Lady In The Water

[Shellhead]

The commercials didn't sell me on this movie. It looked like Shaymalan was trying for scary, but that wet woman just looked like she was on some heavy medication.

MSN gave it a brutal review today:

http://movies.msn.com/Movies/movie.aspx?m=584627&stab=1

"LADY IN THE WATER: GLUB GLUB GLUB"

"Despite some genuinely humorous and frightening moments, Christopher Doyle's imaginative cinematography and the sharp, committed performances of Paul Giamatti and Bob Balaban, the movie loses its way long before it reaches its unearned catharsis. The Shyamalan twist, which has kept audiences coming back for more since "The Sixth Sense," never arrives."

Maybe Shaymalan should go back to making feature-length episodes of The Twilight Zone.

[Nate C.]

I loved it. And I couldn't care less who agrees with me or "gets it".

"Your words are beautiful and you have a big heart."

One of these days I'll have to write a paper on Shaymalan movies (and learn to spell his name). The wit, the soul, the humanity. His movies aren't about twist endings, (this one doesn't even have one) or scaring the audience (although the sprinklers got me every time), but about people. All kinds of people. People that matter. People that suffer, people that laugh, cry, lose, win and love. God, I'm a fan of this man's work. I thought The Village was his weakest work, and still enjoyed it, but this is as good as he's been on any other film.

If you're looking for a formula, don't. If you're looking for a great fable, here it is. Suspend your disbelief and unclench and it'll all be fine.

(none of this is directed at you, Shell. I just came in from the theatre and had to talk about this film and saw your thread.)

[Alex Dragon]

I loved it. And I couldn't care less who agrees with me or "gets it".

"Your words are beautiful and you have a big heart."

One of these days I'll have to write a paper on Shaymalan movies (and learn to spell his name). The wit, the soul, the humanity. His movies aren't about twist endings, (this one doesn't even have one) or scaring the audience (although the sprinklers got me every time), but about people. All kinds of people. People that matter. People that suffer, people that laugh, cry, lose, win and love. God, I'm a fan of this man's work. I thought The Village was his weakest work, and still enjoyed it, but this is as good as he's been on any other film.

If you're looking for a formula, don't. If you're looking for a great fable, here it is. Suspend your disbelief and unclench and it'll all be fine.

(none of this is directed at you, Shell. I just came in from the theatre and had to talk about this film and saw your thread.)

I haven't seen this movie yet but I agree with you. M. Knight pretty much does big budget "indy" movies in a way. Most of Hollywood's movies are "formulistic" stuff with happy endings. M.'s movies don't follow that mindset and some people just don't know what to make of them. To tell you the truth I'm surprised he his movies do as well as they do...but I'm glad they do.

[Shellhead]

Funny thing about this thread... I didn't start it. The guy who originally started it admitted that he walked out 20 minutes into the movie, bored and frustrated. A couple of other posters commented, then I posted. Shortly after that, the other posts vanished.

[Conn Seanery]

That's because sometimes I get real, real tired of people starting threads who put absolutely no effort into it. People who offer up a topic, and add little to nothing like (or the equivalent of) "discuss". If someone's going to start a thread about a specific topic, such as a film or a TV show, they should have something to say about it other than "What do you think?" (or in the case of this thread, "I walked out, did anyone see it yet?")

So I edited the nothing posts out, and restarted the thread with the first post that actually talked about the movie. It's not the first time i've done this on the forum, and it certainly won't be the last.

(I'm posting this for clarification, not to start up an off-topic discussion about it. If anyone needs to followup on this, feel free to PM me.)

[Jack Zodiac]

I haven't seen it yet, and I doubt I'm going to, but about his movies: I realize that they're mainly character-driven, and that's fine, but only when the characters matter. In "Sixth Sense," I was genuinely interested in Willis and Osment's characters, and that made the movie interesting for me, even after I'd realized how it would end. "Unbreakable" was a little different. There wasn't enough memorable character development for Bruce's character, but the story itself was very interesting, and that kept me hooked on the movie, all the way up to the predictable ending.

Now, in "Signs," I was completely uninterested in the characters. Their development was slow and forced, and the backdrop of the movie (which wasn't supposed to be the point of the movie, but was given so much power that it could've been handled better) kind of disconnected the characters from the plot, which wasn't a great idea. I understand what he was trying to get across, and for some people it worked, but I was completely uninterested. Same goes for "The Village." What could've been an amazing, classic horror movie, where you never actually see the creature haunting the cast, turned into a predictable "Twilight Zone" episode. I honestly realized what was going to happen around the time the father started to consider sending his daughter out into the woods. And, once again, the character development was slow and, for most of the main cast, non-existent.

That's why I'll most likely wait for "Lady in the Water" to come out on DVD before I watch it. Unless someone gives me a ridiculously good, believable review of the movie.

[Valmore]

It just seems like M. Night's movies get worse with each one he makes. "Sixth Sense" was great. "Unbreakable" was good. "Signs" was okay. "The Village" was meh. This one just looks bad. I may catch it at the $1 thater just to see for myself if my preconceived notions of it not being good are correct, but I can't see myself paying full price to go see it.

[drwho]

I'll see it if there is good word of mouth on the boards. Dont want to risk the 8 bucks if it sucks.

[DDM]

The reason Lady in the Water fails is because the M. Night does not answer a simple question: What is this movie about? I don't even think he knows. Or he can try to explain it, but the explaination will take up half a page of babbling with no coherent thesis. And that is the main problem. Lady in the Water is a movie without a thesis.

[Lord of Denial]

I will never see a movie by M Night again.

The acting was laughable and the plot was paper thin and made little sense to anyone with me or others I talked to on my way out of the theater. The characters just magically believed everything they where told about this woman and themselves without question and without a single bit of proof.

And worst of all nothing and I mean nothing actually happened in this movie to make you be interested these weak characters. It was boring from beginning to end.

[drwho]

Ok so someone spoil. Are those real monsters or fake ones that just show up to make it look scary? Do they eat anyone?

[Lord of Denial]

Ok so someone spoil. Are those real monsters or fake ones that just show up to make it look scary? Do they eat anyone?


Nothing happens in this movie period. Nothing

[Legato]

Nothing happens in this movie period. Nothing

You serious? If thats true then what good is it to introduce monsters when they dont do squat.

[Lord of Denial]

Go to Rotten Tomatoes and you will see a 21% rating and reviews that are right on when they tear this movie apart.

It was hands down the worst movie I have seen this year.

[drwho]

I was thinking maybe it is a one time scene where someone imagines that they see monsters so they could put it in the trailer and trick everyone like they did with the village.

[Jack Zodiac]

Well, for some horror movies, the element of an unseen adversary makes the movie more thrilling. The first "Evil Dead," for instance. A lot of nothing happened in that movie, but it was still a great horror/thriller. It all depends on what you do with those horror elements.

With "The Village," the biggest fault was introducing the monster, allowing us to see it, and then revealing it as nothing more than a suit. I suppose, though, that continuing to use it even while the main character is blind was a pretty good idea. In the previews for "Lady in the Water," we see the monster itself. When you physically see a monster in a horror movie, you expect a lot to be done with it. And if nothing's done with it, well, then I can see that detracting from the movie.

[malephoenix]

I deeply enjoyed this movie. It wasn't formulaic at all, and maybe I was just in the right mood or whatever, but I was enthralled by the characters, especially Mr. H and the crossword guy. And I found just as much to appreciate in this movie as any of his others. Each one has a main thought or focus. Unbreakable's was "What if comic heroes are simply exagerrations of real people?" And my personal favorite, Signs; "Everything happens for a reason." This one was simply "Everybody has a purpose." DDM, I found it a tremendous thesis, and only made better because it was not done at all the way we're used to. Which, for me, was a welcome change. Indeed, I agree with the poster that said M. Night Shama-lama-ding-dong basically does indy movies with a full budget. Wonderful film. Look forward to seeing it again.

[Shadowfax32]

Ok so someone spoil. Are those real monsters or fake ones that just show up to make it look scary? Do they eat anyone?

They are real monsters. They only attack people.

[pennywisdom]

Judging by the press and TV interviews with actors and Shyamalan leading up to this film, I just assumed they didn't want to ruin the premise by blabbing and giving everything away. Now I see that the reason they didn't give anything substantial away about the film is because there isn't anything substantial to say. I didn't see it yet, but after reading enough reviews, I don't plan to.

[Lord of Denial]

I just thought about this, How damn big a ego does this guy have to actually insert himself into the movie as the character who's life and work will help change the world?

And also to spent half the movie mocking critics for not seeing his genius and gifts as the great filmmaker he believes himself to be.

Self-absorbed jackass!

[Albert]

The Six Sense is the only M. Night movie I have ever truly enjoyed, and seeing the progressively decreasing returns of enjoyment I do believe the man is becoming extinct in his own lifetime. A pity, too, because Sixth is such a well-crafted story.

I know Unbreakable gets alot of love from people, especially in my circle of friends, but I can't really se why. Sure, it deals with the concept of myths in comic literature, but its a far, far cry from Joeseph Campbell. The story IS predictable, the characters and performances totally uninvolvolving and wooden, and the pace of the movie is abysmally slow.

I actually liked the characters in Signs, and the relationships between each of them. If this had been a straight drama, I might have actually liked this film. But instead, we get aliens locked in pantries and the aliens have a vulnerability that would not have flown in the worst 50s B grade sci-fi movie.

Despite that, I went (tic) and saw (tic tic) The Village. Despite warnings from critics and friends alike, I paid my money and sat in the dark. Wow. Bad. Just. Awful. Most telling of all was a friend of mine whom before I went, said to me: "You might enjoy it, if you don't try and guess the ending during the movie." Well, that would have required some sort of electro-shock device. Not only did I (and everyone else) see that ending coming, I didn't even realize until the end that I wasn't supposed to realize what was going on.

I'd have zero interest in seeing Lady if it weren't for one thing. Paul Giamatti. I've never disliked a performance of his that I have seen. So, one of my favorite actors is paired with my least favorite directors. Fate can be cruel. I wonder what the hell Paul was thinking. I'll just have to wait for it to come out on DVD... which shouldn't atke long. The Village seemed to be in video stores within two months of its theatrical release.

[Nikita]

I'm so tired of folks comparing every movie he does to his other movies. Just enjoy his movies for what they are, not for what you think they should be. I think everyone puts their expectations up way too high for each of his movies to the point of being ridiculous and unrealistic. I enjoyed Lady in the Water.......because I didn't expect it to be another Sixth Sense or another Unbreakable, etc. I just enjoyed it as a simple story of people getting together under unusual circumstances.

I thought it was haunting and simple and that's what I enjoyed about it.

[Ontir]

Based upon what I'd heard, I was expecting a train-wreck of a movie, but despite some flaws, the really bad minimally animated opening, and the self-indulgence of casting himself, chief among them, it's an enjoyable, and really moving film.

[xnef1025]

I just saw this and had to say I liked it a lot. It was marketed wrong. Too many people went in expecting horror, but it's not. It's a fantasy movie that focuses on the characters caught up by a living fairy tale. Giamatti carries the whole thing as Cleavland Heap. His growth from a damaged man who'd given up on life in to a hero with renewed purpose was wonderful to watch. If you like fantasy and don't mind Shamaylan's usual wordiness, check this one out.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

BBC´s movie critic Mark Kermode destroyed the film, it´s hillarious just to listen to him cutting loose.. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/fivelive/entertainment/kermode.shtml)

[Jared]

"Absolute self-indulgent waffle!"
"It's like a director commiting hari kari on screen"

Heh.

[Nate Grey]

I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. I'm so glad I saw it. And technically there was a twist in the movie (ha, he couldn't resist), but it was a good one (I'm talking about the critic). Actually, the movie has a lot of "twists" like that, if you can really count any of them as twists, namely everyone was trying to figure out the fairytale and repeatedly got it wrong. And not for lack of trying.

It was a movie about finding out what your purpose is in this world, and learning we pretty much all have a part to play in it. At least, that's what *I* took from it. The nymph was just a means to get that message across. I just can't get over how moving the movie was (Giamatti truly has great acting skills) and how everything came together at the end so nicely.

I guess it was marketed wrong, cause its a modern day fairytale. The grass dog (forget the actual name) made a scary antagonist, I thought. I didn't really see anything coming, with the only exception being when it turned out Heap WASN'T the guardian, I instantly knew who was.

I really enjoyed this movie and can't recommend it enough. Definately getting bought when it comes out on DVD.

[Nate Grey]

I'm so tired of folks comparing every movie he does to his other movies. Just enjoy his movies for what they are, not for what you think they should be. I think everyone puts their expectations up way too high for each of his movies to the point of being ridiculous and unrealistic. I enjoyed Lady in the Water.......because I didn't expect it to be another Sixth Sense or another Unbreakable, etc. I just enjoyed it as a simple story of people getting together under unusual circumstances.

I thought it was haunting and simple and that's what I enjoyed about it.

Haunting and simple! Two other words I would use to describe it. Agree with the rest of your post, too. I didn't expect another Unbreakable or Signs, I just went in expecting a modern day fairytale. And it was that, true, but it was also a GOOD modern day fairytale.

[rondre sleazde]

Love this movie. I watch it every other day on dvd.

[Buried Alien]

Love this movie. I watch it every other day on dvd.

You must know some Chinese folks, then. :)

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[xnef1025]

I know where he got the word "Narf" from now.

Pinky: Point! Zort! Narf! Egad!

:p

[Eliseu Gouveia]

I have to admit I felt like cheering when the three monkey thiungs jumped on the green dog, it was pretty cool .

[Nate Grey]

I have to admit I felt like cheering when the three monkey thiungs jumped on the green dog, it was pretty cool .

I felt the same way.

[J. Robb]

Well, I happened to see "Lady in the Water" at the cheap theatre tonight and WOW... it was really, really bad. Like, I was very close to just walking out and I never walk out. Whatever the "message" is, whatever the "meaning", the most important factor is conveying it in an entertaining fashion. This movie was perplexingly bad.

I've liked some of Shyamalan's other movies, which is why I found this movie so amazingly bizarre. It was like he took everything he knew about storytelling and decided to do the opposite. So much exposition the actual story is redundant, in one (long) scene the exposition is literally phoned in. That cracked me up. I've heard Shyamalan say the movie is based on a bedtime story he told his kid(s), but it seemed to me like this story was made up by a kid. A big budget, special effects-laden story being made up as they go along by an eight year-old.

Sorry if this comes off as overly harsh, but honestly, I haven't seen a movie that bad in the theatre in a long time. I haven't walked out of a movie so perplexed since "Starship Troopers". I certainly wasn't expecting a Nazi propaganda film when I saw that, and I wasn't expecting such amateurish storytelling in "Lady in the Water".

[Nate Grey]

lol don't apologize. If you don't like the movie you don't like the movie. Sorry you didn't enjoy it, but me, I'm itching for a DVD release. Already bought the score to hold me over till then.