Lady in the Water

I just finished watching M. Night Shyamalan’s “Lady in the Water” and my first impression, 15 minutes after the viewing is “amazing”. This is not a film like other Shyamalan’s other work. Without wishing to spoil anything about the plot, I will simply say that some of his trademark methods of storytelling are present and yet it lacks the sense of unease one gets early on in the other movies, such as “Signs” and “The Village”. This is most likely due to the fact that the story is based upon a bedtime story told to his children rather than a plot meant to scare adults with “gotcha” moments. The innocent fantasy of such a story is remarkably conveyed in both the plot and heartfelt acting by the principal actors and their supporting cast.

While Bryce Dallas Howard is stunning and exotic, as usual, this film really belongs to Paul Giamatti, who subtly seemed to be casting out his own demons as the story unfolds. The plot of the movie is available all over the Internet and I will not retell it here. What I wish to focus on is the initial reviews the movie received upon its release, earlier this year. Critics nearly universally blasted it, though no more coherent reason why than Shyamalan himself. Taking the part of a prominent character in the story, Shyamalan broke from his usual cameo appearances in prior films. This provoked outcries of his apparent egotism and self-interest by the same critics who felt stung by the inclusion of a cynical movie reviewer character who gets his just rewards after his predictions for the movie fall short.

As I see it, Shyamalan correctly took critics to task over their conceit that movies are made for them by artists as opposed to the opposite reality. Shyamalan did not make this movie for critics, or even you and I. He made it for himself and most likely, his children. This is how movie-making should be done. Instead of pandering to me, based upon a focus group’s reaction to what I might pay to go see, I want the film-maker to tell a story from his heart and let the critics hang themselves if they don’t like it.

When I watch a movie or read fiction, I have only the single expectation of stepping into a different world of another’s making. I do not expect to find that world tailored to my tastes or even to make me comfortable at all times. What I do expect is to stand as witness to a story being told. I want to search myself for the empathy to identify with the characters on some level. I want to cry when they cry and I want to feel righteous anger as they take up arms against some foe. The ability to find such empathy is entirely my own task and not related to the storyteller in any way except if he apparently goes out of his way to exclude me.

These facts are what the critics missed in their arrogance of assuming the film was made for their approval. For the couple of hours it took to view the movie, I was able to step outside myself and watch a waking dream. This is, again, how movies should be made and I hope that Shyamalan continues to pour himself into his projects with even greater prominence.


The movie comes out on DVD on December 19, 2006. Buy it, as I plan to do.