This movie is haunted by the ghost of Shyamalan's past.

Rating: 6/10 (10 January 2001)

There is something inherently difficult in making a movie after striking gold in "The Sixth Sense," and "Unbreakable" is haunted by the legacy of it's predecessor.
Part of the problem is that this movie just isn't as good as Shyamalan's first film. (And lest you think the comparison is unfair, be aware that similarities to "The Sixth Sense" abound in "Unbreakable"--it's even set in the same city!) Another problem is that Shyamalan's knack for dramatic realism is undermined by the fact that this is basically a Superman movie.
But the real problem is that, after including a whopper of an ending in "Sixth Sense," we, the viewers can't help but try to figure out what the surprise ending will be. (We know there will be one, because everyone expects it and will be disappointed if there isn't one.) That instinct is very distracting, making it hard to feel for the characters because we're trying to decide what lies beneath the plot.
And the absolute worst part of the film is that the payoff for all our conjecture is simply not worth it. Yes, it is surprising, but it is not a chilling, jaw-dropping revelation that completely changes the movie. At best, you may find yourself saying, "Wow, I didn't that coming!" At the end of "The Sixth Sense," I saw many movie-goers who were absolutely speechless. The ones that could talk were trying to figure out how they'd missed it. "Unbreakable" elicited none of these reactions when I saw it. My suggestion for Shyamalan is to make a completely different movie (different style, feel, maybe even genre) next time to suppress the inevitable comparisons and try to regain the creative freedom he exercised so well in his first film.