|
LADY IN THE WATER
|
||||||||||||||
|
Let's get this out of the way right now: I loved this movie, I loved it right to pieces. It made me laugh and it made me cry and I wanted to run out of the house and tell people about it when it was finished. The review my boss wrote is decidedly negative, but I don't think that he and I really differ much in our opinions of the film, as stupid as that might sound. We both loved the story and I can see what he's saying with all his problems with the movie, I was just able to plug my ears and close my eyes and sing really loud to block out the parts of the movie that didn't work (more about those later) so I was left with an overwhelmingly positive experience from watching the movie instead of a burned feeling from seeing a bunch of shit mar a story I really liked.
Right here, I was already sucked in to the story and I was already crying. I'm a sucker for origin stories. I sat enchanted like a little kid and watched the rest of the story unfold. After the beginning narration is over with, we meet several eccentric characters that inhabit an apartment complex, and Paul Giamatti as their everyman landlord who stutters and seems meek and timid. One night he hears a splash in the pool on the grounds of the apartment building, and when he goes outside to investigate, he finds a beautiful and exotic looking woman in the water who claims to be from another land entirely. The rest of the story becomes more and more fantastical as this woman talks about her land and the creatures that inhabit it. Soon it turns out that she is a character from a fairy tale and that she has a mission in this world, and that she needs help from different people in the apartment complex in order to carry out her mission. Gradually, as fantastical as this story is, the people in the apartment complex begin to believe it and they are brought together as a community to try and help this woman fulfill her mission. In the process, they learn things about themselves and they grow and change, and it's everything a journey story should be. A little heavy handed, but that's the way journey stories are, and I was swept up in the tale as it unfolded and I was so enthralled with what was happening onscreen that I was able to ignore a whole lot of caveats along the way. In fact, aside from some unnecessary and unfunny comic relief and Shyamalan writing himself an overlong role in the film, I loved every minute. It's not that Shyamalan is a bad actor per se, it's just that he seems to always cast himself in some pivotal role and it really irks me to have to keep seeing him play yet another wise sage or savior character. All that aside, this is an engaging story with cool, eccentric characters, and it was so much fun from beginning to end that I can't wait to watch it again.
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Have something to say about this review? Pop on over to Cinema-Lunatics
and speak your mind in our Answer Back! Forums >> |
I have a strict rule with regards to my work at Cinema Crazed. I only
write reviews for new movies now in theaters, or for older movies if
they haven't already been reviewed by my boss or one of the other
reviewers on staff (with the exception of special events like the
Grindhouse Fest). I look at it like this: I could go on and on and wax
poetic about "The Covenant" if I want to, but there's really no point in
dredging up points about movies that are already covered here, and a lot
of the movies I watch are old news by the time I watch them, so I get to
kick back and not have to think too deeply about them or worry about
sounding cool and witty in a review later. I'm making an exception with
"Lady in the Water" though. I know this movie isn't the newest kid on
the block (hell, it isn't even Shyamalan's newest movie anymore) and the
review already on the site is a good one, but I just finished this movie
and I have some things I want to say about it.
Why why WHY do screenwriters insist on having scenes in their movie that
undermine the film? Why do they write inside jokes into their films that
fall flat? Do they just enjoy running around giggling like grade
schoolers saying "hee hee hee, that was a joke, I'm smart, see, hee hee
hee"? Because I for one DON'T appreciate it. In the case of this movie,
there's an entire CHARACTER that exists only to be an inside joke; he
stands on the outside of the story and mocks the things that are
happening while they're happening. No, I'm not kidding. Are you laughing
yet? There's this lush, beautiful story and world being created, and
then there's this annoying guy hanging around mucking things up like
that asshole who sits in the movie theater and points out things that
are wrong with the movie and you just want to punch the fuck out of his
face. Why have a character like that here in this film? Why blunt the
impact of your own movie like that? Do you just think you're so cool you
want to remind everyone that you know this is a movie, it's not real,
and you're the director and you can do anything you want, so you're
going to put a character and a scene like this in the movie for no
reason just to piss people off? Because it's not cool or cute or funny,
it's stupid and pointless and it does nothing but ruin the atmosphere.
