
  34. AnthonyN
    Mar 26, 2009
    0
    Steaming piece of crap. No one deserves having to watch this, not even mass murderers.
  35. MichaelL
    Jan 7, 2009
    7
    I'm going to try to hard to defend this film, but I will say that I really enjoyed it. I don't understand how so many critics and fans hated it. Then again, I seem to be one of the few people out there in the world who loved The Village.
  36. SteveS
    Jan 7, 2009
    1
    Just awful. Defies logic at many turns. Wahlberg's and performance is leaden. Zooey Deschanel spends the movie staring gap mouthed at the screen. If you want to watch a bad film to laugh at, there are better bad flicks out there.
  37. AlexG
    Dec 17, 2008
    1
    Nothing good happened in this movie!
  38. MichaelM
    Dec 14, 2008
    8
    Tense and occasionally touching movie.
  39. LarryL
    Dec 1, 2008
    3
    A horrible movie...unless it was meant as a comedy/parody. The acting and the lines were so bad you wish everybody in the movie kills themselves. Including the film crew.
  40. StephenL.
    Nov 29, 2008
    8
    This is a love it or hate it film as the ratings here indicate. I was more towards the love it end of the scale. Not one for the real horror fans that are looking for scare, but engaging and unsettling. Words that apply - Unnerving, Unsettling, Thought provoking, Fascinating, Eerie. Words that don't apply - Scary, Jump out your skin, horror. Don
  41. GrahamD.
    Nov 12, 2008
    2
    Horrible writing and bad acting take away from the horror elements.
  42. CM
    Nov 10, 2008
    3
    Simply horrible, in every respect. What a complete waste of a rental.
  43. DavidC
    Nov 8, 2008
    0
    I swore I would never see another M. Night Shyamalan movie after The Village...I should have known better because this was one of the WORST movies I've seen in the last 15 years, tied with Battlefied Earth. It's good for laughts, but not with the movie --- at it. Once again Mark Wahlberg has proven that he is a terrible lead actor, although he is a great supporting actor (e.g., The Departed). Expand
  44. Zack
    Nov 6, 2008
    3
    This movie was bad. The acting was laughable and the dialogue awful. The overall concept wasn't bad as the exposition to a much larger film. However, the second half to this great epic (what happens to mankind after this) never happens. It just ends abruptly and anticlimatically. If you were to cut this down to the couple good scenes and add a new ending (which shows more aftermath) and have the actors give better performances (most of these guys are better then that). This could have been pulled off beautifully. Expand
  45. AndrewD.
    Nov 2, 2008
    9
    Suprisingly creepy with a definite ecocide-in-reverse theme. The disdain with which bloggers treat M Nights films is a worry. No mainstream pulp director has ever received such scorn. Each and every film stimulated me intellectually and cinematically. In 20 years his films will be remembered and revisited again and again. Then witness the volte-face of the contempary critics who found his works to be egotistical. Methinks you do protest too much. Expand
  46. JonK.
    Oct 31, 2008
    0
    Absolutely one of the worst movies I have ever seen. I liked pretty much all of the other movies by this director, but this was horrible. Don't waste your time or money!
  47. RichardR.
    Oct 31, 2008
    3
    A decent germ of an idea has been turned into a boring film with talk, talk, talk. What awful writing. Come on, Night. You know you can do better -- don't you?
  48. JamieT
    Oct 31, 2008
    1
    Possibly the worst movie I haver ever seen. It replaces his previous movie, Lady in the Water. I was hoping Night was going to get back to making good movies like Sixth Sense, Signs and Unbreakable but instead this retchid movie happened. Did I feel drawn into the movie? Possibly - yes! I too had an overwhelming urge to stick something sharp into my neck while trying to digest this absolute howler! Expand
  49. MitchA.
    Oct 28, 2008
    1
    Without a doubt one of the worst films i have ever seen. How M. Night Shyamalan could get something so wrong after getting other films so right is outragous. AVOID
  50. JenniferK.
    Oct 19, 2008
    1
    This movie was terrible. I kept watching thinking something was going to happen......nothing. The acting was awful and the dialogue was retarded. I only gave it a one because some of the death scenes were worth watching.
  51. Meghan
    Oct 18, 2008
    3
    The previews looked excellent and the premise appeared interesting, but the movie itself was a flop. I was severely disappointed because the idea behind the movie could have made an incredible movie; it just wasn't served to the audience in a palatable fashion. The acting was literally laughable, as well as the script- a total cheez-factory. Idiosyncratic characters, such as the military guy on the road and the old woman who housed them in the end, seemed to be "weird" for no reason at all. I was sitting there wondering what was up with them, and it turned out that their personalities/behaviors served no purpose at all. I think M. Night Shyamalan wrapped himself up too tightly in concept (style) in this movie, and therefore failed to tell the story effectively. He is lost in his own artistry, but this is nothing new for his movies. Avoid this movie, and I encourage you to rewrite it yourself--- you could definitely do much better than this guy. Expand
  52. JohanF.
    Oct 18, 2008
    10
    I think this is a great movie!!! It just have to been seen! Dont listen to the 0 and 1 votes. If you dont watch this movie you have missed something!!!
  53. MayQ
    Oct 16, 2008
    3
    I am a very big fan of M. Night Shyamalan. I feel he is a very creative writer and creates movies that are not your traditional slasher-type, shoot-guns-at-everything kind of movies. I have enjoyed all of his movies... up until I saw The Happening. I liked the concept. I liked the storyline. Again, good job with the creativity. My BIGGEST problem with this whole movie was that the acting was absolutely horrid. I like Wahlberg and Leguizamo, but the acting was... horrible. Completely horrible. I don't understand how the dialogue and the acting could have gone so wrong. Didn't they see they could not play their parts well? Wahlberg is IMO an awesome actor, but I guess he can't do drama. Hell, no one in the movie played dramatic well. If the acting and dialogue were made better, then I think this movie would have been a little better. Rate a 3 for the story. 0 for acting. Expand
  54. AdamP
    Oct 16, 2008
    7
    An entertaining movie - not Shyamalan's best, but entertaining.
  55. ToddF.
    Oct 16, 2008
    3
    The acting was terrible, the script was worse, but there were some entertaining bits to this movie.
  56. HastyManic
    Oct 13, 2008
    6
    A new camp classic...Howlingly hilarious in its pompous ambitions, stupifyingly awful execution, and the low end of Z quality acting and dialogue. I was entertained, but for completely unintended reasons.
  57. SteveB.
    Oct 11, 2008
    9
    I thought this movie had a decent plot with good acting. I think it brings up a good point about global warming.
  58. BillB
    Oct 9, 2008
    0
    I laughed so hard while watching this movie, not because it was supposed to be funny, but because it was so badly done. How can Shyamalan not realize that the dialogue, story content, and acting was absolutely terrible? Mark Wahlberg was worse than an 8th grader in a school play and Deschanel was more like a 6th grader. This movie played out like a stupid comedy, even though you could tell that it was 100% serious. Avoid The Happening unless you are a connoisseur of offal movies or you think that M. Night Shyamalan is a good director! Expand
  59. AlexB.
    Oct 8, 2008
    1
    Laughable at best and overly pretentious. Avoid this movie at all costs.
  60. DanM.
    Oct 7, 2008
    1
    This has to be the worst movie I've ever seen....terrible acting, zero plot, and a god-awful storyline. The Happening = FAIL.
  61. DippyS.
    Oct 5, 2008
    0
    No more time in this world should be wasted on this film
  62. JayH.
    Oct 1, 2008
    6
    Ahhhh, M Night Shyamalan. Mr. pretentious. And he does nearly kill what could have been a much better film. But I like this one better than his last string of stinkers. Mark Wahlberg is a big plus, it is well acted. Shyamalan needs to get off his high horse.
  63. BRock
    Sep 27, 2008
    10
    An awesome concept ... algae bloom in a human affecting environment. Awesome movie for those that like something more than just your cut and dry Action/horror flick.
  64. BlakeO.
    Sep 23, 2008
    0
    The story had no direction or ending. Where do I go to get last 2 hours of my life back?
  65. JackS.
    Sep 5, 2008
    6
    If a small time director was responsible fro this movie, it would recieive good reviews based solely on the fact that such a movie would not be expected from them. But its the fact that M.Night Shaylaman directed, wrote and co-produced this movie set viewers high expectations that this film couldnt possibly achieve. A brilliant idea, but it didn't and never will work well in a movie. Plants just arent scary. The opening sequences were brilliant, thrilling and unique, and the film slipped away after that point, that just happened to be passing by. Dissapointing from a big time director like shaylaman, but a good film none the less. Expected it to be alot deeper like the rest of shaylamans works. Expand
  66. ALL242
    Aug 26, 2008
    0
    This is the worst movie I have ever seen. Unfortunately, I paid full price in the theaters to see the movie. The acting is sub-par, which is the best part of the entire movie. I fail to understand why wind moving through a field toward a group of people running away would get a rise out of anyone. Save yourself the time and money and watch ice melt in the sink, it's much more enjoyable.
  67. ThiagoT.
    Aug 25, 2008
    3
    This movie is horrible. M. Night Shyamalan had good dreams and put it on the screen, after this one its proven how fucking luck and of course, immature he is as director. Zooey Deschanel didn't how what a hell she was doing in the entire film, that was kinda fun.
  68. GirenI.
    Aug 10, 2008
    2
    It's like Shyamalan was trying too hard to gives the movie a B rated but cool ambiance. It was the worst of his films. Just horrible. This is the kind of movie who proves how the director could bring the disaster to any element of the movie.
  69. Georgeofthejungle
    Aug 6, 2008
    9
    Funny, good dialogues, good level of suspense.
  70. RommelP.
    Aug 4, 2008
    10
    One of my best this 2008, I dont like fiction, superheroes tired me, this film in its whole concept is a new experience for me.
  71. JoeU.
    Aug 4, 2008
    4
    I think the movie was enjoyable, but, i did not like the script, i think it was lazy, not well worked, amateur. I also think Shyamalan tried to do something new but it didnt work either.
  72. CarlA.
    Aug 1, 2008
    10
    Fantastically good!, bad for lazy minds, it has a enjoyable ryhthm made with a unique style.
  73. PaigeC.
    Jul 30, 2008
    5
    The only thing that bothered me in this film was the amount of comic relief. There was too much and make the movie more of a comical movie than anything else. It did have good moments of suspence and I did jump however.
  74. JadeT.
    Jul 29, 2008
    9
    Not so bad, not so good !, but the rates of critics are not fair, for me Shyamalan's movies are full of originality.
  75. Mr.Smiles
    Jul 28, 2008
    10
    I decided to be happy when I watched this fantastic film, it made me think about my planet, and now I love more forests and all our nature.
  76. EricM.
    Jul 27, 2008
    2
    This movie is as bad as the critics say. If you saw the previews, you saw all the good parts. And all the interesting moments happen right in the beginning of the film, the first ten minutes. The rest of the movie is the characters aimlessly wandering around. It doesn't get much more boring than this.
  77. JessyD.
    Jul 25, 2008
    9
    I saw it twice, I like it, a little thoughful but funny...scary.
  78. MarkB.
    Jul 25, 2008
    1
    You don't have to know what time it is to know that Night has definitely fallen. Crashed and burned, in fact--following up his genuinely intriguing but critically and publicly trashed suspense drama The Village with Lady in the Water, arguably the most pretentious, misguided and unwatchable big-studio movie of 2006 (with the apparent message of "what the world needs now is love sweet love, but first we kill all the critics"), M. Night Shyamalan desperately backpedals with this ludicrous and offensively gory nature-gone-wild horror; if his stated intention was to make the world's greatest B-movie, he rated it about 25 letters too high. The LEAST of this movie's problems is that Shyamalan's once-impressive ability to leaven his thrills with humor (as with Samuel L. Jackson's "Teletubbies" speech in Unbreakable or Bruce Willis's curt, one-word description of his former wife's lover in The Sixth Sense) has completely deserted him when he needs it most; without giving too much away (although maybe I'd be doing you a favor if I did) the only way to handle this fundamentally absurd plotline is to recognize its essential silliness, as Roger Corman did in 1960 and Frank Oz did in 1986; otherwise you get From Hell it Came, The Navy Vs. The Night Monsters, William Friedkin's dopey The Guardian and this. Shyamalan's characteristic sense of self-importance (only slightly noticeable in his good films, overwhelmingly so in his bad ones), an irritatingly trite wrapup that makes you rue the day you first criticized Shyamalan for his SURPRISE endings, and uniformly miserable acting (except for Betty Buckley, who competently plays a religious fanatic, but then given that she survived playing the mom in the legendary stage musical adaptation of Carrie, she's certainly had practice) help sink this, but what really reduces The Happening from the merely inept to the truly loathsome is its utter callousness toward its victims. It's often instructive to compare a bad movie with a good one: in the original Jaws, Steven Spielberg in mere seconds got us to know the shark's targets and truly feel for the them: the sweet hippie chick, the nice old guy in the boat, and the little boy whose elderly parents either spent a lifetime trying to have a child or adopted him. Shyamalan, by contrast, contemptuously depersonalizes the casualties of his mass murder/suicide epidemic as much as possible: he films most of them in longshot as they do themselves in, and in one disgusting instance shows a woman only from the waist down as she shoots herself. Maybe Shyamalan is such a rabid environmentalist that he truly believes that mankind deserves the bloody slaughter that this film sentences it to, but the fact remains that those driven to their deaths were human beings with hopes and dreams and families and ambitions (and some of them undoubtedly recycled and/or rode their bikes to work). I'm a big Al Gore fan, but this movie did what no other has done: it got me to momentarily consider right-wing harpy Ann Coulter's bizarre, intentionally outrageous admonition that God intended us to "rape" the environment. I didn't think that any filmmaker could, however briefly, put me in Coulter's camp on ANY issue, but then if Shyamalan can get the normally wonderful Zooey Deschanael (Bridge to Terabithia, Elf) to give a truly wretched, luded-out performance, then short of making a recent movie that DOESN'T make its viewers want to run farm machinery over themselves, the man is capable of doing just about anything. Expand
  79. Sammy
    Jul 25, 2008
    8
    I thought this movie was interesting and different which kept my attention.
  80. ChayitoC
    Jul 24, 2008
    10
    Unforgettable, unique, not for all " kind of people ", stunning!.
  81. LilyF.
    Jul 23, 2008
    9
    It is not so commercial as many in theaters right now, but it had for me the most interesting and attractive script, after all I enjoyed every episode of The Twilight Zone.
  82. CarlosS.
    Jul 23, 2008
    0
    Awful unrealistic dialogue. No scientific sound grounds at all. Awful camera movement. Doubly awful acting by Wahlberg and and the little girl. A perfect blend of a B 60's horror movie, with comics, with you-name-it. Everything is predictable, nothing holds interest. From an aesthetic and cinematographic point of view; this is unacceptable!:
  83. NoeC.
    Jul 23, 2008
    9
    M. Night is a genius, this age is not for him, I found some of its movies like this better than "Hitchcock" ones, in Usa is the opposite of Eastwood, sorry for this comparisons.
  84. OmharS.
    Jul 22, 2008
    9
    Interesting movie, good job in its genre where others shows they have minds empty of ideas.
  85. VeroW.
    Jul 22, 2008
    10
    It is in my top 5 this year, of the best of course !
  86. Technicha
    Jul 22, 2008
    0
    Started out great but the ending was the worst i have ever seen. No closure what so ever. The acting performance was mediocre. Watch this and you are gonna get disappointed
  87. JimmyT.
    Jul 21, 2008
    8
    I saw all the superheroes, but Batman was the best, but when I went to see this film my experience was different, no explosions, visual effects nor action in excess, is good, not excellent but good.
  88. PaulL.
    Jul 21, 2008
    0
    M night Shymalan should know how to improve himself since the sixth sense. This is got to be the worst movie of 2008.
  89. RichardP.
    Jul 20, 2008
    9
    Stunning with awesome moments, not so bad as many said.
  90. SamuelJ
    Jul 19, 2008
    5
    I truly wanted to like this movie. I am a huge M Night fan and I even like Marky Mark, but I just couldn't enjoy it. The plot is too simple, it is just pointlessly gory, and lacks any form of the word suspense. I will pretend that this movie never happened (hehe....pun) if you promise to do better next time M. Night.
  91. AdrianO.
    Jul 18, 2008
    9
    Si es buena, no creo en lo que dicen los amarguetas, si te gusta el buen suspenso y el estilo único del director de El sexto sentido no debes dejar de verla, definitivamente el y sus peliculas son infravaloradas, basta ver los reviews que le dieron a sus mejores filmes como Sixth Sense y Señales "Signs" y verás el desdén que le tienen.
  92. TommyBoy
    Jul 18, 2008
    0
    Story line so incredibly bad. Another pure crap movie from India's loser director. Unfortunately the only thing positive about this movie was the jump in his bank account balance. How he could possibly believe anyone would love the plot of this crappy movie is beyond me. The ONLY movie he ever did that was of any value was his "Sixth Sense". From that point on even Mel Gibson couldn't save his "Signs" project. Expand
  93. RafaE.
    Jul 17, 2008
    9
    This is one of the big mistakes of the year !!...I can not believe it... but mistake made by the critics who don't know how forgive.
  94. DanielRR.
    Jul 17, 2008
    10
    Oh really so bad?, no way guys!, All my friends and I enjoyed it !.
  95. IvonneR.
    Jul 17, 2008
    9
    Nice in all aspects, we don't want this things happened never, but its only a movie, amused me.
  96. EunizeN
    Jul 16, 2008
    9
    I liked this movie, bad actings?, what are you talking about people?, simply there are no any excellent or amazing acting, but the movie for me was an interesting topic.
  97. JustinJ
    Jul 16, 2008
    9
    After seeing hundred's of movies of this kind of thriller-suspense I can say that this is not so bad, it is OK.
  98. AdrianB.
    Jul 16, 2008
    10
    I don't care other reviews, this is one of my favorites motion pictures of the year.
  99. RodrigoO.
    Jul 15, 2008
    9
    One thing: I like it because after all the tragedies we saw, there is an ecological message, a warning about protect our planet.
  100. SabellyW
    Jul 15, 2008
    9
    I don't care what others say, I went to see it and I saw a fantastical and entertaining movie.
Metascore

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 38 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 3 out of 38
  2. Negative: 18 out of 38
  1. The movie seems more like a '50s science fiction film of extreme paranoia or an episode of "The Twilight Zone" that even at a swiftly paced 90 minutes feels padded.
  2. Reviewed by: Justin Chang
    50
    In short, this is a Shyamalan movie minus the bravado, the swagger; there are no audacious attempts to pull out the rug from under the audience, no ham-fisted lessons about the importance of religious belief or the power of storytelling.
  3. Reviewed by: Robert Wilonsky
    50
    What a bunch of nonsense--effective nonsense, chilling nonsense, occasionally wrenching nonsense, but nonsense nonetheless.