Lady in the Water

9

RobertB.Jul 21, 2006

Suprisingly funny, tasteful, modern fairytale. The critics can go to hell on this one.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

JohnS.Jul 21, 2006

Don't listen to the critics. Most of them have totally overlooked the fact that this has no intention to tie itself to everyday life. It's a fairy tale, and the characters complicating of everything is just what you and I would do Don't listen to the critics. Most of them have totally overlooked the fact that this has no intention to tie itself to everyday life. It's a fairy tale, and the characters complicating of everything is just what you and I would do if we had to figure out a fairy tale for ourselves. Shyamalan is brilliant with monsters, and it's a relief that there isn't a twist ending for its own sake. The story has no holes, but the meaning of what goes on is up for debate. Do NOT confuse that with a misshapen plot.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

JakeJul 22, 2006

Great film, great acting, and great story. critics...they dont know anything.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

KatherineW.Jul 23, 2006

Don't let the critics fool you. Lady In The Water is a beautiful film, filled with subtle symbolism and hidden meanings. If you leave the film without having caught the Christ figure, the anti-war leanings, or the director's Don't let the critics fool you. Lady In The Water is a beautiful film, filled with subtle symbolism and hidden meanings. If you leave the film without having caught the Christ figure, the anti-war leanings, or the director's statement about his own work, then you didn't look hard enough. This movie is a fairytale, a story that represents greater things that the characters themselves. It is, ultimitely, a story of hope in a grey world, and I am amazed that so few people can see beneath the surface of this wonderful film.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

SusanM.Jul 24, 2006

I thought this movie had a great story, and excellent acting by Paul Giamatti, Bryce Dallas Howard and the supporting cast. Even Shyamalan was pretty good! There is a lot of beauty and hope in this film, and it is my favourite of his films I thought this movie had a great story, and excellent acting by Paul Giamatti, Bryce Dallas Howard and the supporting cast. Even Shyamalan was pretty good! There is a lot of beauty and hope in this film, and it is my favourite of his films to date. I really felt touched when I left the theatre, which was such a nice feeling. I am actually very shocked by all the terrible things that are being said about it...I guess you have to have an open mind going into it, don't expect it to be like the last 10 films you saw because it isn't. It's just special.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

ShaunM.Aug 11, 2006

I love how people are so dumb and unperceptive. This is an excellent movie. Of course the critics didn't like this movie... the movie bashes critics outright! Whatever. Go see this and look forward to a DIFFERENT experience instead of I love how people are so dumb and unperceptive. This is an excellent movie. Of course the critics didn't like this movie... the movie bashes critics outright! Whatever. Go see this and look forward to a DIFFERENT experience instead of all the mindless drivel that seems to pollute the screens nowadays.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

thatguyAug 13, 2006

i have NO IDEA why the critics dissed this film so bad! thi smovie was much better than the though-low-rated-still-overrated the village. this movie, though it lacked scenes of horror, was a very incredible and beautiful.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

DylanG.Feb 14, 2007

Super heart warming. I worked for years in a rep-movie theatre and have seen all kinds of indie films and I very much enjoyed this one. While this movie seems to have been hated by the critics I loved it. It breathed a freshness into both Super heart warming. I worked for years in a rep-movie theatre and have seen all kinds of indie films and I very much enjoyed this one. While this movie seems to have been hated by the critics I loved it. It breathed a freshness into both the way the story unfolds and its handling of fairytale cliches making somehow seem fresh all over again.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

lukechristianscAug 26, 2015

Who cares if the story is fleshed out or Shyamalan's Greek-mythology bed time story is confusing, but "Lady In The Water" is mystical, magical and peaceful also scary, writer-director M. Night Shyamalan keeps us interested into the charactersWho cares if the story is fleshed out or Shyamalan's Greek-mythology bed time story is confusing, but "Lady In The Water" is mystical, magical and peaceful also scary, writer-director M. Night Shyamalan keeps us interested into the characters and the Greek-mythology, be glad he didn't make the film boring. A building manager Cleveland Heep (played by Paul Giamatti) rescues a woman named Story (Bryce Dallas Howard) from danger he discovers she is a narf a character from a bedtime story who is trying to make a treacherous journey from our world back into hers. Cleveland and his tenants discover that they are also characters in the bedtime story. Cleveland starts to fall in love with her he works together with his tenants to protect her from deadly creatures called "Scrunt" from preventing Story to go home to the "Blue World." WARNING: This isn't a family film. It's cliche'd and the story is silly but who cares, but this is Shyamalan's biggest ample imagination I have ever seen. Maybe this isn't Giamatti's best work but he and Howard did tried and that's all the credit I can give them. This fantasy film is magnificent and striking. Grade A-… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

[Anonymous]Jul 26, 2006

Good movie.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

DavidAug 4, 2006

critics have been much to severe on this flick, its not "signs" or "sixth sense", but, it is a great fairy tale telling, with the odd characters we have to expect from this screenwriter. that a character playing a film/book critic is the critics have been much to severe on this flick, its not "signs" or "sixth sense", but, it is a great fairy tale telling, with the odd characters we have to expect from this screenwriter. that a character playing a film/book critic is the only victim of a grizzly (off screen) death, likely motivated most of the red ink. well worth matinee money!… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

8

PabloEJan 10, 2008

Maybe I am stupid, but I was touched by this movie. It is just a fairy tale after all and in my humble opinion much better than all that predictable Harry Potter cultural non-sense.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

GregoryB.Jul 22, 2006

I can't believe this got such low reviews from critics, but I can see why. M. Night, isn't really liked by them in the first place, cast himself a small part in his own movie, and even had a critic character in this that was made I can't believe this got such low reviews from critics, but I can see why. M. Night, isn't really liked by them in the first place, cast himself a small part in his own movie, and even had a critic character in this that was made fun and says in the movie, "there is nothing original anymore." Well if that critic would have stepped out of the screen, he would have seen something that was. If you liked the village, you will like this. It is a beautiful story that is intriguing as it is hypnotic. It is "slow" as there isn't anything blowing up every 5 seconds, but who wants that 24/7. The acting is superb and as I don't think he should have necessarily cast himself in this, he does a good job. GO SEE IT. My fiancee and I love his movies and were talking for an hour after this one. Critics should drop their biases and grudges and see this movie for what it really is, a compelling and thought provoking tale.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

8

OliverC.Jul 23, 2006

This movie is very different than what the commercials suggested, it isn't really a scary movie though it has scary parts. Its fun, a lot of fun, and the problem people have with this movie is that they take the plot too seriously. Of This movie is very different than what the commercials suggested, it isn't really a scary movie though it has scary parts. Its fun, a lot of fun, and the problem people have with this movie is that they take the plot too seriously. Of course it doesn't make perfect sense because it's a fairy tale. It means more than that, to me it tried to show how important all of the people you meet in life are even if they have small roles and how people can accomplish things if they work together. It also has cool monsters.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

SilusG.Jul 23, 2006

Not MNS's best, but certainly a solid showing... and his larger budget is nicely reflected in better creature work. The difficulty is that this movie is a fairy tale

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

CynthiaL.Jul 27, 2006

I found the movie entertaining. A story, that kept my attention to the very end. I think the critics wanted this movie to fail. They were panning it before people got a chance to see it for themselves.

1 of 1 users found this helpful

8

BitBurnJul 30, 2006

This was, yet, another strong picture by M.Night and yes its right up there with Sixth Sense, Signs and The Village. A matter of fact, the movie was exactly what I come to expect from M.Night and I mean this in a good way. Yes, he uses the This was, yet, another strong picture by M.Night and yes its right up there with Sixth Sense, Signs and The Village. A matter of fact, the movie was exactly what I come to expect from M.Night and I mean this in a good way. Yes, he uses the same twists and spookiness as usual and this is possibly why he was booed by Hollywood critics but, come on, the guy has nothing to prove here. His recipe works, just like a Big Mac, and that's why we like it so much!… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

8

DerekG.Aug 1, 2006

Perhaps a bit too literal of a "fairy tale," but I truly don't understand why the critics are trashing it so badly. Perhaps it's because of the critic character in the film. Did Shyamalan hit a bit too close to home?

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

BrendanAug 2, 2006

Lady In the Water definantly does not deserve the low ratings these critics are giving. Shyamalan wrote this whole story for goodness sake! You must be pretty darn talented to come up with a story such as Lady in the Water. I definitely Lady In the Water definantly does not deserve the low ratings these critics are giving. Shyamalan wrote this whole story for goodness sake! You must be pretty darn talented to come up with a story such as Lady in the Water. I definitely reccomend this movie to anyone. Great job Shyamalan!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

MelecioR.Jul 22, 2006

I enjoyed it a lot, forget the critics. Its definitely very original.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

BlakeK.Jul 23, 2006

This movie might not be scary, but it's definately good. The whole movie is basically a bedtime story come true. Not big on twists, but I think it has a nice pace, and has some thought provoking ideas. This isn't the best movie M. This movie might not be scary, but it's definately good. The whole movie is basically a bedtime story come true. Not big on twists, but I think it has a nice pace, and has some thought provoking ideas. This isn't the best movie M. has made, but it's not horrible. Don't listen to the critics, it's worth seeing.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

LindaS.Jul 23, 2006

The crowning compliment came from my daughter as we were discussing the film on the way home from the movies today ... "Shyamalan's movies may not always be knock-down excellent, but I love going to them because they are different -- The crowning compliment came from my daughter as we were discussing the film on the way home from the movies today ... "Shyamalan's movies may not always be knock-down excellent, but I love going to them because they are different -- 'always something you don't expect." And I agree. M. Night is original. That's what keeps me going to his movies. And I suspect that LITW grows on you with multiple viewings much like The Village did. It bothers me that both TheVillage and LITW were marketed as horror movies. Neither one of them fit that bill. The Village was a haunting romance and LITW was a story of rebirth and new beginnings. 'Loved it. (I voted it an 8 instead of a 10 because SIGNS is my #10 MNS movie.) :)… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

EricH.Jul 23, 2006

Fun summer movie, definitely better than how the critics are portraying it. Although some parts did seem a bit self-indulgent, the overall effect of the movie imparted that same magical feel that the best of MNS' works possess. Great Fun summer movie, definitely better than how the critics are portraying it. Although some parts did seem a bit self-indulgent, the overall effect of the movie imparted that same magical feel that the best of MNS' works possess. Great escapist experience.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

ElginB.Jul 25, 2006

Frankly, I think this movie was just a big F.U. to Shyamalan's critics, and not just with the film critic character. In fact, the movie breaks lots of "rules" filmmakers and other storytellers are supposed to follow. The characters are Frankly, I think this movie was just a big F.U. to Shyamalan's critics, and not just with the film critic character. In fact, the movie breaks lots of "rules" filmmakers and other storytellers are supposed to follow. The characters are thinly drawn and often stereotypical; the plot twists in the movie seem almost ad hoc and are often advanced by exposition instead of through action. Beyond that, Shyamalan has a lot of fun with his reputation by casting himself as a Messianic writer who's opus is entitled "The Cookbook"-- sounds like a reference to the Twilight Zone, to me. And, of course, there's the character of Farber himself who is made fun of in a much more overt fashion. Anyway, I think this movie was Shyamalan's attempt at showing that he can do everything the wrong way and STILL make an entertaining movie. The fact that he succeeds only shows how much of a true talent he is.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

JayE.Jul 25, 2006

M. Night Shyamalan's movies from this point out will all have a crippling flaw--they are not Sixth Sense. Any person who walks into a theater will expect a haunting thriller with a Big Twist at the end. When they see a heart-warming M. Night Shyamalan's movies from this point out will all have a crippling flaw--they are not Sixth Sense. Any person who walks into a theater will expect a haunting thriller with a Big Twist at the end. When they see a heart-warming though dark fairy tale with eccentric and interesting characters... they will be grossly dissapointed. What we have is a children's fairy tale that is told for the grownups, with dark visuals and off-beat characters with some very funny moments. We need to approach it as we approached the fairy tales of our youth. We know how to do that. What we have is a Tim Burton movie as told by M. Night Shyamalan.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

KirinH.Jul 25, 2006

Heard the bad reviews and went to see it anyways. I liked it a lot. Of course, I loved Unbreakable and many hated that one too. I think he is a genios...who else can be that imaginative? At least it is not a rehash of everything else!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

SGJul 27, 2006

Critics are incredibly stupid to rate this movie, which is a fairy tale told in modern symbols, as having a lack of logic. They didn't get it!! It's not meant to be taken seriously or to be a magic to modern life type Critics are incredibly stupid to rate this movie, which is a fairy tale told in modern symbols, as having a lack of logic. They didn't get it!! It's not meant to be taken seriously or to be a magic to modern life type story---it's a bed time story for childreren, and nothing more. I think they just don't know how to advertise his movies properly. The characters are all simple because they live inside of the director's "childeren' book" which apparantly he concocted for his own kids. The only one of his movies that should be examined under the logics of real life is 6th sense. The others, like this one, are just folk tales or fairy tales. Critics are a waste of space. This was not a bad movie, if you recognize that its a fairy tale for kids. He has some damn good atmpospher tricks that no other director has. nuff said.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

PhishLJul 29, 2006

Either you love it or hate it. i think we should watch it with an open mind, keeping in mind its a fairy tale. also its something different, not like all the other formulaic crap that comes out of hollywood's bowels every single day!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

JustinL.Jul 22, 2006

Every Shyamalan movie is different, requiring an open mind to consider yourself a fan of his work. Though unique, all have merit. Lady in the Water is a rare original fairy tale, and the most humor-rich of his films. I found a lot of it Every Shyamalan movie is different, requiring an open mind to consider yourself a fan of his work. Though unique, all have merit. Lady in the Water is a rare original fairy tale, and the most humor-rich of his films. I found a lot of it overly convenient to be believable, but the overall experience was a positive one. Shymalan weaves a wonderful web, also knowing that everything doesn't need to be shown on the screen. Giamatti was great, Howard was mysteriously less-is-more, and the ensemble cast was cleverly entertaining. Glad I saw it in theaters before reading any reviews or watching trailers. I imagine our home will own the DVD, too -- just like The Village.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

PaulD.Jul 22, 2006

Loved the movie. MNS's best so far. He uses cinema elements in a very effective way. often you have scenes where more than one character are involved but the framing is such that you only see one character and in some way are connected Loved the movie. MNS's best so far. He uses cinema elements in a very effective way. often you have scenes where more than one character are involved but the framing is such that you only see one character and in some way are connected to their thoughts and feelings while aware of the other characters presence. This forces your imagination to fill in the blanks. Well done cinematography. Shyamalan also uses speed ramping in a very effective way, and allows the viewer to understand the pace of the film and continue the suspense properly. While the plot meanders, the plot devices seem a little canned but are none the less compelling. the acting is superb and the blend of Mythology and real life is interesting and engaging. A beautiful film that tells a story using all of the tools a good filmmaker should: cinematography, sound, editing, and mise en scene. Wish it wasn't getting such poor reviews, because it's such an intelligent film. Great work Shyamalan!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

MichasiJul 23, 2006

Usually, personal films like this tend to marginalize audiences, but it

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

LucasR.Jul 24, 2006

We live in an age where we no longer celebrate originality. in fact we celebrate the lack of it. in a world of crap movies we have a movie like "Lady in The Water" it may not be perfect, or M.Night Shamalayns best work, but it tells a story. We live in an age where we no longer celebrate originality. in fact we celebrate the lack of it. in a world of crap movies we have a movie like "Lady in The Water" it may not be perfect, or M.Night Shamalayns best work, but it tells a story. It has humor, its focused, and your supposed to latch on to something here. You're supposed to hold on to the idea that no matter what circumstance you are in, no matter where your life has taken you, you can have an awakening. You can wake up one day and realize that you are not alone, you can believe in something, and others will believe in you when you do that. Its about hope. In an age of war, terrorism, and celebration of our moral decay. You have one guy who wants to tell a story, and he did. I swear M.Night Shalayan is way ahead of his time. His ability to create a world within a world and be able to relate to his audience is his most valuable gift. "think outside of the box". Too many critics follow a sort of rule/path in which they can compare and "intelligently" critique a movie. Art is art and at the end of the day, I walked out of that theatre feeling good about myself, and thats all that really mattered to me.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

GaryM.Jul 28, 2006

Let me tell you why I gave this film an "8." This movie deserves to be seen. It deals with what should be true humanity and what being good is all about. Nowadays, being good is severely underrated. Empathy is only but a hazy dream. How do Let me tell you why I gave this film an "8." This movie deserves to be seen. It deals with what should be true humanity and what being good is all about. Nowadays, being good is severely underrated. Empathy is only but a hazy dream. How do we strive to become better? Survive life's ordeals? With love, unity, selflesness? It's true this movie has noticeable flaws, but overall it is the message, the complete product, which is truly overwhelming. This is this summer's nicest, feel good movie yet. But, hey, ... that is just my opinion.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

MichaelO.Jul 28, 2006

The movie was excellent. It wasnt the same sort of twist as is usual for M. Nights movies, however the acting and little bits of flavor added throught were wonderful. The human element in this movie is unmissable.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

MagicBuns1992Jul 17, 2020

I felt inspired to write a review for this movie because it is so unfairly rated by the critics! Is it a brilliant movie? No, it has it's flaws such as not always being consistent but it's good! Is it childish? Yes, but it's story was clearlyI felt inspired to write a review for this movie because it is so unfairly rated by the critics! Is it a brilliant movie? No, it has it's flaws such as not always being consistent but it's good! Is it childish? Yes, but it's story was clearly influenced by a children like fairy tale - it's meant to have that element! One of the things that truly stood out for me in this movie was that it did not play on the usual tropes, in fact the best twists in the movie work on this finely. The role the male protagonist is an example of this, the actor who plays him (Giamatti) isn't exactly a model. No, instead he's a typical man in an extraordinary situation and his "purpose" becomes one of the most heartwarming features of the movie.

This isn't a horror, it's a fairy-tale. It has a few funny jokes, the acting is strong enough to hold, it has some heartwarming moments and it also has a message. It may not be for everyone but I personally felt it had a heart-warming ambience; it's unusual and it truly gives of the feel that this is a an art piece that Shyamalan wanted to express.

Give it a try, you may just enjoy it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

HeatherC.Jul 23, 2006

I go to movies to be entertained. I've been told a good movie is one that makes you forget you're wearing a watch so you never look to see how long it's been going. This movie did that for me. True it's contrived and not I go to movies to be entertained. I've been told a good movie is one that makes you forget you're wearing a watch so you never look to see how long it's been going. This movie did that for me. True it's contrived and not very believable but isn't that what a fairy tale is. While there's not much entertainment in the world right now it was a fun 2 hours to go to the theater and be swept away by this story and the incredible acting of Bryce Dallas Howard. I've enjoyed all of Shyamalan's movies and I think I'm one of a few so I feel this was money well spent and a good way to spend the day in rainy New England.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

TylerW.Jul 23, 2006

An interesting peice of work. Giamatti and Howard are excellent;Shyamalan's role in the cast of this film was not at all bad.As for some of the nay-sayers out there who hated this movie I have this to say;Shyamalan does not glorify An interesting peice of work. Giamatti and Howard are excellent;Shyamalan's role in the cast of this film was not at all bad.As for some of the nay-sayers out there who hated this movie I have this to say;Shyamalan does not glorify himself by acting in a key role.That's like saying Mel Gibson's role as William Wallace in Braveheart [which he directed] was an egotistical, selfrightous decision. And Shyamalan's choice to kill off the film cridict wasn't meant to give a big fuck you to the critics who misjudge him, but it was supposed to show what happened to the non-believer,cynic of The Cove appartment complex. Sadly though, most film criticts are very cynical, narrow-minded people.This film wasn't what I expected, but it was still a fine vessal of a story.It's a lot more entertaining than the sundance Indie. sh.. that has been popular lately.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

JeremyW.Jul 26, 2006

For the record: I loved "6th Sense" & "Signs", but hated "Unbreakable" & "The Village"--especially "The Village. So, that said, I was very skeptical when I paid my $10 to go see this movie. As it turned out, I was pleasantly surprised. This For the record: I loved "6th Sense" & "Signs", but hated "Unbreakable" & "The Village"--especially "The Village. So, that said, I was very skeptical when I paid my $10 to go see this movie. As it turned out, I was pleasantly surprised. This movie is not great, but it is entertaining. Most importantly, M.Night does not try to tack on some lame, completely implausible twist ending as in "The Village". He basically just made a bedtime story full of colorful characters and evil beasties. Compared to a lot of the other crap Hollywood has tried to force on us this Summer, this movie holds it's own around 7.0… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

DanN.Jul 31, 2006

Contrary to most of the media critics on here I actually enjoyed the movie. Part of the problem is that in the previews it was billed as a scary movie which it certainly is not. It's more fantasy than anything and should be viewed as Contrary to most of the media critics on here I actually enjoyed the movie. Part of the problem is that in the previews it was billed as a scary movie which it certainly is not. It's more fantasy than anything and should be viewed as such. Just relax and watch a decent bedtime story.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

GenRJan 25, 2007

I really liked this movie. Much more than

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

NatS.Jul 22, 2006

Not bad, though not great. Cool story, but just a little too weird and absurd to compare it to The Sixth Sense

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

WayneP.Jul 25, 2006

Considering the films that usually make tons of money ~ the Hollywood sequels of sequels of forgotten TV shows, and the predictably predictable romantic sit-coms crowded with the latest, hotest "STARS" ~ it's hardly surprising that Considering the films that usually make tons of money ~ the Hollywood sequels of sequels of forgotten TV shows, and the predictably predictable romantic sit-coms crowded with the latest, hotest "STARS" ~ it's hardly surprising that Shyamalan's films are generally unappreciated. Admittedly Shyamalan is an something of an acquired taste, but for anyone who is simply too tired of the fast-food films that crowd the multi-plexs to even moan anymore, Lady in the Water, like all of Shyamalan's films, is deliciously different and unselfconscious fantasy.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

ChadM.Jul 26, 2006

Is Lady in the Water a great film? Certainly not. But a 36? No, no, no, no, no. The incredibly harsh reviews Lady has received must be the byproduct of the current anti-Shyamalan movement apparently sweeping through Hollywood and critic Is Lady in the Water a great film? Certainly not. But a 36? No, no, no, no, no. The incredibly harsh reviews Lady has received must be the byproduct of the current anti-Shyamalan movement apparently sweeping through Hollywood and critic circles. The film suffers through a few inexcusable plot holes and some shamefully self-serving moments that are clearly Shyamalan's chosen method, albeit an immature one, of dealing with criticism. The majority of the film, however, is an interesting, original and beautifully filmed tale. Like him or not, Shyamalan is very skilled at creating mystery and fear for his audience, and that fact that he manages both again in light of the often absurd script only reinforces the idea that this guy does have some talent after all. He just needs someone to stand by him and smack him every time he comes up with a great idea like casting himself as a prolific writer or using some silly plot device such as a bedtime story told in inexplicably sporadic chunks to further the plot.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

ChadS.Jul 29, 2006

"The Lady in the Water" plays like a wet dream for people who indulge in role-playing games like Dungeons and Dragons. How all the tenants readily accept their roles without even a shred of initial skepticism just doesn't work because "The Lady in the Water" plays like a wet dream for people who indulge in role-playing games like Dungeons and Dragons. How all the tenants readily accept their roles without even a shred of initial skepticism just doesn't work because the filmmaker failed to establish the right tone, a platform in which the fantastical could negotiate itself within its realistic setting. But if you're adamantly against the way big-budgeted major studio films are written, in most cases, more than one writer, you'll probably enjoy the quirks, warts and all. In melding the fantastical with the everyday, even the artwork for Helium's "The Magic City" is more successful. "The Lady in the Water"(who should be mute, or learned to speak English like Daryl Hannah in "Splash") has a naive charm; there's an unawareness of how loopy this whole cinematic ordeal really is.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

DamienDarko777May 6, 2011

Meh. This movie is a little too heavy-handed for its own good, but if you can forgive that, then it turns out to be a pretty good fairy tale horror-fantasy with some decent scares and laughs.

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

7

Tss5078Feb 24, 2013

OK, what kind of drugs is M. Night Shyamalan on and how can I get some!? This is one weird, tripped out movie! Overall it's was good, but just very very weird. It has Shyamalan's typical, dark, methodical, presence, as well as his uniqueOK, what kind of drugs is M. Night Shyamalan on and how can I get some!? This is one weird, tripped out movie! Overall it's was good, but just very very weird. It has Shyamalan's typical, dark, methodical, presence, as well as his unique brand of humor. What's not typical thou is this story. I don't give spoilers, so let's just say the whole movie I was either saying WTF?!?! or WOW that's cool! It's a strange one, but unique and imaginative. It took me a little while to figure out, but ultimately I decided, I liked it!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

DanBurritoSep 29, 2015

We all know that M. Night Shyamalan's career started plummeting at a certain point but he gets unfairly criticised for movies like this. I mean sure, it's a bit silly but it's also intruiging. Paul Giamatti was brilliant as usual and BryceWe all know that M. Night Shyamalan's career started plummeting at a certain point but he gets unfairly criticised for movies like this. I mean sure, it's a bit silly but it's also intruiging. Paul Giamatti was brilliant as usual and Bryce Dallas Howard was really good too. My biggest complaint was that there's this character who only works out one half of his body (so one arm is more muscular than the other) and while the character isn't forgotten or anything, you'd expect that detail to come in important. But still, it was an interesting movie, definitely better than some of the Shyamalan disasters.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

DubeauJun 23, 2018

Seen this movie many times now. For me it's a tale for children and adults. The way the story is told is really interesting because it unveils itself like a puzzle. The acting of Giamatti is amazing, and Bryce isn't bad. Some of the secondarySeen this movie many times now. For me it's a tale for children and adults. The way the story is told is really interesting because it unveils itself like a puzzle. The acting of Giamatti is amazing, and Bryce isn't bad. Some of the secondary characters are funny and they should have more space in the movie. The filming isn't always good. Bad angles and poor lighting are everywhere. The FX are decent but are very static in their presentation. The music has some very interesting tracks. Shyamalan went into another style of movie, and I think peoples were expecting much of the same. I give the movie a 68%. Giamatti and Howard saved that movie in my opinion. It's not that bad actually but visually it can be boring.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

JulienJan 17, 2007

This is by far the less interesting Shyamalan movie. But still, the direction and the music are amazing, and the story, mere but fearsome, can make you cry at the end.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

JazminA.Feb 20, 2007

Nice story although underdeveloped. Maybe Shymalan should concentrate on writing the next movie and get someone else to direct.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

BrandonTJun 27, 2008

A weird movie but oddly entertaining and chilling. Shyamalan mixes some humor and horror in this powerful film. Not the strongest of his set though and certainly not a classic.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

KevinS.Jul 26, 2006

This movie is not nearly as bad as the critics are saying - they clearly don't get it. Lady in the Water isn't Shyamalan's best either. Giamatti does a brilliant job - and some of the special effects are great.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

JustinS.Jul 29, 2006

I did enjoy this movie. Surely it wasn't my favorite M. Night Shyamalan film; I daresay my least favorite. Still, I think the horrid reviews it has received have gone overboard. I do think a lot of the negative critiques are valid. I did enjoy this movie. Surely it wasn't my favorite M. Night Shyamalan film; I daresay my least favorite. Still, I think the horrid reviews it has received have gone overboard. I do think a lot of the negative critiques are valid. There's a LOT of holes in it. While there is an outstanding cast in "Lady", there are many unneeded characters. I found it especially odd that the tenants in "The Cove" who were least helpful to the Lady's cause were given the most screentime, and as a result came off as more heroic than the actual suppossed heroes. And, to finish with my own negative critiques, I had difficulty seeing what the overall message was that the animals wanted the human vessels to hear. The majority of critiques I've read of the film pay particular attention to the arrogance of Shyamalan shown through the film. While I have read a number of articles that point to a definite ego and insularity the filmmaker is unfortunately guilty of, I think many of the critics comments are unwarranted. First off (and I'd say most importantly to note), Shyamalan didn't depict himself as a "hero whose writing would change the world in the future." Yes, his character is promised this fate in the film. But the character is a social/political commentary. He's not making movies. He's actually cast off as quite humble, though a bit of a smart ass to his sister. He doesn't seem to take himself to seriously at first, but rather just wants to get down in writing a few ideas of what he sees as wrong in America. Shyamalan, unless I'm REALLY missing something, has (aside from the Village, perhaps my favorite of his films) never had political commentaries in his films. I don't even know what his political beliefs are. "Lady in the Water" never reveals the particular characters beliefs, thus saving it from being overly partisan. I also do not think the films depiction of "critics" should be taken THAT seriously...though the critics I've read thus fart, particularly Roger Ebert (my personal favorite) show an enormity of sympathy for Mr. Farber (played hilariously by Bob Balaban). Yes, Mr. Farber is an isolated, antisocial literary and film prick who thinks he has the concept of story mastered. And yes, Shyamalan probably was trying to send a sort of pre-emptive strike against the films inevitable cultured despisers. Still, Mr. Farber's main flaw wasn't the very fact that he was a critic, or even that he was arrogant about it. In his own odd way he was quite helpful to the quest and the Lady. Rather, his fault was the isolated life he chose to live. He shows no interest at all in his neighbors, is grumpy, and is totally unapproachable. Worst of all, he has no love for stories any longer. His approach to critiquing them and his social behavior destroys any passion he may have once had for the stories that connect people together. I think this is a sin many critics are often guilty of, and I'm glad to see it in a movie. The films biggest fault in its depiction of him (and criticism in general) is the disturbing way his death is shown, and the untactfull comic relief incorporated in it. Yes, Lady in the Water was pretty silly. But it was, I must admit, very fun to watch. It was refreshing to be brought back to to the world of fairy tales, albeit imperfectly. And even if the film doesn't change the world (and I'm pretty sure it won't), it at least brought us back a certain "childlike spirit" in reviving good ol' fashion "Big Bad Wolf" stories that many of us miss .… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

MarkD.Jul 31, 2006

Better than reviews! Snobby movie critic probably made most critics angry and snipey.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

BrianMcCriticJul 10, 2013

No question this film is the start of a drop off for Shyamalan, but call me crazy I still enjoy watching this film as a ridiculous, bizzare, and overall nonsensical bit of fun.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

InlikeflynnJun 8, 2014

I don't know what kind of mind set was the director on when writing the script but he must have been way over his head...

There are many things here that don't click together: i mean, there are some memorable character traits and theI don't know what kind of mind set was the director on when writing the script but he must have been way over his head...

There are many things here that don't click together: i mean, there are some memorable character traits and the directing is actually competent, but the whole movie is stuck in it's own state of mind that is hard to fully sympathize with the circumstances, for example: why prolong the movie with unneeded conversations? they pretty much add nothing to the film, that doesn't classify has "character development", why all the weird editing and camera positions? they just make the movie silly to watch and what's up with shyamalan casting himself has the choose one? is he pretending to be the best? is he trolling us...?

The movie is memorable, has a nice soundtrack and the directing effort is where it counts, with it's actors who all do a good job in my opinion... however I can't help but scratch my head at all the weird choices and ridiculous style that make the movie more off a comedy than anything else. I can at least say that the movie made me watch it until the end and I can appreciate that the director wanted to break the common rules of storytelling.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

BrianM.Aug 5, 2006

Shyamalan underwhelms me once again with, 'Lady in the Water'. Granted, I wasn't expecting anything even decent when I went into the theatre, so I was not let down, merely met with an adequate film that does not disappoint, Shyamalan underwhelms me once again with, 'Lady in the Water'. Granted, I wasn't expecting anything even decent when I went into the theatre, so I was not let down, merely met with an adequate film that does not disappoint, but does not excite in any way either. Although some things are "not as they seem" here, the movie is still very predictable. Shyamalan tries to throw some twists into the mix, but is quite unsuccessful with this. Overall, this is a pass in my opinion until it hits shelves on DVD. Then, I'd recommend renting it, because it is still not a BAD film. Certainly a step-up from the dreadful, 'The Village' I'm hoping this is the first film in re-establishing Shyamalan's touch with filmmaking that we haven't seen since 'The Sixth Sense' or 'Signs'...I sure hope so. Until then, here is an average film that we are left with. It is amazing that Shyamalan is continuously given so much creative control over his films, that many better filmmakers have not, and will never see in their careers. I do not mean to come off as a "Shyamalan hater", I did love 'Sixth Sense' and liked 'Signs' quite a bit. I suppose that's what happens when the bar is placed at such a high level to begin with.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

NickT.Jul 21, 2006

A fairy tale with more rules than chess. A plodding, contrived and ultimately silly story. But still the picture is studded with moments of directorial genius and saved from banality by Paul Giamatti's formidible but understated A fairy tale with more rules than chess. A plodding, contrived and ultimately silly story. But still the picture is studded with moments of directorial genius and saved from banality by Paul Giamatti's formidible but understated portrayal. MSN, like Jim Cameron, is too gifted a director to be permitted to contiue to do all his own writing. As for his "acting"...MSN please take a tip from Hitchock and stick with the nonspeaking walkby.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

JamesH.Jul 21, 2006

I am a big fan of M's work but this movie seems to have its feet in everywhere. the plot is convoluted but strung out. M always brings a great story but to be honest-the movie is mesmerizingly confusing and ridiculous. I thought PAUL I am a big fan of M's work but this movie seems to have its feet in everywhere. the plot is convoluted but strung out. M always brings a great story but to be honest-the movie is mesmerizingly confusing and ridiculous. I thought PAUL GIAMATTI was excellent along with BRYCE DALLAS HOWARD. The movie touches many emotional levels for several characters and is heartfelt. REDEMPTION, ONE'S FUTURE and HEALING. I really think this movie has too much of a good thing, which hinders the overall impact. you could say that simplifying the plot would get less confusion but more clarity. overall?, I liked it-but I expected more-or should I say less?--really only 2.5 stars… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

RickyQ.Jul 21, 2006

A very weird movie, but it is quite entertaining. A fairy tale is what it is, so don't go in taking the movie too seriously.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

EliasK.Jul 26, 2006

Giamatti was brilliant as usual. Without him I shutter to think what the film would have been. Will I go see it again in the theaters like I did Signs and The Village - no. Will I rent or buy the DVD when it comes out - not likely.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

EleazarJ.Aug 12, 2006

This movie has too much characters to boot which can easily confuse casual viewers. Also too much mumbo-jumbo words referring to the creatures and the resident's role in fulfilling their part. A sheer dissapointment when compared to This movie has too much characters to boot which can easily confuse casual viewers. Also too much mumbo-jumbo words referring to the creatures and the resident's role in fulfilling their part. A sheer dissapointment when compared to 'The Village'. I want more unexpected endings!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

baoDec 26, 2006

An okay film, although it moves like a snail. See it if you want to be like a kid again..nor not.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

MetalMan95Sep 13, 2010

Critical reviews for a movie that, if you just checked your brain at the door, you could've enjoyed it. This movie is so far out there and is a fun movie. Don't incorporate logic, if you do you wont like it. It is a movie for kids, and anyoneCritical reviews for a movie that, if you just checked your brain at the door, you could've enjoyed it. This movie is so far out there and is a fun movie. Don't incorporate logic, if you do you wont like it. It is a movie for kids, and anyone with a fantasy. Watch it, enjoy it, but don't incorporate logic, that would be a huge mistake.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

SpangleJan 5, 2016

Eh, Lady in the Water feels better than this, but this rating also feels a tad generous. I do not really know. On the surface, the story is incredibly dumb, many things occur that are incredibly far-fetched, and the film even (ironically, butEh, Lady in the Water feels better than this, but this rating also feels a tad generous. I do not really know. On the surface, the story is incredibly dumb, many things occur that are incredibly far-fetched, and the film even (ironically, but stupidly) explains itself and story structure. The characterization is odd and people are far to willing to accept that this sea nymph stuff is legit. However, if you look at as a fable, it does come together better and makes you suspend some of that belief. Even better, it really makes you feel something and has a great message in it. However, some of the character actions are incredibly dumb. I think critics took this one purposely due to the characterization the critic, so I feel as though their reactions were a little too harsh, but Lady in the Water certainly stops short of being good, even though I wish it was better.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

JPKJul 11, 2019

Pretty Boring
This in my opinion is Shymalan’s first misfire, It has some alright parts but the film was pretty boring.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

FilipeNetoFeb 13, 2018

A touching story.

This fantasy film talks about the appearance of a sea nymph in the pool of an apartment complex where Cleveland is caretaker. The nymph, Story, will then change the lives of all residents, need to help them to fulfill herA touching story.

This fantasy film talks about the appearance of a sea nymph in the pool of an apartment complex where Cleveland is caretaker. The nymph, Story, will then change the lives of all residents, need to help them to fulfill her mission and return to her world. Directed by M. Night Shyamalan (who also is one of the leading roles), has Bryce Dallas Howard as the protagonist. M. Night Shyamalan has accustomed us to stories with a touch of fantasy and imagination. Its as if this remarkable filmmaker refused to grow and would like to make his films with the imagination of a child playing with a camera. And, in this movie, its pretty much what happens, having himself gone head to the front of them and "playing" with the story that he's creating (as he also wrote the script). But don't think that this movie is bad. It's a good movie has touching scenes and reaches the audience for our children's side, the child that we all have within us. We would like that the plot was real and could be a creature so kind and innocent as that nymph. We would like to see people collaborate as in the movie on several occasions. And that makes us enjoy the film.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

D.C.Aug 9, 2006

I find it very interesting that Shyamalan has such a cult following by some and can be dismissed by others (especially critics at times). I think this film desrves all the comments here... it is good in some respects (atmosphere, I find it very interesting that Shyamalan has such a cult following by some and can be dismissed by others (especially critics at times). I think this film desrves all the comments here... it is good in some respects (atmosphere, cinematography, some of the acting) and pretty formulaic in many others. I think Shyamalan tries hard to establish himself as another Hitchcock and I think this is part of the problem. Every new generation of filmgoers wants an auteur to call their own (especially one with such a cool name) and that perhaps explains all the 9's and 10's people are giving it here. At the same time, the 1's are not fair either. But I do understand the low scores as Shyamalan is beginning to feel like another Tarantino as his films have a hard time living up to the high expectations and hype. The film is fairly decent but I would say rent it. Shyamalan stands out from the mostly crap that is coming out of Hollywood these days, but there are much more compeling and interesting films (independent and international) to see out there.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

4

BillyB.Jul 23, 2006

M. Night Shyamalan has based Lady in the Water on a bedtime story he read told his children and that is the biggest flaw (of many) of the movie- It plays as if someone is making up the story as it unfolds "There was a lady who lived in the M. Night Shyamalan has based Lady in the Water on a bedtime story he read told his children and that is the biggest flaw (of many) of the movie- It plays as if someone is making up the story as it unfolds "There was a lady who lived in the drain of the pool and when she came out there were terrible grass monsters that wanted to eat her but ther were also some good tree monkeys that wanted to help her......" that is how the whole movie plays out, no suspense, no twists just lots of "come on's" and "are you kidding's". There is not one credible acting performance from any of the residents living in the Condos where the story takes place and it will probably knock Giamatti down a few notches on the get list while Bryce Howard's best scene is when she says "narf" and proceeds through the rest of the movie looking like a deaf-mute Carrie. "I see wet people" and nothing much more in this absolute waste of time!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

BirdL.Jul 23, 2006

Is it just me or did anybody else see that stupid microphone hanging from the top of the screen almost all the way through the movie. i mean what a distraction for 8.00 dollars.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

JimP.Jul 24, 2006

There's a great story about Groucho Marx who attended a party and as he was leaving said to the hostess "I've had an unforgettable evening." Then, before she could gush out a reply, added "unfortunately, this wasn't it." That There's a great story about Groucho Marx who attended a party and as he was leaving said to the hostess "I've had an unforgettable evening." Then, before she could gush out a reply, added "unfortunately, this wasn't it." That roughly sums up my response to LITW, which I wanted to like much more than I did. There were people in the cast I enjoy seeing in anything, including the very underused Mary Beth Hurt. But when trying to sum up a film you find yourself saying "well, it wasn't the worst movie I've seen all year" you know in your heart it has to be a contender.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

KevinF.Jul 24, 2006

Fails to establish it

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

MitchM.Feb 25, 2007

I went into this film with a GREAT attitude, really wanting to get lost in this supernatural world, and enjoyed it out of the box. But ... as each scene dragged on, with more layers of incomprehensibly convoluted and voluminous dialogue I went into this film with a GREAT attitude, really wanting to get lost in this supernatural world, and enjoyed it out of the box. But ... as each scene dragged on, with more layers of incomprehensibly convoluted and voluminous dialogue that supposedly dilineated this "other world" ... my eyes became droopy, and I became snoozy, and suddenly I didn't care what was in the pool, or under the grass, or in the trees, or ... zzzzz.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

I_loveJan 31, 2019

There just is too much going on , plus it is boring and sped up at time, while it has some good qualities, the monsters were a bad touch

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

TeresaW.Aug 1, 2006

The film was weak throughout, cluttered beyond understanding and, most notably, uninteresting as a whole. Lady in the Water leaves its audience aching as the forced plot strains their attention span.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

3

TrevorDec 27, 2006

In short this is truly clunky. A fairy tale with such a ridiculously convoluted storyline, it spends almost all of its time giving an exposition. The character with most of the relevant information spends a great deal of the movie saying In short this is truly clunky. A fairy tale with such a ridiculously convoluted storyline, it spends almost all of its time giving an exposition. The character with most of the relevant information spends a great deal of the movie saying 'oh wait, here's something else my mother didn't tell you before'. The director's attitude to both himself (messiah) and film critics (killable) is self-indulgent and distasteful. Nearly everything in this film seems leaden and forced. Many of the actors give good efforts, but the dialogue they're saddled with is just so bad (and embarrasingly earnest), this was never going to work.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

MikeAJul 23, 2006

This wasn't as strong a strory as "The Village". It didn't have a story that really drew us in. Plus the kid reading spiritual things off of the cereal boxes. Come on this movie "jumped the shark" from that point on.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

MattH.Jul 24, 2006

A very self-serving movie -- really a vehicle for Mr. Shylaman to attack the critics he so reviles. Who casts themself in a high profile part in their own movie anyway? And for someone who strives so intently to bring together a diverse A very self-serving movie -- really a vehicle for Mr. Shylaman to attack the critics he so reviles. Who casts themself in a high profile part in their own movie anyway? And for someone who strives so intently to bring together a diverse cast, his depictions of some groups -- for instance, the Korean characters in the movie -- are extremely stereotypical. This movie is a really poor effort all the way round. The final effect is dull and boring. I do still have a huge crush on Sarita Choudoury though...she's gorgeous!!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

Rev.RikardJul 29, 2006

The trailers led us to believe we could expect an experience in horror or suspense. Instead we were treated to a fairytale. Even the fairytale wasn't that original; even the "monsters" were similar to the "grassy" red beasts in "The The trailers led us to believe we could expect an experience in horror or suspense. Instead we were treated to a fairytale. Even the fairytale wasn't that original; even the "monsters" were similar to the "grassy" red beasts in "The Village." The difference between the advertising campaign and the actual story borders on dishonesty. Shyamalan admitted this movie arose from a nightime story told to his children that developed over time. It should have stayed there.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

LuiscApr 13, 2008

Boring...no sense movie! If you have problems to sleep just see this movie.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

HalB.Jul 24, 2006

I was really hoping that the (vast) majority of legitimate critics out there were wrong; but alas, most of them are spot-on correct: this is egocentric, pretentious New Age hooey at its worst. Fine cinematography, arresting visuals and I was really hoping that the (vast) majority of legitimate critics out there were wrong; but alas, most of them are spot-on correct: this is egocentric, pretentious New Age hooey at its worst. Fine cinematography, arresting visuals and earnest performances simply cannot make up for the silly story and self-absorbed symbolism. Nothing terribly new here -- very predicable and very disappointing. It's really quite a shame, because Shyamalan has proved himself to be a real talent in most of his past work. He attempts to be Spielberg, and falls flat on his face. Of course, this is just my opinion... If you like pretentious New Age drivel, this one may be to your liking.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

jaimeharringtonJul 22, 2006

Horrible film. What was he thinking? I liked his earlier films but hits is embarrassing bad. Giamatti did a good job in his role (thus the 2 rating).

0 of 1 users found this helpful

2

DavidL.Jul 26, 2006

My friends and i were unable reach a consensus...was it embarrassingly bad, laughably bad, or tragically bad? however, we did all agree on contrived, pretentious, and stupefying. All of which is especially disappointing for me personally, as My friends and i were unable reach a consensus...was it embarrassingly bad, laughably bad, or tragically bad? however, we did all agree on contrived, pretentious, and stupefying. All of which is especially disappointing for me personally, as i thought, and still think, that "The Sixth Sense" is a masterpiece, and a far better picture than that year's Oscar winner "American Beauty" i rate "Lady In The Water" a '2' rather than a' zero' for two reasons: a beautifully evocative and sometimes truly haunting atmosphere (the cinematography and score, both excellent); and an against-all-odds beautiful and haunting lead performance by Bryce Dallas Howard, who is compellingy otherworldly and somehow entirely convincing (in a critical, but very difficult-to-carry-off part), despite the inconsistent and idiotic (and shockingly predictable) script. Without her presence the film would have been all but unwatchable, but probably even a whole lot funnier...unintentionally, of course. So, ultimately, i guess, it's really tragically bad, given the director's obvious and previously established talent, and also his apparent lack of humilty and self-awareness as an artist; he needs to spend less time and energy manufacturing and proclaiming his own cultural significance, and more time doing what he has so effectively done in the past: just create entertainment. In the end it's about the AUDIENCE, Mr Shyamalan, not about YOU.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

2

KenG.Aug 15, 2006

[***SPOILERS***] It can be taken as an ego trip that Shyamalan cast himself as the character whose words will change the world, and it also might have helped if he was a better actor, but I won't bash him too much for that because I [***SPOILERS***] It can be taken as an ego trip that Shyamalan cast himself as the character whose words will change the world, and it also might have helped if he was a better actor, but I won't bash him too much for that because I think he might be a better actor then he is a film-maker. It's time to admit that "The 6th sense" was some kind of freak accident, and that M. Night Shyamalan has little talent as a film-maker. In fact, forget about just admitting it, it's time to shout it from the heavens, get the word out, warn people. His latest turkey (Lady in the water) is a muddled, at times incoherent mess which is so sloppy that at times he either forgets or ignores things he established ealier in film. The whole thing has an underdeveoped feel, as It feels like he is just haphazardly throwing together the various pieces of the story, before the story ever crystalized as a whole in his mind. And he really got carried away (big time) with the whole question of what role each character will play thing in the rescue, until it reaches the point where you just want to shout "Just make up your mind, and get on with the story! " Also if Shyamalan wants to bash movie critics in his movies, fine. As a group movie critics might be ripe for bashing. But it can't come off as if he's given a lot more though to how he will bash them, then he gave to the movie that he's bashing them in.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

GregM.Jul 22, 2006

The fact that this is a FAIRY TALE does not excuse it from being bad. Sorry to all of those who seem to think so. It is still bad, very bad, so pretentious (which does not make it smart or brilliant, just pretentious) in its earnestness thatThe fact that this is a FAIRY TALE does not excuse it from being bad. Sorry to all of those who seem to think so. It is still bad, very bad, so pretentious (which does not make it smart or brilliant, just pretentious) in its earnestness that I cringed. The best fairy tales tell us something about ourselves, this fairy tale tells us about MSN, his ego, and his lack of coherence. For the love of god and everything that is good in the world, could someone inform him that as a director he makes a pretty but pretty bad movie, but as an actor he is absolutely HORRID? Not to mention it shatters our suspension of disbelief, which, last I looked, is why I go to movies. Instead I sit there thinking: ah, hey, here's the director, making his dumb cameo for which there is no reason, and isn't he a windowlicker for it?… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

LuisG.Jul 23, 2006

Well then DISNEY execs were actually correct in trying to convince the writer and director to go somewhere else because this is by far the worst film ive seen so far ....the village was playing it safe i enjoyed the thrill of the creature butWell then DISNEY execs were actually correct in trying to convince the writer and director to go somewhere else because this is by far the worst film ive seen so far ....the village was playing it safe i enjoyed the thrill of the creature but here we dont even ge to see anything or experience anything but questions " wheres the twist, wheres the story,wheres the monster" the monster was actaully the director himself really what an awful film....it wouldnt even play well when i was reading those goosebumps books in elemetary school....what a waste of talent ..dallas was perhaps the only particular character and thats a stretch.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

PatrickAug 18, 2006

The plot made absolutely no sense, and the parts that were meant to be scary the whole audience laughed at. It dragged on for too long as well.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

StaubinAug 7, 2006

this movie was complete drivel and i totally disagree with anyone who would give it a "10." in giving this movie a "10," you are basically saying that you would mention it in the same breath as Citizen Kane, or Goodfellas. if you gave this this movie was complete drivel and i totally disagree with anyone who would give it a "10." in giving this movie a "10," you are basically saying that you would mention it in the same breath as Citizen Kane, or Goodfellas. if you gave this movie a "10," you should probably go give Little Man a 10 as well. i think the critics actually liked that better. the plot was more like m. night reaching into a hat of assorted ideas, characters, and names and then throwing them like Jackson Pollack onto a script. this is not good filmmaking at all, shame on you.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

CarlM.Nov 19, 2006

Interesting concept, but poorly executed. It just didn't go overboard enough to support the oddball story line. Sort of like a cross between "Splash" and "Cujo", it's not nearly as good as either.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

MarkB.Oct 16, 2006

Q: Who had a worse summer, M. Night Shyamalan or Mel Gibson? A: Shyamalan, because at least Disney will still release Gibson's next pic! Seriously, though, I've been a fan of Shyamalan through most of his career as a pop culture Q: Who had a worse summer, M. Night Shyamalan or Mel Gibson? A: Shyamalan, because at least Disney will still release Gibson's next pic! Seriously, though, I've been a fan of Shyamalan through most of his career as a pop culture fixture (a mild one of his box office smashes The Sixth Sense and Signs, a very enthusiastic one of his less universally well-liked gems Unbreakable and The Village) but this already-legendary train wreck about a mermaid...er, merperson...oh, all right, "narf" is a textbook example of exactly the kind of arrogance, self-indulgence and megalomania that derailed the careers of such equally, unquestionably talented filmmakers as Peter Bogdanovich with At Long Last Love and Michael Cimino with Heaven's Gate. (At least, unlike the latter, Lady was crippling but not fatal to its studio; thank God Night didn't utterly destroy Warner Bros. with it!) Let's play William Petersen or Gary Sinise for a moment and perform a brief autopsy: to start with, you DON'T base a movie on the bedtime stories you tell your kids, and if you must, you DON'T apparently make it all up as you go along! (This from a filmmaker who became justifiably famous for his meticulous construction and completely rational surprise endings!) You DON'T cast the great Paul Giamatti as the lead in the first film he stars in that guarantees that his not receiving an Oscar nomination for it won't arouse the tiniest peep of protest. (He's not bad, but that stutter is TERRIBLE.) You DON'T feature Bryce Dallas Howard after you get a genuinely touching and impressive performance in The Village in a role that can be played by any attractive woman who looks good in a man's shirt (and nothing else) and can tread water. You DON'T abuse such fine character players as Mary Beth Hurt and Tovah Feldshuh by casting them as painfully stereotyped apartment complex residents (the ethnic "balancing" in this movie is so contrived and forced that I'm surprised that Shyamalan left out a Maori warrior and a Navajo shaman). You DON'T make your movie so stultifyingly self-important, pretentious and lacking in humor that Cindy Cheung, playing an overbearing Chinese student, comes across as giving the best performance by default, if only because it resembles some type of ersatz comic relief. You DON'T play with the camera in ways that echo the worst excesses of 1960s navel-gazing by shooting so much stuff in extreme soft focus that people in my audience thought something was wrong with the print and alerted the management, or by filming an entire expository scene through poor Cheung's armpit! You DON'T make a movie that preaches that what the world needs now is love sweet love and then in the middle of it express such vindictive, self-serving hatred toward critics that it would be hard to blame Roger Ebert's hospital guards if Shyamalan was the one director they DIDN'T allow to visit him! And for God's sake, M, you DON'T cast YOURSELF as a Thoreau/ Lenin/ Thomas Paine-type writer whose ramblings hold the key to saving the world as we know it, if we all just listen. There's no doubt that Shyamalan still has much to offer, and that he'll make better (or at least mildly watchable) films again, but in the meantime maybe the time is ripe for him to take a nice long rest (just as disappointed Lady patrons will surely want to take a rest from him). Perhaps when he returns, a possible project for him--and one that's as far removed from the supernatural-suspense genre as possible--would be a remake of Sullivan's Travels, the Preston Sturges classic in which Joel McCrea played a director who travels countrywide for material and inspiration to make a film that expresses The Great American Social Statement, only to find that often the best thing a filmmaker can do for people is simply to entertain them. Now THERE'S a role that Shyamalan would be a perfect fit to cast himself as!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

johncDec 11, 2006

Unspeakable, unbearable, unwatchable, un... believable, but the narf's legs are gorgeous.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

JamesG.Jul 23, 2006

This movie started out slowly, in order to introduce the characters. It then shifted gears to boring with ridiculous, plodding "plot twists" (I use that term generously) and then ended up by downshifting to a plain waste of time and money. This movie started out slowly, in order to introduce the characters. It then shifted gears to boring with ridiculous, plodding "plot twists" (I use that term generously) and then ended up by downshifting to a plain waste of time and money. You end the movie with no love for the emotionless lead actress, nor do you care for the plight of any of the hapless characters. Do everyone a favor and avoid this movie so we can send a monetary incentive to Mr. M. Night...no more pulp please! I don't know what you did with the man who wrote and directed "The Sixth Sense", but your evil must stop!"… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

MichaelBagameryApr 19, 2014

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I consider it a minor miracle I actually stayed awake for the entirety of this movie. Questions arise within the viewer that M. Night never seemed to consider: Why does the eagle-creature not come earlier in the story? Do these Scrunts prey upon its kind? Wherefore the negligible character development? Why and how does the kid engage in divination with **** cereal boxes? And of course, why did M. Night cast himself as the indirect savior of humanity? I’ll come clean: I had never actually seen any of his other movies before this one, so I’m rating all his other films more cautiously as a rule.

The correct adjective for this would be SOPORIFIC.

I would give this movie 1/10 only, but it does get an extra point for predicting America’s future president as being a Midwestern orator, and two years and change after this movie was released, guess who…… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

2

EpicLadySpongeApr 7, 2016

M. Night Shyamalan returns again to direct another film and this time, we're going to the water to find the Lady in the Water. This seems to be a simple project for the entire movie cast to see where Shyamalan might live for the rest of hisM. Night Shyamalan returns again to direct another film and this time, we're going to the water to find the Lady in the Water. This seems to be a simple project for the entire movie cast to see where Shyamalan might live for the rest of his eternity no matter dead or alive.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

1

MichaelK.Jul 24, 2006

Erin D.- given that your response is the most rational of all, there should be no reason for you to question it. this movie just made me cringe more and more as it became hopelessly derailed. the dialogue was clumsy and entirely unrealistic, Erin D.- given that your response is the most rational of all, there should be no reason for you to question it. this movie just made me cringe more and more as it became hopelessly derailed. the dialogue was clumsy and entirely unrealistic, characterization was rote and forced, cinematography was nonexistent or at least very plain (except for the one shot at the very end which removed from context was pretty cool) and the story was overburdened to the point where it might as well have not been there. Best part of the film, the minute-long stick figure animated piece at the beginning which was the ONLY part free of pretension. The only salvation that night was following it up with Kevin Smith's Clerks II to wash out the horrendous aftertaste. Now I would actually look forward to one of Shamylan's contrived twists.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

1

MattF.Jul 20, 2006

absolutely ghastly. A twisted, uninteresting pile of steaming dung.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

1

A.BlankenshipAug 1, 2006

This movie is on par with "Manos: The Hands of Fate." I was too offended to watch the scenes with Shyamalan's acting in them, preferring to watch the drapes on the walls of the theater instead. Alas, I could not escape the condescension This movie is on par with "Manos: The Hands of Fate." I was too offended to watch the scenes with Shyamalan's acting in them, preferring to watch the drapes on the walls of the theater instead. Alas, I could not escape the condescension in the tone of his voice, and I have not been more bitterly disappointed by a film in my entire life.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

1

RathM.Jul 21, 2006

Someone please stop him before he makes another truly pathetic attempt at storytelling. "M" really needs to stuff his ego where the sun doesn't shine, fire the yes men around him and truly work on something that isn't utter tripe. Someone please stop him before he makes another truly pathetic attempt at storytelling. "M" really needs to stuff his ego where the sun doesn't shine, fire the yes men around him and truly work on something that isn't utter tripe. First year film school students produce better films than this garbage. I saw this as a free pre-screening promotion and still want a refund and my time back!… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

1

DavidB.Jul 23, 2006

Disaster. What an absolute mess. Would be a 0 if not for some unintended comedy from the narfs, tartutics, scrunts, and the great eatlon. Can't help but get a laugh when the tartutics jump out of the trees to attack the scrunt, which is Disaster. What an absolute mess. Would be a 0 if not for some unintended comedy from the narfs, tartutics, scrunts, and the great eatlon. Can't help but get a laugh when the tartutics jump out of the trees to attack the scrunt, which is a evil grass hyena. ;)… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

1

DaveK.Jul 21, 2006

Misguidedly earnest, numbingly arbitrary. Even the long shots and layered framing is tired by now.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

Lady in the Water

User Reviews