Night Time

Rating: Null/10 (24 November 2000)

Why was this made? To establish a new genre, following on the heels of `The Sixth Sense.' Playing it safe, we have Willis again as confused in the face of the supernatural, a knowing boy, a background wife. Right, and a plot twist at the end. Fund it well enough to ensure a high level of craft and produce not just good box office, but also a new Hollywood trend to ride.

It's not going to happen, primarily because this film is just not good enough as an assembly, but also because people can only be freshly surprised once. The last film depended on its writing and the trick of largescale retrospective reinvention. This was a trick of the written word, not something that comes out of the visual medium. In an attempt to be more cinematic, this film ambitiously adds two elements:
--An attempt to be self-referential, or at least contain mirrored symbology in the comic book motif
--An attempt to build a peculiar world, slightly surreal, presumably to serve as a springboard for plot turns and artsy effects
But these are implemented clumsily. Part of the problem is Willis. His appeal is based precisely on the notion of an ordinary guy, specifically an ordinary guy in an ordinary world. But the real problem is the writer and we presume his committee of advisors. He is a print writer with a good visual sense. (The scene in the train is very good.) But he is not someone who can visualize the world first and then cinematically animate a story. This trend is already dead, killed by its creator. The comic book thing could have been used well, as it is the root of image-based storytelling. Surely this is what was intended But all we get are a few stares at covers.

This could have been an excellent film. But the writer cannot escape the written word.