Enough is Enough

When is Humanity Going to Get That We’re All in This Together?

Lady in the Water: M. Night Syamalan’s a Genius!

Posted by honestpoet on April 1, 2008

We finally watched this movie. It was incredible! We looked up the writer/director/producer on wikipedia (discovering that he also played one of the characters), and I was saddened but not surprised to read of the negative critical response (as well as disappointing box-office figures) that it received. We all thought the movie was amazing.

I suppose I’m not surprised. That which is truly good is seldom well received by either the establishment or the masses. (I’m sure his treatment of the film-critic character in the movie didn’t help his standing with the film critics, but it sure had all of us rolling in our seats, laughing.) But I think the movie is perfect and Mr. Syamalan is a genius. It’s recursive, and funny (not just the part with the film critic), and just scary enough to be exciting, but not tediously so (like *I am Legend,* which we watched recently and had to take breaks from, as the tension was making me and my daughter nearly ill). And it was uplifting. Just magic. That’s what movies are supposed to be like.

Advertisements

One Response to “Lady in the Water: M. Night Syamalan’s a Genius!”

  1. majutsu said

    I think it’s great too. I like how it’s a story on three levels: 1) the fairy tale, totally imaginary, told through the immigrant mother’s mouth, 2) the tale with Mr. Heep and Story, the water nymph, where mythological characters (devil dogs, evil monkey men, and nymphs) interact with humans, and 3) the level of the totally real, the story of a broken doctor who’s family was killed some time ago. Throughout, the director plays with character (by having the movie’s characters being shuffled through different mythological roles), language (the crossword puzzle, reading cereal boxes, and telling the story through an immigrant and her daughter-interpreter), and plot (having the movie critic discoursing on his own trite demise 🙂 ). What I also found fascinating was that the writer-director reveals every human emotion: fear, wonder, purpose, caring, joy, sorrow, innocence, . . . except — romance. Romance is curiously absent. There is thankfully no luridness between the main character and the nymph. Love is there — love between brother and sister, father and son, but no sexual love. The movie critic explains, incorrectly as usual, that it is because romance is over-done. But that is not the reason sexual love isn’t here; it is because sexual love has no place around children. And the director wants us to enjoy the story like children, cookies, milk-mustache, airborne-playful-feet and all. 😉 I also point out that Paul Giomatti is a joy in this, much like he is in John Adams, and he is really quite the acting tour-de-force right now. All the actors are great in this, and he really shines. It is a good time, a great story, wonderful characters, and a lot of fun! But this movie critic better go before that dog chomps his ass 😦

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: