In light of the release of the latest Bond film Casino Royale, we focused this podcast on all things James Bond. We discuss the following:

Download and enjoy!

[iTunes] Subscribe to the Podcast directly in iTunes (MP3).
[RSS] Add the A Fistful of Reviews Podcast feed to your RSS aggregator and have the show delivered automatically (MP3).
[MP3] Download the show in MP3 format.

- Jones

Share on Facebook

2006 / 128 Minutes / PG-13
Reviewed by Dale Nauertz

“Insomnia” and “Batman Begins” were fairly straightforward (and relatively great) movies. But lest we forget how director Christopher Nolan’s career began, he has returned with another dense puzzle box of a film. With its unconventional structure and cinematic sleight of hand, “The Prestige” seems less like the work of the man who reinvented the Batman franchise than it does the work of the man who announced his arrival to Hollywood with the film “Memento”.

(more…)

Share on Facebook

2006 / 84 Minutes / R
Reviewed by Dale Nauertz

“Borat” is a curious mix of fiction and reality. I’m not sure where the line between the two ends in this movie. Apparently, many of the unwitting participants in this film have begun filing law suits against Twentieth Century Fox, the company that distributes the film. That suggests to me that a great deal of the footage that looks real probably is. If these were just actors, they would have no reason to be upset. If they were merely people playing characters that were racist, misogynist and moronic, they’d have nothing to complain about. But, as I suspected all along, the people saying the dumbest things in this film are sincere about them, and that makes Sacha Baron Cohen, the mastermind of this film and the man who portrays the titular character, more than a great comedian. It makes him an amateur sociologist…and something of a genius.

(more…)

Share on Facebook

Episode 4 of the A Fistful of Reviews podcast is now up and available for your listening pleasure via a variety of methods.

[iTunes] Subscribe to the Podcast directly in iTunes (MP3).
[RSS] Add the A Fistful of Reviews Podcast feed to your RSS aggregator and have the show delivered automatically (MP3).
[MP3] Download the show in MP3 format.

This time we talk about sequels we’d like to see, sequels we don’t want to see, and political films we feel are worth seeing. Enjoy!

- Jones

Share on Facebook

Well Episode 3 of the A Fistful of Reviews podcast has been edited and posted for your listening pleasure.

Featuring discussion of all manner of overrated films, as well as movies worth checking out this Halloween, the podcast runs a little over an hour and ten minutes and features a guest appearance by Ben Heckendorn of benheck.com.

The discussion gets a little heated during the overrated movies discussion so be prepared for an, at times, emotional debate featuring some colorful language.

Episode 3 Download

If you use iTunes you can subscribe to the podcast and automatically receive the latest and greatest Fistful podcasts without evenb lifting a finger. Cool, huh?

Subscribe to the best entertainment podcast in the world!!!

If you have any topic ideas, or suggestions on how we can improve the show we would be happy to hear them. Eventually we plan on adding an Intro and doing a better job of time management so stay tuned.

As always, thanks for listening!

- Jones

Share on Facebook

Better late than never I guess. Our long overdue second Podcast has arrived! Now that Dale is settled in at his new place we should be able to get on track with the originally promised bi-weekly schedule. The topics for Episode 2 are:

Hollywood’s Manufactured “Stars” (Orlando Bloom, Jude Law, Jessica Alba, etc…)
Film vs. Television: Which is better?
What’s up with all these god damn sports movies?!? (Friday Night Lights, Invincible, Coach Carter, etc…)

Download it in MP3 format (opens in just about anything) here:

Episode 2 Download

Or subscribe to it here:

Check back in the coming days for Dale’s annual “What am I waiting for?” list and a new list of things Hollywood would like you to forget.

- Jones

Share on Facebook

By Dale Nauertz

I probably say this every year (though it seems true every year) but this has been a pretty shitty year in film. There have been a few gems, but definitely less than five of them (“V for Vendetta”, “Little Miss Sunshine” and “The Matador” are the only great flicks that come immediately to my mind). On the whole, my attitude toward the year’s films has been one of boredom, disappointment or both. That’s okay, though, because I’ve saved some money (which I proceeded to blow on other things) and read more books than usual. But I’m surprisingly optimistic about what the fall and winter months hold. I have a feeling that all the year’s best movies will be seen in the next three months and that some of them might be pretty spectacular. There are some great filmmakers behind some of these films, and some truly intriguing concepts and premises. They could still suck, of course, nothing is ever surefire, but when it comes to entertainment and enlightenment, these are the films that I’ve got my money on. Like last year’s list, I’m going to use the Homeland Security color scheme to indicate my level of interest in upcoming films. As with our country’s terror alerts, any of these films could escalate from one color group to a group of higher interest based on word of mouth, critical acclaim, a great trailer or a really boring weekend.

Here’s how the color schemes break down:

Green: these are films I have virtually no interest in. In fact, I would do anything in power to stay away from these films. No foreseeable force could make me go. I will not probably not even mention them.

Examples: “Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning” or “The Santa Clause 3: The Escape Clause” (merely hearing these titles is enough to irritate me)

Blue: I don’t really want to see these either, but if I were drugged, abducted and returned to consciousness in a theater playing one of these films, I wouldn’t be too displeased. (Though I would wonder who the hell would go through such trouble just to get me to see “Gridiron Gang” or Russell Crowe’s “A Good Year”)

Yellow: I would describe my attitude toward any films in this category as “mildly intrigued”. I doubt I’d be intrigued enough to see them in the theater but, as I already mentioned, a great trailer or a really boring day off might be enough to get my ass in a seat.

Examples: “Flushed Away”, “Tenacious D in the Pick of Destiny”

Orange: I want to see these, probably even in a theater, but if they’re released the same weekend as something on the red list, they’re gonna have to wait their turn.

Examples: “Casino Royale”, “Fast Food Nation”

Red: Movies I really, really want to see. Unfortunately, it’s a pretty short list.

Now, onto:

The Red Alert List

1. The Fountain

Like “Gangs of New York” this film is making its second appearance on this list. It was supposed to come out last fall/winter, but it didn’t. I was sad. But it’s pretty much a lock that this film is finally getting released in November. Why do I care? The teaser and trailer both looked excellent. The plot, as I understand it, is highly intriguing (Hugh Jackman on a quest for eternal life and the love of that eternal life, played by Rachel Weisz, one of the few women worth searching for over the course of several centuries if you ask me). The visuals are highly arresting. And all of this is being put together by Darren Aronofsky, who hasn’t made a film since 2000’s haunting “Requiem for a Dream”…mostly because he was having so much trouble putting this film together. Brad Pitt was initially supposed to star, but he dropped out. There were the usual studio run-ins and so forth, but despite these complications it seems that this film will finally see the light of day. And I, for one, am psyched.

2. “Southland Tales”

This is the second film from Richard Kelly, the director of “Donnie Darko”. “Donnie Darko” was great and extremely messed up, and “Southland Tales” sounds like more of the same. It’s got The Rock, Sarah Michelle Gellar, Jon Lovitz, Stiffler, Justin Timberlake and John Larroquette in it. Apparently, it’s about the Apocalypse (which takes place in the summer of 2008). I’ve seen a couple clips from this film and they didn’t look amazing, but they certainly looked intriguing. At the very least, it looks just fucked up enough to be a good time. The Internet Movie Database has this film scheduled to come out in November, but they don’t have a specific date listed for it yet and no trailer has yet been released. That isn’t a good sign. The film had quite a buzz going for it earlier in the year, but that buzz evaporated due to a disastrous screening at the Cannes Film Festival. Still, I want to see it. If the French hated it, it could conceivably rock pretty hard. Of all the films on this list, this one is the most apt to end up on my list again next year. Here’s hoping it gets released before its own apocalyptic deadline.

3. “The Prestige”

I’m champing at the bit for this one. I was interested in it by its mere premise: at the turn of the 20th century, two magicians (Hugh Jackman and Christian Bale) start as friends but soon become competitors, each trying to top the other with a more spectacular stage act. David Bowie portrays electrical genius Nicola Tesla (the inventor of radio and many other fine things whose inventions were usually “liberally borrowed” by the likes of Thomas Edison and others) who apparently helps out at least one of these fictionalized Houdinis. Christopher Nolan chose this project as his follow-up to “Batman Begins” (and likely the film that will precede his involvement in its sequel “The Dark Knight”). Between this and “The Illusionist” it seems that early 20th century magic acts are going to be well represented at the box office this fall. I’ve always been intrigued by the world of early 1900’s magic (Harry Houdini and the book “Carter Beats the Devil” are two of my main reasons for this). But, of the two, this is the one that I have more interest in. “The Illusionist” looks interesting and all, but it looks like a romance between an egocentric magician (Edward Norton), a hot chick (Jessica Biel) and some count or something (Rufus Sewell). “The Prestige” looks more mysterious and gothic (judging by its amazingly cool trailer). Plus, the idea of dueling magicians is more interesting than another damn love story. And, just for those of you still on the fence, “The Prestige” has Michael Caine. I rest my case.

4. “Stranger Than Fiction”

Will Farrell stars in a film from the director of “Monster’s Ball” as a man who one day discovers that he can hear someone narrating the events of his life. When he hears that same, narrating voice coming from his TV during a talk show one day he begins to suspect his life might be the creation of a renowned writer, played by Emma Thompson. Unfortunately for Will’s character, Emma Thompson is contemplating the death of his character and he has to somehow stop her. This sounds highly intriguing, though I’m frankly amazed that the script wasn’t written by Charlie Kaufman. It sounds like the brand of absurdity that is his bread and butter. The film looks to be quirky, surreal craziness in the vein of “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind” or “Adaptation”. If that’s actually the case, it should be an excellent time. Plus, this might be Will’s chance to branch out and illustrate that he can do more than the ingeniously moronic comedies he seems to specialize in.

5. “Flag of Our Fathers”

It’s another damned war movie, true. But this one is directed by Clint Eastwood, whose recent film output has been better than just about anyone else in Hollywood. Aside from that, and according to the trailer, “Flags of Our Fathers” appears to be move beyond the usual battle, bonding scene, battle template utilized by most World War Two films. The film concerns the battle of Iwo Jima, the boys who raised the flag on Iwo Jima, and the media attention and aftermath of that event, wherein the American military made the boys into celebrities in order to sell war bonds and bolster the financial position of their war machine, which might have been just as important as the strategy of the battles themselves. If it really does concern more than just a seemingly endless stream of Pacific theater battles, and if it is up to par with Clint’s recent cinematic output, then this has an excellent shot at winning “Best Picture”. And kicking the ass, once again, out of…

6. “The Departed”

…Martin Scorsese!!! This film is Marty’s third with Leonardo DiCaprio (one of those things that make you go…Hmmm). I guess Leo must be the DeNiro of his generation after all. All of us ardent DiCapriots were right after all, and all you Leo-haters were simply bothered by his looks. Matt Damon, Alec Baldwin, Martin Sheen and Jack Freakin’ Nicholson are on board as well. As far as casts go, that’s pretty impressive. The film is an Americanization of a pretty terrific Hong Kong thriller called “Infernal Affairs”. Like 98% of Hong Kong thrillers, this one is about people undercover, one a gangster undercover in the police and the other a police officer undercover in a gang. It’s about the nature of identity and good and evil and all the usual Hong Kong action movie themes. Scorsese should have a field day with that sort of material, plus it might give Nicholson the chance to do some wonderful scenery chewing (at which he excels) and Damon and DiCaprio the occasion to face off and be all angsty. This all sounds very promising. And who knows, if Scorsese just does a movie he wants to do rather than flirting with Oscar gold like he has in the past, he might just win one. Just don’t get your hopes up and act all pissy if you lose again, Marty. You’re starting to look like a crybaby.

7. Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan

It’s not often that a comedy comes out as controversial as “Borat”. It hasn’t even been released yet and it’s got an entire country pissed off. The president of Kazakhstan has even scheduled a meeting with President Bush to discuss the ramifications of this film…despite the fact that its lead actor, writer and general mastermind (Sascha Baron Cohen) is actually from Britain. I don’t really care about any of that. All I know is that the character of Borat, played by Cohen on his HBO series “Da Ali G show”, is a hilarious creation. On “Da Ali G Show” Borat interacts with average Americans (all of them clueless that he’s only a character) under the guise of making an informative television show for those in his home country of Kazakhstan. These clueless Americans generally embarrass themselves, and a good time is had by all watching. The movie looks like more of the same, but that’s fine by me. Borat’s shenanigans usually leave me in stitches, and I’ve been yearning for a great comedy. “Borat” looks like the season’s (year’s?) best bet.

8. Apocalypto

Mel Gibson’s latest movie is the story of a Mayan sacrifice who rejects his destiny and wants to live. I don’t know this for certain, but I would assume this touches off a bloody revolt. As with Mel’s last film, the movie is not in English, filled with subtitles and is certain to be bloody (from what I remember of Mayan history from high school, they weren’t exactly touchy feely). Why do I want to see this? First of all, I love Mel, no matter what kind of antics he’s up to. Secondly, from the trailer, this movie looks downright, batshit insane. No matter what, it’s bound to be unique.

Orange Alert:

1. “Casino Royale”

I love James Bond movies. I’ve seen them all, even the bad ones (“The Man With the Golden Gun”, “Diamonds are Forever”) and I’m sure that I’ll see this one too. The trailer makes it look pretty good, but I’m still not sold on restarting the Bond franchise…particularly in modern day. The book on which this film is based was damned good, but I’m not sure how it will work in a modern context. Plus, I like Bond the way he is. I don’t need him to be grittier or modernized or blonde. Still, I can’t deny the drawing power of 007. I’d be lying if I told you I was even going to try.

2. “A Night at the Museum”

Ben Stiller is a guard at the New York Museum of Natural History. As it happens, the museum comes to life at night. Basically, that means Ben will have spend the majority of this film running from CGI. So it’s essentially “Jumanji” with Ben Stiller. Hell, it’s even got Robin Williams in it as Teddy Roosevelt. I liked “Jumanji”, I like Teddy Roosevelt (if I had to choose a favorite president, he might be it), and I like that Dick Van Dyke and Mickey Rooney are getting work in this film. Mark my words, this movie may not seem like much now, but it’s going to be one of the season’s surprise hits. Trust me.

3. “The Good Shepherd”

Robert DeNiro directs and Matt Damon stars in the story of the CIA and its evolution over the years. As long as its better than “Syriana”, I’ll be happy. Plus, it’s got Joe Pesci in it. Remember when Joe Pesci got work? Those were good times.

4. “Children of Men”

Alfonso Cuaron follows up “Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban” with this, an intriguing film about a future where humans can no longer procreate. Clive Owen plays a former activist escorting a mysteriously pregnant woman (Julianne Moore) to a lab in the ocean…or something. I don’t know the specifics, but I am interested. Very, very interested. I like futuristic movies, I like Julianne Moore, and I like Clive Owen. I see no reason not to see this.

5. “Pan’s Labyrinth”

Guillermo Del Toro (director of “Hellboy” and “Blade 2”) is one messed up dude. I am intrigued by this, his latest film, that tells the story of a young girl who enters a labyrinth and discovers that she is a princess who must complete three dangerous tasks in order to achieve her destiny. Underground settings and strange effects are a given. But will David Bowie make an appearance? Time will tell.

6. “For Your Consideration”

The gang behind “Best in Show”, “Waiting for Guffman” and “A Mighty Wind” strikes again. This time they are using their improvisational skills to tell the story of an independent film that gets award consideration come Oscar time. Should be amusing, with some gut-busting moments…just like the others.

7. “Fast Food Nation”

I love the work of director Richard Linklater. Here, he takes on the world of fast food with a little help from Greg Kinnear and Bruce Willis. Could be interesting.

8. “Man of the Year”

Robin Williams plays a Jon Stewart clone who runs for president as a joke. When he gets elected, it turns out the joke is on him. Lewis Black, Christopher Walken, and Laura Linney round out the cast for this, a comedy with a solid premise from director Barry Levinson, who’s never made a downright BAD film and usually guides Williams to some of his better work. He did direct “Good Morning Vietnam”, after all. I’ll go in the hopes that Robin Williams can be funny again.

And there you have it. A not-so-brief list of movies I’ll probably shell out money for. Some of them are bound to suck (in a perfect world, all of these films would be great) and some of them are bound to run too long or have a little too much fat in the middle or perhaps be just too weird for their own damn good, but this list is and has always been about potential. These are the films I’ve found in the upcoming schedule with the potential for goodness, perhaps even greatness.

But moviegoing is like gambling. You roll the dice and take your chances. Unfortunately, as of late, the House usually wins.

Share on Facebook

2006 / 87 Minutes / R
Reviewed by Dale Nauertz

There is a fine art to making a great action movie. The film needs to have enough plot to propel the action sequences, enough plot to drive them and give them a reason to exist. However, it’s usually best if that plot is not too complex. If the plot is too complicated, then the film is thrown out of balance. No one goes to these movies, after all, for plot. For that, people see interesting little independent movies or those prestige films released in the last two months of the year…or they stay home and read a book. Then again, not enough plot and the movie just becomes a series of explosions without reason. With too little plot, the audience is still provided with some chaos, but they don’t care about it. They are left with no emotional investment in the proceedings. They have nothing and no one to root for (in this it’s also good to have an interesting or, failing that, likable hero and an interestingly evil villain for him to play off of). Therefore a good action movie needs enough plot to keep it moving, but not enough to slow it down. A good action movie plot should be fairly aerodynamic.

Then again, judging by the movie “Crank”, maybe I’m wrong. Maybe a good action movie doesn’t need much plot at all. However, a good action movie needs something that makes it unique. If you can’t hatch an interesting plot, then you at least need an intriguing gimmick.

Like “Speed”, “Crank” has the least plot imaginable…but it does have a great gimmick. A hit man inexplicably named Chev Chelios (played by the taciturn Jason Statham) awakens one morning feeling like shit. He soon discovers the reason for this: he has been poisoned in his sleep by a dude named Ricky Verona (Jose Pablo Cantillo) with something nicknamed a “Beijing Cocktail”. This drug inhibits the gland that produces adrenaline, or something, causing his body to slow down and eventually shut down altogether. Verona helpfully, and cockily, informs him that he’ll be dead in an hour. However, Verona didn’t count on Statham being a truly resilient son of a bitch. Chelios discovers the only way he can stay alive is by forcing his body to produce adrenaline. Therefore he can’t slow down. He drives as fast as he can, starts random fights, takes drugs, has very public sex with his sweet girlfriend (an adorable Amy Smart) and does just about anything he can to keep his heart pumping. Like a shark, he has to keep moving, as fast as he can, or he’ll die. In short, it’s kind of like “Speed”, except Statham is the bus.

I’ll admit, the premise of this film is pretty ludicrous and kinda stupid. The movie itself has as much logic as a film like “Road House” or “Con Air”. It bears only a passing resemblance to our reality. But that’s fine. That’s really all I want out of my action movies. It has a ludicrous premise, but it plays that premise to its hilt. The movie stays exciting because, like its protagonist, it never slows down. Rapid edits, split screen, Atari graphics, Google Earth, the filmmakers (mysteriously named Nevedrine/Taylor) throw everything they can conceive at the audience to keep our adrenaline pumping, to keep us on our toes. I never knew where this film was ultimately going, or where it would take me next. I thrive on that sensation. The filmmaking style borders on overkill, but for once this excessive style of filmmaking actually works with the story it’s trying to tell. The style of filmmaking actually makes you feel like the main character, moving as fast as you can and keeping yourself adrenalized. The action sequences are clever and inventive, which helps immeasurably. The film’s actual plot (the reason why Statham’s oddly named character has been injected with “this Chinese shit”) is pretty routine. It’s the same plot we’ve seen in pretty much every hit man movie ever made. But since the filmmakers seemed to use their time devising ingenious action scenarios instead, I really didn’t mind. I’d rather more writers and directors used their time to make things explode in new, exciting ways as long as the plot of their film isn’t going to reinvent the wheel anyway. There are some great fight sequences, an excellent sequence in a hospital, the best car chase through a mall since “The Blues Brothers”, and a particularly outlandish motorcycle ride. This is the most fun I’ve had at a movie in ages. I also love that the filmmakers milk their bizarre premise for all that its worth. They continually find new, inspired ways for Chelios to keep moving and new methods for him to introduce bursts of adrenaline into his anatomy. I love it when a movie makes the most of its premise. If you’re gonna go, go balls out.

The film loses a bit of steam toward the middle, I must admit. I actually started to get a tad restless. That’s when it starts to concentrate on the actual plot which, as I said before, is pretty routine and flimsy. But the filmmakers “everything but the kitchen sink” approach to this outlandish material works more often than it doesn’t and the actors (particularly the twitchily psychotic Castillo, the eye-poppingly intense Statham and Dwight Yoakam as a depraved, laconic Zen Cowboy doctor) invest these outrageous proceedings with everything they’ve got. Jason Statham invests the film with urgency and Amy Smart invests her scenes with a sweet humanity. “Crank” doesn’t give you a chance to get bored. It’s not hard to suspend disbelief while watching this film either. The movie doesn’t slow down long enough for you to realize how ridiculous all of this is. It’s such giddy, goofy fun that the smile didn’t leave my face until about half an hour after the final credits rolled. “Crank” isn’t going to win an Oscar but, unlike a lot of action movies, it doesn’t seem to have any pompous delusions that it will. I don’t think the people behind this movie are even aware the Oscars exist. “Crank” isn’t reinventing the wheel; it’s just trying to keep its audience relentlessly entertained. And, on that score, it succeeds brilliantly.

It’s not the best film of the year, but it is definitely the most fun. It’s one of those rare films that understand it’s not your plot that matters, it’s your attitude. And “Crank” has enough attitude for three movies. It’s a hard-R-rated extravaganza of blood, breasts, psychosis, gore and pure unadulterated mayhem that doesn’t know the meaning of the phrase “politically correct”. I didn’t realize how much I’ve missed this sort of thing. It’s just as good as those gleefully brain-dead action movies they made in the 1980’s. If you’re nostalgic for films like “Rambo: First Blood Part 2” and “Road House” then get your ass to a theater. If not, then go see “The Illusionist” and leave the rest of us alone. Like its lead actor, “Crank” has a certain kamikaze delight that is sadly lacking in most modern action films.

Share on Facebook

Well for once I have made good on a promise. There is after all, a first time for everything.

So behold!!! The first ever A Fistful of Reviews podcast!!!

There were a couple of technical difficulties here and there and we are still working on the format for the show, but overall it came together quite well. Hopefully you enjoy it.

Anyway, we ripped on, made fun of, and generally discussed the following:

Celebrity Madness (Tom Cruise, Mel Gibson, Lindsay Lohan, etc.)
Snakes on a ahhhh… Who gives a shit?
Movies that we are sick and tired of (Sequels, Superhero Movies, “Begins” movies, etc.)

Download it in MP3 format (opens in just about anything) here:

Server 1 Download

Or subscribe to it here:

Like the rest of the site the podcast is mildly explicit. There’s a couple of F-bombs here and there, but never referencing sex which means if the MPAA were rating this it would probably be a PG-13. The download is 23.75MB and just under an hour long. Hopefully it’s entertaining and doesn’t bore you to death. Feel free to send feedback our way. If you liked it, hated it, have topic ideas, etc. feel free to let us know.

- Jones

Share on Facebook

2006 / 110 Minutes / PG-13
Reviewed by Dale Nauertz

I don’t think there’s a filmmaker beside M. Night Shyamalan who would have had the sheer hubris to roll on a mess like “Lady in the Water”. “Lady in the Water” is, as Quentin Tarantino once said of Brian De Palma’s “Bonfire of the Vanities”: “the kind of mess that only a talented filmmaker can make.”

According to M. Night Shyamalan, “Lady in the Water” began as a story that he told his daughters at bedtime. The tale concerns a narf (kind of like a mermaid without the fins) from an undersea world who comes to influence mankind and push us toward another stage of intellectual development…or something. She comes to our world through a tunnel from her sea kingdom that ends up in a Pennsylvania swimming pool. The caretaker of the apartment complex where this pool resides is a guy named Cleveland Heep (Paul Giamatti). Heep discovers this lady in the pool water, falls into the pool and almost drowns before she saves him. After this, Heep lets the narf sleep on his couch while he tries to help her find the human being she has come to inspire.

Also living in this apartment complex are a man who is great at crossword puzzles, a hermit, a man who lifts weights to develop the muscles on only one side of his body, an apartment full of stoners, and a crotchety film critic. Proving that it takes a village to help a narf, all of these strange characters eventually come together to help the narf (the word gets sillier every time I type it) achieve her goal and also to protect her from being killed by a scrunt (a cross between a wolf, a porcupine and a lichen intent on keeping her from completing her mission…for some reason).

Just from reading that synopsis, you can probably tell that “Lady in the Water” is a mess. For one thing, it’s often just plain silly. A man with well-defined muscles on only one side of his body, a narf named Story (Bryce Dallas Howard, looking exceptionally pale and damp), something called a scrunt? These are downright ludicrous concepts. It would be hard for ANY movie to make them work as anything but high comedy. Yet, somehow, Shyamalan makes most of these goofy (albeit highly original) concepts work…at least for the amount of time that I was watching the movie. After I left the theater, I started wondering why the hell I cared about any of this, but for the two hours I spent in “Lady in the Water’s” company, I was strangely mesmerized. Even when characters started looking for divine revelations in the morning crossword puzzle and asking a film critic how the film’s events would turn out, these plot machinations somehow didn’t make me want to throw popcorn at the screen. Perhaps it is because Shyamalan brings to “Lady in the Water” the same dark, suspenseful tone that he has brought to all his other films. The goofy events onscreen take on a ponderous, self-important weight due to the way Shyamalan stages and lights them. The scrunt is a wacky concept, but Shyamalan presents it in such a way that it’s actually pretty creepy. Shyamalan casting himself as a writer with the potential to change the entire world is a pretty shaky proposition, yet Shyamalan the director actually manages to coax a good performance out of himself. It’s not actually as self-delusional as it would seem.

Still, despite the fact that most of the film works, this is a slight, silly film with a self-important tone. Giamatti and Howard do good work, as do most of the supporting actors, but they can’t quite compensate for the fact that their character names are “Cleveland Heep” and “Story”. Themes that would work as subtext are actually spoken aloud by major characters (never good). Moments of sublime ridiculousness abound. The plot isn’t bad, but if Shymalan had used a more fantastical, whimsical approach, it might have worked even better. Shyamalan’s standard look and tone are starting to wear thin. This is a fairy tale, after all, and he still shoots it like a thriller. This, his standard approach, still works, but in “Lady in the Water” I could see cracks forming around its edges. If Shyamalan doesn’t branch out and try something new, I doubt his usual method will work very much longer. “Lady in the Water” is lighter than his past efforts, but it’s still a tad ponderous for its own good.

“Lady in the Water” is like a balloon attached to a lead weight. By all rights, it should never leave the ground. It should falter under the weight of its flaws. And yet, by some bizarre miracle, the movie actually remains airborne most of the time. It’s silly, self-important and weird but it’s still original and highly entertaining…in its own, lunatic fashion. For all its flaws, “Lady in the Water” still one man’s artistic vision. As goofy as this story is, Shyamalan obviously cares about it, and that care and love translate through past everything else. In a summer of films that seem crafted by a committee of executives, these things make “Lady in the Water” downright refreshing.

Share on Facebook