Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

UNBREAKABLE is part one of a planned trilogy!!!

Hey folks, Harry here... with oh so exciting news for me and my fellow UNBREAKABLE lovers... Just as I thought... "CHAPTER ONE" of a limited edition superhero trilogy!!! YES YES YES!!! Mr Glass is not done with RAINCOAT MAN... oh no... BOX OFFICE GOD WILLING... we'll see the rest of this story. Didn't like the way this first one ended? WELL BUB, THAT AINT THE ENDING! I have faith. How about: UNBREAKABLE, BREAKABLE and BROKEN? Aaaahhhhh, he can do better than that...

Hey Harry, how's it going? Ted here and I just got back from the brilliant film that is Unbreakable. After the movie I decided to read everything I could find on the film. And I came up with this bit of news that I think you'll find very interesting...

Back on November 6 Bruce Willis did an online chat over at Yahoo to talk about Unbreakable. Here is one of the question asked:

sGreenHornet asks: So Mr. Willis do you have any other films in line with M. Night Shyamalan? (or you rather not say)

And Willis' reply...

bruce_willis_live: Unbreakable is the first part of a trilogy of films.

bruce_willis_live: I can't tell you about the others ...

bruce_willis_live: But we're supposed to do two more.

bruce_willis_live: you'll understand how it lends itself to a continuing story.

Hmmm... The Unbreakable Trilogy? It's obvious that the "first edition" was left wide open for a sequel, but I don't know... too many things could go wrong if this is true. Then again, we could be witnessing the beginning of one of the most brilliant trilogies of all time. Just imagine the "revelation" at the end of the third film...

The highly informative chat is available in it's entirety at: CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE CHAT IN ITS COMPLETE GLORY!

Hope this helps. Thanks,


Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Nov. 23, 2000, 3:16 a.m. CST


    by ELGordo

    Well I heard that the first film has gotten such rotten reviews that it

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 3:17 a.m. CST

    Dear god no....

    by CranialLeak

    What is it with people in Hollywood and trilogies? And after reading Harry's TB on his review, I am apparently one of the few who did not buy into this movie. And yes, I am a comic book fan. If you want more details, well then too bad. I'm just tired of talking about it tonight.

  • Dont you think? I mean, most trilogies are action movies, this is like (from what I hear) more of a thinking-mans action movie. I hope it works

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 3:41 a.m. CST


    by Critch Starblade

    From the looks of the film, it can't have cost that much to make, despite Willis's budget busting starring role. And since this is guarenteed a no.1/close to no.1 weekend with a guarenteed $30+million take, I should think there wouldn't be much problem making this into a series. The finest Comic-book movie ever...because it wasn't a comic book. :-) My head hurts.

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 4:15 a.m. CST

    So it's 3! 3! 3! mints in one!!!

    by Troublemaker2000

    If it ain't broke don't fix it. And if it ain't fixable don't break it. Excellent delayed scoop Harry you unearthed a golden nugget from the vast reaches of cyberspace and even scooped the trades and all the other film sites. Good job dude! Now let's get Alicia Silverstone in parts two and three in some tight latex spandex outfit!

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 4:30 a.m. CST

    David Dunn, Security

    by enigmainyourhead

    I think it'd ruin it to do a sequel movie. You can't continue this story without making it a bit campy at least, unless you leave Sam Jackson out of it completely. But someone should make a "David Dunn, Security" comic book series, with lotsa nice Alex Ross paintings in it, it might get normal everyday types that don't usually read comics into comic stores to check it out. Anyhow, that was the most intersting drama/thriller comic story, and again it's too easy to screw it up with a sequel, and make it all campy and silly like the stuff at But Bruce Willis makes a cool superhero. Oh boy, I'm not makin much sense. Time for my pills...

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 4:41 a.m. CST

    Man oh man, when David goes back up to that room...

    by straybullets actually gave me the chills. That is single handedly the greatest "vigilante" scene....EVER. It was actually the most realistic take on super powers there has ever been . It wasn't a lame fist-a-cuffs, spin-kick hoo hah...It didn't try to be hip and Matrixy. It was breath taking. It was awesome. And for the people who didn't get it...fuck 'em. I am glad they didn't like it. There is no educated opinion otherwise. Period.

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 6:46 a.m. CST


    by roctiv

    This trilogy information is great news, and it should pacify those who were dissatisfied with the ending. I saw it in a theater with a huge, spellbound audience, but when they walked out a lot of people were actually laughing. I was kind of thrown but I slowly grew to like it.

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 7 a.m. CST

    Unabashed UNBREAKABLE fan

    by Nordling

    Just got into a wrestling match with Moriarty in the chat room (yes, if you go into the chat room, chances are you might bump into one of the AICN's cool that way). Moriarty was sorely disappointed in UNBREAKABLE. I thought it was one of the best of the year. He thought the pace was too slow, and I thought it was just right...etc., etc. In the end, make up your own mind about it. But I think more people will like UNBREAKABLE than not. It does require more from you than just sitting there, though. It asks you to make leaps you might not be willing to make. And personally, I liked the ad campaign... Anyway, I'd like to go on record as saying I think a sequel would be a bad idea. I loved the film, but I don't think another movie of this would work. It would fall victim to the same cliches it tries so hard to avoid. Though...oh shit, it would be cool if David Dunne got a letter from Mr. Glass in prison...LIMITED EDITION...he opens it up and it says simply, Did you know you could fly? David gets up on the roof...jumps...and falls flat on his face...and the next day he gets a letter that says...I will be coming soon. Hope that hurt. Be used to pain, for Mr. Glass is coming....nah, too cheesy. But the flying bit is cool, huh? Please...validate me and say that was cool....please?

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 7:09 a.m. CST

    I cannot wait

    by iamroman

    I'm suprised they're trying to stretch it into a trilogy, but I still want a sequel! This was the best film of 2000 so far for me. A comic/graphic novel come to life. I totally agree with the ending, although the pacing\editing seemed really off, I would have jazzed it up a bit more. I can't imagine this movie cost much to make, the only CGI in the whole thing was the scenery in the train windows at the beginning. I've seen straight to video movies with more FX. There shouldn't be much problems with getting another one made, unless it bombs REALLY bad, which I doubt.

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 8:21 a.m. CST

    Can't Wait!!!

    by Baron Von Chaos

    I live in Brazil, and as I'm still waiting for Unbreakable to be released here in this forgotten land, you come to me and tell me there are two sequels already on the way?? Oh, my poor old heart!!!

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 8:47 a.m. CST

    Unbreakable: Flawed Genius

    by Cronksty

    Ok, I saw Unbreakable last night, and yes, I loved it. But frankly, the movie had numerous problems. First of all, how could you fellow Cinema Geeks NOT predict that Samuel L. was a villain? The hints fucking slap you in the face. "Villains have a larger head." Hmm, I wonder why they decided to give Samuel L. that ENORMOUS, out of place fro? Add that to the dark colored robe and walking cane. And then "larger eyes." When I think of Sam Jackson, I first picture those enormous whites in his eyes glaring down at me behind a large pistol as I squirm like that oh so frightened Brett. When his mother said this, there had already been a previous villain description (the head) leading us to a very suspicious state. Then of course there's the fact that he kept saying "we're the same, yet, opposite." What? Did you think that meant that "Mr. Glass" was David's sidekick? Now let's talk about the credits. WHY THE FUCK DID YOU DO THIS, SHYAMALAN?! How in the hell was that necessary? The rest of your movie requires an above average level of intelligence, yet, you provide an ending suitable for the prototypical American Dumbass. The rest of your film requires so much thought and discipline, yet you tack on an ending that steps out from the screen and pisses on the rest of the film. Then of course, there's the trilogy bit. This would be entirely unnecessary if you had made Unbreakable a little longer. I dont know about the rest of you, but Unbreakable ended way too soon. He goes on one "heroic adventure," and that's it. Why save the realization of Mr. Glass as the bad guy till the end? How about putting it two-thirds into the movie? Oh, I almost forgot, THE LAME-ASS WATER WEAKNESS! Just fucking TAKE IT OUT. That's all there is to it. It's underdeveloped, but even if it did receive more focus, how on earth can you make this interesting? If someone was holding me under water and I swallowed a bunch, yeah, I might get close to drowning as well. If someone threw me in a freezing pool only to be trapped in a heavy tarp, I too might not make it out. I can't remember, but did Glass claim that was his weakness as well? When did we see this in action? If you ask me, I say there IS no water weakness and it's only something Mr. Glass wants David to believe so that his comic-obsessed brain receives the necessary kryptonite element. Ok, yes, that's a lot of bitching I just performed. BUT, they are FLAWS. Flaws placed upon a brilliant movie. I hope that the sequels will fix this shit up. Maybe if I went in expecting two more, I would not have let these faults fester in my brain, as PLANNED trilogies are, to me, one entire movie (which is why I try to avoid bashing Episode I). There were so many wonderful aspects of the film, such as the "break" scene on the stairs. Then of course I love how the typical superhero costume translates to real life (does anyone else fantasize a superhero life style while beneath a rain poncho? Uh, I dont, just asking). Oh, we must not forget the wonderful framing of the shots (very comic book-esque). The joyous realization that the boy's father is, in fact, a superhero as he looks in the newspaper. The weight-lifting scene, the opening conversation on the train, David rescuing the children, the emergence from the water, David seeing the gun in the man's belt (and Glass' subsequent search)...ALL BEAUTIFUL FUCKING SCENES! The least Shyamalan could do though is release the DVD ending with Mr. Glass' shouting his confession after revealing his over the top obsession AND FADE TO BLACK. THAT'S IT. NO shot of David and NO DAMN TEXT. Connor

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 9:03 a.m. CST


    by newfers

    Man, oh man, I do not understand most of you people ('cept Moriarty, who was right on the ball on this one). Unbreakable was a slow, dull, hushed, mostly lifeless bore-a-thon... I generally LOVE movies that take their time when telling a great story, but this was NOT a great story. It wouldn't even make a good 60 minute X-Files episode (I'm sure they've done similar stories). Note to M. Night : next time, turn on the microphones, or urge your actors to speak a little louder. Why the fuck Willis liked to whisper in the middle of a crowded stadium, I'll never know. Note to Bruce Willis : hey buddy, if they ever do a live-action episode of "The Simpsons", you're a lock for Homer, buddy... can you say "Dough!"? newfers

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 9:03 a.m. CST

    Sheer brilliance

    by Frank Black

    This may be the welcome return of thought provoking, inteligent story telling. M. Night has taken a big step and made the first really great scaled down superhero movie. This is where it all began and we are thankfully returning there with grace. Movies are great again. This was one of the years best! Thank God!

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 9:37 a.m. CST

    may work with M. Night Shyamalan

    by DeMoNiCMurray

    Unbreakable was an awsome movie. I loved it from beginning to end. The ending was great. They didn't need to explain what happened after. The movie wasn't about that. It was about the whole experience and how it leads up to the two. All i can say is M. Night Shyamalan is an amazing writer/director. He kept so much time on tghe details and the characters. Also, the camera work was spectacular. ANyone who sees it should go see it again again if they didn't notice it. Loved the movie. Anyways, this trilogy thing might work. You can't know anymore. From our views of routine all sequels they won't be as good, but with M. Night Shyamalan doing it you don't know. HE's changed the whole views on what we expect from movies.

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 10:01 a.m. CST

    This is not good news....

    by docsisx

    but for some reason I don't think it will happen. UNBREKABLE was brilliant and stands on its own two feet. Harry you must obviously think there was something missing from the film if you feel it needs a sequel. M. Night do not do this! Masterpieces should not have sequels!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 10:36 a.m. CST


    by elryano

    Do you people not get the movie...spoilers are here of course... The movie is suppsoed to be a more realistic adaption of a comic book right? Well this is how comics end..with the dramatic cliffhanger and the beggining of the rivalary of the hero and villan! And Mr Glass looks like quite a cool villian..this is without a shadow of a doubt the BEST superhero movie I have ever seen...very realistic..I wish that Night could do the Watchmen movie after seeing this...and to all of you that hate this movie, get over yourselves...most of you think that you have to complain about cant enjoy them...Unbreakable was and is a good movie and is a movie thats worth throw out a whole movie just because u dont like the ending is sad...lets see you all grab a camera and make a better movie...

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 11:14 a.m. CST

    Why the end titles were PERFECT.....

    by You Ate Sand?

    The end titles were completely unneccessary as the end to a movie, but to the end of a comic book they are perfect. For those of you who are fans of the old Batman and many other cheesy ass older comics (not that vintage Batman is cheesy by any means), the comics ALWAYS ended with one or two panels of text explaining the outcome you didn't see. I haven't seen this done in many years, but it is very very commonplace, and M Night is a genius for including it. I guess this only reinforces the fact that people with complaints just dont' GET this movie. I've noticed that the majority of negative reaction revolves around these closing text screens, well, there's your answer, what do you have to complain about now?

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 11:40 a.m. CST

    Isn't everything?

    by X-Girls

    ...part of a trilogy, we can't make just one successful movie, or's got to be three and no more. Not that I care with Star Wars and X-Men...make as many sequels as freakin possible.

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 11:47 a.m. CST


    by Stark

    The flying sketch you propose, though amusing, falls apart when one applies the tiniest bit of common sense. And I offer this here as belated advice to everybody who as a kid tied a towel around their neck and leapt from their own rooftop. If you truly suspect you can fly, try taking off from the ground first. If you can't do it there, elevation ain't gonna help.

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 11:57 a.m. CST

    sounds like Matrix/Sixth Sense

    by X-Girls

    add to that some boredom.

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 11:59 a.m. CST

    First movie was 90 min. first act

    by Matt X

    so why not a trilogy? I suppose in the last movie, it'll turn out to be just a dream of Pam Ewing, er, I mean, the Sam Jackson character.

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 12:01 p.m. CST


    by Baron Von Chaos

    Sorry, folks, couldn't resist!! :o)

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 12:32 p.m. CST

    What isn't part of a planned Trilogy these days???

    by IAmLegolas

    The studios should know when to say when!

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 1:15 p.m. CST

    And the first part was named...

    by haunted

    X-Men, discover your Wolverine

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 1:21 p.m. CST

    And I forgot to say...

    by haunted

    that Mr. Glass is the name of a Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra's short story. And guess what?. It was about a breakable man. How genius!.

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 2:24 p.m. CST

    Hey MidNight Shamalamadingdong: Break A Leg!!

    by Bari Umenema

    Which is showbiz for "Good Luck"! And today's Cartuna gif is totally gross and disgusting, who wants to see a mini-Harry carved up and eaten like a Thanksgiving turkey? Not me turkey-lurkey! OK back I go now to!

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 2:31 p.m. CST

    read a comic book

    by szanman

    Anybody who enjoyed this movie and also anyone who didn't 'get' the movie should read Legends of the Dark Knight #65 - 68. It's a story arc called "Going Sane" and it explores the dynamic between Batman and the Joker. In it Batman is seemingly killed and the Joker doesn't know what to do when his arch-enemy is dead, so he goes sane. After seeing the brilliant ending of unbreakable, this was the first comic story to pop into my head and I think it makes a great complementary story to the movie. read it.

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 2:36 p.m. CST

    Why does Moriarty hate this movie?

    by Bari Umenema

    Seriously, why? Is he jealous? Or just pissed that it changes the entire dynamic of superhero and supervillain and elevates it to something else? Moriarty if Harry loves it and many other Talkbackers are equally enthralled with it then perhaps the subjective opinion through your eyes is not 20/20. I have not seen it yet, will most likely see it on Friday or Saturday but from what I have read on this board and Harry's review board it certainly seems to be an ambitious take on comic book movies and their origins which under normal circumstances everybody enjoys. But not the Professor. So what gives?

  • or maybe Die Hard 4, 5, and 6 ?

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 3:45 p.m. CST

    A great movie--sequels could work (spoilers)

    by tbrosz

    I thought this film was one of the best treatments of superheroes I have seen in a long time. The slow pacing was part of the film's signature, and worked well for me. The middle-aged man with a family finding his powers is somewhat new, and I thought worked well. The best part is that, with the possible exception of his "spider-sense," we are never really certain of his powers until the very end of the movie, and even then they are not blatant. I love films where you're never sure if the "magic" is real until the end, and maybe even then. I have seen the famous play "Harvey" done both ways, once where you're never sure if Harvey is a hallucination, and the other way, where doors and gates move by themselves, and Harvey is obviously real. I'm inclined to think the former is more interesting, but the modern film audience demands its special effects. My biggest fear watching this film was in the scene with the gun and the kid. Had he actually shot him, and the bullet actually bounced off, the mystery would have been gone entirely and it would have ruined everything. In "Unbreakable," many people were turned off by the titles at the end. I think they need to loosen their shorts a bit. Before I saw the movie, all the talk about the "horrible" end made me think something truly bad was going to happen like a bunch of heroes flying out of the sky and asking him to join the Super Guy Club! A few favorite touches I liked: The weightlifting scene. The scene where he ripped open the car door. Low shots of him in his raincoat from behind, where the raincoat hung around his legs EXACTLY like Christopher Reeve's cape hung in rear shots of Superman. The scene where he gets out of the pool and stands in front of the awestruck children. I would love to see more movies showing what it is like to be a lone hero in the Real World, unlike most comics where heroes are on every other street corner. Luke Cage was supposed to be like that. Spider Man started out like that. Then both of them were dumped into Marvel's billion-hero universe (I don't even READ Marvel anymore.) Things the filmmaker should touch on: family life, relations with the cops, the guilt at not being able to be everywhere he should be. Things to avoid: supervillains (except ones like Glass--of the Luthor variety, with no real powers--the "mind" variety), and of course, the temptation to populate the world with other superheroes. With maybe one exception: what will happen when the kid hits puberty? (Hint, hint) End of ramble.

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 5:01 p.m. CST

    Moronic Idea

    by deepcore2

    How typical. The movie works incredibly well as it is. It is the ultimate superhero movie. Who wants to see Willis in a raincoat on his continuing crusade to fight evil and the devious Mr. Glass? Come on. The film works so well because it allows you to walk out and create your own post movie superhero scenarios in your head. Does Glass break out and wreak havoc again? I don't want to see it happen! It's way cooler to just extrapolate. Way to cheapen the whole movie. How lame. Any sequels will be thouroughly laugable.

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 5:13 p.m. CST

    I love purple (fashion Spoilers)

    by samedi69

    An obvious note for anyone who saw sixth sense, the use of Color in "Unbreakable". Purple. It's the color of lust in many traditions and here Mr Glass is covered in it. Purple is also a very popular "villain" color in comics. Mr Glass looked like he raided Lex Luthor's wardrobe. Instances of purple that I noticed -Mr Glass' first and last suit -His leather coat has a purple lining and the bluish tint the the film gave his coat a purple tint. Those are the big ones. Any others I am forgetting. I love simple and subtle messages in films. The red in sixth sense was great. Oh and notice that the shoplifter woman in red is most likely the same woman who poisins her kid in the 6th sense. hmmm. Briliant movie. You will believe a man can be unbreakable

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 5:26 p.m. CST

    It was great but...

    by Kype

    The movie was probably the most original movie of the year, but was it really necessary to beat us over the head with the surprise ending? It didn't seem to fit with the mysterious tone the rest of the movie was thriving on. It almost felt as if it was dumbed down just to make sure everyone in the audience knew exactly what was going on. I think it could have benefited from an ending which resembled the slightly ambiguous, and classic sixth sense surprise . Who would have liked it had the final line of the sixth sense been, "Hey, I'M A GHOST!"

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 7:53 p.m. CST

    Unbreakable trilogy

    by CountZero

    I think it's far more likely that the remaining two films in this supposed trilogy won't be directly connected to Unbreakable - i.e. we won't see David or Mr. Glass again - but they'll be united by theme. Why would Willis say in the chat that we'd understand how they'd fit together once we saw them (and yes, I'm paraphrasing, for all you pedants out there) - if they were direct sequels we'd know immediately how they fit together, they'd be a literal extension of the first story, with the same characters. No, I think Shyamalan has something broader - and BETTER - up his sleeve...three films unconnected in story and character but tied together by theme and purpose...

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 7:57 p.m. CST

    I knew it! There were two many hints in this movie not to reali


    Let's just hope that the "Unbreakable" trilogy does not go the way of the "Scream" trilogy. I loved "Scream", and remember hearing that whole thing was planned as a trilogy, but after watching "Scream 3" it was clear that the potential of that franchise was squandered, and we'll probably be seeing a b.s. "Scream 4" in the near future (Still, Paker Posey rocked in Scream 3, as she does in all her films). Really, "Unbreakable" will not be fully realized unless there IS a sequel; i mean, the whole movie felt like a set-up for future battles between "Security Man" and "Mr. Glass". Can't wait for the new films!

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 10:26 p.m. CST

    Connected Trilogy

    by Kevin Bosch

    Nothing Willis said in the chat leans toward the three movies not being connected by character. He doesn't say "you'll see later why the three movies would be connected" he says "you'll understand how it lends itself to a continuing story." "It" meaning the first movie. We will see, after sseing the first movie, how the first movie, with it's ending and revelation and topic, could lend itself to sustain sequels. Besides, isn't Willis, answering a question about whether he will work with M. Night again by saying "...we're supposed to do two more.", enough proof that the actor, and his character, will be involved in the sequential movies?

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 10:50 p.m. CST


    by wadewilson

    a previous post suggested that purple was the color theme for the movie.... how wrong you are. purple is the theme for samuel jackson's character only. everything he represents (his coats, the cane, the present his mom gives him in the flashback)is colored in this fashion. in the flashback where he gets the present from his mother, he is wearing a suit that is red with purple pin-stripes. red, as established in sixth sense (also seen in unbreakable when the woman steals a necklace) is the color of death, with the purple pinstripe indicating that he is becoming what he will be as an adult. anyhoodilydoodle... the true color of the movie is GREEN. from scene one, everything bruce willis wears and represents is green. (his son's shirts in many scenes, the stadium, his "costume" the poncho, etc.) this is great! from the very beginning i knew to look for something like this thanks to my expirience with insights to sixth sense on the dvd. green and purple... they are colors that perfectly compliment each other on the color wheel. when the two characters were friends, i thought it was exactly that - they went together perfectly. but how wrong i was.... like any great hero and villian, they compliment each other; they are opposites and yet are strangely perfect together. wade

  • Nov. 23, 2000, 11:08 p.m. CST


    by FullTiltBoogie

    If it's true that this is part one of a trilogy then that makes me feel a whole lot better. At first I was really disappointed by the abruptness of the ending. But there was one exchange between Willis and Robin Wright Penn. She asked him why has he been trying to come between her and her son. He said he didn't know, something felt wrong. That leads me to believe that something's going to happen down the line where somehow Penn's character is going to end up harming the kid or vice versa. Not necessarily on purpose but that would make sense giving Willis' power to see someone's wrong doing. We'll see...

  • Nov. 24, 2000, 3:56 a.m. CST

    Unbreakable 2: With A Vengance? More Unbreakable? Unbreakable Fo

    by Andy Travis

    I liked the movie, it actually was similar to a Superman idea I once had, where Clark was this blue-collar schmo who tried to never use his powers. But I never could figure out how he'd groom himself (i.e. cut his hair, shave, trim his nails, etc.). Anyway, I did feel the ending was a little too on the nose, although I did like the general outcome concerning Jackson's character. Was that an Alex Ross drawing of "Security Guard Man" in the paper at the end? Just wondering. As far as sequels, I really don't think this film is going to burn up the box office. Then again, they're remaking Rollerball, which defies explanation. Huh?

  • Nov. 24, 2000, 7:41 a.m. CST

    Moriarty DID NOT hate UNBREAKABLE...

    by Nordling

    he was disappointed in it. He thought it was flawed, and the pacing was all wrong, but there are several scenes that work. He'll be posting a review of this in a few days, probably. Those who misunderstood what I'm said, hope this clarifies.

  • Nov. 24, 2000, 1:27 p.m. CST

    More Ambitious than Sixth Sense

    by J.Shaft

    While this movie was not without its flaws, the end result was by the far the most original main stream movie we've seen in years. Yes some of the camera work was too extreme (the camera spinning around the young Mr. Glass' comic book gift almost made me black out), yes the ending shattered the slow and deliberate pacing of the film and left us all in a state of utter what-the-fuck (first film of a trilogy or not), but it was the first time a superhero movie has ever felt natural and possible and real. The concept alone is brilliant: hero and villian born into "reality" because of the comic myths that envision heros and villians. Mr. Glass, obsessed with finding a superhero, fufills the other end of the spectrum and becomes a supervillian. It's rare that a story this fantastical is morally and emotionally realistic. It's pure genius and I can't wait for the sequel.

  • Nov. 24, 2000, 4:46 p.m. CST


    by twister10

    That was my reaction to this film. The idea was great, the ending was great, the acting was good, the camera angles were pretty kewl, and the kid was cute. Buuuuuuut, I just don't think they pulled it off. Granted, I don't think many people could pull a believable superhero...then again, look at other films: the Matrix for one. The W. Bros not only made a believable superhero, they got us to believe that Keanu Reeves was it...scary. Even something as kiddie as Harry Potter did it. These stories didn't put the superhero in OUR world though, and they explained why the shit they did was possible. Trying to get a person to believe that the guy next door is a superhero, well thats just not kosher with most folks. It's pretty crazy actually, a little too off in the deep end for me. It's such a pity too...I was sitting there at the theater crossing my fingers saying "please don't tell us he's a super hero, please God give us a reason at least" but my prayers were not answered. If they make the next two films, I want a REASON behind the first one. I dunno, tell me that it's the next stage in human evolution for all I care: super mutant humans...wait I swear I've heard that one before. Ah well, I don't CARE- any reason will do not matter how lame, I just want an explanation!

  • Nov. 24, 2000, 9:13 p.m. CST

    Hell Yes! Thank GOD! Ooooh ahhh! Best MOvie Ever!

    by Mr Glass

    Yo! just saw this movie and it is great! Fuck all the people who didn't like this movie! This movie will stand the test of time as the best movie ever and go into the annals of history with the other modern comic classics of our time such as Godzilla and Batman and Robin! This movie is even better than Phantom Menace if you can believe that any film could compete with the likes of Jar Jar Binks. Heck this movie even blows Speed 2- one of the pinnacles of action and suspense- dare I say, OUT OF THE WATER! excuse the pun. This movie is the bomb diggity bomb. Sweet sassy Molassey! I couln't believe the performances that were evoked in this movie. Ever seen Mario Van Peebles in that awesome movie Solo? or how about Bill Bellamy in one of the greatest heralded performances ever in Booty Call? Or Dennis Rodman in Double Team? Well if you can believe it, Bruce Willis is better than most of those, except for Bill Bellamy- he's the man! Everyone should go see this movie! If they don't, they should be lined outside the street and have a pit bull crush their balls with his teeth while a vulture poops on their head and then shot execution style through the head for their blasphemy! And did I mention the director is M. Night Shymalan? The Greatest Director of all time! He is truly the most god gifted man on the planet! Did you see the interview he had where he stated the secret of his success is becuase he "became aware of what others were not aware of" -The man is a Genius! Fuck Einstein, he only hypothesized relativity. M. Night Shymalan made me believe that ghosts are real! I always wondered why my cabinet drawers always are open and why it get's cold in the winter. Now, I know that the reason why is because ghosts migrate to the north during the fall! M. Night is also damn cute too! I may be a 35 year old, overweight, white male but to be honest M. Night makes my Dick Hard! I was practically creaming in my pants when he made his appearance as a drug dealer! That guy is the most handsome man on the planet! The Phantom Menace used to be my favourite movie until sixth sense came out but now the champion of film is definitely Unbreakable! I can't wait for this movie to come out on VHS so I can put it next to my Backstreet Boys and N sync CD's. Hey speaking of Backstreet Boys. You guys got to listen to the new Black and Blue album! It rocks and it rocks hard! It's almost as good as Limp Bizket's hot dog flavored water. It'a mad ill y'all! Those Backstreet boys know how to turn the party up! You guys should also pick up 98 degrees revelation! Give Me just one night! Una Noche! Give me just one more movie! Shymalan!. I'm waiting for ya! Oh Yeah! If you don't see Unbreakable you are a pathetic loser nothing scumbag so everyone should go see it!

  • Nov. 25, 2000, 12:05 a.m. CST


    by dr_gonzo911

    Mali_ocean what is your problem with comic book geeks? Are you angered that the very people that you picked on in high school are more succesful than you are now? Are you pissed off that now you mop up their urine in the restroom of the local mcdonalds? Anyway you said "in the words of ebert I hate hate hate this movie"...actually Ebert didn't hate unbreakable he gave it three stars so it would help if you do your research a little better but I know how hard pressed for time you are during your 10 minute break time at mcdonalds...Anyway I was pleasently suprised by Unbreakable after all the negative crap I've heard about it. It was one of the best movies I've seen this year and I loved the cinematography. It was a good movie but theres no way it could compare with Requiem for a Dream,or Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon.

  • Nov. 25, 2000, 9:43 a.m. CST

    Integrity in film

    by dr_gonzo911

    Mali_Ocean I would love to put you in a cage and have white cannibals poke you with sharp bamboo sticks! you said you believe europeans are more broad minded than americans yet you resort to 5th grade playground insults such as calling ppl "dork asses". obviously your intellect knows no bounds. Anyway you seem to have problems with comic dorks because we all live inside a world of comic books etc. I used to be into comics, yet I haven't bought one in years so in your mind not living inside the comic world would also mean that I would LOVE Jerry Maquire because my comic free mind could grasp the emotions of the film...Mali just shut up, shut up you had me at hello.... The reason why everyone hates Jerry Maquire is because it is a peice of sentimental garbage! And your favorite filmmaker Spielberg although has made some great films has also made some peices of utter crapulence. We like Kubrick, Sodenberg, Aronofsky and Peter Jackson because they refuse to blatently sell out to Hollywood and become the studio bitch boy that Spielberg has become! Their films had integrity just like Unbreakable did. that is somthing that your feeble mind cannot grasp, so stop talking, shut up pop armageddon into your vcr (which is probably the only type of movie that your acd addled mind can stand) and go watch your micheal bay crap fest. Thank you this public service announcment brought to you by Dr Gonzo

  • Nov. 25, 2000, 2:12 p.m. CST

    Good movie... good ending until...

    by VrequiemV

    The freeze freams we're so goofy they ruined the seriousness of that last scene. How disappointing. I did enjoy the movie and my only other gripe is : it's almost the same damn movie as the 6th sense... now I've forgiven Kevin Smith for making the same movie over and over but I hope Night doesn't do the same... He shows too muich promise. I'm getting tired of movies all of a sudden becoming trilogies when the first one opens well... this one did lead to a sequel but the tirlogy surpirse is getting old... Anyway.. just had to bitch a bit...

  • Nov. 25, 2000, 3:04 p.m. CST

    The ending...**** spoilers****

    by neovsmatrix

    Actually, I don't see how those captions really were all that goofy. I can see how it COULD have been lame, but what really prevented that effect for me was when David is shown walking right past, even after those captions. If there was a fade out and the movie actually ended on those captions, I would have thought it was lame, but it didn't. I think there was some significance behind it pausing near the very end to show the captions, and then watching David walk away as Elijah calls out "They call me Mr. Glass". By the way, HE never calls himself Mr. Glass. That moniker is something he was tormented with by the kids because he was so fragile physically. But he is unbreakable in spirit and he reminds himself and others with that phrase over and over. That's how I see it, and I truly loved this movie. This was my favorite movie of 2000, and I hope Disney has the sense to go through with plans for the Unbreakable sequels even if Unbreakable isn't considered a rousing success. I really hope this movie does well enough at the box office for a sequel. It's one of the few movies that I thought was superb this year.

  • Nov. 25, 2000, 7:05 p.m. CST

    Unbreakable trilogy

    by shaggy-g

    The Entertainment weekly has a story in it and it says that Willis and Jackson think that this movie is structured like a sequel but Night wants to do other things first. So take that as you will. Also, I'd just like to say as a former pool boy I found the pool scene as the most disturbing thing on film since that drugdealer in Lethal Weapon shared the same fate as Willis in unbreakable.

  • Nov. 25, 2000, 8:27 p.m. CST


    by jeff bailey

    Okay, it's everything everyone says it is. I really can't say anymore. And some people will like it and some won't no matter what their experience with comics.And normally, I don't like to fight with other talkbackers. But while i can see why Mali has an opinion on "geeks" I'd just like to say that I'm not sure if you could call the movies he picked realistic representations. Jerry Maguire (and I loved it as much as anyone) feels very much like a fantasy. I kept waiting for Zellwegger to take off her mask revealing the alien beneath. Does anyone know a girl that sweet, cute, smart, funny, and cool? Great. Now I'll be waiting for the geeks don't know any chicks response. But I think she was as big a construct as Jerry. Let's face it, even movies that try to be "real" like Loach or somebody end up being stuck in "movieland" in one way or another. It's inevitable. What feels more real then "Breaking the Waves" and yet that has a very fantastic subtext. And as for not relating to real, I think the realism of the film is what so many of us are impressed with, like the family life, etc. But to me this movie was everything everyone says it is. Truely one of the most magical experiences I've ever had at the theatre. And that I wont apologize for or try to explain.

  • Nov. 25, 2000, 10:55 p.m. CST

    Trilogy? Stoooopid idea.

    by Mockingbird Girl

    I thought UNBREAKABLE was a great film... but everything that made it great will be negated by a sequel. Take it for what it is, and move on.

  • Nov. 25, 2000, 11:54 p.m. CST

    the crazy never die HST

    by dr_gonzo911

    Mali_ actually I didn't like x-men I think I'll watch mr. death instead...anyway did anyone think that the kid in unbreakable resembled all too much the kid from the 6th sense! Its somthing small but it really annoyed the hell out of me all through the movie.

  • Nov. 26, 2000, 10 a.m. CST

    Upside down

    by bah

    I haven't read everything here, but I haven't seen anyone comment on the "upside-down" theme of the movie. There are numerous inverted shots and objects (the car wreck, a sign on a fence, the kid watching TV, Elijah getting his first comic book, after he falls down the stairs, etc). I suppose the obvious explanation is that it's a symbol of the hero and villain being opposites yet similar. Any other ideas?

  • Nov. 26, 2000, 1:13 p.m. CST

    'Unbreakable 2: Electric Boogaloo'... coming soon!

    by Rick Sparks

    Sorry.... I had to! :)

  • Nov. 26, 2000, 3:27 p.m. CST

    A final word on the colors.


    From the opening scene where Eli Price (present) was introduced, it was obvious to anyone comic-book literate that Price was the villain. When describing Jaguaro he mentioned that the villain's heads were always disproportionately larger compared to the rest of their body. This explains his funky ass afro. Later when Price's mother describes the eyes of villians she says they are also larger and convey a distorted view of reality. Samuel L. has some big mutha' fuckin' eyes!!!! Onto the color, in an issue of wizard Alex Ross described the process of choosing colors for a villain. He said colors should always be opposite the colors of heroes. So where as heroes have red and blue, i.e. Superman, Captain America, and Spider-Man villains have purple, orange and green, i.e. Lex Luthor, Joker, Magneto, Thanos and even the Incredible Hulk to the extent that he is Bruce Banner's archvillain. While costumes primarily colored with purple represent villainy,Lex, and Magneto, costumes that are also orange represent homicidal urges, Thanos and Joker represent this idea. Elijah Price wore purple and orange stripes when he received the gift.The mother that David Dunn touches and realizes that she is a child abuser is wearing a purple leather coat. The man who tries to sneak the gun into the football game is wearing orange camoflauge and the home invader is of course wearing an orange jumpsuit. Thats my two cents and I hope you all enjoy reading it I would like to hear what anyone else thinks of this color theory.

  • Nov. 27, 2000, 8:25 a.m. CST

    Unbreakable broke me!

    by benzy

    Hey Ya'll, I just saw that movie Unbreakable. Though I found a few flaws in the movie itself-I feel it is impossible to please everyone and make a "perfect" movie. Every single person, millions and millions would have done things differntly. -I thought that the movie was groundbreaking. Totally earthshaking. I am so glad that American cinema is delving into stories that aren't just black and white. Fantasies, creative fantasies will come out because of the success of the Sixth Sense. I think it will open up the market to differnt points of views of differnt story tellers in the not so near future. Some will hit it on the head and be pure joy -like unbreakable and the sixth sense- some will be horrible and get the combination of actors and stories screwed up- I can't wait to see what comes out of this- I saw three absolutly fantastic films in the last month- Charlie's Angels-fine, jiggly, leggy ladies having fun without the penis guns, Bamboozled- topic race, with the exception of the overly symbolic killing of Mr. Glover and Mr. Wayans- but tears swelled up in my eyes at the end montage. and Unbreakable- from the point of seeing the rubber padded car of Mr. Glass- I was into this one, baby. I didn't know anything about these movies and let the films do the talking. I've had such a good time at the theater in the past month that I haven't felt this giddy since walking out of Revenge of the Ninga downtown and doing pretend karate on my friend. It's a great time for movies, and they are not all the same. Benzy

  • Nov. 27, 2000, 11:54 a.m. CST

    on comics and Unbreakable

    by Airchinapilot

    Mali_Ocean, I kindly advise you to read any of the following comics to (hopefully) release your impressions of comicdom: Garth Ennis: Preacher / Warren Ellis: Planetary and The Authority / Alan Moore: Watchmen / Frank Miller: The Dark Night Returns / Alex Ross: Kingdom Come, Uncle Sam, Marvels. All of these are excellent and ADULT fiction that just happen to be graphic novels with fantastical themes. And a question for you. How can someone who likes Cormac Mac Arty (All the Pretty Horses) not understand how a genre (western) can contain gems of humanity? If westerns can, with all its foundations and conventions, why not comics and the superhero genre?

  • Nov. 27, 2000, 12:14 p.m. CST


    by Metatron

    Unbreakable is NOT part of a yet-planned trilogy. Whatever newspaper article Harry pulled out his butt that cited Willis as stating there is a planned trilogy is not the case. Willis and Jackson, according to an interview with the two of them AND Shyamalan himself, have been pushing Shyamalan and Disney for a sequel... but so far, Shyamalan, who conceived, wrote, produced and directed Unbreakable, has not made any commitment. Does this mean that Willis and Jackson can't convince him eventually? No. Does it mean they should? No. However, I do think Shyamalan is capable of making sequels that don't have all the bad characteristics of sequels... especially bad hero story sequels. If he isn't going to pen it and direct it, forget it, I wouldn't want to watch some Joel Schumacher-like bastardization of one of the most unique, best films of our time. But this certainly means that the idea of a trilogy HAS NOT BEEN PREPLANNED from the start... Harry should know better than to pretend unconfirmed rumors are headline-worthy... but then, who am I kidding, he's a journalist. What else should I expect from him?

  • Nov. 27, 2000, 4:24 p.m. CST

    I'm with you on the color theory, Adam Power

    by cuznjean

    The first thing I said to my friend upon leaving the theater was that we shoud have seen that coming just because of all of the purple he wore. Good catch on the orange connection, I missed that one.

  • Nov. 27, 2000, 4:50 p.m. CST

    weird camera angles

    by cuznjean

    I haven't read through all of the posts yet, but didn't it strike anybody (besides me) that the tricky camera angles were meant to convey the panels in a comic book? Especially the back-and-forth between Bruce and the woman on the train. Lay each shot out on a page and add word bubbles above their heads and it would look just like a comic. Maybe I'm stretching on the comic book parallels, but considering everything else, I can't help but think that was the intent.

  • Nov. 27, 2000, 5:59 p.m. CST

    COLOR THEORY - info on sequels

    by speaker

    I am positive the aforementioned color theory is right, and M Night gives away some info on the next movies with it. I dont think anyone else said this, but specifically I am talking about the scene at the breakfast table where bruce willis slides the paper over to his son. that comes right after the big fight scene in the house between good and bad, between GREEN and ORANGE. when the boy walks into have breakfast in the next scene - his t-shirt is green with an orange stripe. and hes drinking orange juice. this obviously is foreshadowing that the son is going to end up turning bad and against his father. it makes perfect sense - the scene where he tells his dad, "I'm not like you" as well as the scene where he almost shoots his dad are all setting up his eventual turn to the darkside, which i am sure will be done via samuel jackson. anyway... thats my two cents.

  • Nov. 27, 2000, 6:25 p.m. CST

    My idea for the next Unbreakable movie

    by Sam McAbee

    Maybe the second film can be called Inedible. It can be about a crippled cook with no taste buds, named Gerald Icetope AKA Mr. Bland who spends his life cooking inedible and horrible food, searching for the one man who will enjoy his cooking. He finds that man after hearing about a guy named Edgar Eggs who is the only man to ever win the Texas State Hard Boiled Eggs and Yogurt Eating Compotion by eating over 400 hard boiled eggs and 300 containers of Bananas

  • Nov. 27, 2000, 10:25 p.m. CST

    A trilogy, huh?

    by Alonzo Hawk

    Ah memories of summer 1977. I can see it now, Action Figures, Mcdonalds happymeals, Comic spinoffs, merchandising up the wazzu, Unbreackable conventions, ect, ect, ect.... Hey we could even have willis fight the guy from "Iknow what you did last summer" , it could be called " Securityman vs The Gorton Fisherman" It's making money, but I didn't think there was anything particularly brilliant about the film.

  • Nov. 27, 2000, 10:28 p.m. CST

    The pacing (spoilers)

    by Tranzor-Z

    Whoever grips about the "slow pacing" of this movie doesn't actually read comics. Anyone who's ever read a decent graphic novel knows that this movie was a perfect example of issue #1 in a short series. The first issue always establishes the world you're seeing as familiar, as just real enough to seem real. It also tweaks just a little here and there, so maybe you got it in your mind that really weird things can happen here. Followed by establishing the "hero" in easily recognizable vignettes, so's you know who the hero is. He doesn't do anything heroic until the end of the first issue, which is a perfect place to put a cliffhanger ending. Some, then most people who watch this movie will be slavering for the next issue. Just my two cents.

  • Nov. 27, 2000, 10:50 p.m. CST

    Lemme pop in here to make one simple point:

    by Dave_F

    The thing that's bugging me about this otherwise quite interesting Talkback is how the word "comics" is used synonymously with "superheroes". Superheroes are a *genre*. Comics are a *medium*. A MEDIUM. And like any medium (radio, television, film, prose), capable of exploring any genre or combination of genres in existence. Speaking of comics as though the medium equals only superheroes is a symptom of the close-minded attitude that keeps American comics in the kiddie ghetto. And nearly every single post here is doing it. Shyamalan did it in "Unbreakable" too. It's a matter of semantics, but by no means a trivial one. I mean, Harry says, "Comic books for me have been about the mythology of mankind", only to mention comic creators like Eisner, Crumb, and Shelton in the next sentence and completely subvert himself. Not a ONE of those guys wrote about superheroes or mythology! My humble request is this: please don't use the broad term "comics" when you really mean something as specific as "superheroes". The Europeans and the Japanese have flourishing comic book traditions with nary a superhero in sight. When they hear the word "comics", it could mean anything from the surreal science fiction of Moebius to the political melodrama of Kaiji Kawaguchi's "Eagle" to the romantic comedies of Rumiko Takahashi. The thing is, American comics have that same diversity, but we just can't seem to get past that goddamn fucking mental block of comics = superheroes. It drives me insane.

  • Nov. 28, 2000, 4:01 p.m. CST


    by ThereIsNoSpoon

    Unbreakable was unique in that it was film about a superhero treated as a psychological thriller and not an action movie. Can M.Night keep it that way? Should he? My first thought is that David can't be the only unbreakable person in the human race. Mr. Glass was not in fact a "Super" Villain because he had no special powers or abilities. Maybe Bruce would have to face another "Unbreakable" person, but that would turn the franchise into an action film which wouldn't be right -Then I had another thought - See David had two weaknesses - along with water there was doubt. He doubts his power at first as well as his intelligence, his ability as a father, husband, provider, etc. His next villian will be someone who will try to convince him that he is not good enough to be a hero. A villain that will force him to be an intelligent and anylitical detective and make it so that he can never resort to his strength and invulnerability. And here's where it could get interesting - Mr. Glass's entire motivation for being a villain was to uncover the hero hidden amongst ordinary men. He will break out of jail to help David believe in himself - the classic comic book story of a hero having to team up against his archnemesis to fight a greater foe. God, this could be SSSOOOO good.

  • Nov. 28, 2000, 4:37 p.m. CST

    Yes, I can see it now . . .

    by ThereIsNoSpoon

    The villain will be some sort of billionaire. David will work security at a public appearance of his, and uncover some vast terrible machivellian plot. The billionaire is smart enough to realize the threat David represents and fights him on level he can't fight back - by attacking his confidence. I can hear the slow, haunting voice of - Martin Sheen perhaps? in the trailer for the movie - "Do you really believe yourself to be some sort of "super" "hero", Mr. Dunne? Do you think that your exceptional health and intuition gives you the ability to stop one of the most powerful men in the world? You feel that what I am doing is evil. I am a leader of men. As such I must make tough decisions. And so this does not jibe with your homespun 'morality', what do you intend to do? Beat me up? We don't live in a comic book, Mr. Dunne, we live in the real world. If either one of us were to have to resort to violence to achieve our ends, there is a much greater likelihood that I would get away with it than you! Go home Mr. Dunne. Use your little gift to help other little people in ways that will be heroic and inspiring to their little minds. Leave larger matters to the men who's gifts are better suited to handle them. . . "

  • Nov. 28, 2000, 7:19 p.m. CST


    by LordKinbote

    Wow, you're pretty good.

  • Nov. 28, 2000, 9:59 p.m. CST

    Unbreakable 2 will not involve Willis.

    by TheArtfulDodger

  • Nov. 28, 2000, 10:07 p.m. CST

    Unbreakable 2 will not involve Willis.

    by TheArtfulDodger

    I just visited the "Are you Unbreakable" site. And deduced,(this is an assumption, yet I am confident I am correct.) That the Unbreakable sequels will not feature WIllis, or Glass, for one reason, because that would be gawdy. Number two: On the Unbreakable site, the Flash intro, is many newspaper clippings, such as: "727 crashes, one survives." All these clippings, of disaters, and one surviving, at least four, plus pictures of disasters(one that looked strangely like a scene from "Twister.") These are not Mr. Glass' doings, as he only perpetrated three acts of terrorism. Point number three: I believe Shyamalan favors continuing a story in theme but not characters. I quote this from an interview found M. Night Shyamalan on the IGN movies site: IGN Movies: Is there going to be a Seventh Sense? Shyamalan: No. It won't be called Seventh Sense, first of all. If I did a sequel, anywhere down the line, it would probably be the same subject matter, but different characters. Just a separate movie. If I had something to say *End of interview clip* Therefore, I conclude, with the assumption, that if Shyamalan chooses to explore new characters with his sequel to the Sixth Sense, he will most likely also do so with the sequel to Unbreakable. (I mean come on, Unbreakable had a similar mood as The Sixth Sense. Just in a different manner.) Thanks for reading this if you did!

  • Nov. 28, 2000, 10:15 p.m. CST

    Not to mention.

    by TheArtfulDodger

    Not to mention the whole site is about: "There are Unbreakable people among us, and it gives signs, and a test and such." I now wholly believe the next movies will be about different people.

  • Dec. 5, 2000, 2:09 a.m. CST

    ok, lets talk sequel

    by The Credible One

    So here is how the sequel is gonna pan out. What Unbreakable did was "flip" the comic book angle and went to the other end of the spectrum by having almost no action and making it entirely dramatized, an adult comic. Now, can anyone guess what we are gonna get in a sequel? I bet you cant wait for me to tell you......Well, its pretty damn obvious, he is going to flip his own concept by making it into an actual superhero movie similar to Batman. We will see Darkhood Man against Mr Glass in a battle with pyrotechnics, and 200 million dollar budgets. It will be an over the top movie that is the complete polar opposite to the previous work. The first movie was merely a setup, developing the characters. It was like, a pyschologist explaing why these characters acted the way they did, in the "real" world, but now in the sequel we get to see the blown up version. Dont take my word for it.......check yourself......but Im sooo right

  • Jan. 8, 2001, 11:03 a.m. CST

    unbreakable, many issues

    by dazeddarla

    okay- i've read everyone's comments and these are mine... 1) i know little of comic books and the "superhero" genre. i was an Archie fan and that's about it. but i thought that it was nice to see a movie about comic books, in the same way "scream" was a great movie about horror. it was clever to open up the movie with statements about comic books and their readers. it was also nice that it wasn't marketed as a superhero film. it was the "setup" of movies we never really get to see. it was the "why" and "how" that is always rushed to get to the action and conflict. it was an action movie with little action at all. BRILLIANT! 2. as i was watching, i sensed a few clues and at one point said to someone, "are they good and evil?"... my mistake was in thinking about the possibility of david being the evil character. in the beginning, we're not sure if he's really a nice guy or not. i also considered that maybe david and elijah would be a batman/robin duo. i'm glad it wasn't. 3. i love the director. i love that he makes the people's lives as important as the exciting stuff. most movies fail to make a connection with the actors, but have great action... others have a great connection, but little story. i love that his direction is so slow, it's almost painful and agonizing. it's the opposite of so many films that are rushing for deep thoughts or punchlines. he creates tension and awkwardness. and the movie seemed so long, but it was really short, just as sixth sense was. most movies end too early or drag on too long. i love that director creates this world that coincides with what the characters are feeling. in sixth sense, we felt the torture of a little boy. in this, i felt elijah's physical pain and david's emotional state. and at the movie, i felt the hope. BRILLIANT! 4. great directors repeat many of the same themes in their movies. there are many similarites in the worlds in sixth sense and this movie. at the core, they are about communication and the need for love and human contact. many movies fail to bring about these themes, but not this director. m night is the master! his other theme is that extraordinary things happen even in dreary, hopeless places. and finally, he likes to show that people need to open their eyes, ears, hearts, and all their senses. we are missing things around us! in sixth sense, a boy sees everything, his mother dismisses obvious clues to his powers, and a man has neglected his wife for so long that he doesn't realize he's dead! in unbreakable, a man has superhuman powers and he doesn't even know it, because he's too lost in his dreary existence. he doesn't even realize that he's never been sick... something that a person like elijah, who is in constant pain must and will resent. M Night is saying, "LOOK AROUND! PAY ATTENTION! THERE ARE AMAZING THINGS HAPPENING... AND APPRECIATE THEM!" 5. the reason i cann't give this movie 4 stars, and will settle between 3-3.5 stars is the ending. i did love the ending, but i thought that even if a movie is the first of a trilogy, it must stand alone. i felt the end was rushed somehow. i didn't mind the words on the blackscreen and what it gave away. 6. for all of you who don't want the trilogy, i don't quite understand that. i want the trilogy because 1) i didn't feel it was complete and 2) there is much to be done with this story. i agree that trilogys can be disappointing (scream). but i have a sense that M Night will pull it off in amazing ways. there's so much he has set up for in this. here are but a few things that must be demonstrated... - i think harry said this and i agree. there will be an underground lair, maintained by elijah's mother, and an amazing release from the mental institution. - the son will turn on david at some point... maybe because he has little superhuman powers. then again, maybe he will be loyal to his father and it is david's wife that turns on him. - there will probably be some great water scenes! - david doubts himself and he's clearly more of a physical threat, to elijah's mental threat. then again, couldn't david very easily kill elijah with one punch? how will m night keep that from happening. i'm sure elijah anticipates this... i'm sure m might will surprise us again. while i was watching the beginning, i kept thinking how amazing the story was. sometimes copying a genre is just copying, but other times it is used to invent something else (like how austin powers copies bond movies). there were simple comic book concepts, but there was also much more! anyway, i can go on and on (and have), but "that's all i have to say about that."

  • April 29, 2010, 9:52 a.m. CST

    Fuck you QcoIQh

    by orcus