Interesting shocker ending, if it's a bit depressing.

Rating: Null/10 (23 August 2002)

NO Spoilers in this review!! Isn't that great?? Read On, all ye who cometh without having seen the movie and wish to have the surprise kept a secret!
I hope all of Shyamalan's movies are not going to have this same feel and execution. Twice around it's gripping, but if Signs and future films are going to have ponderous pacing and one of those Grab Ya endings, I think this technique has overstayed its welcome. I finally rented Unbreakable and was less than pleased with the overall mood of it. It is really slow moving (pointlessly so) and dwells in gray, drab scenes that are somewhat boring.. and then there is this use of colors amid the gray that is even louder and more obvious than Schindler's list or Pleasantville. The plot develops minimally, and (for better or worse) the hints at the ending are extremely subtle- to where even comic book enthusiasts will probably be caught off guard. The ending does WORK, but it is very dark and unpleasant... And worst of all is that (for everyone who has seen The Sixth Sense) you will be sort of just tolerating the plodding pace so that you can get to the end and find out the BIG SECRET.
Unbreakable is an exaggerated version of The Sixth Sense, with its oppressive tone, attention to detail, characteristically quirky filming, and this effort to convince us that life is little but a series of moody, dimly-lit days and experiences, and that our routine world is regularly affected by supernatural meddling, and fully teeming with people who talk softly all the time. (Even the babysitter can't summon but a murmur.)...But Unbreakable lacks the intensity and emotional involvement of the earlier work, as there is not a strong character presence this time. Bruce Willis is again assisted by a young boy (Spencer Treat Clark, whose fine performance will probably lead him the way of Haley Joel Osment... and am I the only one who is starting to miss the Good Ol' Days when people just had two names..? And where are all these *competent* child actors hiding? Because Shyamalan seems to have the market cornered for himself and it really isn't fair to us, the viewers, who have to put up with movies from lots of different studios, even Lucasfilm. (Cough, cough- Jake Lloyd. ) probably because Willis' character is about as bland and ordinary as he was in The Sixth Sense (David Dunn and Malcolm Crowe are essentially the same person.) and so he needs someone more stimulating around just to keep the audience interested... Unfortunately the boy only has a few scenes, and the other supporting players, Audrey Dunn and Elijah Price: Comic Book Guy (No relation to the other Comic Book Guy of the same name.) are a mixed bag. Audrey is about as special as a plain baked potato, (Audrey Dunn and Anna Crowe are essentially the same person.) and Elijah is simultaneously too tragic and erratic a figure to be likable. Several times in this film I found Samuel Jackson's dialogue to be so campy and outlandish I wonder how he was able to get through it without laughing, but considering how this one ends I guess it all makes sense.
More than anything this movie suffers from Dessert Syndrome, which is that the meal isn't varied or satisfying enough to keep you from wishing it would hurry up and get to the sweet part - Though even *that* is bittersweet when it finally arrives. Still, it's nice to see that there exists a filmmaker who can actually keep you in the dark (literally) about something that will seem a lot more obvious after you find out what it is, and make you criticize yourself for not seeing it at the time. A mediocre movie, but the resolution is probably worth the time spent.