Warning: Many spoilers here!

Deconstructing the mythology of supermen and comic book superheroes, M. Night Shyamalan brings forth a dark and engrossing film, "Unbreakable." Based on the simple idea that the superhuman powers possessed by the heroic characters in comic books might be based in fact, fact that has been exaggerated greatly over time for commercial exploitation, Shyamalan offers us the story of David Dunn, a security guard who is the sole survivor of a train crash. Dunn might never have even thought much about his seeming invincibility if it weren't for the appearance of Elijah Price, a crippled, somewhat obsessive and introverted comic book collector. When Price hears of Dunn's remarkable survival, and he has in fact been searching for such a survivor, he pursues the thought- to-be common man with his ideas, and tries to convince him of his invincibility.

The magic of this is all Bruce Willis, as Dunn, the actors as characters who come into his sphere, and writer/director Shyamalan. The combination of a filmmaker working with great talent here weaves intricate ideas and spools up plot and theme like so much cotton candy. We begin to float on the idea, as Dunn does, and begin to see the emergence of a super hero in the protagonist. This is amazing stuff. Darker and much more intricate then Tim Burton's "Batman," Shyamalan offers us many ideas that may not have occurred to us before. For example, if "Superman" lived on a farm and only became aware of his superpowers because they were so extraordinary, how did the other super heroes gain knowledge of their powers? If a common, everyday, modern man is born invincible, incapable of being unharmed and, perhaps, immortal, but does not know it, how would he discover these traits? It's fascinating stuff.

Yes, Shyamalan takes many liberties here. There are a few shaky ideas that we simply have to gloss over to believe. For example, Shyamalan has Willis' Dunn question whether or not he's ever been sick a day in his life. The character even approaches his wife with this question. This is something that surely would have come up in conversation within the last 12+ years they have been together, especially if Dunn had not been sick with a cold while she were. Wouldn't someone at some point have said, "Gee.. I hope you don't get my cold," and eventually said, "Damn, you never get sick." It's a pretty hard pill to swallow. We accept it, of course, because we have no choice - and Shyamalan has got much more important stuff to get to.

One of the best and brightest things about the film is the idea that Willis' Dunn is married and has a 12 year old son. It's no accident that the boy is at the age where comic books begin to become important as we are dealing with a world that is extrapolated out of a comic book ideal. Comic books are in fact, often seen upside down here because we are dealing with a life turned upside down and a world highly out of balance. It's a philosophical viewpoint that offers an idea: If the world creates evil, it will also create heros. And this is a philosophical idea of a world in flux, a world out of balance, turned upside down.

Even more interesting and important is the fact that Dunn's marriage is falling a part. His crumbled relationship is crippled, in fact, somewhat because of his subjugating his skills and abilities. Robin Wright Penn, as Dunn's wife, provides engaging and believable moments to allow us to grasp why Willis has done so. His life's path and choices unfold for us in flashback and it's outcome is exposed through dialogue that Penn's Mrs. Dunn offers in an important moment in the film. Even if it is brought forth from another of Shyamalan's plot twists that is a bit hard to swallow: In the film, she is a physical therapist and Price happens to come to her after he breaks several of his brittle, weak bones. They talk.

Critics and naysayers have tried to make it appear that Shyamalan is somehow copying his successful film of last year, "The Sixth Sense." While there are numerous similarities, including the films' star; the dark feel; the slow moving camera; the usage of a young male to revolve around the main character; and a plot twist at the end, they are two wholly separate films. Shyamalan is only guilty of having a style and craftsmanship that is apparent in both films, although this is the weaker of the two, storywise.

Shyamalan proves himself again to be an important director of the emerging 21st century with the film. Each and every scene in "Unbreakable" is perfectly etched. I used to believe that a director failed somehow if you noticed how he shot or edited a certain scene. Shyamalan negates such an ideal. His opening section, where Willis and a female actress are viewed in their train seats by a lethargic and wavering camera is nothing short of beautiful. Panning and slowly weaving from one image to the other, from a POV of between the seats in front of the action, Shyamalan offers a dizzying insight to Willis' Dunn by the exposition of action and dialogue. It is marvellous. When we realize that the action is actually being given to us from the POV of a child, it is even more revelatory. Shyamalan consistently frames his pictures here beautifully and interestingly providing us with an idea of an actual framed picture. This in turn recalls the frames of a comic book without ever being literal about it all. The film has a subtle beauty, of pictures and frames, that draw us in, expose what it chooses to expose to us, and allows the story to unfold small, slowly and gracefully. This is a master of image and artistic photography at work here. It poises Shyamalan as one of the most important commercial filmmakers (if film is art) of the modern day.

The acting in the film is flawless. Willis yet again proves his worth as an actor of subtle nuance and quiet thoughtfulness. He amazes us here. His moments in the latter stages of the film, where he dawns hooded poncho and actually engages in a superhero actions, is nothing short of breathtaking. And not a word is said. It's a film sequence of action and intense moments that is somehow subtle and graceful as well. It's brilliant work and Willis is as much responsible for this as Shyamalan. There is a cohesion and thoughtfulness to the film that proves Willis and the filmmaker to be on the same level, of the same mind.

Penn and Jackson are perfect in the film as well providing impetus for plot and fusion to Willis. Jackson is called upon to perform a really interesting yet difficult character and does so with brilliance. Penn is more than love interest and offers us a sort of twisted hope for resolution. In this story it is she who must also prove herself to us, not only Willis. None of the characters are easy nor typical. And finally, Spencer Treat Clark as Dunn's son provides us with a child's point of view and point of reasoning to the story that makes us question, makes us frightened and makes us feel. Called upon to make us believe a couple of really desperate and difficult moments, Clark delivers. His work with Willis is nothing short of perfection and watching the dynamics of their relationship unfold is truly engrossing. They are a pair that rival Willis with Haley Joel Osment in Shyamalan's previous film, often indeed recalling that relationship, but elevating it wisely above savior and victim to savior and wide-eyed admirer, hero and hero worshiper, father and son.

So many moments of the film engage us. When Dunn finally accepts his fate, he asks Price how to begin and the latter replies, "Go to where the people are." It's a deep and important statement because it not only suggests that people need protection but that it is from other, more dangerous, people that they need this protection. There are no villains except for the one that we as a society create. The bad guys are also guys - guys who are walking around, guys who have everyday jobs, guys who live next door.

And, what is most beautiful and sorrowful about the film is the sequence where Dunn, now accepting his fate, confronts a bad guy, fights him, and wins. This isn't a heroic and Hollywood moment caught up in the false bravado of "action" and confrontation but rather a quiet, dark and troubling moment where evil becomes apparent to Dunn and he has to fight it. Earlier in the film, Dunn tells Price he wakes up every morning and feels sadness and now it is crystal clear to us why he feels this way: Because evil exists. Because bad things happen. Because sometime the hero is a reluctant hero and sometimes he never comes. When Willis as Dunn finally acts, it isn't a bold and shimmering moment full of grandiosity and pompous heroics. Rather, it's a moment of deep sadness, of fear and of hurt. It made me sob with sorrow. Like Kyle Maclachlan's Jeffrey in David Lynch's dark masterpiece "Blue Velvet," we only find ourselves asking "why..."

But while Lynch questions why there is evil, in "Unbreakable" Shyamalan questions why there is goodness, why there are heroes, and the answer rings back quite loudly and clearly... Because it is human. Because it is in our hearts. And with this in his heart, Willis' Dunn becomes more than a superman, he becomes an everyman, a hero, a husband and a father. A man.

Note:

Shyamalan has a cameo.

Score by James Newton Howard.

Penn was cast after Julianne Moore dropped out to appear in "Hannibal." Cate Blanchett was also apparently considered at one point.

There have been talks of sequels to the film.

Filmed in Shyamalan's hometown of Philadelphia, where the piece is set.

More of Lodger's reviews indexed alphabetically! Just click your favorite letter to go there.

a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z

HOME

In Association with:

Search the web or add filethirteen after search to find it here!

Web Design By: