Reviews

2 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
A bedtime fable worth seeing
13 March 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Not everyone will like this film. I happened to think it is a small gem, and that it will grow in popularity and esteem as more people come to know it. However, it seems to have been marketed as a scary, horror thriller, which does it an injustice. I almost missed it because of the hype, and my teenage daughter skipped watching the DVD with me, because she does not like "scary movies." She was clearly misled.

It's hard to categorize Lady in the Water. Suffice it to say that the author himself calls it a bedtime story.

I predict that you will enjoy this film if you have enjoyed: - The Princess Bride - Paul Giamatti's characters - Rod Serling's Twilight Zone - Stephen King's "It"

Like the Princess Bride, Lady in the Water is a romantic fable about love, but not about romantic love. The love in this film is love of neighbor, a good Samaritan kind of love.

Paul Giamatti is the core and fiber of this film. No other character is developed as much as his character. He plays a Jimmy Stewart for our generation, a bumbling everyman with a core of integrity and humble good will.

To me this movie resembles the best of Rod Serling's Twilight Zone. It's an eerie morality play, where the audience gladly suspends their disbelief in order to enter the author's realm.

It also strongly reminds me of Stephen King's "It" (read the book, rather than watch the mini-series)in that it follows a band of outcasts whose characters grow enormously as they discover their own latent talents in a foreign world that exists just beyond the perceived reality.

And for the record, I thought M. Night Shyamalan's acting turn in his own movie was rather good.

Lady in the Water is not a perfect film, not even a masterpiece, but it does not deserve the scorn that has been heaped upon it. If you harbor a soft spot for fables and fantasies, do-gooders and **SPOILER ALERT** happy endings (LOTR anyone?) then take a chance on this lovely little film.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A Terrific, Inspiring and Entertaining Movie.
16 March 2006
I had not heard of his movie before. I caught it in mid-broadcast on cable, while channel surfing, eleven years after its release, and after the first few moments, decided to watch it to the end. It is now one of my favorites, right up there with "To Kill a Mockingbird." This film succeeds both as star turns and as an ensemble piece. But more importantly it succeeds in portraying American society in the 1930s as a whole, and involving the audience emotionally in both the the greater social issues as well as the smaller, more tender, personal issues. Despite its sensitivity, it is far from a chick flick. Despite it's theme of violence, it is far from a macho action flick. It is a courtroom thriller based on real events, and it is worth watching more than once.

The script writing and direction are calculated to be moving, and they succeed. Every actor in the film, every detail of the art direction, every camera angle plays on your heart and sense of moral indignation. To do so successfully, as I think this movie does, is the definition and purpose of art.

Kevin Bacon shows the most range in his film that I have ever seen from him. His physical performance was very demanding, his character work even finer. His chemistry with each actor in every scene is both bold and subtle, raw and complex. He reminds me of DeNiro's performance in the "Cape Fear" remake.

Christian Slater's character provides the viewer's point of view in the film, and he plays with great emotion and passion, and yet with a touch of reserve and detachment. I am strongly reminded of Kevin Costner's performance in "The Untouchables." Needless to say, Gary Oldman is a master at his craft, and always amazing to watch. Every character Oldman plays is memorable, and the antithesis of type-casting. His portrayal of the warden in this film is a brilliant balance of a socially acceptable monster.

This movie has received a lot of criticism for portraying historical facts inaccurately, and for taking sides in a political debate. I would remind the open-minded viewer that "To Kill A Mockingbird" also took great liberties with the facts of the historic court case on which it was based (there were six accused rapists, not one; the person on whom Atticus Finch was based was in reality the judge and not the defense attorney, etc.) and emphatically took sides in the even more hotly contested political debate over racial discrimination in America. Both films were based on real life, but neither claimed to be a documentary. Whether you resent historical tampering and political statements for dramatic impact is something only you can decide for yourself. Personally, I support both "To Kill A Mockingbird" and "Murder in the First" as films whose merits outweigh their flaws.

In short, this movie is worthy of your time, and will reward you, whether you want entertainment thrills, a good popcorn movie, a morally inspiring story or the appreciation of a well-crafted piece of work. It falls a little short of "The Shawshank Redemption," but not far. Despite what this or any other review says, start this movie without any preconceived notions, and just go along for the ride. I think you will be surprised, happy and satisfied.
31 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed