Comments on: M. Nightly Retrospective: 'Lady in the Water'

By: RaTTleR_NL

RaTTleR_NL — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 11:01:41 +0000

At the time I did have trouble with it because I as well expected certain things because of his previous films. But thats my own mistake.
I was, however, quickly able to push those aside and judge the film on its own merrits and decided I love it.
It really is a bed-time story, a fairy-tale but for adults.
It did come across as magical as other fairy-tales used to do when I was little.

Forget what he did before and see what a wonderous story he tells.
It's just different, a bit like Big Fish is different.

By: adu

adu — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 03:27:03 +0000

I absolutely hate this movie, it totally bored me.

By: ckybltz

ckybltz — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 02:45:06 +0000

I loved it as well. The disagree with the above poster though, I think the bedtime story marketing was perfect, because thats EXACTLY what it was. I think people saw M. Nights name on and, expected something else, or as the old argument goes, they were expecting a twist, and that it would all of a sudden end up being a horror film. It is exactly what it was said to be. The problem is with peoples preconceived notions of what a M. Night movie is "supposed" to be.

By: IsItThursdayYet

IsItThursdayYet — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 02:28:10 +0000

I actually really liked "Lady in the Water" too, but somehow I've never gotten around to buying it. I really liked the ending too – it wasn't really a twist, but it was a nice pay-off. Something about "Lady in the Water" just made it way good. I don't know why the critics, or audiences for that matter, decided to hate on it so much.

Maybe it was the "Bedtime Story" marketing. I honestly think that probably hurt it.