Lady in the Water

I want to pick this up on DVD still. I have some gift cards waiting to be used :) I love this film, and M. Night, though not a great actor, didn't really take me out of the film. Is it awkward seeing him in the film, yeah, but once I get over that, I just enjoy the story... One thing I do know, if you go into the film with preconceived ideas about what it is or isn't, you'll hate it. It's unlike anything I've ever seen before.
 
Night totally takes me out

Mel Gibson acting in Braveheart does notl the guy is like superuber actor stud (and director) but Night is like 'Dude, come on ...'

The film is not bad. No. It's movemaking.
 
Well, it was movemaking in that it made me move toward the exit...

...I admit, I went in with this preconceived idea that I would be shown a story with compelling characters, well-drawn and acted, and an internally consistent story that made sense, and followed some kind of workable dramatic structure.

My mistake.
 
I was so disappointed by this movie.

I'm normally a huge Night fan, but this story was embarassing. I was actually laughing when I shouldn't be. I felt bad for the actors trapped in this debacle. Night, needs to make like Hitchcock and not actually speak in his films.

Chris
 
GenJerDan said:
Sloooooooooow. Dull.

But it's the first one of his I didn't like, so he gets a pass.
Click to expand...
I dunno.

What about the super-advanced creepy-smart conquer-the-world aliens, who (a) are deathly vulnerable to water, who (b) choose to invade a planet which is 2/3 covered with the stuff, with an atmosphere loaded with water vapor?

And an ex-minister who lost his faith because his wife died in an accident, but regains it because aliens invade the Earth...?

I mean, come on.
 
The problem with the water lady is that he either a) tried to translate an Eastern myth, or b) tried to make one up.

If a), it didn't translate. At all. Wrong sensibilities for us Western yahoos.

If b), he ran into the same problem almost everyone who tries to make something up out of whole cloth finds: t'ain't easy to hit mythic. There's gotta be something recognizable in the back 40.

"Superheros" often have this trouble. There are only so many archetypes to go around. Either you end up copying/combining something, or you end up with The Spleen. (Anyone want a super hero script that needs a whole lotta work?)

Myth is just a notch or two or ten more difficult. I've often thought about trying it...looked to The Golden Bough for sources... Even with a source and deep analysis, it's a bear trying to make it resonate with moden folks.

As for unbelieveable premises...Signs didn't bother me. It's tied with Unbreakable for last place (or was, anyway...new contender hit the screen), but I found it pretty easy to ignore the hole.

But holes abound everywhere. If the filmmaker is good enough, you shouldn't notice them unless you want to.

On the other hand, if M. acts in another film, drastic measures will have to be taken.
 
I like all his other films but i could not get past 30 minutes of this one. All the characters are trying to lure me but I'm not biting.

I thought The Village was a 3 star movie, Signs was a 4 star movie, Unbreakable was a 4 star movie, and the Sixth Sense was a 5 star movie. This two or less, only because I didn't watch it. I'll give him the benefit of doubt.
 
I went into Lady not at all interested in what I saw in the trailers, but wanting to - HOPING to - see another good M Night movie. It didnt happen. Bored the entire way through and I thought the whole thing was just painful.

Loved 6th Sense, of course. I thought Unbreakable was brilliant, highly entertaining, and I loved it, BUT it was missing something that keeps me from saying it was a good movie. I'm not sure what. Haven't really analyzed it.

Hated Signs. Boring. Wanted to like it - couldn't.

I found Village highly entertaining and dont care so much about the fact he took the exact story from somewhere else. He's not the first and he made an entertaining flick.

Lady was just painful. I wasnt buying any of it.

I wouldn't miss Night if he just faded away and made nothing else. I'd really like him to make another great movie, though. Doesnt look like it's happening.

-GageFX
 
Finally saw Lady over my holiday break. I've been very critical (hopefully intelligently so) of M. Night's films in the past, and I honestly expected to be disappointed with Lady. I was surprised to find that at the end of the film I liked it. There were some major issues with it (M. Night casting himself as a writer who will change the world, the transparent motive for having a character be a movie critic, etc.) but I completely bought into the idea of examining what inspires people and addressing the potential that we all have through the myth of the narf and the metephores of the characters.

I don't know, something just resonated with me in this film.
 
It seems that we all expect too much from M. Night. He has done a great job with his first 3 movies and I would be satisfied if he never made another one. But he is too young and too creative to not make another one. I think he will learn from his failings and surprise us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top