Rating: 
Summary: Unbreakable
Review: I was struck watching this film by the old fable about the emporer's new clothes. As a big fan of "The Sixth Sense", it was shocking to sit through this overly long rehash of someone's juvenile fantasies filmed in too dark, out-of-focus cinema techniques. Someone, somewhere along the way, should have told the young boy genius director that this was bad, bad, bad. Willis and Jackson and the rest of the cast are a talented lot, but not even they could save this poor dog.
Rating:
Summary: Unwatchable
Review: I must have wildly different standards for film than those reviewers here who have called this "a great, great film" or "wholly original". I enjoyed "The Sixth Sense", M. Night Shyamalan's previous film (and to which, by some critics with incredible perceptual problems, "Unbreakable" was described as a sequel--it is most assuredly not, in any accepted use of the term.); I've always liked Bruce Willis and usually enjoyed Samuel Jackson's acting terrifically. The two of them were fantastic in "Pulp Fiction", and I looked forward to seeing them together again. But I found "Unbreakable" absolutely excruciating. Others have mentioned the slow pace as a positive--I found it left me so totally bored with the story that by the time there was any action I simply didn't care. It's not that I'm an action film buff--a story with little action but great writing--dialogue or plot, or with fascinating character development will captivate me. But I found "Unbreakable" to have none of these. In fact, trying to pinpoint the main source of this movie's problems is quite difficult. It's not the dialogue (for minutes at a time there isn't any!), nor the acting, and it isn't really the concept--when you put the thing away for a while and think about the ideas involved, they have some interest although too much was made of the comic book, and not enough of idea of truth behind mythology. (The premise that water was Willis's "Kryptonite", and he goes out to hunt down the bad guy when it's raining buckets and manages to fall into a pool was simply absurd....please, spare me!) The music certainly didn't help matters, but it wasn't bad enough to sink the film to the depths it achieved. I've got to put it down to the direction--it seems to me that Shyamalan tried too hard to recreate the success of "Sixth Sense" by starting with an unexpected twist ending, and working backwards from there. But it didn't work for me. The twist at the end with Jackson's character is rather good, but I had so totally lost interest in the entire film by that time that I simply didn't care, and I found it absolutely unbelievable. Poor Jackson had the bad luck to have to utter perhaps the most ludicrous last line of any film ever made, and I have to believe that the director realized this after filming was over and everyone had gone home, because the music swells at this point, almost obscuring what must have seemed on paper a fine idea. Thank heavens the idea of a trilogy based on this movie was abandoned. Now, if at the end Samuel Jackson had sung to Bruce Willis (to the tune of Unforgettable): "Un-break me, you sweet unbreakable you...." Hey, I keep waiting for Hollywood to call.
Rating: 
Summary: Great Movie that Brings Great Craft to a Poor Premise
Review: As others have noticed, this is no Sixth Sense, but fans of that movie will be glad to notice the same level of craft and storytelling here. There's a scene at the beginning of the film that is truly horrifying -- a doctor tells David Dunn (Bruce Willis) that he is one of only two survivors of a train wreck. Survivor number two is in the foreground, at the bottom of the screen wrapped in bandages from head to toe, and as the scene progresses we see fresh blood spreading like an ink blot on the bandages. Then we leave the body behind as the camera zooms in closer to David, who is about as traumatized and dissassociated as you would expect him to be as it dawns on him that he has just become the only survivor. The best thing about this film is that every scene is like this. The director is absolutely superb at maintaining tension and getting at the emotional resonance of his story. Like in the Sixth Sense, the fantasy plot is made all the more gripping by the cool, icy realism that Shyamalan has made his signature style. Bruce Willis puts in an amazing performance as a man who has missed his calling and instead spends his days clinging to an undeserved mediocrity. Samuel L. Jackson is great as the grumpy catalyst who puts Willis's life back on track. The story arc the hero goes through is compelling and heartfelt. The cinematography is almost perfect. This movie has a real heart, something that's sorely missing in most Hollywood films these days. So why didn't it do as well as the previous film? I think it has everything to do with the plot. The suspension of disbelief was a rather easy thing to do in the Sixth Sense. There was only one pill to swallow -- the creepy little kid sees dead people. Here there are about four. Let's count 'em off. 1) The movie suggests, nay relies on the notion that comic books are an important, relevatory way our culture expresses its deepest needs and mythic desires. It's an interesting idea, if done with a light touch. Ang Lee used this notion to good effect in "The Ice Storm," but he did so by treating it lightly. Here it's presented in the most leaden way possible, with Samuel L.'s character practically preaching on how important comics are to the souls of modern people. In other words, the central theory here is that Hindus have Krishna and Arjuna, ancient Egyptians had Osiris and Horus, while modern Americans have Batman and Howard the Duck. Forgive me if I don't buy it. And I love comics as much as any former 10 year-old kid. 2) Since comics are fraught with all this mythic weightiness, it seems only fitting that the connoisseur of comic books would be rewarded with untold riches and patronage, as Samuel L.'s character Elijah is in the movie (and as practially no one is in real life). His gallery of original comic book art is open by invitation only. He drives a Cadillac with custom padding in the interior. He walks with a glass cane. He wears the latest European fashions with regal aplomb. In other words, Elijah's character is so divorced from reality that the surprise ending practically jumps up and waves at you an hour before you get there. There's one scene in an actual comic-book shop where the guy behind the counter is about as pimply and geeky and flea-bitten as Samuel L's Elijah should have been. It's a scene that does nothing for the movie (watch Elijah mope!), except to remind us how outlandish the whole art gallery concept is. 3) The end of the movie (without giving anything away) shows the hippest of the art crowd sipping cabernet sauvignon and nodding appreciatively at framed drawings of Wolverine knocking bad guys out in weird forced perspective. It's a truly bizarre scene, with yet another fundamental disconnect from the realism the director builds so well elsewhere. 4) Titles at the beginning of the movie set up the whole fiasco by telling us how many comic book collectors there are in the US, how many comics they own, and how much time they will spend reading them. It's a bad sign when your first reaction to a movie is to say to yourself "Yeah? So what?" Other sources paint a less rosy picture of comic books: sales are at their lowest point in history; in spite of the odd genius like Lynda Barry or Art Spiegelman, comics are headed straight over the cliff in terms of cultural relevance. Yet in "Unbreakable" they are the repository of every Jungian archetype our culture has. If Shyamalan had spent less time trying to pump comics up into something they aren't rather than deal with the reality of how they're perceived in this culture (for right or for wrong), he would have ended up with a much stronger film, one that might have been even better than its predecessor. These flaws didn't bother me as I watched the film. I simply enjoyed the fantastic storytelling and went along for the ride. But they're there. They had a direct effect on the box office receipts. I hope this is just a sophomore slump for this promising director, and that he can learn the lessons here and move on. He's simply too good to lose. Hollywood needs him.
Rating: 
Summary: This is how a comic book film should be made!
Review: Growing up in a household with artwork of superheroes instead of traditional paintings gracing the walls of my living room the advent of a film that approached the comic book mythology with a mature, non-action summer blockbluster mentalitly not only sounded wonderful, but something close to god-sent. Not only does Mr. Shyamalan propose that comic books are modern day mythology, he also attempts to prove their true art in this very well made film. What Mr. Shyamalan does is essentially take comic bnooks into the real world, stripping the story of the campy and silly plot lines which we have all associated with superheroes. David, Bruce Willis' character is no shwashbuckling, smiling pretty boy who has sworn to protect the earth from interstellar invaders. He's a common man, with a breaking marriage and father and son relationship that would make Bill Cosby's head spin. Elijah, Sam Jackson's character is also very much down to earth and brings to the screen a certain air that makes you WANT to believe this could happen. The somber tone of the film also adds to the natural feeling of the story, showing how a normal man would naturally deal with the prospect that he is not only more that meets the eye, but something god-like, born solely to fight the evil in the world. David doesn't jump into battle galantly, unlike the heroes of other films, he approaches he recently realized powers with disbelief and awe. These things add up to create a film of that takes fantasy and make it seem as close to reality as possible. You would swear that these events could happen, and while the surprise ending was hinted at towards the end of the film, it is not the less shocking which adds the greatness of the film. I truly that the proposed trilogy becomes a reality as I hope to see what happens to our hero further through his journeys.
Rating:
Summary: Unbreakable - it's not a simple "comic book" movie
Review: I have no idea why people are giving this movie 1 or 2 stars. I only "assume" that they are used to the usual American action movie pacing. No, this is not Batman or Die Hard, but yes, the movie is somewhat complicated, interesting, relatively original, and has a languid pacing that builds up suspense. I felt it was a good movie with an interesting ending, which unfortunately felt a little rushed. This is why I gave it 4 stars. If the second movie in the trilogy comes out, the first one will be able to stand much better. Vadim
Rating:
Summary: "They say this One has a surprise ending."
Review: I know someone who likes this movie a lot...and is intrigued by it, so I will tread lightly. First, one of the most hilarious, but awful (if intentional) puns...or one of the most incredible lapses of continuity scoping, and then the pun splats you in the face! ...when David comes to the gallery and meets Elijah's mother, they talk and are getting acquainted and she is telling some things about Elijah...she says: "He has come through a lot in his life. A couple of bad spells I thought HAD BROKEN HIM." Oh my gosh...did she really say that?!!! There are so many reviews here, that there is no need to go over plot. A few dislikes...and a few likes are sufficient, I think. The worst acting in the film comes from David's wife's crying scene when she comes and asks him if he has been with anyone while they have been having problems...her sniffling is very unreal...too artificial...the same goes for the the kid actor playing "Joseph"... his crying is just as artificial and unbelievable... but at least, one might say that in the realm of crying he is like his "mother." A scene that takes on different connotations and responses in this viewer, at least, on the second viewing (and knowing what is in the ending) ...when Elijah falls down the stairs of the subway entrance trying to follow the mysterious stranger on whom David's "intuition" had "seen" a gun...the second time I was thorougly satisfied to see the fall and hear the crunch (if you know what I mean). And when Elijah is lying in the hospital, and the camera closes in on his eye...it looks like the eye of the whale in the 1950s version of "Moby Dick"... then the image is put inside the circle of the logo leading into the image of the next scene. And when David stops the foreign looking gentleman at the stadium and frisks him for drugs, he should have arrested him for impersonating a film director (sorry, guys, I just had to do it!). Well, we know the flaw with the plot, don't we? What comic book hero was ever married...and had a kid? So, you say in defense, they are trying to make it a hero for these mediocre modern times...but isn't that what kills the original mythos of the comic book heroes of the 30s, 40s, and 50s? ...trying to make them synch in with modern times and mores? Aren't comic book heroes written and drawn for adolescent males to fantasize about? Do adolescent males, thinking of power and strength and muscular bodies that they might have, also fantasize about marriage...and a kid... and a job as a security guard at a football stadium? "Superman" always had the aesthetic and power appeal for me...but "Captain Marvel" had a lot of mystic aura...and that neat lightning bolt on his chest... but just don't remind us of Gomer Pyle saying you-know-what...what a way to kill a fantasy! The best photography in this film is the first outside shot of the "Limited Edition" gallery... the windows are nice...and the shots in the swimming pool as David is struggling to get out of the pool cover with the sparkling light coming down through the water...the painting behind David and his wife in the restaurant has unbelievably beautiful color...but that dialogue and that whole scene are tedious for me... The person I mentioned who likes this film is especially impressed with the scene in the train station when David walks down the stairs to be "where there are people" (as Elijah has told him to do). The train station and its lighting almost take on a cathedral like aspect... The most contrasting music versus action comes when David struggles with the killer in the bedroom...you have this very interesting heroic/almost religious music while these two guys are grappling in a very real looking bedroom...which seems pretty mediocre...and they are knocking punch impressions in the walls... The best sound in the film is when David first walks into the bedroom...the thunder...and the wind...from the rainstorm outside...the blowing strips of curtain... nice effect of sound and visual... Let's hope two and three are better and more able to stand alone on their own...does this film measure up in your mind to a possible rival for the first entry in the "Godfather" trilogy?
Rating: 
Summary: Unbreakable
Review: I think this movie was actually very good. Most prople were turned off of it because it was not The Sixth Sense, and I blame the advirdisments, such as: "Unbreakable, from the writer/director of the Sixth Sense, starring the Actor from The Sixth Sense." The film takes a slow and cerebal approch to something that could of been silly, superheros walk the Earth. Unbreakable starts out with the birth of a child, who has several boken bones upon birth. Then in modern day we see a man on a train, then the train crashes (offscreen) and we see him in the hospital. The docters infrom him he is the only survivor. A man now, the child born at the beggining has a strange condition that makes his bones break very easily. He thinks that comic book superheroes are real, and that David Dunn (Bruce Willis) is one of them. He has never had an illness and never been injured. Skeptical at first, David slowly realizes that Elijah (Sam Jackson) may be right.
Rating: 
Summary: Beyond redemption
Review: It is rare to see a film that has no redeeming qualities at all, but this achieves it.
Rating:
Summary: Complete waste of time
Review: When I first heard about this movie it sounded kind of interesting. But in fact when I saw it it was a HUGE disappointment. The storyline is absolute crap. Right when you think you have the movie figured out it goes and does something totally confusing. They say that this movie is supposed to be a thriller but there's really only one part that's even close to a thriller scene. I advise that you do not waste your time with this movie.
Rating:
Summary: About that Poncho!!!
Review: Was this a comedy ? While watching someone, face unseen, skulking about in a poncho on some heroic(?) mission, we wondered if Bruce had abandoned the film entirely due to embarassment and boredom! And about that dialogue..."Stop, you're not supposed to shoot your father!" How idiotic and where was the much needed psychiatric care for the boy? This movie was a joke and complete waste of time.
| 
