Part 1: “The Sixth Sense” (1999) ** out of ****
Part 2: “Unbreakable” (2000) **** out of ****
Part 3: “Signs” (2002) ***½ out of ****
Part 4: “The Village” (2004) *½ out of ****
Part 5: “Lady in the Water” (2006) ½ out of ****


The Shyamalan Experiment
Part 6
“The Happening”
June 13, 2008
* out of ****
Director: M. Night Shyamalan
Cast: Mark Wahlberg, Zooey Deschanel, John Leguizamo


The Shyamalan Experiment just HAD to go out with a bang… or a bad. “The Happening” just very well might be the stupidest movie of the year, and that says a lot, especially when movies starring Paris Hilton, Larry the Cable Guy, and Eva Longoria have been released. This movie already has Razzies lined up for it and it hasn’t even been a month yet. Yesterday, I found a perfect quality bootleg, because there wasn’t no way that I was going to pay for this shit. I’m glad that I didn’t have to, because…

“The Happening” just flat out sucks.

You have to come up with your own adjective for the film because it is so much worse than “worthless.” Not only is the film worthless, but the acting is worthless, the direction is worthless, the script is worthless, and basically, everything else is worthless. I never knew that you could make a good premise such a bad movie, but I’m guessing that M. Night Shyamalan is the first one to do it. Didn’t really surprise me though, especially after “Lady in the Water.”

“The Happening” is about… well… I don’t quite know. People start killing themselves for no apparent reason, and, like most movies, people believe that it is the work of terrorists. Always blaming terrorists, huh? Anyway, people start killing themselves, New York City is evacuated, and kids from Philadelphia are sent home from school. Among the many people sent home is high school science teacher Mr. Elliot Moore. (Mark Wahlberg) His relationship with his wife/fiancée/girlfriend Alma (Zooey Deschanel) is having problems.

Anyway, they go all the way up to a Philadelphia Train Station with fellow teacher Mr. Julian (John Leguizamo) and his daughter. (Ashlyn Sanchez) When the train stops, Mark Wahlberg goes up to them and they ask what’s up. How do they respond?

Train Guy: “We’ve lost contact.”

Mark Wahlberg: “With WHOM?”

Train Guy: “Everyone.”

It’s pretty bad when you can’t even get some good dialogue. With the bit that I posted above, it’s so fucking funny. I fell on the ground laughing my ass off, and if you think I laughed that hard, you should have seen me laughing at that infamous lemon drink line. But you know what it is funnier than the dialogue that you will find yourself never to speak? The deaths that you will never see. My favorite? The one when the guy starts the lawnmower and runs himself over.

But being that as the film is M. Night Shyamalan’s first rated R film, why doesn’t it feature more gore? If you just cut out a tiny little bit of “fucks,” “The Happening” could receive a PG-13. Shyamalan doesn’t go nearly as far as he could go with an R-rated horror flick. And as much as I would have liked it to push the envelope, it doesn’t. It doesn’t push anything. Because the time when “The Happening” could be really suspenseful, it just becomes boring.

Here is something that I just don’t understand though. If these guys are running from wind the entire movie, wouldn’t this wind become faster and faster as much as it blows? Instead, when the wind goes right by them, nothing happens. It is basically a waste of time and plot development. This movie would have been so much better if Shyamalan would have paid more attention to the plot than he did with the locations. It makes me feel like ashamed that this guy is a native Philadelphian, a place that is just right across the bridge from my exit.

Instead of the comedic lines, M. Night Shyamalan would rather have Wahlberg and his friends meet two kids, one of them being little chubby Spencer Breslin. Not against any heavy people, but I kind of find it impossible that this chubby kid can run like Jimmy Rollins without getting tired. He eventually becomes annoying, M. Night Shyamalan eventually becomes annoyed, and kills him with a shotgun. No seriously. I only brought that up because it is the best part of the movie. Now if everyone else dies…

I’ve said it before and I’ve said it again – Zooey Deschanel cannot act her way out of a paper bag. I know that a few will disagree with me, especially Kelsey, but she can’t act worth of jack. Supposedly her character shows no emotion during this movie, but she clearly tries to show emotion. The final outcome is the same thing – no emotion. It’s like she plays the same character in every movie – boring and uneventful. Kind of like… “The Happening.”

And then here is the real problem – Mark Wahlberg. It seems to me that this Shyamalan guy can get some of the best actors to do some of the dumbest things in history. He gets Adrien Brody to play a retard, Paul Giamatti to play a boring hotel owner, and now Mark Wahlberg to play a teacher. Could you see this guy playing a teacher? I couldn’t even see him playing a porn star, but I still did a few days ago and he was brilliant as one. I thought that Mark Wahlberg could play any role. I was wrong. But he probably could have done a good job, if he didn’t sound so faggy and intelligent the entire time.

“The Happening” doesn’t mark an end to The Shyamalan Experiment. It only marks the beginning, as I’m sure that with a bigger budget, more and more people are going to check out his new films. They can be given great reviews or really shitty reviews. Whatever they are, I will be there. Supposedly, this guy is making a movie from that kid’s TV show “Avatar: The Last Airbender.” Between the kid from “The Sixth Sense,” Spencer Breslin in “The Happening,” and the kids that watch this show, I’m beginning to wonder… just what the hell does M. Night Shyamalan have against kids?

Or the better question, what does M. Night Shyamalan have against his audience?


Thanks a lot for the feedback! Some people have praised my words, some people have sent me messages saying that I was a bad reviewer, and someone even has a group called "Stop The Happening" or something like that.

Part 1:“The Sixth Sense” (1999) ** out of ****
Part 2: “Unbreakable” (2000) **** out of ****
Part 3: “Signs” (2002) ***½ out of ****
Part 4: “The Village” (2004) *½ out of ****


The Shyamalan Experiment
Part 5
“Lady in the Water”
July 21, 2006
½ out of ****
Cast: Paul Giamatti, Bryce Dallas Howard, Jeffery Wright


“The other thing that you gotta look for is my own acting, which is worse… so bad… and I do this, like, girlish, like, girl scout scream, which is very awful.” – M. Night Shyamalan, on an extra feature on the “Signs” DVD


One of my favorite experiments put on film was Morgan Spurlock’s attempt at eating nothing but McDonald’s for thirty days. At the end of those thirty days, Spurlock had gained over twenty-four pounds, increased his blood pressure, and has a better chance of a heart failure than he did before. Earlier this year, comedian Doug Benson got high for thirty days straight. And I highly regret anything in my life, but the only thing that I regret doing with this experiment was not recording the entire FUCKING THING!

Okay, now I can take a movie like “The Sixth Sense.” It had great acting – I have nothing to say about that. If the twist was covered up much better, it would have been better received by me. “Unbreakable” is a fucking classic. I added that to my top thirty after watching it again. When I watched “Signs” again, I liked it a lot more than I thought I would. And as far as “The Village” goes… yeah, I won’t even begin to talk about that one.

I only have one more movie left, and I don’t think I can do this anymore.

Because after watching M. Night Shyamalan’s fifth film, “Lady in the Water,” I really don’t think that I’m doing this for my readers anymore. This is worse than anything that Eli Roth and a chainsaw can do. This is worse than waterboarding. This is worse than being put in a room with nothing but a toilet and a TV, playing nothing but “Hannah Montana.” “The Village” had a few redeeming qualities. “Lady in the Water” is fucking worthless.

Before the film actually starts, a voiceover done by no one other than Paul Giamatti tells us how retarded man has become and how we can’t listen. Ironically, M. Night Shyamalan casts Adrien Brody as a retard in “The Village” and he tries to tell us that WE can’t listen to the true art of his film? Yeah, fuck that shit. Anyway, Giamatti plays some guy named Cleveland, and no, he’s not fat, black, and awkward. This guy is just fat, white, and boring, as is with a lot of Shyamalan’s characters.

He runs a motel with a pool, and one day, he sees a narf named Story (Bryce Dallas Howard) swimming in his pool. She has a message about the fate of the earth. Here at the motel are a colorful cast of characters. M. Night Shyamalan plays a wannabe writer. Cindy Cheung plays a young girl who knows a little bit about narfs. A guy played by Jeffery Wright can finish any crossword puzzle. Freddy Rodriguez plays a guy who can only work out with his right arm.

But nothing, and I mean NOTHING, can even compare to the character played by Bob Balaban.

Bob Balaban plays a film critic, who throughout the film irritates the shit out of the viewer by spotting numerous film clichés and reminding us where the film falls flat at. The film critic is not a work of Shyamalan, but it is based off of every single film critic that reviewed one of his films. More precisely, if you thought “The Sixth Sense” was overrated, thought “Unbreakable” was boring, watched “Signs” and felt no sympathy for the characters, and just despised the shit out of “The Village,” you were the inspiration for this annoying and very arrogant character.

That’s not even the best part of the film critic. See, you would think that since this was obviously inspired off of a few different film critics that M. Night Shyamalan would figure out his pacing issues and what works and what doesn’t work. Yeah, well I’m kind of guessing that when M. Night Shyamalan goes to sleep with his toy army helmet on his head he believes his own bullshit. Never mind the critics that criticize your work, but do whatever you want and let people hate you. That’s what George W. did, and that’s why we hate him.

So whenever this critic points out when the film gets the least bit boring, it actually does get the least bit boring. Before he gets killed, he believes the usual film bullshit. When a powerful person that is stronger than the hero tries to kill the hero, the hero will defeat the powerful one. You know what happens after he makes mention, right? And his death isn’t even the least bit impressive, and doesn’t do justice for the time that he’s been in the film.

Well, the critic is the only thing I can really say about the film, because the critic is the only thing that drives the film. “Harry Potter” is so successful is because we believe that we are in their world. The reason why “Lady in the Water” fails is because, otherwise the fact that it sucks, the audience can’t get used to being in this world. Shyamalan’s fans will probably respond back by saying that you are supposed to suspend your disbelief. How can you suspend your disbelief when you already can’t believe that you’re watching such a crappy movie? And you can’t get used to being in their world because there is nothing to picture but the world that you live in. I live right over the bridge from the place where this was shot at and I STILL can’t get into the movie.

Believe me, I would love to sit down and roast M. Night Shyamalan’s career like a pig hanging over a campfire, but this is one of those times when I’m actually begging for mercy. Something tells me that the last film of his will actually be the roughest of my travels. You can’t say that I’m not committed to my job as a reviewer, but you sure as hell can say that there is a time when you just have to stop what you’re doing, look yourself in the mirror, and ask why the hell you’re still doing something as painful as this.


The sixth and final part of my travels, "The Happening," will appear on the site in a few days. No idea when, but until then, there won’t be a UFC article until I’m finished watching all of these movies and have a week or two to heal.

Part 1: “The Sixth Sense” (1999) ** out of ****
Part 2: “Unbreakable” (2000) **** out of ****
Part 3: “Signs” (2002) ***½ out of ****


The Shyamalan Experiment
Part 4
“The Village”
July 30, 2004
*½ out of ****
Cast: Bryce Dallas Howard, Joaquin Phoenix, Adrien Brody


Well it is suddenly getting harder. “The Sixth Sense” isn’t very good, but “Unbreakable” is a freaking classic and “Signs” is probably one of the best alien films of all-time. After “Signs,” shit has been going downhill. Everyone has said that “The Village” is the film that displays M. Night Shyamalan’s true suckiness, but I didn’t want to believe it. Out of the six films, not including “The Happening,” this was the first Shyamalan film that I haven’t seen prior to doing this little harmful experiment of mine, so I went into this film with no thought other than being astonished that Adrien Brody would be cast in a Shyamalan movie.

I don’t even have a joke for that. Shyamalan cast Brody as a retard. Shows what happens when you pick a shitty script.

“The Village” is the worst film that M. Night Shyamalan has made. It’s stupid, retarded, and boring. You can’t even understand half of the story while it is going on. It’s poorly acted and just tiring. I understand that this movie will never be as respected as “The Sixth Sense,” but when it is coming from someone who doesn’t respect “The Sixth Sense” worth of dick, you would think that M. Night Shyamalan would make a decent film, like “Signs” and “Unbreakable.” Yeah, right.

The movie takes place in present time in a village where everyone thinks that they live in the 1850s. Yes, I just spoiled the ending. But it’s not even a twist. Shyamalan may think it is, but the movie goes without a twist. To even call it a twist ending is giving a bad name to a twist ending, and that includes “The Sixth Sense.” Anyway, a guy played by Joaquin Phoenix asks to go through the forbidden woods in the village to search for medicine. In this village, there are a bunch of old hags, a blind lady, (Bryce Dallas Howard) and a retarded Adrien Brody.

May I add that in these forbidden woods hides a monster, a monster that can tear this village apart, not by being vicious, but by bringing out the true secret of the village. Wanna know the secret? There is no secret. Well, between the characters there are, but not with the audience. Think about it for a second – if there is a monster that lurks around a small village, and if a guy comes out of nowhere with modern day clothes, wouldn’t you believe that something was up with the village’s time-period? And who in the hell would want to live in the 1850s? I’d rather be Amish instead of being around those fucks.

And tell me, why in the hell would you send out a blind girl, who is your OWN DAUGHTER, to go get medicine, while you clearly know that there is a monster and your daughter is blinder than Helen Keller. If you think that your daughter can climb over the wall to get your village medicine while being blind, you are just about as dumb as the filmmaker. It’s common sense. The funniest part about it is that they don’t want anyone to know that there is another world that is more high-tech than the one that they are living in outside of their gates, so they send the blind girl so she can’t spoil anything. That’s kind of like sending a dumbass but very biased Shyamalan fan to review his film. The fan knows that if it will surprise him, he thinks that it will surprise everyone else too.

I’m sorry, but if you think that sending a blind lady into the woods and have her pick her way out is a good idea, you should be hung and have your carcass fed to wild wolves.

It’s quite obvious that “The Village” was inspired by many things, but not many great things. I know many people are quite fond of “The Wicker Man,” but I absolutely hated that movie. I even think that the remake starring Nicolas “Fu Manchu” Cage is much better than the original, and I hate that one too. The quite obvious comparison between the two is the conspiracies that the two groups of villagers have of the village that they live in. The group in “The Village” thinks that by not letting everyone know that there is a world outside, it would make their world so much better. The group in “The Wicker Man” thinks that by sacrificing some character, it will help the harvest. I didn’t like it any more in “The Wicker Man” than I did with “The Village.” Now that I think about it, I hate it even more.

Nothing makes me mad more than the lack of acting by these actors. Yes, sure they don’t have much to work with, especially with a shitty script with shitty dialogue and a shitty plot, but they don’t do much to help. You know something is wrong when Adrien Brody, an Academy Award winning actor, is playing a retard. William Hurt and Sigourney Weaver don’t do much to help this film either. Even Joaquin Phoenix is unimpressive. The only one that I can give kudos to is Bryce Dallas Howard. You would think that with a shitty role like this that it would require shitty acting. Well you’re wrong, because she gives the performance of her life in this role.

If you noticed that in the first part of the Shyamalan Experiment, I explained how boring “The Sixth Sense” was. You shouldn’t be surprised that I was bored while watching this too. In some instances, I became so bored that I forgot that I was watching a movie. At times, I didn’t have a single clue what was going on, and this was while I was paying attention to what was going on. But when I compared this movie to “The Sixth Sense,” I saw just how much more I respected that movie. Even though it was boring and uneventful, it had the potential to be great. The twist was great, but if it wasn’t so clear for the beginning of the movie, it would definitely be his best film.

But with “The Village,” there is no twist. There is no plot. It is a bunch of ideas that Shyamalan had while sleeping. He put them together into one big arbitrary script and out came one of his worst ideas ever. If you can say that you watched this movie without laughing, then your face is too tight. It is so funny that it definitely kicks the shit out of “The Love Guru” twice, and that is supposed to be a comedy.

I only have two films left in my Experiment, and already I’m getting Shyamalan fatigue. Imagine how miserable I am, add it by two, and then you will already get of what I think about “The Happening.” Shyamalan owes me, and everyone else, his paychecks for his last few movies after this project. There isn’t a single great thing about this movie, other than the score by the masterful James Newton Howard, who was nominated for an Oscar for his work. Still, I got a couple more days left. If I can get through this, you all promise to buy me a cold beer?


Part 5, "Lady in the Water," will be coming Thursday night. Until then, go watch "In Bruges," "Definitely, Maybe," and "Charlie Bartlett," which are all on DVD this week.

Part 1: “The Sixth Sense” (1999) ** out of ****
Part 2: “Unbreakable” (2000) **** out of ****


The Shyamalan Experiment
Part 3
“Signs”
August 2, 2002
***½ out of ****
Cast: Mel Gibson, Joaquin Phoenix, Rory Culkin


Part one of my experiment was a part that I found clearly overrated. Part two of my experiment was a part that I found clearly underrated. Part three of my experiment, “Signs,” has been called both.

I watched “Signs” for the first time five summers ago. I woke up at around 4 in the morning and couldn’t fall back to sleep, so I decided to pop in two movies in the DVD player that I rented the night before – “Signs” and “Donnie Darko.” I watched “Donnie Darko” first, and at that time, I found it stupid and boring (one will find it funny that now it is one of my favorite movies ever). After that, I put “Signs” in my DVD player. I found it stupid, awkward, and just not scary.

And I have seen my fare share of bad-acting. The last UFC I did was for “The Hottie and the Nottie” and not even the beauty of Paris Hilton could have saved that movie. But the biggest problem with “Signs” was that this was only a one-man movie. With only four actors that actually take most of the space up, three of them were nominated for Oscars, and the only one that was worth a damn in this movie was Mel Gibson. Not even Joaquin Phoenix (who stars in part four of my travels) could save this movie. Basically, I wouldn’t like this again a single bit.

But as it turns out, when I revisited “Signs” for my experiment, a lot changed on me. Sure, it is still a one-man movie, but it is even better the second time around. I’ve come to notice about Shyamalan three movies in that he relies on human emotions more than scares, and “Signs” has the most emotions out of all of his films. It deals with thoughts of religion, death, beliefs, faith, and family. The reason why I found “Signs” so boring was I expected a horrifying movie that dealt with jumps and scares. Truth is, “Signs” is still a very scary movie, but one that doesn’t have to deal with jumps and scares. It pushes you to the limit and asks the questions– just how far can one go to protect their family, if it is something that they don’t believe in?

Reverend Graham Hess (Mel Gibson) has lost all faith in his religion after the death of his wife. (Patricia Kalember) He lives in a house in Bucks County (about fifty miles from where I live) with his two children (Rory Culkin and Abigail Breslin) and his younger brother Merrill. (Joaquin Phoenix) On one random day, he wakes up to find his children in disbelief when they find out that there are circles where crops once stood.

Before this, Graham hasn’t had a single good conversation with his kids or his brother. His son doesn’t even like him, he is always complaining to his daughter about how she leaves half-full/half-empty water glasses around the house, and he doesn’t even want to associate with his brother half of the time. Mostly, their house has been filled with awkwardness and a lot of television watching.

But this event brings them all together, because they all begin to realize that it isn’t just there in Bucks County where the crop circles are appearing at. Oh hell no, they are appearing all over the place. So with the help of a baby monitor, a few books, and some old news clips, they all form the opinions that this is the works of aliens… except for Graham. He doesn’t know what to believe anymore, but throughout the movie he tries to reconcile with his family. When it comes to the point where he will have to reconcile and help save them, can he do it?

Alfred Hitchcock was the master of suspense. Most people consider his best film to be either “Vertigo” or “Rear Window,” but I consider his best film (and the best film ever) to be “Psycho.” In the film, Alfred Hitchcock sets up the main character to steal an envelope filled of money and it brings her all the way to the Bates Motel, where she will later be murdered. Alfred Hitchcock set this entire event all up into motion to finish the rest of the movie. It hasn’t become a case as to who stole the money, but who murdered the main character. In the movie business, this is called a MacGuffin, a plot device used to drive the story and the emotions or intentions of the characters, which are later forgotten by the end of the film.

The reason I bring the MacGuffin up is because M. Night Shyamalan relies on the apparent alien attacks to drive the movie, but the alien attacks aren’t so much as to show fear and terror, but rather to show just how Gibson has to bring the family together. He doesn’t want the aliens to be the reason why we are so scared of the outcome. He uses this alien attack to bring all of these characters closer to each other. By the end of the film, aliens are forgotten about and we just care about this family spending their possible final moments together.

A scene shows Joaquin Phoenix’s character watching the TV and seeing a clip of a bunch of Brazilian kids seeing an alien walk in the backyard during a birthday party. Yes, this scene is definitely scary, and it sure as hell scared the shit out of me after I saw it, but I didn’t look at it the same way the audiences did. I didn’t care about the Brazilian kids. I cared about the Hess family. If you replaced the Brazilian kids with the Hess family, imagine the true horror of the film. And this was when they were still mad at each other.

And I’m sure that no one forgets the true reason why everyone watches these M. Night Shyamalan movies – their twists. You would think that with a film like “Signs” that there would be a great twist. Truth is, there really isn’t one. If there was a twist, it would have surely ruined the film. The only problem with the film that I had was the ending however. It was a let-go, but after being in the front seat of a ride like that, what else could you want other than a happy ending for these characters?

The acting didn’t bother me the second time around. Mel Gibson is still brilliant and Joaquin Phoenix engaged me in many of his scenes. The score was frightening, as it is with Shyamalan’s previous two films. If we cut out the last ten minutes of this film, “Signs” would probably be one of my favorite movies of all-time, needless to say my favorite film of his.


I'll probably have Part 4, "The Village," up later tonight. It's basically half-finished. Just don't expect nothing good.

“The Sixth Sense” (1999) ** out of ****


The Shyamalan Experiment
Part 2
“Unbreakable”
November 22, 2000
**** out of ****
Cast: Bruce Willis, Samuel L. Jackson, Robert Wright Penn


I really enjoyed some of the positive feedback on my “Sixth Sense” review. I posted it on Digg and realized that at least fifty people clicked on it to read it. Some of them, who didn’t comment on my actual post, sent e-mails to my FilmArcade e-mail address and praised me. One of them even offered me Shyamalan’s address so I can send a letter to him. I declined because, well, I don’t have the money for stamps. I don’t even have money for his one movie starring Rosie O’Donnell, let alone for stamps. And they cost less (not much less, you can probably find that movie in a two dollar bin).

But one comment from a guy who clicked on my article sent an e-mail to me. In a nice and very understanding way, he told me about how wrong I was about the film. He even brought up a point that since I didn’t like the twist, I didn’t like the movie. I love constructive criticism when it comes to my reviews, and even Fred the Wolf dissed “The Blair Witch Project” in the one comment for my review, and this guy did it in a perfect way. Not the least bit ignorant and very understanding. I like that.

I just guess that no one really “got” my opinion. I don’t hate “The Sixth Sense” because of the twist. First off, I don’t hate “The Sixth Sense.” I hate “Alvin and the Chipmunks,” but not “The Sixth Sense.” And secondly, I don’t hate the twist. Actually, if Shyamalan didn’t make it so clearly obvious within the first thirty minutes, it would have been a perfect end to the movie. I don’t like the movie because it was boring and just not scary. It’s overly predictable and unless if you wear a helmet on your way to work as you drive in your car, you could figure that out.

But his film after that, “Unbreakable,” is much different than “The Sixth Sense” was. Whereas “The Sixth Sense” is boring and very predictable, “Unbreakable” never loses speed and the twist at the end is very surprising. I’m sure that everyone, including me, will be comparing the two films together, with “The Sixth Sense” probably winning most battles, but there isn’t a doubt in my mind that “Unbreakable” is Shyamalan’s masterpiece, and probably the second best comic book film ever (behind my favorite film of all time).

And not only was “Unbreakable” great, but it showed a different kind of side of M. Night Shyamalan. It shows the geeky and true master of suspense. He doesn’t beat Alfred Hitchcock, but when you compare “Unbreakable” to that film starring Rosie, you got a guy who has improved over the years. Shyamalan clearly shows how much he loves comic books. He throws in references here and there, gives props to some of his favorite heroes and villains, and ends the film in a perfect way. We can cheer for the hero, but even the villain is just part of the hero’s discovery.

From the day that Elijah Price (Samuel L. Jackson) emerged from the womb, he came out with broken bones. He was born with Type I osteogenesis imperfecta, a disease where bones break easily. During school, kids tormented him and called him Mr. Glass. There was only one thing that kept him from going insane – comic books. He later started to believe that if he is as weak as he is, there is someone who is unbreakable and invincible like the people that he reads about.

On the other end is David Dunn (Bruce Willis), a security guard at a football stadium that was never able to live the life of a football star due to a car crash. He lives with his wife Aubrey (Robin Wright Penn) and his son Joseph. (Spencer Trent Clark) After a massive train-wreck that killed one-hundred and thirty-one people, David came out as the only survivor. Elijah meets David one day and tells him that he believes that David is invincible, that he is more than just human. Joseph believes it also, and so David and him go downstairs into the basement, and in probably one of the greatest scenes ever in a superhero film, David begins to lift weights. First he lifted 250, then 270, and then 350. Maybe he is a superhero after all.

You could have sworn that I just gave you the twist to this film but all I have left to say is expect nothing of the sorts. What could have been a superhero origin movie where the superhero already knows that he has powers and fight against a villain, M. Night Shyamalan decides to take the entire movie into the origin of the superhero. He decides to let Willis get used to his super powers. Other than lifting the weights, there is a scene where Bruce Willis searches a drug dealer (played by Shyamalan, no less) and he tries to get used to his superpowers. This scene is so perfect that it begs the question whether or not it is Shyamalan trying to fuck with the viewer or Willis.

I can’t say that the film is flawless. The reason why I took off half of a star when I reviewed “Iron Man” was because it didn’t have a great villain. Usually, the rule of a superhero origin film will end with the hero killing the villain, or bringing him to justice. The film never has a clear villain, but you can’t complain. This is probably the most in-depth superhero movie that I’ve ever seen. It doesn’t need a villain as long as there is a conflict for the superhero. The conflict for this film is (other than Willis trying to get use to his powers) who Willis should decide is right – his son, who believes that Elijah is right, or his wife, who believes that he is nuts. It wasn't a problem with me, but I'm sure someone will have their panties in a bunch over it.

The other best part about the film is the acting. Bruce Willis is perfect as a superhero. When he is no longer the dead person, he is the person who will never die. Samuel L. Jackson is awesome in his role. He’s perfectly believable. I’ve seen people like his character before, but I think Sam plays them better than they do. Those final moments create the real intensity between the two. And just so I don’t get another e-mail in my box, I actually LOVE the twist ending.

My only problem is that “Unbreakable” is too short. According to Shyamalan, he wrote one very long script that dealt with the origins and a few villains. Instead of including the villains, he decided to focus on just the origin of the superhero, which he thought was the most interesting part of the script. I don’t think that I’m alone when I ask for a sequel for this film. Can M. Night Shyamalan possibly start one of the greatest superhero franchises ever?

If all of his films were like “Unbreakable,” my job would be easy.


Due to the unavailability of "Signs," I'll have to skip it for now and go to his next film - "The Village." That one will be posted probably Monday night.

UPDATE: I JUST received a copy of "Signs" from my video-store, so I'll do that one first. It will be posted as soon as I watch it.

The Shyamalan Experiment
Part 1
“The Sixth Sense”
August 6, 1999
** out of ****
Cast: Bruce Willis, Haley Joel Osment, Toni Collette


Yes, this is in chronological order and yes I know M. Night Shyamalan directed two films before this one, but no, I don’t give two shits about them and yes, I will not be reviewing them. If you got money to dish them out for me, be my guest and send them my way. Otherwise, quit your bitching and enjoy my torturing.

The most talked about movie of 1999, other than “The Phantom Menace,” was M. Night Shyamalan’s “The Sixth Sense.” After a lackluster debut in a comedy called “Wide Awake” a year before, he came back with a movie that left people talking. It had everything – ghosts, Bruce Willis, and red doorknobs. Oh, and the twist ending that everyone loves.

But me…

Okay people, now let’s be frank. I saw this movie twice and I didn’t even have to see it in order to guess just what the twist was. Not only has it been such an iconic twist over the past few years, it is completely predictable. I won’t spoil it for anyone, but just look closely. After Bruce’s character gets shot in the first seven minutes or whatever the hell it is, watch the next time when he tries to talk to his wife. Why isn’t she answering back?

This is the part when you call out, “OOH! I KNOW! It’s because he is a *****!”

And right you are, my friends. Bruce Willis has played a dead man at least ten times before this, and three just counting all of the “Die Hard” films that came before “The Sixth Sense.” What was once a man who kicked serious ass stars in a drama that was marketed as a horror film to garner some press.

Yes guys, I don’t care what you say, “The Sixth Sense” is a drama. It isn’t a horror film because nothing scary happens. It is not a suspense film because there is nothing to be suspenseful about. And it is not nearly as smart as everyone believes it is. That includes you too, Shyamalan. Ever since this film was made and you received that Oscar nomination, you think your hot shit and all of your twists work. Stop right now. They don’t. “The Sixth Sense” is to perfection as Amy Winehouse is to sane.

Psychiatrist Malcolm Crowe (Bruce Willis) becomes surprised to see a guest arrive to his house in the middle of the night. The guest is an unwanted patient of his, (Donnie Wahlberg) who shoots Crowe in the chest before pointing the gun to his head. A few months later, it appears that Crowe is alive and well and still seeing children, but can’t bring himself to forget about what he was doing to that patient and how he didn’t help him. He decides that this patient that he welcomes in to assist with helping him will help him get back on track with his life.

The patient’s name is Cole Sear, (Haley Joel Osment) who, with his mom who works two jobs, (Toni Collette) live close away in the city of Philadelphia (which is just across the bridge from me, I’ll have you know (and yes, I’m not proud that Shyamalan shoots his films in Philly either)). Crowe’s problem is that this new patient of his has all of the same problems as Wahlberg’s character had. Cole can see dead people that do not know that they are dead. Crowe is determined to get to the bottom of Cole’s case, even if that means to… watch him star in a play so he can outact a pompous nine year old kid…? Dude, is that the best Shyamalan can do?

One of the biggest problems isn’t within the film itself, but it is within the context of the film. Many people while watching this film will begin to think that Malcolm Crowe is battling his own demons. Yes, he is, but I look at his story in a different way. He is battling his demons AND everyone else’s. He thinks that his wife isn’t talking to him because he is the reason why Donnie Wahlberg broke into his house that night (I wouldn’t blame her, I’d rather have his much more talented brother too). He believes that he can’t help Haley Joel Osment’s character because he has the same problem as Wahlberg’s character, which results to him trying to battle his demons so he can battle Osment’s demons.

And even though I said the word “demons” too many times, not a single demon shows up throughout the entire film. This is because M. Night Shyamalan would rather tell the story instead of showing us a single scare. Normally, I wouldn’t have a problem with that at all, but for a film that is considered to be one of the scariest films ever, well, it just doesn’t cut it. The biggest scare of the film is not the scene when Osment is pulled into a closet by the “bullies,” but when Osment and Toni Collette are sitting in the car and she is apologizing that she missed his play.

“The Sixth Sense” is basically an acting driven movie, and that is the best I can say about it. Even though that the story, the developments, and the twists suck dick, the acting is surprisingly fierce throughout the entire film. Toni Collette is perfect as the hard-working mom just trying to get enough money to support her and Cole. Both her and Osment give enough emotion to keep the acting under control. Bruce Willis does a great job and it is obvious that he did a lot of hard work to prepare for such a role like this, but in the end, it doesn’t work out.

Yes, this is possibly the most overrated film of 1999 and probably one of the most overrated “horror” films ever made. Just the thought that people were actually scared of it makes me even madder. The thought that M. Night Shyamalan thinks that if he could fool you once he can fool you again makes me fuming. You all know what the result of all of that was? So I don’t have to tell you?


Part 2 of The Shyamalan Experiment will be coming either Friday or Saturday: “Unbreakable.”