It's time a Lady in the Water discussion.

First of all, the critics absolutely HATED this movie, and I think I know why. There's no logical explanation (even taking into account that some people may not have liked it for various reasons) for this movie to end up with the pitiful 21% it has on Rotten Tomatoes. Previous Shyamalan films have been underrated, but not by very serious amounts. The critics are mad because there's a movie critic in this movie, and he's an idiot. I'm sure Shyamalan knew this would happen, but I'm not sure he meant for it to destroy his movie's box-office numbers.

I really thoroughly enjoyed the movie. From an emotional perspective, it was fantastic and very moving and hopeful, and quite funny.

From a filmmaking perspective it can be seen as fairly flawed, but I managed to throw these technicalities away, in exchange for an incredible, fantastical experience.

All in all, it was an amazing, fantastic, magical film, with zany characters, whimsical moments, and a totally engrossing world. To those who complain about the fairy-tale elements - phooey.

Not many movies have that mysterious lasting impression, where you'll still be thinking about them for ages. This one did, and I can truly say (in danger of being torn to shreds by people who've read the reviews, but not seen it) that it is one of my favorite movies now.

MAJOR SPOILERS AHEAD!!! BEWARE!!!

Did the movie break the fourth wall?

No. That fourth-wall breakage was the audience's fault, if it existed. Why CAN'T a movie have a scene where a critic talks to himself about his life as if it were a movie, without breaking the fourth wall? He wasn't acknowledging that he was in a movie, just thinking to himself that it was like a movie.

Was it pretentious and arrogant for Shyamalan to play the writer?

No. He always plays a role in his movies. He played a writer who, unknowingly, created a book that would change the course of the world. He was a modest, serious character. This writer wasn't Shyamalan, he was a character PLAYED by Shyamalan. People complain about the oddest things. Again, the CRITICS are breaking the third wall here, by thinking of the actor and not the character. Silly critics.

Did the second act fall apart?

Yes, it did. But I forgave it. In a way I can argue with myself that the REASON it felt really weird and forced and not right in the second act was because the critic had told him what to do, and it was wrong. We were seeing the story going wrong, and it felt wrong. Somehow that's not a totally convincing argument, but it kind of works in my head half the time.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: titaniumdoughnut,

(Before I start: Everything in my head works half the time, so don't feel bad )

Lady in the Water was a great movie. Its been awhile since I watched a movie with as many zany characters as this one. All of them had their own personality.

Were some of the parts of the movie predictable? Sure! But even if you did predict what would happen, Shyamalan performed it in such a new and crazy way you still jumped, or you still laughed out loud. The comedy was exceptional.

and of course, shyamalan took the time to throw in little details that are never stated. (SPOILERS)

Cleveland used tobe a doctor, and he ends up being the healer. Thats never specifically stated, but you pick up on the connection.

And due to the trailers, I didn't know what the movie was really gonna be about. The first one was all magical, and the second was really scary. I was rewarded with a pleasent mixture of both.

Anyways, don't beleive any of the reviews. All of them are bad. You got to check it out for yourself. Just because it didn't have any guns, car chases, sex, drugs, booze, lawyers, or rogure cops, the critics didn't like it.

As far as Shyamalan being egocentric: What hollywood figure isn't? How some nobody called Gibson egotistical when he wrote, acted, and directed bravheart? How come nobody got mad at George Cloony when he did it? Come on, lets show some consistency.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Forsakenproductions,

I haven't seen this movie, but I want to say that I think M. Nights movies are extremely underrated (except for The Sixth Sense of course). I like his stories and I like how he blends the horror/suspense genre with interesting and thought-provoking plots, whereas most horror movies are stupid stories that only serve as a backdrop to all the scary crap going on (kind of like bad late-night pornos that try to have a plot, even though everyone is just watching for the sex).

I will see this despite the bad reviews. Since when do we pay attention to the critics, anyway?

The movie was very good. It's an adult bedtime story that kept all of the fantasy elements alive, as well it maintained a mature role.

I liked the movie a lot, although I disagree about the fourth wall breaking. It definitely broke the fourth wall, in an ingenious hilarious way. The critic might as well have been talking directly to the audience, making ironic/coincidental comments about the film he was in.

Though I was totally caught off-guard by the fact that the eagle is actually, like, a big eagle.

I mean, it's a weird movie. And nowadays where every movie is the same, it's nice to have a weird movie.

I agree. It's nice to have a weird movie.

the critics are idiot sheep who can't think for themselves. this movie was terrific

Is this a collaborative joke or is this movie really good? You guys make me want to see it, and I'll be hopping mad if I'm disappointed now. I like Jeffrey Wright, but I hate the entire Howard family, and every time I see a Paul Giamatti movie, I walk away feeling as if he's infected me with pathetic. I'm planning on seeing A Scanner Darkly and Miami Vice back-to-back this weekend -- should I really add this to the list?

The movie sounds so stupid. Although reviews should be taken with varying grains of salt, when it's unanimously panned it's generally worth avoiding...

Paul Giamatti is fine, it's Shyamalan that's the issue...

The interesting fact here is that the critics gave it 20% and the audience have given it 74% on Rotten Tomatoes. Such a huge discrepancy is unusual and once you see the movie, you'll understand. Do add it Harris. You won't regret it, unless you hate Shyamalan's movies, but I don't think you're the type.

yeah, if your gonna see miami vice you might as well wash out the bad taste with Lady in teh wAter

I haven't talked to anybody who liked it. Now that's only six people who've seen it but that's enough. If it wasn't for the free movies I wouldn't be seeing it, but now I have to see if it's as bad as it looks.

I'm a moderate Shyamalan fan. Sixth Sense = pretty good. Unbreakable = awesome. Signs = Good. Village = Turned off because it was so atrociously written and acted.

Did you know, your signature makes it impossible to argue with you?

quote:

Originally posted by Harris:
...and every time I see a Paul Giamatti movie, I walk away feeling as if he's infected me with pathetic.

Haha I know what you mean. That guy ****in sucks. But yeah this movie was pretty horrible. I give it a 4.5 out of 10. I did enjoy his little bit about movie critics.

I wonder if Shyamalan meant to make such a piece of sh*t when he was thinking this up just to piss people off. You just gotta wonder sometimes when you see a movie this horrible by such a talented dude. This movie had so much potential, I was expecting Splash meets Omega Man or something like that. This is comin from a guy who loved Signs AND the Village, and didn't care for the 6th sense...

I say skip it Harris, it's not worth the money.

Did anyone else think Bryce Howard was really hot in this movie?

I find that opinions are much stronger than facts because they are always right and are far more passionately felt. For example: It is my opinion that the world's populations is 500 billion people.

I actually like Giamatti; I think he's a great actor. I just want to beat the snot out of him every time I see him whimpering with his little bald flabby head. And, I admit, I do hate Shamalamanan, so maybe I should skip this and see Miami Vice twice.

There is a scene that's particularly likely to cause you to want to beat the snot out of Giamatti. It involves him pretending to be a child at heart, so an old woman will trust him, and it's possibly the weirdest thing I've ever seen.

Harris, I just have a feeling you'd like this one, or at least like parts of it, just based on your own films and how zany some of the characters in this are. But don't hold me to it

I have to admit that I think Paul Giamatti's best role was as Limbo in Planet of the Apes.

Josh, do yourself a favor and rent American Splendor. You'll thank me later...trust me.

"I'm, uh... I'm Paul Giamatti, and I just... I just hate Merlot. I, uh... prefer Pinot Noir... it's just so... so pathetic. I like mangy puppies with broken legs and weak analogies, too."

What a loser. But I guess he makes more money that I do. Damn...