Neither Tarantino (TV Guide) nor the maker's of the Sixth Sense could create a movie this solid.

Rating: 10/10 (3 May 2001)

Why might TV guide and other sources try to compare this (outstanding) film to other works? One surely 'might' know why: propaganda to sell copies of your magazine; or perhaps a way to make your limited film knowledge fans regurgitate your pointless review to their friends--to look smart of course!
Fortunately, this film makes up for the poor reviewers. This movie is certainly the best film I've seen since 'Amores Perros' in Guadalajara, MX. Movie makers are still on the edge of making 'cognitive' movies: Being John Malkovich, Requiem for A Dream, Memento. What about the Sixth Sense?? Well, while it's a fine film, the sixth sense makes the viewer say "ah hah!" or "oh my god!" Memento and Requiem make the viewer feel something viceral: you might say "that sucks, I'm sure glad I'm not...", but it makes you feel for the narrator(s). Memento, especially the opening rewind shot, gets the viewer into Pearce's point of view: you try to think as he does.
Hopefully, if you read this review, you'll take my advice: try to figure out the movie on your own, don't worry about reviewers, esp. me.
-If you haven't seen the movie, don't read below-
The movie revolves around Pearce "conditioning" himself to believe false "facts." So all of your plot descriptions, while accurate for story telling purposes to pre-viewers, are not TRUE!