M. Night Shyamalan's career is coming to a halt. But before the film community sends the Philadelphia writer/directer off, let's take a look at his works.
"The Sixth Sense" is masterful; "Unbreakable" is an underrated comic book gem; "Signs" is frustratingly dumb, then kills any chance of lingering suspense by doing the anti-"Jaws" and showing the wimpy water-allergic aliens; and "The Village" is an intriguing experiment that is far deeper that its apparently simple conclusion.
Then there's "Lady in the Water." Possibly attempting to switch up his style or be exceedingly philosophical, Shyamalan's latest released film was critically panned and made little money. Disney, who had financed the director's previous four films, passed on the script, and with good reason. Seeing an opportunity to profit off of Shyamalan's name (perhaps despite the quality of the material), Warner Bros. bankrolled the project and attracted an impressive cast.
As with any director of great works, it's clear why big-name players were drawn to Shyamalan. Still, it's surprising that so many talented actors were lured by the filmmaker's mystique into lending their chops for such an awful movie with writing that already bears the mark of Cain.
"The Wendell Baker Story" was the last feature to receive such poor reception in these pages. While buddy, family, and blackmail statuses explained Luke Wilson's cast, only Shyamalan's (quickly-fading) "next Hitchcock" status rationalizes the participation of Paul Giamatti, Jeffrey Wright, and Bob Balaban reciting the writer/director's empty dialogue. "Lady in the Water" elicits the same feelings as "Baker" of witnessing quality actors embarrass themselves. There is nothing else like it.
The movie is so bad that it warrants the question, "Do directors intentionally make bad films?" The assemblage of talent combined with the horrible end result suggests that the audience must have missed out on a giant inside joke on overly-critical moviegoers and especially film critics, as hyperbolized in Balaban's loathsome character. Surely there's some deeper meaning that we're missing that goes beyond creatures with names that sound like dialogue from "Pinky and the Brain." This is some kind of metaphysical understanding that comes from an Indian background, growing up in Philly, and making millions of dollars all while "keeping it real." And if audiences don't get it, it's because they're incapable of believing in other worlds and will never be able to recapture the joy of bedtime stories. Yes, that's it exactly.
But if it's so deep, why do all of the pieces fall together so easily for Giamatti's Cleveland Heep? Why are an assemblage of apartment tenants who all seem to wish for isolation from one another so willing to unite for a common, fairy tale cause? And if the bad guys are so bent on destroying their enemy, why don't they follow through when they have clear opportunities. These questions are regrettably non-specific, but to attempt to explain and dissect the movie's plot and meaning would only further tarnish what's left of Shyamalan's gift and he should at least be allowed to make home videos of his kids.
Worst of all, there is the absence of the kind of twist ending that has defined Shyamalan's career. Though the expectation of such a cinematic device has been heavily criticized, perhaps Shyamalan needs his twist endings. In his past films, when the story appears to drag, the anticipation of the looming "gotcha" keeps the audience guessing all the while, forming an enticing mystery. Though the twist's existence is predictable, without one in "Lady in the Water," he leaves nothing to look forward to except the end credits. What's especially disheartening with this sloppy effort is that at no point does a twist even seem possible, making the release's mysterious intention (the only true mystery) a colossal failure.
While Shyamalan's June film "The Happening" has the potential to be environmentally preachy (which could make viewers either increasingly pro or anti-"green"), it thankfully appears to be a return to the who/what-dun-its he does best. However, Mark Wahlberg's comically raised eyebrows show yet another actor "Syamalanized" by the filmmaker's aura and the half-assed delivery of the trailer's wannabe sincere dialogue recalls the writer's greatest consistent weakness. I hope to be pleasantly surprised, but it seems that Shyamalan is going to ride out his early earnings into a continuing career of pretentious films until every fan of "Sixth Sense" figures him out and the only actor who will work with him is M. Night himself. Once you've seen "Lady in the Water," in which he gives himself an unprecedented major supporting role of staggeringly self-indulgent proportions, you'll understand why that's a likely outcome