Lady In The Water "B-"

Mr. Heep Is A Playa!

"Lady in the Water" is the latest film by the increasingly eccentric M. Night Shyamalan who shows a maturation in his filmmaking but sadly, the results are somewhat misguided.

The now infamous story of how Disney turned it's back on M. Night even though he had made them a ton of money (every film he has made was for Disney) is a well documented fall from grace. One that resulted in duplicitous dealings, bruised egos, and Hollywood politics at their finest. All of this because the studio "didn't get it". Unfortunately, the audience didn't get it either. The film was a flop but should not have been the gigantic flop it was, truth be told.

Enough of the behind the scenes melodrama and on with the film itself. As Shyamalan himself likes to say (over and over) the story came from a bedtime story he made up and told his children. This is the first problem. The story is really a deceptively simple one (but I'm not surprised the studio execs didn't get it). It revolves around a apartment complex maintenance man named Cleveland Heep played beautifully by Paul Giamatti. One night Cleveland sees a young woman drowning in the pool (or so he thinks) and tries to save her. He of course doesn't and she winds up saving him. But who is she? She is what we later find out to be a "Narf" named "Story" (played by a vapid Bryce Dallas Howard) which is a vague mix between a sea nymph and a mermaid, but not quite. Anyway, it turns out that Story just wants to get home, but in order to do that everything must come together perfectly. Following me so far? I did mention the film had a simple plot line, right? Well it does. The rest of the film follows the regular conventions of a bedtime story believe it or not, with things happening precisely and people being in the right place at the right time. Just when you think all is lost you know everything will work out in the end. It seems like M. Night knows this all too well because there is an interesting subtext that makes fun of these conventions that is done very tongue in cheek. Does this minimize the story being told? I think so, because it seems forced and out of place. It also seems that Shyamalan doesn't have anybody to reign him in.
That's the second problem.

The characters in the film are gross stereotypes from the new age old lady to the young Chinese girl wearing barely there tacky clothes. But the worst character is played by M. Night himself who should never be allowed to act again (much like Peter Jackson MUST make a movie under two hours) he is just terrible. On top of that he is the character that impacts the future by writing a book. Come on. M. Night is so full of himself. That is the third problem.

Remember the "Narf"? Well, she does a lot of sitting around looking dazed and confused. Did I mention she is always naked and wet? I guess you can't expect much more from a sea nymph. Anyway, back to the film.

Even after all this I still like this film. It was shot, edited and scored beautifully. I knew what was going to happen but I still rooting for the Narf to get back home. I thought the movie had just the right amount of tension balanced with humor and even though the execution was somewhat soggy, overall the story was told in an almost endearing way. The fourth problem is that M. Night has really typecast himself in a certain genre of film. When you think of him you always think of a mystery/thriller. It turns out to be "The Sixth Sense" regurgitated. Doesn't he realize that people have the attention span of a flea and get bored very easily? Come on Night make something different, take suggestions from others, don't put yourself in your movies anymore and for God's sake don't give hours upon hours of interviews talking about yourself and your brilliant ideas. You are too good a filmmaker.

If you want to see a perfect of example of a movie made by an overindulged, insulated and spoiled filmmaker that is at the apex of his artistic madness then by all means see "Lady in the Water".
Actually see it anyway, it's pretty good.