User reviews

I love this film. I'm the only person I know who doesn't hate it, but I cannot fathom why it gets such a bad rap from everybody. It seems that Shyamalan's films have this a running theme - with the notable exception of the Sixth Sense, which pretty much everyone seems to get. He makes movies that are very subtle, and which seem to need you to focus on them just right to fully grasp what he was trying to do. I've enjoyed all his movies, but for me the alien part of Signs takes a lot away from what I believe to be the central storyline and as such the whole movie suffers a little. Yet I know other people who think Signs is his best, specifically because of the way the alien plot line accentuates the central one.

Unbreakable is a beautifully simple film, but I think it has to hit you just right for you to completely get it. All the actors nail their parts, particularly Bruce Willis and his kid. Shyamalan takes an interesting (if slightly fringe) theory and puts it in a real world context, with a real family. Somehow he manages to never go overboard with it and - for me at least - it gripped me from the first moment to the last. Samuel L Jackson's character history is really nicely crafted in the middle of the other plot lines and you get genuinely involved in the people Shyamalan has created.

Don't get caught up in all the talk of the twist ending. The ending is good, but if you spend the whole movie waiting for this tumultuous twist you'll inevitably be disappointed, and the movie stands alone without it.

Don't go into this movie expecting another Sixth Sense or Signs. It's very very subtle and very understated. If you don't like slow movies, just don't watch this because it moves at a very sedate pace, but I personally think you'll be missing out. You'll likely either love it or you'll loathe it, but at least it will make an impression.

My kudos to M. Night Shyamalan for proving the consistency of his moviemaking abilities. "Unbreakable" is a movie that is rich in both technical brilliance as well as script quality.

First, let me get my one objection for the movie off my chest. The ending could have been done better. The majority of the length of "Unbreakable" does an excellent job of building suspense, with the wonderfully muted, melancholy acting adding depth and tension to the plot. My problem is that it fails to live up to its own expectations; the ending does not consummate entirely what I expected it to. Somehow, in a movie that took painstaking details to illustrate every step and glance, concluding it in the manner that it did felt almost blasphemous. Maybe in a nameless action thriller it could be passed off as mere hackery. But here, it seems strangely out of place, kind of an enigma in itself...

Now that the ugly part is over with, I feel almost obligated to sing the praises of "Unbreakable". Shyamalan's prowess with photographic techniques and processes shows through in this, with rich reds and blacks given to scenes of moist emotion and colder colors dedicated to the bleak, uncaring (uncared for?) world. One technique I particularly liked was the manipulation of photographic mediums, some parts using crisp 35mm films and others using angry, shuttered magnetic (or 16mm?) film. In the end, it all worked very well, because each technique seemed to integrate seamlessly with the plot and mood (notice the confusion and panic at the very end?) "Traffic" is a good example of processing overdose. "Unbreakable", on the other hand, hones it perfectly. The lushness of this movie comes in close second to the wonderful eye candy of "American Beauty". I could watch it again easily... with the sound turned off!

On the more human side of the spectrum, the acting was wonderful. How nice it is to see Bruce Willis proving himself to be a true A-class actor! His unassuming and insecure behavior worked *perfectly* for this role. Samuel L. Jackson, like always, did a bang-up job with what the script gave him. Robin Wright and Spencer Clark's characters seemed a bit two dimensional, but they seemed to be minor roles compared to the prominence of Willis and Jackson's characters. A little character development would have been appreciated, but if the ending was a result of the time-constraint guillotine, then I would expect the developmental scenes to have gone too.

The thing that people seem to complain most about this movie is the plot. I like the premise. A little fantasy in our movies isn't such a bad thing once in a while, is it?

Interesting film and one of the greatest successes of the magnificent filmmaker Night Shyamalan . This intriguing picture with twist ending revolves around a security guard named David Dunn (Bruce Willis) who miraculously survives a catastrophic train crash outside Philadelphia . His marriage to Audrey (Robin Wright) is crumbling , and he's thinking of moving to New York . David learns something extraordinary about himself after a devastating accident . He formerly had a car accident that was a pivotal point in David and Audrey's relationship. He meets a strange man (Samuel L Jackson) with Osteogenesis Imperfecta , a real but rare disease . At the end takes place a confrontation against a violent delinquent , some camera shots show David in a hooded raincoat , which may be to imply that he's some sort of a caped crusader.

A suspense thriller with supernatural overtone full of intrigue , emotion , surprise and plot twists . Shyamalan came up with the idea for the film while filming ¨The Sixth Sense¨ ; of all the films he's made , this is Shyamalan's personal favorite and of course is set in Philadelphia , like most of his films . He is an avid comic book fan, which was made apparent in this film . As in comic books, the main characters have their identified color schemes , David's is green and Elijah's is purple , they show up in their clothes, the wallpaper and bed sheets in their houses, Elijah's note to David, and various personal items, among others. Several camera angles were chosen to simulate the comic book device of a frame around each scene . Excellent performances from the two main characters , M. Night Shyamalan always had Bruce Willis and Samuel L. Jackson in mind to play the roles of David Dunn and Elijah Price. Enjoyable support cast as Robin Wright , Spencer Clark , Eamonn Walker , Leslie Stefanson and Charlayne Woodard, who plays the mother to Samuel L. Jackson's character, is actually almost a full 5 years younger than her on screen son . And as usual director M. Night Shyamalan makes cameo appearances in his own movies, like Alfred Hitchcock, one of his favorite directors , this time as a Stadium drug dealer . Colorful and evocative cinematography by Eduardo Serra . Marvelous and thrilling musical score by James Newton Howard who always works with the director . Well produced and directed by Night Shyamalam , many of his films have car crashes playing pivotal roles and involve two ordinary individuals with extraordinary abilities or events happening to them , one of the people either has connections to a child or is a child, and the one connected to the child is always having marital difficulties . Night Shyalaman is an expert on fantastic films plenty of intelligence and thought-provoking issues as proved in ¨Sings¨, ¨The village¨ , ¨Lady in the water¨ , ¨¨The incident¨ with exception to flop titled ¨Airbender¨ . Rating : Better than average , worthwhile watching .

"Unbreakable" is an extremely well-crafted film. The acting is mostly terrific, with Bruce Willis cementing his position as almost the only actor who can convincingly fill a certain kind of role: an unpretentious, quiet, blue-collar man, no intellectual but also no fool, well-meaning but no saint. As in "The Sixth Sense", he is on quiet, controlled form here, but in this film he's more regularly the centre of attention, and he's sufficiently magnetic to carry it off. Samuel L. Jackson, the perfect Tarantino actor, also excels in a completely different, much more restrained aesthetic.

The production is in many ways as good as the performances: measured, pretty dour and unvarnished. Within individual scenes the writing is usually fine, and some of the staging is memorably done - although the director's obsession with precise storyboarding does yield a certain inertia, making this largely a film of fluent compositions rather than dramatic scenes. The trouble is that all this sophisticated film-making can't disguise the fundamental lack of intelligence behind it. It's not that the plot is silly or the idea self-evidently implausible -- that is very rarely a problem so long as the film is made with conviction -- it's just that the idea isn't illuminating, it doesn't tell us much about anyone or anything. Its impression of seriousness is bogus.

The family drama which occupies the foreground most of the time is in fact incredibly ordinary: if you imagine this story shorn of its fantastical elements, it would barely pass muster as a TV movie of the week; and (more damagingly) that family story is in no way enriched or even much affected by the journeys taken by Willis's and Jackson's characters. And I don't even think that this film tells us much about comic books or superhero origin stories -- certainly little that isn't squeezed into the opening couple of minutes of Ang Lee's "The Ice Storm" (itself no masterpiece). It's very strange to see so much professionalism and care in all departments lavished on such a thin, underwhelming, half-baked idea for a movie.

It seems this movie has taken a bit of heat, known by many as Shyamalan's "worst" film. It is often written off as slow moving, and the twist at the end as unoriginal and boring. I've heard people say the acting and camera work was awkward and stale and that the casting was poor. Ironically enough, as more people begin to dislike this movie, the more I seem to fall in love with it. This film has a lot of personal bearing with me, both as a student of psychology and a lover of movies and just plain art. I feel like I've taken this film under my wing during its times of criticism, and now I'd like to try and show everyone what exactly I love about it so much.

Shyamalan really showed a stroke of brilliance by getting Serra to be his cinematographer and to play around with the aestetics of the film. I don't know how or where Shyamalan is getting these guys for his movies, but I definitely love the style of each frame he shells out. Serra had been involved with predominately foreign films before Unbreakable. This was his first big American film, and I think you gotta give a little credit to Shyamalan for that. His unique and creative touch really added to the direction. In keeping with the "comic book" theme of the movie, you will notice that almost every shot is taken as if you are looking through or in between something. Like the squares of a comic strip. There is also a dark, slightly blue colored filter used throughout most of the film. This gives the movie a very bold, but eerie tone. Showing that the world can be a rough and scary place, but it can also be fought and overcome. It is evident that time and effort went into every shot. It may not slap many viewers in the face as brilliant, but it really strikes a chord with me.

As for the score, I am more than willing to argue that this is, hands down, James Newton Howard's best score of his very successful career. It is compelling and booming. It's very powerful, but not over-the-top and excessive. For anyone with the soundtrack, check out 'The Orange Man' and 'Visions'. These are two of the most powerful pieces of any film score around. And I stress the word "powerful". Yeah, he's no Hermann or Morricone, but the emotional weight and emotive power of his chords and his overall composition are just downright chilling.

The writing and the direction are just as captivating as the score. Almost every line of dialogue and every scene seems to be placed out on an island, alone so that everyone can stop and judge it. Some people might view this as cocky and/or boring direction, but I see it as daring and unique. Much of Shyamalan's writing is done that way. ('…I see dead people…' '...They call me Mr. Glass…' etc. etc.) Another aspect of the film that tickles my fancy is the underlying themes. I do believe, to a certain extent, that people do have somewhat supernatural powers at times. People have been known to make miracles and do unbelievable things. Maybe these things could be 'developed' in some way. These theories are, in a way, intertwined with some aspects of psychology, such as selective attention and self-actualization. If you care to discuss some of these ideas, let me know and I will relate them to the film through my eyes. In short, I do believe there is a superhero in everyone. It may not be through supernatural powers, but it may simply be through the act of reaching out to a person in need. Other themes of the movie, like how completely different people can always be connected in some way and how everyone has their vulnerabilities and weaknesses are intriguing, yet universal. From a psychological point of view, Shyamalan really gets inside the head of OI patients (osteogenesis imperfecta). He then brings this psyche to the next level with Jackson's character. Elijah, is very passionate but very tortured and evil. His interactions with Willis bring depth and focus to both the characters and the story. Certain scenes in the movie are really quite striking and powerful. The shots of Willis in his security poncho. The train station scene. Elijah's breathtaking fall on the stairs and many more speak so loudly to me and say so much in just a simple clip. For some reason this movie just speaks to me, like art. If anyone cares to discuss more about this film, that'd be cool. There is a lotta other cool stuff to talk about with this movie. Just thinking about it makes me want to watch it a few more times. It may not be the feel good film of the year, or the masterpiece that everyone was looking for, but it definitely sits well with me.

This is a much better film than I ever thought it would be, and intrigues me every time I watch it. Samuel L. Jackson's role is what mainly inspires me to watch this multiple times. His character is amazing and just leaves me shaking my head.

This is a pretty low-key movie with the other star, Bruce Willis, playing an extremely subdued role for him, almost too subdued. There are times in here when you keep waiting for him to say something, and he says nothing. Half the time he's barely audible.

But he and Jackson play off each other well, and this is very suspenseful film, even if a lot doesn't happen. To explain the story would almost ruin it, because it's preposterous. I'll just call an interesting fantasy-horror film with a little family story tied in with Willis' wife (Robin Wright) and young boy (Spencer Treat Clark).

"Unbreakable" is beautifully filmed, has very little profanity in it, and a strange, strange story with a great twist at the end....one of the best I've ever seen in a movie. This movie is done by the same man who did "The Sixth Sense," M. Night Shyamalan, so if you enjoyed that you probably would like this, too.....although it's so different I wouldn't want to predict who would like this film and who wouldn't. If you're open to try something different, give it a look.

Elijah Price (Samuel L. Jackson) was born with a rare disease that makes him very susceptible to bone fractures. To motivate him to not be afraid to go outdoors in fear of breaking a bone, his mother rewards Elijah with comic books when he does. As an adult he lives alone and becomes a comic book art dealer.

David Dunn (Bruce Willis) gave up a promising football career after a car accident he wasn't even injured in. He marries, has a son and works as a security guard. He begins to question his purpose in life after being the only person out of 131 people to survive a train accident. And then he meets Elijah.

This is a good vs. evil in the classic sense, and yes, there is a superhero, but not like you'd read about in the comics.

I guess I can't be too surprised with all the negative responses that Unbreakable is getting. These days, the masses don't appreciate a buildup of atmosphere, strong character interaction, and stories heavily centered on characters and their psychology. Unbreakable has all of these traits, and proves to be a superior movie to the Sixth Sense in my opinion. Too bad it's so underrated.

I've seen this movie several times, and I have never even gotten tired of it. It does deal with comic books, but approaches it with a level of sophistication and intellect never found before in comic book movies. The movie walks a very fine line between reality and the comic-book world, at the same time walking a very fine line in terms of audience perception. Some chalk it up to be a silly comic-book movie, others a brilliant comic-book movie. And yet, there are still others that maintain Unbreakable's comic book theme does not exactly make it a comic-book movie. It's more of a drama, just like the Sixth Sense was more of a drama than a horror movie. Both are excellent dramas, but Unbreakable was superior in every aspect.

I especially admired the camera movement, and the framing of certain scenes to bring to life an actual comic-book. I also admired how Unbreakable was very light on dialogue, making full use of subtle gestures, movements, and actions to represent the character's thoughts. The character's environment plays a similar role and certain colors are often brought up to represent distinct emotions and thoughts the character has.

In the end, there are a number of things in this movie that can cause people to quickly denounce the movie, but these are all dependent upon perspective, as there's nothing truly wrong with the movie. In fact, if viewed objectively and with an open mind, the viewer might be much more apppreciative of Unbreakable.

It's clear that many of the posters to this comments area were truly angered by the movie and did not think their thoughts through prior to writing their comments, which is a shame as Unbreakable truly deserves better. If M. Night Shyamalan's next movie is at least half as good as Unbreakable, I'll definitely be in line to buy a ticket.

M. Night Shyamalan followed up "The Sixth Sense" with the not-quite-as-great, but no less fascinating, "Unbreakable". Bruce Willis plays Philadelphia security guard David Dunn, who survives a train wreck that kills everyone else. After this, he meets Elijah Price (Samuel L. Jackson), who suffers from Osteogenesis Imperfecta, which causes his bones to break very easily. Elijah is convinced that David is as strong as the superheros in comic books. But what is there about either of these men that remains to be discovered? As in his previous movie, Shyamalan creates a bleak setting that may be about to undergo a mind-shattering change. This one isn't as good as "The Sixth Sense", but you will be shocked at the end just the same. Watch for Shyamalan as the man whom David investigates at the stadium.

M. Night Shyamalan seems to be proving himself quite the auteur. Unbreakable was the cinematic experience I had hoped it would be, especially after The Sixth Sense. A quiet sense of wonder permeated each and every scene, accomplished with some of the finest cinematography I've seen in the last couple of years. Director of Photography Eduardo Serra's execution is subtle, understated and absolutely beautiful.

Cinematography legend Greg Toland of Citizen Kane and The Grapes of Wrath fame would be proud of what this film accomplished artistically. I also couldn't help but notice all the long camera takes this film had, reminding me of a few Woody Allen films that let the actors act without the intrusion of the film making process, i.e.; getting a scene covered from multiple and sometimes meaningless camera angles just so the director and editor have something to work with in post production. The characters seem at times to be acting for the benefit of the others on screen rather than "us", the audience, lending a quality of voyeurism to quite a few scenes. The directors intent is quite clear to anyone wishing to delve a little bit deeper into the story and characters while appreciating how such a vision came to breath on film.

With regards to the story, Mr. Shyamalan and his crew have constructed something so rich in visual texture while managing to keep the story subdued and character development full of deep-seated anticipation. Every plot point came perfectly without any extra connotations that usually creep into a story such as this (super heroes?). Without any melodrama both Bruce Willis and Samuel L. Jackson give very authentic performances that help the film keep its "Any Town USA" and "Average Joe Six-pack" feel very much alive.

By virtue of ingenuity and most likely a meticulous preproduction period, Unbreakable manages to be a consummate clinic in directing, writing, acting, and cinematography. One of the best movies in the past decade.

Well, this is the 328th review on IMDB, so I'm probably not going to say anything that hasn't been said yet.

I will just say that, more than any other movie I can think of, I am absolutely shocked that this movie has a 7.7 rating and ANY positive reviews at all. In my opinion, this is indicative of the fact the movie going public no longer understands what makes a good film or even recognizes one when they see it. Unbreakable was an attempt at a two hour character study, primarily of two men. I'm guessing it was meant to be a character study because there isn't a plot or story line to speak of. This is fine, character studies can be interesting, unfortunately we are spoon fed little pieces of information in one scene, and then shown the effect of it in the very next, as if we were being spoon fed the dimensions of the characters.

For all the benefit of the doubt M. Night Shyamalan gave his audience in The Sixth Sense, he treats them like complete idiots in Unbreakable, making sure he drops a small foreshadowing to the audience before hitting them over the head with the actual event to make sure they understood. And even with this heavy handed approach, we ultimately end up with two people we don't care about swimming around in a thin story based on the incredible assumption that someone wouldn't realize that they had never been sick or injured in their entire life until it was pointed out to them.

In fact, the entire foundation of premises this movie is built upon is so fanciful and preposterous, that even a reasonable suspension of disbelief is impossible.

Lastly, the camera work, particularly the artsy shots, should LEND to the storytelling, not take away from it. Every time Shyamalan indulges in one of these sequences, he is not highlighting something important, he is reminding us we are only watching a movie. What he did so skillfully in The Sixth Sense comes across as random and forced in Unbreakable. Top this off with one of the most ridiculous scenes ever put on film in a serious movie (those who have seen it will probably know what I am talking about, those who don't heed my warning and go see it anyway, just watch for the scene with the kid and the gun), and you have a self-indulgent pile of trash unworthy of even going straight to video. I don't know if Shyamalan was rushed to get this out, or if he got Kevin Costner syndrome after the success of his first movie and decided that he could mail one in, but Unbreakable is Unthinkably bad. At the very very least, do yourself a favor and catch it for free on HBO or Showtime, or spend a buck and watch it in the dollar theatres, where it will be very soon I hope, making room for something more palatable.

A massive train crash outside Philadelphia kills 132 passengers and leaves only one survivor. The survivor, security guard David Dunn walks away completely unhurt from the accident. Some time later he is contacted by comic book collector Elijah Price who believes that comic books are merely exaggerated versions of truth and that some people are created weak like him while some are created strong in order to protect the weak. David develops his talents with the support of Price and his son Joseph and, despite his cynicism, starts to try to use his powers to help people on need.

The 6th sense was always going to be a hard show to follow up but Shyamalan has managed to make a film that is almost as clever, emotive, thoughtful and slow. It even manages to end with a twist that is almost as good as sixth sense's was. The story moves quite slowly, almost painfully at times, however I found this succeeded in making the film feel more thoughtful and less glamorous. The director even shots the train crash in a very low key manner, as if to make the point that the film isn't about cheap spectacle or visual thrills. Instead we follow David as he finds his abilities and gradually accepts them, all this side is fascinating although some of the side stories are a little dragged out. The twist is only the icing on the cake and if you're into the characters the way I was then it is really impacting. One bit of advice - don't think about it or try to work it out. Thinking about the twist will stop you enjoying the main story and will spoil the film for yourself.

Willis is excellent - he doesn't set the world on fire, but he does a very low-key performance as a common man confronted with so much potential responsibility. He doesn't ham it up but you know that there's things going on inside his head that reflect on his face. Jackson is also really good - he maybe plays it a little too weird and should have been a bit more of a geek rather than an uptight art dealer sort. Willis and Jackson should keep making films together from now on, cause even there worst collaboration so far has still been good - Pulp Fiction, Unbreakable, Die Hard With a Vengeance - it seems to be a winning partnership (Loaded Weapon 1 doesn't count as Willis is only in it for 5 seconds!). A surprise addition to the cast is Eamonn Walker as Dr Mathison, it's a small role but he is a fine actor and deserves to be seen in big films (check him out in HBO's Oz for a real show of his abilities).

Overall it's very slow and may frustrate some people, but if you got the 6th sense then you'll probably get this. The story is moving and thoughtful and the final scene is merely the icing on a very fine cake.

When I first watched "Unbreakable", upon its release in theaters in the year 2000, I thought it was a boring and overrated film. Now that I watched it again in 2020, I still think it is a boring and overrated film, but at least now I can easily bring myself to write a handful of positive comments about it as well. Quite a lot of things can change in 20 years' time, that's certain. For starters, M. Night Shyamalan hasn't made anything but rubbish after "Unbreakable", and continued to do so until the fairly successful "Split" in 2016, so it's a lot easier to label this one as of his finest accomplishments. More importantly, over the course of two decades, the film grew out to become somewhat of a unique trendsetter and simultaneously a type of underdog in its own sub-genre. Whether or not he intended for it to be one, "Unbreakable" sort of is a superhero movie. There have been dozens (far too many, in fact) superhero movies in the past twenty years, but in 2000 the concept was still fairly unique, especially considering the protagonist in "Unbreakable" - David Dunn - is a reluctant and highly atypical kind of superhero.

Yours truly keeps on nagging that M. Night Shyamalan stole the basic concept for this film from the relatively obscure horror gems "The Survivor" and "Sole Survivor". True, both films came first with the idea of one single person walking away unharmed from a major disaster that killed hundreds of people, but "Unbreakable" admittedly is quite original in terms of linking it to superhero powers. After he miraculous survived a train accident that killed all other 300 passengers, Philadelphia security agent David Dunn is stalked and harassed by gallery owner and comic book fanatic Elijah Price. For you see, ever since birth, Price suffers from a physical condition that makes his bones extremely breakable, and he developed a theory that David Dunn must be his counterpart at the other side of the spectrum; - namely someone unbreakable. Why is this interesting? To be entirely honest, I still don't know, and this immediately leads us to what is still the bottom line: "Unbreakable" is a mainly boring and uninvolving film. The ideas are good and the integer performances (notably from Willis and Wright-Penn) are solid, but the slow pacing is intolerable and the "big revelation" at the end is quite "meh".

The final plot twist in "The Sixth Sense" made me wonder whether its director could repeat such a stunt, in "Unbreakable". Force us to follow the path he wants us to take, by telling his story, slowly, subtly leading us. Make us start to believe we know what will happen next, make us love the characters, then make us *want* things to happen next. Yes, tonight when seeing "Unbreakable", all that happens, again. And then, exactly like in "The Sixth Sense", he pulls the carpet right from under us, in the final seconds of the movie takes away everything, every expectation, he first gave us. Many people will be so disappointed by this that they will end up hating the movie. So did I, for about five minutes. Now I know the movie will make me think, literally move my thoughts, for a long time after tonight. I want to see it again, right now. Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant. Hollywood has a new master storyteller. His name is Manoj Night Shyamalan.

I sometimes don't understand why people dare to say that M. Night Shyamalan is one of the best of todays directors. I'm not saying he isn't a good one, but what has he proved so far? He has only made six (!!!) movies. OK, some of them were great successes at the box office, but that still doesn't mean that you are a great director (I don't consider movies like for instance "Dumb and Dumber" as masterpieces either, even though they are very popular with a certain audience). And I don't mind admitting that he sure knows how to build up a certain mysterious atmosphere and frightening scenes. But saying that he's one of the greatest directors, just because of that, I will not. At least not until he has made another 15 or 20 great movies...

With "Unbreakable" he has kept one of his traditions alive. He has directed the movie, produced it, has played a little role in it and has written the script for it. This time the story is about an ordinary man who suddenly becomes very special. But the seemingly ordinary and perfectly normal security guard David Dunn is not only the sole survivor of a horrific train-crash that killed 131 people, he didn't even have a scratch on him afterwards. A little later, comic book specialist and art gallery owner Elijah Price, nicknamed "Mr. Glass" due to his more than fragile bones, contacts him to confront him with an incredible theory: he believes that Dunn is his exact opposite, that they both seem to be 'linked by a curve, but sitting on opposite ends'. He's convinced that comic books are what remains of an ancient system of storytelling, that the superheroes they are about, are based on real people and that Dunn is one of these people. At first Dunn doesn't believe him, but as he keeps thinking about it, he finds out that he has never ever been hurt or sick in his life, his physical strength is larger than normal and he has a skill which others don't...

Normally I'm not a fan of movies based on comic books, so I already immediately assumed that I wouldn't like this movie either, just because of the subject. But I'm wrong. This is actually a nice and mysterious thriller with an interesting story and some fine acting. Samuel L. Jackson is very good as Elijah Price, but I guess it is Bruce Willis who surprised me the most. I sure hope to see him more often in this kind of 'serious' roles, instead of in the role of some action hero... The entire movie looks more than OK and I admit that M. Night Shyamalan has done a nice job with it. I hope that he'll make a lot more movies like this one, because I really liked it. I give it a 7.5/10.

Willis finds out some strange things about himself after being the sole survivor in a train wreck. Jackson tells him he's special. Is he really?

Unbreakable really is an act 1 superhero story stretched to feature lenght (Night tells us in an interview). Genius. For once I believe Willis is the person on screen, not that he's playing Bruce Willis, the cool actor. Night uses colors (mostly blue, purple and green) and well chosen camera-angles as imagesystems (word is that the storyboard read like a comic). Most of them really work out well. I loved the slow pacing of the film. It really takes it time to tell us what's going on. As usual Shyamalan puts human drama first in his script. The first scene where Willis meets the woman in the train... You have to see the genius of it. In a few lines of dialog Shyamalan let's us discover the character Dunn.

Another reason why I love this film is because Shyamalan shows he has courage to make THIS after the enormous success of The Sixth Sense, which I think is inferior to this film. I just know the studio execs where pushing for something more tangible than this, but he chose this instead. A homage to comic books. And it works! BEAUTIFUL!!

For me, The Sixth Sense is M Night Shyamalan's best film, but Unbreakable comes very, very close. Maybe it is not a movie for everybody, due to some parts dragging and rambling on just a tad, but it is a thoughtful, moving and compelling film.

It is a very well made film with beautiful, brooding cinematography and striking scenery. Unbreakable also features my personal favourite James Newton Howard score for any of his collaborations with Shyamalan, it is so gorgeous and subtle. Even with the odd draggy moment, Unbreakable does have a very enthralling story that resonated with me a lot. Like The Sixth Sense, it deals with the supernatural genre but takes it to a thought-provoking and surreal level.

The pace is measured, and for the most part it works. The script is thoughtfully written as well, the characters are interesting(I don't think Willis has had a more involving character than the one he has here) and Shyamalan's confidence and assurance further adds to the many impressive things about Unbreakable. Bruce Willis and Samuel L.Jackson are both fantastic, and one wonders why they didn't do more together.

Some have been dismissive of the ending, I actually thought it was fine, though I was underwhelmed by it on my first viewing a few years back. I did say before that The Sixth Sense's ending was the only one of a Shyamalan film that worked, after re-watching Unbreakable I take that back. I still think though the others were either needlessly melodramatic(Signs), laughable(The Village) or both(The Happening). All in all, a great film and one of Shyamalan's better ones. 9/10 Bethany Cox

Everyone wanted to love wunderkind M. Night Shyamalan's follow up to his break out hit "The Sixth Sense," but in only his second feature, the trappings that have since gone on to utterly ruin his films and his reputation were already beginning to wear thin.

Those trappings include lugubrious pacing; gray, dour production design; a tone almost silly in its degree of solemnity; and a "twist" ending that feels forced and anticlimactic.

I've caught "Unbreakable" on T.V. once or twice since seeing it in theatres back in 2000, and while it's not a terrible movie, it's a perfect one to have in the background if you want to take a nap.

Grade: B-