Moviepro (www.moviepro.net)

We have taken some photos of "Unbreakable". They represent actual movie quality.

• The better X-man posted on 31 Aug 2009

  Comics are a weird thing. They fascinate me totally with their superheroes, their mix of entertainment and art, the obsession. I never was a fan of comics. I read some of course, but the time of collecting comics obsessively was in my opinion in the 60's or 70's when they were something special. Today comics are mostly calculated moneymakers. This says also Samuel L. Jackson in this movie, as an obsessive comic-fan.(Warning: Spoilers may be ahead!)I've heard a lot of discussions whether this movie is about a comic hero or not. It's an interesting thought and you can absolutely say that this is a typical hero finds his powers-story. I was pretty sure about that, but after thinking a while, I'm not sure anymore.The centre of the story is well-known. One man survives a train crash, while 130 died and he doesn't even have a scratch. Then an owner of a comic gallery contacts him, because he has broken 54 of his bones in his life. So they try to find out what's it all about.This summary isn't very detailed, but the movie goes to many ways to retell it easily. We have the main character who is unsure if he's special, we have 'Mr. Glass' as he was called in school, who wants to know his place in the world, we have a father-son conflict, we have a husband-wife conflict and we this thing about comics. They are all packed in one movie and the director, M. Night Shyamalan, connects them brilliantly.Bruce Willis as the survivor, who isn't sure if he ever was sick in his life, plays this role so brilliant, you want to embrace him. He shows again, that he's a very gifted actor, who can show us all the depth of his soul with one look. He's a man who absolutely doesn't know what went wrong with his life and is to desperated to find it out.Samuel L. Jackson hasn't as much screen presence as I thought, but does it good. He is a bitter man, because he was hurt physically and also psychological all his life. He has to be scared to walk, because his bones break so easily and that isn't the easiest way to live.Robin Wright Penn plays the wife of Bruce Willis and does a wonderful job too. You can see how much she wants to know what went wrong in her marriage. She wants to make decisions even if they're not good for both of them. She looks nearly as sad as Willis does.M. Night Shyamalan, who again has a little acting part here, again proves his directing and writing talent. The story is well developed, unpredictable and always surprising. In a time, where movies surprise you as much as nothing, he comes with wonderful ideas to show us, what cinema is all about.He has the gift to write and direct single scenes very exactly. The scenes could stand all alone. They're are very effective for themself, like the one with the son and the gun. Most of them are built as if they were a single short movie. They have a prologue, a climax, and a solution. They make you move toward to screen. It's wonderful how he does that.The photography by Eduardo Serra is also excellent. In a slow movie like this slow camera moves are needed. They seem very well-thought and developed. Look at the beginning sequence in the train for example. Again the colours are also very important. The main colour is green here, since it's visible in almost every scene. But there is also red which gives signs of evil. There is even more with the colours but I'm to unprofessional for that.The music by James Newton Howard is great again and the costumes and art direction are also. Look at the details, as the car of Jackson, which is polstered all inside.(Again Big Spoiler Warning!!)So, again, what's this movie all about? Of course, Willis acts like the typical superhero, who finds out his powers, uses them and becomes a better man. Somehow we have seen this very often, like in 'Batman' or 'Superman' or better in this year's 'X-Men' where all the people get to know for the first time in their lives what they are capable of. The Willis character would fit exactly to the group. And Jackson is the perfect villain, with mad ideas, crazy costumes and even a wheelchair (the second wheelchair in a superhero film this year). Everything fits in this picture, but...Well, the 'but...' is somehow not only about this film, but about all superhero films and comics. Think about it. Is Willis so unusual because he wakes up every day sad? I mean, how many people do you know like that? Don't most of us feel like that every morning and day and night? We are searching for our place in life and if we choose a wrong path, we are sad, because we don't know what we did wrong. So it's with Willis here. And also with Jackson, who knows something went wrong and goes mad about it.It's the special ability that every one of us has inside him or her, which makes our life happy, if we live with it. This makes comics so fascinating. These guys know what they can do and they use it. Most of us are desperate to know what they should do in their life. There's a talent in all of us and if we use it, we can have a happy life. As simple-minded as it sounds, it's true. We are all superheros.8/10 \ 3.5/4 \ 2+ (1+ - 6-)

• Solid, but by no means Unbreakable posted on 27 Aug 2009

  As it was for his first film, M. Night neither impressed me nor disappointed me. This film is definitely nothing special, and The Sixth Sense was even more so incredibly overrated.First order of business: Bruce Willis was pretty darn good in comparison to other films he's appeared in, such as Armageddon, but remained nothing extraordinary. I could just as well say the same for Samuel L. Jackson, though he has had a more impressive track record than Willis (as far as performances). Robin Wright Penn also had a sold performance, though I am not one to criticize acting with much strength. The atmosphere was almost a mirror image to the atmosphere of Sixth Sense, though it was a bit warmer. Many of the cinematography techniques were original, but I think many would agree with my complaint of overuse of original ideas, which really ran this film into the ground. Creativity is great, but overuse can kill. The framing of the train scene is beautiful, but monotonous. The spiraling over the comic book was extremely predictable and in this particular case, not creative. The overuse of hand held camera was useless, because it provoked the wrong emotion in a few instances. The theme was steady, but as his last film M. Night only gives us a few minutes to ponder its existence in the last few seconds of the film. Not to say that surprise endings are bad, but if one is attempting to get across an intelligent message, one should let the audience ponder in it a bit longer, along with the characters. I'd have to say it is an intelligent marketing technique though. Perhaps the reasoning for a quick, spontaneous ending was to surpass the lack of depth in the theme: "Without evil, there would be no good" to impress with the entertaining and surfaced story. It seems the film builds up to a stark nothing that instills a feeling of emptiness, which pointlessly juxtaposes the redemption in Willis' character. The captions were utterly pointless at the end, probably the most disappointing conclusion I've witnessed in some while.In other words, if you like The Sixth Sense, you will most likely enjoy this. If you though the Sixth Sense was somewhat pretentious, surfaced, and extremely overrated, I am almost sure you will obtain that similar feeling though this film.**1/2 of ****

• Not too flattering. posted on 23 Aug 2009

  I felt that this movie idea was childish and stupid. The script was not too good and the director tried to make it a better movie than it could have been. I found that the director over-exaggerated many camera styles(such as
  framing and steady-cam). I also thought that Bruce Willis set him self up for a blow in starring in Sixth Sense. That
  movie was so good at showing his acting skills that his performance in Unbreakable was to say the least a horrible depiction of his skill.

• Paint an elephant blue and its still an elephant. posted on 23 Aug 2009

  A movie by Shyamalan is a movie by Shyamalan is a movie by Shyamalan. At least that's the trend which "Unbreakable" would suggest. Another plodding and tedious bunch of Hollywood dark kinda paranormal stuff, this film manages to squeeze even less plot into its run time than its Shyamalan predecessor, "The Sixth Sense". But, hey, if you had a formula that worked and got $10 mil to do it again, you would too, huh? So, the moral to what is hopefully not a series of Shyamalan pseudo-paranormal spooky nonsense flicks is, I guess; if you liked "The Sixth Sense", give "Unbreakable" a try. If not, don't.

• Very good. posted on 23 Aug 2009

  M. Night Shyamalan's Unbreakable continues his solid work of creating suspense with restrained, subtle performances amidst an original idea. Mixing the world of comics and the everyman struggle for significance, he gives us the tale of David Dunn (Bruce Willis). He is a security guard who gave up a football career. Not finding any meaning or purpose, he drifts from his wife (Robin Wright-Penn). His son, Joseph (Spencer Treat Clark), though, is at the age when he sees his dad as invincible and powerful. He wants to believe his dad is more than ordinary. Enter Elijah Price (Samuel L. Jackson). He suffers from a debilitating disease that makes his bones incredibly fragile. Almost like glass, they break easily. He wants to explore David's uncanny luck of being the only man not hurt in a train wreck that left so many people either dead or incredibly injured. This leads to interesting questions regarding purpose and meaning. Juxtaposed amidst the world of comic heroes and villains, it is brought to life in a subtle, restrained, and believable way. Again, Shyamalan gives us a restrained movie, focusing on ordinary people thrust into extraordinary circumstances. His direction not only helps us identify with David and Elijah, but also gives us suspense in the story. What I really liked is that the obvious hints keep us interested. We are not sure what plot is truly unfolding until the last 20 minutes. It is revealed slowly, keeping the audience interested. The only gripe I had is the ending seemed a bit forced. I think Shyamalan felt the need to top himself from his wonderfully made Sixth Sense. I'm not saying it was bad, but it's revelation was not executed that well. Still, in any case, I thought this one was underrated. The first time I saw it, I thought it okay. The more I see it, the more I like it.

• On the right track! posted on 21 Aug 2009

  M. Night Shyamalan created such a stir with the surprise ending of 'The Sixth Sense' that 'Unbreakable' seems like a difficult encore to execute properly. But Shyamalan does it beautifully. By building a slow burn leading up to his latest revelation, Shyamalan doesn't TRY to top 'The Sixth Sense' and that's what makes 'Unbreakable' quite good. Samuel L. Jackson is the MVP here, a cross between eccentricity and chilling horror. Bruce Willis is good as the average blue collar man like he's done so well before.
  The movie is like a slow funhouse/horror house tunnel. The slow pace works because there is so much to fill your mind with as everything becomes clearer and clearer like a jigsaw puzzle being filled in by a pro.
  'Unbreakable' is one for the cult/buried treasure files as it will be appreciated more and more as the years pass.

• Not broken too badly... posted on 19 Aug 2009

  I'm not much of a fan of M. Night Shyamalan's films or directorial style.
  Although I "sort of" enjoyed The Sixth Sense in the theater, I made the mistake of buying it on DVD for some unknown reason -- it's impossible to enjoy that film more than once, because the "twist" at the end is really the entire worth of the film, IMO. Once that twist is known, the movie becomes a real bore, and is really not watchable more than one time."Unbreakable" fared somewhat better in my eyes, but still lacks far too much. Like others have commented, the ending is too abrupt. Although I didn't see it coming, it just doesn't grant the viewer the "payoff" they deserve.That said, I believe Unbreakable is actually the better film by far. I could easily watch it again, knowing the "surprise ending." The pacing of the movie was good most of the way through (I wasn't squirming in my seat like I was during "A.I."), the acting was reasonably good, and I didn't notice those funny camera angles like some of the other reviewers here. To me, the "problem" with Unbreakable lies mostly with the ending -- definitely anticlimactic and abrupt (and the text-over "explanations" definitely detracted, in my opinion). The surprise twist is delightful for approximately 10 seconds, at which point it fades.Also, I have to admit that I don't much appreciate the "light-core horror/supernaturalism" genre. Give me The Exorcist, Jacob's Ladder, Serpent and the Rainbow, Fallen or even Ghost over M. Night Shyamalan's watered-down, empty and un-moving brand of "horror/supernatural" any day.
  Anyhow, I give Unbreakable a rating of 7/10 -- and mostly thanks to Samuel L. Jackson's great performance.P.S... I have an almost unused copy of "The Sixth Sense" sitting here on DVD that I watched only 1/8 of the way through before falling asleep... anyone wanna buy it? (just kidding, no Emails please -- I'll dump it off on Ebay or something eventually).

• Much too long to get around to nothing posted on 17 Aug 2009

  This movie was a disappointment because it had so many possibilities that did not turn out. The hero, David Dunn was poorly developed. He appeared bored with life both before and after his epiphany. The parallels between him and his counterpart, Elijah, were never drawn. His backstory was poorly told. And finally, his son was just a two dimension.Many reviewers compared this to the director's fabulous Sixth Sense, but there really is no comparison. This movie was edited to death and not where it should have been. The bulk of the movie dealt with his dreary present and not enough with his past or future.The ending was terrible. Any movie that fills out the ending with titles explaining what happened to the characters after the action finished is poorly done.The movie should have ended at the breakfast table after much more action on the part of the 'new' David Dunn.All in all this movie took too long to deliver too little.

• Terrible Attempt at Emotion and Drama in this Disappointing Movie posted on 17 Aug 2009

  I'll say it right now, Unbreakable is my pick for worst movie ever made. Not necessarily in terms of quality, I'm sure some Sci-Fi channel movie would snatch that prize, but in terms of writing, acting, and most importantly, directing. I counted how many words Bruce Willis said throughout the entire movie, my final total was 6 (that is not technically true as I didn't really count, but I'm confident my estimate is within about 10 of the actual number). There is an unbelievable amount of epic staring at each other done by all of the characters involved. I really wanted to enjoy this movie when we popped it in, in fact it was my choice to rent it, but by the end everyone in my family was laughing quite hysterically (needless to say the movie was not supposed to be funny). I do not enjoy when a movie is filled with dumb characters, in fact I really hate it when it seems every character is mentally deficient. This is one of those movies. One scene in particular struck me as incredibly ridiculous. Bruce's son decides he's going to shoot Bruce to show everyone that Bruce is truly invulnerable. Bruce and his wife freak out (naturally) and try to get the son to put the gun away. In a moment of unintentional comedy, myself and two other members of my family all said out-loud, "For God's sake, just shoot him." The movie would have been over and this horrible scene would cease to poison our minds with contagious stupidity. The big twist at the end was not clever, and relatively easy to predict, meaning of course that it was disappointing and therefore fit great with the rest of the movie. If you are someone who can REALLY get involved in a movie and truly feel the character's pain. then perhaps you will love this movie, but my entire family just couldn't get over how ridiculous everything was and how everyone kept staring at each other in an unbelievably corny way. I do not recommend this movie to anyone unless you are looking for a comedy, cause after all, I found this movie quite hilarious in a pathetic sort of way.

• Original, amazing posted on 05 Aug 2009

  I went to see "Unbreakable" knowing virtually nothing about the film, which is very rare. I walked out of the theatre and said nothing, I just listened to the conversations of my movie-going comrades. I noticed that all the intelligent people raved about the film, saying how wonderful it was, while the less cerebral people said it was just okay. That's the thing with this one-you need a brain to enjoy it. When someone asked me how I liked the movie, I simply replied, "It was the best F@#$ing film I've seen all year."
  And it was. While Shyamalan's "Sixth Sense" was superb in every way, it didn't throw me on my ass quite like this one did. I was completely taken by the film's use of comic book heroes in a totally original way. This is definite Oscar material, especially for Samuel L. Jackson. "Unbreakable" will certainly be added to my home library.

• Unmissable posted on 01 Aug 2009

  M. Night Shyamalan is a very artistic director and i believe pulled off one of the best super hero films of all time. It is a very storyline orientated and attention must be kept on the film through it. Missing a moment can throw off the whole movie and ruin it. The acting is awesome and the story is extraordinary. Shyamalan pulled off the movie to look as a Comic and give comic attributes as well. this movie was horribly over looked because it was a Super hero movie that wasn't action packed. It was slow and didn't really do anything spectacular, the hero was old and outta shape and didn't figure out his potential till his late 40s. It broke all the rules of the super hero genre. I think this movie is a must see and given a fare chance in a world were action is all thats needed.

• Sloppy finish makes film a train wreck posted on 28 Jul 2009

  As a movie enthusiast and a film student, I was very excited to see M. Night's new masterpiece, Unbreakable. It is possible that my expectations were too high, but speaking for myself and the majority of the attendees in the theater, there was a sense of disappointment looming around us as we left. I overheard a lot of `What the hell was that?' and `maybe we should have seen the Grinch.' Although the story was inconclusive and seemingly thrown together poorly at the end, M. Night does deliver some powerful visuals and original directing styles. The acting, of course, is superb! With Samuel L. Jackson and Bruce Willis at then helm, they single handedly saved this film. Sadly, the characters were so overdeveloped in the first hour and a half of the film, there was no time left to do anything interesting with them. I felt the characters and audience had both been cheated by a mediocre, forced ending to what could have been a great movie.I have a feeling it is going to be one of those `love it' or `hate it' films, so my suggestion is to try it out for yourself and see where you end up.

• Masterfully Done posted on 28 Jul 2009

  This movie was again masterfully done. The suspense was real, but no the focus of the movie. The confusion felt by Bruce Willis is extended to the audience to obtain the right effect. The camera work was fantastic, and M. Night Shayamalan did a good job of avoiding overdirecting. He had a surprise ending, and it was a good one, even though I guessed it. One can only hope that, even though these surprise endings are fun, that he doesn't go for that every time, or else it will seem like he is selling out, and it will become the only reason that people go to his movies. It was a great movie though.

• What is wrong with this movie? posted on 26 Jul 2009

  It is a good idea. Willis and Jackson are good. The ambiance is there. Yet something went wrong. Was it too slow? Was it that the idea could be developed in a better way? Was it that you expect something to happen and it doesn't? I haven 't seen the "Sixth Sense", so I don 't know if this is the man 's style, but in this movie something doesn't click. Not a waste of time, but not archive material either.

• Finally, a real-life super-hero posted on 24 Jul 2009

  Without a shadow of a doubt, this is THE forgotten movie of the 2000's Academy Awards night. It's quite unfair to compare this picture with the previous « The Sixth Sense ». Both confirm Shyamalan as a talented screenwriter and director. The plot of this film is far from being vulgar: a Security man (played by Bruce Willis who will never be a versatile actor) escapes unharmful from a train accident. After finding out he's the only survivor of the accident,he will be snatched away from reality by an Alter-Ego (played masterly by Samuel L. Jackson)who believes that Willis has what it takes to be a real-life hero. The final scene is breathtaking, but Shyalaman could have passed on the superflous subtitles that describe what happened after this final scene. Conclusion: it's a masterpiece of the Contemporany movies and Jackson is (after so many flops)as great as he was on «Pulp Fiction».

• A Great Film... posted on 24 Jul 2009

  Ive heard people say that it wasnt like the sixth sense or that it had a "sssllloooww" moving story. Those kinds of people are not diverse and impatient. This is a intriguing and thought provoking film about a man who trying to find out about himself and why he survived a train wreck. He recieves help from a brittle bone patient played by Samuel L. Jackson. Anyone who appreciates a great film like this will enjoy it thoroughly!

• Brilliant posted on 22 Jul 2009

  I believe 'Unbreakable' is a brilliant film. And instead of saying "it's great! go see it!", I have provided evidence as to why I feel this way.Screenplay: People complain these days that most movies are too much alike, that there is a lack of creativity. This film breaks the mold and delivers a story of how comic book heroes and villains come to be, and does so flawlessly in my opinion. 'Unbreakable' explains the physical attributes, "special powers", weaknesses, motivation, and even the costumes that characterize the hero and the villain in a comic book. And it is all done in a dramatic, fascinating way. There's your creativity right there.Cinematography: Few directors take advantage of the camera as well as M. Night does, and throughout this film I am in awe of how artistically he puts it to use. Why just point and shoot when you can interact with the characters and the audience?Acting: Bruce Willis is excellent in this film, as was he in 'Sixth Sense'. I am happy to see him breaking out of his stereotype and performing well in more serious roles. And Samuel L. Jackson was perfect as Mr. Glass, he looked purely evil.Why would anybody want 'Unbreakable' to be another comic book movie filled with action? There are hundreds of movies already out there that will satisfy that desire. Take your pick: Superman, Batman, Spawn, X-Men, Blade... need I go on? Watch one of those if you are in the mood for action and excitement. If you don't like "slow" movies, then what that means is you typically don't like dramas... so don't see 'Unbreakable' and then whine about it being "slow". This film provides a truely unique moviegoing experience. Toss aside any ideas of what you think it should be and allow it to command your attention. You won't be sorry.

• Bad story, great philosophical idea! posted on 20 Jul 2009

  (-----------CONTAINS SPOILERS--------)Nobody can avoid the comparison with sixth sense, neither me. And I have to admit that the plot was better in 6th sense. Unbreakable's story is full of "gaps". For example, Willis hasn't ever been sick or injured in his entire life but he hasn't notice the fact yet! He believes that he was injured on a car accident, but when Jackson tell's him he wasn't, he admit with surprise it's true! He didn't know if he was injured or not? So, why do I believe that Unbreakable is better than 6th sense? It's the idea behind the story, something that was missing in sixth sense. 6th sense was just a game between the director and the audience. And everything was the ending. In unbreakable, the audience is expecting the same: a not-so-interesting main story, that is completely changed by the final scene. And the bet is that the director should find an even more surprising ending. He failed. But he succed something else.The not-so-interesting story becomes a dialectic philosophical thought: you are the opposite of your opposite. Your opposite defines you. You exist because your opposite also exists. And if you cannot find your opposite, you have two solutions: die or create it!Jackson creates his opposite by a man who is led by the facts out of him. Willis is not a good person, he is absolutely neutral. Of course he is unbreakable, but he doesn't know it, so he is not! He has found his place around the average, because the average doesn't need an opposite: it the opposite itself. But Jackson knows that he is the unlucky guy, so it must exist a lucky, good, perfect one, to define his existance. So he finds Willis and gradualy transforms him into the perfect opposite of himself.The most amasing is that Jackson is being transformed into a bad, evil guy, while he is seeking for Willis. He kills people to find the one who will save them.On the other hand, Jackson was realy very week, physicaly I mean, and Willis was realy unbreakable (but he didn't want to admit it). The line with the edges exists, but somebody should reveal it. Or did Jackson created? That's another philosophical question: do we follow our fate or do we create a fate to follow?Unfortunately, the director failed to present in a proper way that great idea. It cound be an excellent movie...

• willis CAN act posted on 12 Jul 2009

  I always felt "The Sixth Sense" to be very much overrated. A non-suspensful horror film saved by it's excellent twist.
  This film is much better. A really tense suspensful film, that this time is spoilt by it's twist. You're really drawn in and affected by Willis' progress. I didn't see the need for another irritating kid.You always leave such films thinking what a good actor Willis is, and why he bothers with "Die Hard 27" etc. Jackson on the other hand, seems to be the most over-the-top actor around since his good "Pulp Fiction" outing.

• M. Night cures insomnia posted on 10 Jul 2009

  Interesting premise, but pretentious and excruciatingly slow. The use of color doesn't intrigue the way Sixth Sense did. Perhaps, as others have suggested, the movie improves with subsequent viewings; I am not sure I can muster the enthusiasm.