MovieChat Forums > The Happening (2008) Discussion > My theory: it wasn't the plants.

My theory: it wasn't the plants.

posted 4 years ago by sONOMArEturns (1253)
7 replies | jump to latest

This movie is pretty damn bad, but I do think brief glimpses of Shamalan's genius shine through. Easily my favorite element is one that is often overlooked; its ambiguity. While most of the characters in the film seem to agree that plants are the culprits of this apocalyptic attack, I disagree. There's the theme in the film that science can't explain everything; multiple times in the film is this line referenced, and Mark Wahlberg even says at the beginning "scientists will have their theories for the books, but it doesn't mean they're right...somethings are just beyond our understanding." The fact that the film bookends itself with this statement at both the beginning and end shows that this is obviously something symbolic of the meaning of the film.

This implies that, even though people have reasons to theorize the plants are behind this whole thing, the theories might all wrong and it could be something else entirely. The movie loves focusing on the sky, especially during the opening credits. The very last shot in Paris seems not to focus on the plants, but rather the sky above the plants. In fact, rarely at any point does the cinematography focus on any plants, flowers, trees, or grass at all. You'd think a film about killer plants would show at least a few closeups of ominous looming grass, trees towering over people, something of the sort, but it never does. To me, this can either imply multiple things:

1. It's global warming, or something similar. This one is a bit obvious and lots of movies have done it, but it could just be Earth's way of giving us a wakeup call.

2. It's a religious event. Shamalan loves referencing God and Christianity in his films, with the theme of Signs being that God acts in mysterious ways and that all things happen for a reason. Perhaps the focus on the sky implies that this is an act of God. The whole "beyond what science understands" thing definitely reeks of something religious.

I also don't think the plants are the villains (what an odd statement) because the film constantly mentions the bees dying off. Bees are plants number one friends, so why would plants be killing off the things that keep them pollinated and alive?

Overall this film is terrible but I do think it could've worked with a few more screenplay drafts. Shamalan bragged about the film being written in one go and it clearly shows. Some of these more subtle ideas could've been better realized with two or three more drafts. Or, it should've been a full-fledged horror-comedy, like Tremors or Slither. In the end, I do think the plants are not to blame at all, and I think Shamalan intended for us to discuss the film's many mysteries, but too bad the film sucks and nobody cares.

[–] Iffy762 (1334) 4 years ago

I watched it so long ago that it's a little hard to remember some parts. I actually think I liked it more than most people because I liked the idea of plants as having their own inner personalities and intentionality. Plants don't think about things the way animals do, because they don't have neurons, but they do have xylem and phloem, so why can't they "think" in their own plantish ways? I think there has actually been research that plants have a way to communicate with each other; when I heard about that, I thought of this movie. The plant kingdom has been around longer than the animal kingdom because animal life depends on energy that plants have captured from the sun, so the idea that plants have a kind of "wisdom" that humans don't understand totally resonates with me.

I doubt the bees were killed by the plants, as plants want bees to pollinate them. I would think more likely the movie was saying that the death of the bees was a consequence of human misbehavior (whether pesticides or climate change) and that the stress of losing the bees' services might have been a factor that led to the plants "attacking" humans.

I think of coronavirus as another consequence of human misbehavior, as loss of wildlife habitat brings wildlife into contact with humans, allowing zoonotic viruses to leap to human hosts.

[–] sONOMArEturns (1253) 4 years ago

Interesting ideas. Plants releasing toxic pheromones isn't as far fetched as most people think because they actually do it in real life. Certain plants can release gas that wards away hungry predators. I think the whole concept of the plant idea comes from the dendrocnide morides plant, which many people thought would release a toxin that made insects commit suicide by jumping to their deaths. We know now that the toxin just killed insects, or at the very least caused them to flee in a massive panic, which made them appear to be jumping to their doom. I guess we could assume that all plants secretly possess this same ability, or that this trait has lied dormant until now.

[–] Iffy762 (1334) 4 years ago

Love the idea of plants all possessing the ability to release this gas, although I hope the idea remains in the realm of fiction!

Terry Pratchett, at the start of one of his Discworld novels, had a whole section about trees "thinking" at a much slower rate than animals, and how the passage of years would seem like seconds or minutes to them. It was very insightful and also very funny. The book might have been "Jingo" but I'm not sure.

[–] ProgsReturn (2075) 4 years ago

I know what you're talking about but it might have been 'reaper man' due to the themes of relative ageing and dying.

[–] Iffy762 (1334) 4 years ago

google says you are correct!

[–] mikethemartian (6705) 4 years ago

The Great Vegetable Rebellion was better than this movie.

[–] e3e34ifj (1912) a month ago

I just watched it and I think you're onto something with the "some things are just beyond our understanding" notion. Maybe the plants aren't meant to be taken literally. However, I think Shyamalan was confused by his own message or something. There are quite a few shots where the plants are ominious, like one shot at the end where the trees move in the wind almost like Kaiju monsters.

I think maybe what Shyamalan was going for was that there IS an explainable understanding as to why the Happening happened, but us humans are too stupid to recognize ourselves as the problem. The shots with the nuclear powerplant is my main evidence here. I think Shyamalan was also going for a "love conquers all" message; people seem to die most often when they're angry or frustrated, like the group arguing in the field, the two teens, and the mentally ill old lady. The gas seems to spare people when they're acting out of love, like the married hippie couple who ultimately get shot by the soldier, and the scene at the end. Even John Leguizamo seems normal at first, and he was trying to calm a stranger down when the gas hit. But there's also a few times where this seems inconsistent so who knows.

I think maybe the idea is that God, or some 'unexplained phenomena' gave plants the ability to act in self-defense for a day before taking it away.