I love it. And in the spirit of all movies Shyamalan, I'll keep mum about the plot.

I loved the pace, the control, and the development of how the plot unfolded. It had a whodunnit feel of a mystery that is carefully revealed layer by layer. The ensemble cast and characters were fantastic, with each character possessing usefulness to the story and to peer characters, and their eccentricities make them a joy to watch. You have the Korean mother and daughter, the Vietnam Vet, a father and son, a new neighbour, a group of cock-talkers, a guy who works out only his right side, and so on. Although most of them are one- dimensional, they are no less than endearing in their own way, like those in Cocoon or Batteries Not Included.

I love the superb acting by the main leads of Paul Giamatti, who's fast becoming one of my favourite character actors, and in here, provided his character Cleveland Heep with much emotional baggage, pain and that almost natural stammer when nervous, and Bryce Dallas Howard, her Lady in the Water, name Story, is so beautiful, yet so enchantingly vulnerable. Both anchor this movie well and brought about believable character development, or in the case of Story, that oracle air of wisdom, wit and fear of the unknown.

I love the special effects, done no less by Industrial Light and Magic. They're a pretty sight, even though some scenes were dark, literally and figuratively. Cinematography was done by Christopher Doyle, so those in Asia should already well be aware what he's capable of.

There's a major departure from his previous films, which I think is probably good to keep things refreshing for the moment. Some points and scenes in the movie are so deceptively simple that you will almost guess the outcome before the next scene transition. The movie ended the way it should, instead of relying on the "next big gimmick". And probably bad news of those who loathe directors cameo-ing in the own movies, well, this time round, Shyamalan has quite a significant role for himself.

And I know why many critics out there didn't give this movie the rating it deserves. They are surprised at Shyamalan's audacity in taking a huge swipe at critics in general, since they have been highly critical of almost all his past works. It's an obvious no-holds-barred jibe at their anal characters of being high and mighty and of imposing their thoughts and opinions on others, when little do they know that their opinions mean squat most of the time. There's another cheeky reference too at romances in the rain, which I thought perhaps cinematographer Doyle would have found it amusing given his work on Wong Kar-wai's In the Mood for Love and 2046 (citing these 2 as I've recently watched the former).

But those aside, thank you M Night, for sharing with us a wonderful bedtime story, which I think will be repeated at bedtime to many children around the world. It's beautiful, simple, easy to grasp, and allows for good shuteye fantasy.

Just for the record, I am not a Shyamalan detractor, nor am I a fan. I loved The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, and there were good things about Signs and The Village, even if the films were deeply flawed. It's just that to me after The Village, the rest of Shyamalan's resume ranged to strange to dire. Whether I loved his first couple of films and didn't care/hate the rest has nothing to do with racism, contrary to some of the threads I've come across on his message board.

It's just that it is sad that such a promising director, who showed that he could tell a story effectively had either become sloppy or had tried to do many things at once and consequently the respective film buckled(which was the case with The Village). Lady in the Water is not Shyamalan's worst, for me that's The Happening with The Last Airbender not far off, but having seen all his films I do think it is his strangest.

Lady in the Water does have its good things though. The score is suitably haunting, Paul Giamatti is a wonderful actor and while deserving of a stronger character and less contrived script he does give his all into the performance and it shows. But the best thing about Lady in the Water was the beautifully done animated prologue.

However, that is all the praise I can give. The rest of the acting is either unimpressive or awful. Bryce Dallas Howard was fantastic in The Village and she is good as an actress, but while like Giamatti she tries her best her character is nowhere near as poignant or as interesting as that of hers in The Village. Jeffrey Wright and Bob Babalan are wasted, and Shyamalan himself makes an appearance that feels very thrown in and at the end of the day is just a form of annoyance.

Scripting-wise Lady in the Water all feels very contrived and overly-silly, the pacing becomes increasingly sluggish in the second half which further suffers from trying to do too much and the characters consist of either stereotypes(the film critic tenant, the kid who could decipher codes from cereal packets and the philosopher of future importance) or fantasy "mythological" clichés with grass-haired werewolves for scrunts and twig monkeys for the tarturic that have no depth to them. The scenery and lighting are okay if not exactly dynamic but the camera angles look slip-shod and lazy, with over-use of half-face shots and focusing on nothing.

But it is the story that sinks Lady in the Water. The premise was actually interesting, but the execution feels very muddled. I didn't find anything interesting about the nymph's story, it suffers from trying to cram too much and the mythological characters are rather daft. After watching the film, I was saddened at how the director of a thought-provoking and atmospheric movie like The Sixth Sense could've gone to a artificial and self-indulgent movie like this one. By all means, Shyamalan has done worse, but this is definitely not his finest hour. 3/10 Bethany Cox

A very silly film, and one which displays M. Night Shyamalan at his worst: a director seemingly incapable of pacing and tone. This one's from the heart, an original fairy story told to one of his kids and adapted into an adult movie. While I admire Shyamalan's intentions, the result is an inexcusably bad film, one made all the more frustrating that it starts out kind of good.

The first hour or so was mildly entertaining, boasting an excellent and rare leading performance from Paul Giamatti (who holds everything together) as a handyman who discovers a nymph floating in his apartment block's swimming pool. So far so unusual, but around the hour mark the film totally falls apart. Shyamalan was fine at setting up his premise, but he has no idea what to do with it once he gets there, and as a result the movie just kind of plods along until an entirely forgettable ending.

Aside from Giamatti, along with brief turns from Jeffrey Wright and Freddy Rodriguez, the cast is disappointing. Shyamalan himself has a supporting role and is no actor, so it's kind of embarrassing to have him casting himself in this when somebody decent could have taken the part. The real-world interaction isn't bad, but the fairy tale type stuff that goes on is embarrassingly twee and underwritten, with ridiculous names for characters and creatures. You get the idea that Shyamalan thought he was really good for thinking this stuff up, but the truth is it's been done a hundred times better before and this turns out to be his worst film yet.