LADY IN THE WATER....- Page 5

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 7/23/06 at 5:58pm

The film, according to Box Office mojo, has been doomed by bad word of mouth: the film suffered huge drops from Friday to Sunday, and only ended up with about 18 Million, which is less than half of what THE VILLAGE made opening weekend.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 7/24/06 at 4:22pm

I saw this last night.

BSO, I find a lot of your comments to be absurd.

Why are people preoccupied with racist notions, and "this is racist," "that is racist." Just take it for what it is. I felt that he was trying to incorporate a myraid or races to represent a people greater than those simply living at THE COVE. To say that the depiction of the 5 sisters was racist is, I believe, absolutely assinine, unfounded, naive, and just plain damn annoying. What, were you also offended by Tovah's performance? Was it too "stereotypical" for you? Please. Ease up. I thought she was hilarious. I also thought the Asian girl (who is absolutely not a prostitute, by the way) and her grandmother were hysterical. Not a great actress, but I thought the girl was a riot.

Some of the writing in this film is undeniably weak - though it has generally across the board fantastic performances. Paul Giamatti was, once again, brilliant in the role and he brought tears to my eyes several times. What a fine actor.

I resisted this film to the max, until about 45 minutes into it. I was so taken in in the story, the characters, and the dark whimsicality of it that I was taken completely off guard. I loved this film. Absolutely loved it. I think those of you that hated it really have some sort of vendetta against Shyamalan himself.

Now, I will admit that casting himself in the film as a character who will inspire the next leader of the country was not only sickeningly narcissistic, but just stupid. Bad, bad idea. The whole film critic thing was a humorous thing on the side, but it quickly grew obnoxious and preachy. Had Shyamalan not been featured in the film, it wouldn't have been so terrible in that respect. However, I was able to separate the man from the character. Whether that's what he intended or not, that's what I subconsiously did. I didn't watch the film and say "Oh, there's M. Night!" If I would have, I probably would have hated the film just as much as all of you did. When Story was telling him his future (that his writings would inspire, blah blah blah) - I thought it was a very emotional moment. Again, I didn't look at him up there as Shyamalan. I looked at him up there as his character.

Anyone going into this film expecting a horror movie is just setting themselves up for disappointment. It was not advertised as a horror movie, it was not marketed as a horror movie, and if you were disappointed due to the genre, I'm sorry, but that's your own fault. It is nothing more than a bedtime story.

I found the story heartwarming, beautiful, and - for the most part - very well done. There are some stunningly gorgeous visuals here, and some really really nice moments. When Giamatti was crying and holding Story in one if the final scenes, I thought his monologue was beautiful- and yes, it made me tear up.

Also, at the very end when he tells Story that she saved his life - wow. I admit it, I was crying at the end of this movie. I was. I don't care if I'm the only one, but I will proudly say that I thought this was a wonderful, wonderful, wonderfully enjoyable and breathtakingly moving story. It's not really the film that's anything special - because it is as flawed as can be - but the story is something that's really just plain beautiful - and there's NO disputing that.

Racial stereotypes, please. Go get a job.

If you are on the fence about seeing this film, do go see it. I was so prepared to hate it - and I was pleasantly surprised. Think of it more along the lines of BIG FISH than any of Shyamalan's past films. And, to be quite honest, I liked LADY IN THE WATER a hell of a lot more than I liked BIG FISH. It's a fairy tale. It's a bedtime story. And it's a damn good one.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 7/24/06 at 4:25pm

lmao. i clicked on this thread ready to scream, we get it munk you hate it! ok, maybe that's only funny to me.

interesting assessment if the film, munk, thanks.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 7/24/06 at 5:03pm

I haven't seen the movie or read this thread. But I bet I can guess. WE'RE the people living under the water and the Narcs or whatever are the ones who live on land. But it's just our perception!

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 7/24/06 at 5:04pm

i'm gonna see it just because he has characters named after a pinky expression, "narf, poit!"

[JohnBoy2]

Posted: 7/24/06 at 5:05pm

I'll say it again, my favorite film of 2006, thus far.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 7/24/06 at 5:16pm

I've got Narf balls.

[Fiction Writer]

Posted: 7/24/06 at 5:30pm

Do you now? I thought they were more wiffle-like than Narf.

And I told Ivan the same thing, Munk, about M. Night. This movie is an ego trip gone wrong.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 7/24/06 at 7:56pm

I'm intrigued by the reaction of people who saw this show in NYC and were moved to tears by the end. When I saw this at the Union Square Theatre, people were laughing at the screen at the end with many walking out in honest to goodness disgust. I just didn't see anyone react in anyway the way Munk and Trash did.

I will take no issue if the film did move you; we are all moved by different things, and you don't have to have a "good" movie to trigger a powerful response. But, I will never understand critiques of the film that find the story cohesive or any kind of successful modern parable; I'd actually love to find somebody who could actually follow the convoluted legend the film revolves around.

Modern parables/fairy tales that work? COCOON, E.T., even GOONIES. I think you'd be hard pressed to find a child that wouldn't fall asleep or be engaged by a "bedtime story" like LADY IN THE WATER.


I can't comprehend hating THE VILLAGE and loving this movie. It makes THE VILLAGE look like THE GODFATHER. Updated On: 7/24/06 at 07:56 PM

[BSoBW2]

Posted: 7/24/06 at 10:26pm

Thanks Munk. But I am not the only one to say it...and many people around me felt the same way.

Like MB said, I can't believe people were moved by it, but different things move us.

You think what I said is absurd, I think what you said is absurd. I was so excited to see this. And it started fine. And I was really enjoying it...until Shyamalan entered.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 7/26/06 at 12:39am

I saw this today, and I loved it. I cried at the end. It IS a bedtime story--NOT a horror film. NOT a "movie with a twist".

[secondstar05]

Posted: 7/26/06 at 1:38am

I loved this movie, but I think part of its problem is that people are misunderstanding its intent. It is not, as some of its previews have implied, a horror. It is slightly suspenseful, yes, but mostly I am inclined to classify it as a fantasy. If you can get past the fact that it's NOT a scary movie, you will (hopefully) see that it is a lovely film, and--in my opinion--wonderfully unique from the rest of Shyamalan's films.

I think that it is (sadly) becoming the "cool" thing to hate M. Night Shyamalan. Find fault with his movies, fine, but I don't see any reason for personal attacks against him, which is what I see happening. It honestly didn't even occur to me to think of his role in this film as egotistical or self-serving until I saw such thoughts posted here. Perhaps that was naive on my part, but I wasn't really watching it thinking "That's Shyamalan, and he's thinking a lot of himself." I was just seeing his *character*, and appreciating the beauty and emotion of Story's revelation about his future.

...Well, now I'm just rambling. My point is, I hope that people will start giving this movie a chance, because I think that it deserves a little appreciation.

[Cruel_Sandwich]

Posted: 7/26/06 at 1:46am

this movie just sounds beyond awful...

[Beanmatt]

Posted: 7/26/06 at 2:35am

I guess I didn't understand the whole "necessity of adult fairy tales" aspect. I thought it was odd that as they realized they needed to find more and more people, these people just seemed to buy into the details of the situation (water narf, the grass monsters, the giant eagle, etc). No one seemed to be like "what the heck?!" They were just gung ho to try and help.

Then near the end...I think it was the Bill Irwin character...finally shouts out out something along the lines of "Sometimes we need to believe stories are real." Something like we need to escape from the world around us. As soon as he said that I recalled the few times where a US conflict/war/fighting was on the televisions in the background of some scenes.

So, the real world is so awful that we have to believe in the impossible sometimes? Or that art/stories/narratives are important. Was THAT the point of this movie???

[melissa errico fan]

Posted: 7/26/06 at 8:32am

I must be a glutton for punishment: I've hated nearly every M. Night Shyamalan movie, and yet I still find myself paying $10 to see every piece of crap he churns out. I went to see LADY IN THE WATER last night, and I can't tell you when the last time I laughed so hard and so unintentionally was. Shyamalan presents his films as if each one of them is a mini Greek tragedy, but his dialogue and situations are so trite, pointless and downright laughable that you simply can't take them seriously.

Paul Giamatti is always watchable, and is the film's only redeeming quality. Bryce Dallas Howard gave a truly awful performance---I think she might need to hit Acting 101 again before making another movie. A talented supporting cast is wasted (*spoiler* During Bob Balaban's pre-death monologue, the people in the audience were on the verge of convulsing with laughter *end spoiler*).

Nobody was crying when I saw it. Everyone was laughing.

[BSoBW2]

Posted: 7/26/06 at 9:43am

I think you are right - people don't understand the intent of the movie.

It is a reaction to the way THE VILLAGE was received. It's M. Night Shyamalan's ego against the back drop of a, what could have been a very intriguing and beautiful (had it been structured more), fairy tale.

I liked it until Shyamalan enters and you realize that this is an ego driven movie with a few good one liners that will make people think.

[JohnBoy2]

Posted: 7/26/06 at 10:04am

I find it incredible that anyone would have an issue with what they perceive as ego-driven (I didn't get that), in a film or a show, or any aspect of show business. At the core of the arts, is ego. So what?

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 7/26/06 at 10:10am

I understand his intent 100 percent. It is his craft or lack of it that leaves me absolutely baffled.

One of the best things I have read about the film, from THEFILMEXPERIENCE.NET:

"I think it should be mandatory viewing at film school actually. That is not a recommendation. It's more along the lines of "Do not let this happen to you!" Film is a collaborative medium for a reason. Your ideas will not always be perfect. Other people may greatly help you shape your own work."

[James885]

Posted: 7/26/06 at 10:20am

I saw this film last night. I now understand why Disney didn't want to produce this film. For all the wrong reasons, I found this film to be hilarious. "Narfs"? "Scrunts?" A character named Story?? I just found it really hard to take it all seriously. I thought that Shyamalan's jab at critics was pretty funny. My friend joked that it was some kind of revenge for the horrible reviews that The Village recieved. I think the initial story was good, but the I thought that the movie itself was just very poorly written. IMO, Shyamalan hasn't had a good film since The Sixth Sense.

[TheQuibbler]

Posted: 7/26/06 at 10:52am

I agree with all the negative reviews. I liked the story well enough, but the execution was awful. I hated the way he presented the story through the Asian girl. I also didn't feel any emotional bond between Story and Cleaveland, so his monologue near the end, while perfectly performed, didn't register with me at all. The story itself, while interesting, was unnessecarily complicated and, to me, felt like M. Night was just attempting to pad out the movie to make it longer. His films always have an arrogant tone to them, and this one is the worst offender.

And racist or not, those characters were indeed stereotypes. And annoying.

[justagirl2]

Posted: 7/26/06 at 1:10pm

Quib, I honestly couldn't have said it better myself. I was just telling someone yesterday that the story wasn't necessarily bad, it was just the way it was presented on film. The film got really messy towards the end, and that's when my friend and I just began to laugh at everything. Strangely enough, though, I didn't mind Shyamalan's appearance in the movie. I suppose it WAS egotistical, but I just didn't feel that way when I saw it. Hrm. I guess my reaction was a bit complicated!

[BSoBW2]

Posted: 7/26/06 at 10:41pm

Stereotypes? That's absurd!

[lovelyspotlight]

Posted: 7/26/06 at 10:44pm

Haha, I say this every time somebody mentions Lady in the Water...but...

When I was at the School for Film and Television's "Summer in the City" program last summer, they were casting for that film like two doors down from my Voice class. I don't know why, but I feel some sort of affinity to the movie, although I haven't seen it. : )

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 7/27/06 at 12:38am

I didn't care for this movie at all. I loved the Village and Unbreakable, was underwhelmed by Signs, and I just hated this one. It's very slow moving and takes a while to build to anything. The thing that kind of threw me, was the fact that none of the residents seemed startled by the story. It seems like people were more than willing to join in and help out. Were none of them a bit taken aback by the fact that there's this women who came from "another world" and is being chased by this big ass wolf? Also, did they cut out the whole "who's afraid of the big bad wolf"? I thought that maybe this was a spin on Little Red Ridinghood or something like that because of the trailer and that quote, but then I was totally lost in this movie. It seemed like M.Night just kept making things up until it sort of fit the story. And I hated the way the "monkey" creatures looked. They looked like little midgets in suits. I didn't understand the point to most of the movie. I wasn't sure why she was telling people their futures, and the fact that Cleavland's family is dead, yet nothing really comes of it. I thought something might be eplained, but no. I wouldn't recommend this movie.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 7/27/06 at 12:58am

*SPOLIERS*

I forgot to mention the directing. I had a big problem with this. I don't mind artistic directing, in fact, I much prefer it. But I like it when it's done well (Requiem for a Dream, and in a more mainstream manor, X2). I didn't like how M.Night would set up the camera and then not move it. The one scene that comes to mind is when they're in the room full of people and the camera is fixated on the hippies and a door, when all the action is going on to the left of the camera. It just made the scene incredibly boring to watch because you expected something to happen at the door, but yet nothing does. Speaking of which, there were a lot of missed "jump" moments, I think. For instance, the part where the wolf comes through the door for the first time, you can see him in the glass, so it's not that frightening. Then, later in the movie, the wolf can't get out of the same door which he just pushed his way through.

I did like the score though. And I can't wait to see "The Fountain."