Here we go...

Rating: Null/10 (11 August 2002)

With 950 comments on this film already, I almost didn't add another one because I am writing this after seeing "Signs", M. Night Shyamalan's third movie. But reflecting on this man's row he is hoeing, I had to come back and do this before leaving a comment on "Signs". Try to imagine yourself as a new film maker, look at the stars, the directors,the money, how in the world do you compete? How do you break through that wall? Just like he did in "The Sixth Sense", remembering the heart of what is being done; "It's about the story". It is story, period. Shyamalan tells a story, spins a yarn. Big storys, huge yarns, become dependent on big things to propel them. But real stories have always reigned or failed on a single point; the telling. It isn't what's told, but how it's told. The plot of "Unbreakable" can be contained in a single sentence and has been throughout these 950 reviews. But if we start trying to tell how the story is told it gets bigger and messier and confusing and, well ... the easiest way to tell this tale is to make a movie. "The Sixth Sense" announced a gifted and powerful envisionist. We didn't see him coming. Now that he's here we want him to jolt us the way he did in his first film, with every film he makes in its wake. That's not only impossible, it isn't desireable. We want this guy to continue to tell us stories because of the way he tells them. No, they aren't all going to be our favorite, that's impossible, too. Some people can tell you a bedtime story and you'll be asleep in ten. Other's can tell you the same bedtime story and you're not going to sleep a wink, not this night. We have a new story teller among us. He has told a story called "Unbreakable". If you want loud, colors, special effects headed for the oscars, stars being stars instead of people, you might want to pass on this one and everything else Shyamalan makes. But if you want to hear a story ... here we go.