I announce, with trembling anticipation, the debut of what may be our next Great Bad Movie. In preparation, I hereby impose a Suck Watch: In just five days, M. Night Shyamalan’s embattled Lady in the Water will begin to suck!
Be forewarned: I have no specific intelligence; nay, I have no intelligence whatsoever, as many of you have observed. I haven’t seen the Lady in question. My colleague Gary Susman cheated and caught a screening. He declares it "not terrible." In the spirit of the age, I’m going to ignore this report, as it does not correlate with my preordained conclusions. I have only my nose to guide me. And my nose detects the sweet reek of hubris rising off the proud city of Shyamalot.
What we know: It’s a passion project. It employs a nomenclature ("narf," "scrunt") that appears to derive either from babytalk or frat initiation. It places its maker, acclaimed screen presence and noted credit card user M. Night Shyamalan, in a pivotal role. And, according to star Paul Giamatti, "the plot unfolds, because all anybody does in the movie is sit around and tell each other the plot. It’s a really weird thing to try to do." And there’s the fact that, thanks to Michael Bamberger’s hagiography, the very talented M. Night lately seems to be trying for a slightly Christlier impression of David Blaine.
These factors, taken together, practically necessitate a Suck Watch, where we here at PopWatch anticipate the debut of that most rare and wonderful of pop phenomena, the Act of Solemn Hilarity. That’s probably the best-case scenario: At the other end of the continuum crouches Ritual of Ponderous Self-Indulgence. Neither outcome is good news for Night’s interest in taking over the Harry Potter franchise — the mere fact of which adds a new speculative dimension to his sudden, angry jump from Disney to Warner Bros., a.k.a. the House that Harry Built and Puts a New Roof On Every Couple Years.
But that’s just business talk: We’re discussing something far more important here, the minting of fresh new badness. Will Lady in the Water be good-bad? Or bad-good? Or good but misunderstood? (Misundergood?) (Hey, if he can coin stupid new words, so can I.)
Narf up some responses below.
Read the excerpt from the book about making this movie that you guys published last week. Nina Jacobson and the suits at Disney read the script and said “We don’t get it”. The problem with needing a script explained is that the audience doesn’t get that luxury, so they either stay away, or they tell other people to. Night heard that, and rather than edit his story, he took his ball and went home, or rather to Warner’s.
Shyamalan’s movies have decreased in quality and gross with each film. His hubris and this trend would support your about-to-suck hypothesis. And he should get to direct a Harry Potter film only after Joel Shumacher and Akiva Goldsman (no, I’m NOT letting him off the hook for one of the worst screenplays in recent memory) get to make another Batman film.
The trend regarding Shyamalan’s films is that each film is worse than the one preceding it, so I see no reason to think that LADY IN THE WATER won’t be terrible.
My take on it is, even if the story sucks, I’ll still have Paul Giamatti’s performance to enjoy, he da man!!
Though i think it is ridiculous to pass judgement on any movie before seeing it. However, considering Night’s last movie, “The Village”, which i regard as one of the biggest let downs at the movies i have ever experienced (i hate a movie that doesnt follow through on its premise). The trailer does look good but then again so did the Village.
I also read the excerpt from that book and Shyamalan sure came off as a whiney baby. I mean they didn’t get it and they still offered him $60 million and complete creative control and he still whined and said no. That is alot more then almost any other director would ever be given. That totally seems like some kind of crazy diva behavior to me. Plus he whined even more when Giamatti said he had not read the script. So far this movie doesn’t look promising.
it will most likely be pretty bad, because the other posts are right…each movie gets worse, though I think Signs was worse than The Village. and there’s also the fact that he insists on acting in his films…he is not an actor!!! why doesn’t someone tell him? the film grinds to a halt whenever he appears on screen. I think his career is a lesson in letting good reaction to one film (Sixth Sense) make you self-important and thinking you can do no wrong…and I admit Sixth Sense was pretty darn good!
i URGE all of you not to go out in record numbers to see LADY IN THE WATER. Why? Because I as many of you were burned by THE VILLAGE — I’m still actually angry at the feelings I had coming out of the theater for that one and its been over 2 years. I can’t take hearing the headlines that this one grossed over 40 million — PLEASE DON”T BE FOOLED AGAIN — He even had to switch studios because Disney did not get the movie. there are three other movies that look better — My super ex girlfriend, monster house and clerks 2 — spend your money on any of those — go see Superman Returns again — just don’t spend money on Lady in the Water — because if you were fooled by the marketing of the village, you should realize your mistakes and stay away.
Have you seen the trailer? Not content with putting himself in every one of his friggin dumb movies, Shamalamadingdong puts himself in the *trailer* as well!
Narf! I’m sorry – but everytime I hear it I have to think of Pinky & The Brain. How can you take serious a movie that reminds you of two lab rats trying to take over the world???
I read the EW book excerpt last week, and I too found Night to me a megalomaniac who can’t take criticism. He had one smash movie that I liked (Sixth Sense), but everything since has stunk on ice. It’s to the point I won’t go see anything he directs theatrically – he’s burned me with lousy movies too many times now.
So I’m with you, Scott – this is gonna tank big time, and will be gone from the multiplexes by August 5. Count on it.
Narf!
Sixth Sense and Signs were the best. This just looks strange, not scary, just strange. And exactly Scott, “Narf” was the sound Pinky the mouse made. So Shamalan ran out of creative names for characters? Is he going to steal from Baboo the genie and call his next one “Yapple Dapple” or from Shaggy “Zoinks”?
I disagree. Knight makes some enjoyable movies (Unbreakable and Signs were fun). I think people are disappointed that his films don’t turn out to be Sixth Sense clones. As for his larger role in the film, so what? Indian-American actors get stuck with the convenience store/taxi driver bracket most of the time. Good for him. I do question EW’s decision to attack a movie sight-unseen, especially one directed by a popular minority director. Hmm.
Ok I get the idea about what the main plot line is, but what the hell is this really about, I mean with the monster and all? When I saw the first trailer for it the film seemed like a-how should i put it-um..well fairy tale-or a family film i guess. Now it seems like some fantasy thriller, that looks really ridiculous. I do want to see it (mainly because of Paul Giamatti’s acting), but yet there is a part of me that feels yes-this movie will probably suck.
I don’t remember who actually said it, but I believe it’s true: as M. Night gets more talented as a director, he gets less talented as a writer. I think we can all admit that at least his films are visually stunning with great cinematography, and most of the performances are up to par (I didn’t like The Village either, but I did like Bryce Dallas Howard’s performance). M. Night is just losing the ability to write good movies. But he’s such an egotistical, conceited brat that he can’t see that’s true. He should let someone else write his next movie, and make that a tradition. I mean, sure, he’s trying to pass himself off as the next Hitchcock, but Hitchcock didn’t write every film he directed. Barely any, in fact. He needs to stop being a one trick pony and…I don’t know, make a romantic comedy or something. “M. Night Shyamalan’s The Break Up 2.”
Maybe not.
I rather enjoy M. Night Shyamalan’s movies. And, if someone tells me NOT to see a particular movie, I’m more likely to go and take lots of friends with me! Therefore, I’ll be working hard to make his next movie a hit. There will never be another “Sixth Sense” so people should stop expecting every one of his movies to be just as good!
I’ll probably go see it, because I like MNS’s storytelling. Here’s my take on it–just because the studio people ‘didn’t get it’ doesn’t mean it’s going to be bad. On the contrary, I think that statement reveals it’s an original idea that they’ve never seen before and they aren’t sure if they’re going to make money on it. And about MNS’s ‘whining’ that Paul G. hadn’t read the script–that could be an author’s insecurity, and not a filmmaker’s ego, talking.