The film was beautifully shot. There is some great cinematography delivering some beautiful images. I also enjoyed how the dialogue would run together at times, reminiscent of Robert Altman, and how the angles did not always focus on the speaker, but on the reactions — despite the fact that they seem out of place, it was interesting work.
In the end, I think that M. Night Shyamalan is an extraordinary talent. However, he has not shown any real growth in his work. I believe he should try working from someone else's written word, or perhaps try working in another genre. His last two films may have been disappointments, but there is no denying the ability he possesses, he just in a bit of a slump.
Bottom line. Some fine acting, wonderfully shot, yet the end result feels so incomplete. The story falls flat, and it drags the rest of the work down as a result. I cannot recommend this film, although it may be worthy of a rental. All I hope for is that Shyamalan does not let this tailspin last any longer.
Not Recommended.
Article comments
1 - RJ Elliott
Well-written review!
I guess my main complaint (from the "suspension of disbelief" desk) was that so many people in this movie were so gladly willing to involve themselves in something so bizarre. (I mean, narfs? Scrunts? If I was a tenant there, I'd be all like, WTF?)
However, I disagree with the idea that this movie was somehow shallow WRT a deeper meaning. I was able to see plenty of deep sub-text (the former doctor is discovered to be "the healer" and is able to heal the narf only after finally publicly venting about the loss of his loved ones, and thereby also healing himself in a way...the movie critic who whines about how all movies are unoriginal, and then gets unexpectedly [to him] eaten by the scrunt...etc.), and I found a lot of it rather touching.
I honestly wouldn't recommend it to most people, because most people do not enjoy this type of film. But I did enjoy it, warts and all.