Unbreakable
User Score
7.1 out of 10

Generally favorable reviews- based on 103 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 82 out of 103
  2. Mixed: 6 out of 103
  3. Negative: 15 out of 103

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. DanF.
    Feb 23, 2005
    0
    After watching this movie I was at a lose for words. M. Night Shymalan should be crucified. This movie is definitly the skid mark on bruce willis and anyone else involved in the movies' career. This movie made me want to kill myself, it was only about an hour and a half long but it felt like an eternity in hell.
  2. UncleMunkle
    Jan 9, 2003
    1
    zzzzz, zzzzz, snore.... Is it over? Wha' happen? Huh? Duh, ok. Whatever. zzzzz,zzzzz, snore...
  3. Ben
    Aug 27, 2001
    0
    They should have called this film Unwatchable. My sixth sense tells me, "hated it."
  4. Dunebuggy
    Aug 5, 2004
    2
    This movie took itself way too seriously.
  5. KenG.
    Aug 15, 2006
    3
    Intriguing concept, which was really poorly handled.
  6. Sasha
    Jun 20, 2007
    0
    Unbreakable It is hard to review this film as a motion picture, because it feels more like TV soap opera on mute. The 1 hour and 47 minutes of boring, predictable and foolish sequences of silence in between unbelievably repetitive dialogue easily make this movie one of the most roll-your-eyes producing films I have ever gone threw. Bruce Willis plays the dull and slow-moving David Dunn, a lone and unharmed train wreak survivor who discovers that he is unable to sustain injury. Meanwhile, the emotionally unstable and easily injured Samuel L. Jackson plays the obviously brilliant yet deceiving psycho who thinks comic book heroes walk the earth. The movie unravels from somewhat interesting to boring. It takes most of the movie for what is at hand not to be dealt with, and you find yourself staring at the mysterious situation put forwards simply not breaking through with a much needed common thriller plot twist or breaking point. This is of course, until towards the very end. One central problem with the movie is that it is highly unlikely that one man would go his entire life without tripping or falling and wondering why there was no pain or injury. His mother would not wonder why he never got Chicken Pox? His father would never wonder why his knee did not bleed when he fell on it extremely hard during some catch? His wife would not wonder why when he slipped in the shower and smashed his head on the floor that he did not feel any pain? It just seems so unbelievably silly and impossible for this to happen and for nothing to be realized until a frickin train accident at the age of 40. The movie is essentially unrealistic beyond obvious proportions. The acting performances are easy and have no depth due to the pathetic script handed to the actors only to damage there impressive careers. Put simply, this movie is bad. If you wish to take my advice, avoid it by any means… Expand
  7. Mr.R
    Jul 27, 2001
    0
    A ponderously slow film with a laughable, incredulous ending that neatly wraps up nothing. Which film is the real work of Shaylaman? I hope not this one.
  8. Maxine
    Jul 30, 2001
    3
    All I can say is what a freaky movie!
  9. Sasha
    Jun 21, 2007
    1
    Unbreakable It is hard to review this film as a motion picture, because it feels more like TV soap opera on mute. The 1 hour and 47 minutes of boring, predictable and foolish sequences of silence in between unbelievably repetitive dialogue easily make this movie one of the most roll-your-eyes producing films I have ever gone threw. Bruce Willis plays the dull and slow-moving David Dunn, a lone and unharmed train wreak survivor who discovers that he is unable to sustain injury. Meanwhile, the emotionally unstable and easily injured Samuel L. Jackson plays the obviously brilliant yet deceiving psycho who thinks comic book heroes walk the earth. The movie unravels from somewhat interesting to boring. It takes most of the movie for what is at hand not to be dealt with, and you find yourself staring at the mysterious situation put forwards simply not breaking through with a much needed common thriller plot twist or breaking point. This is of course, until towards the very end. One central problem with the movie is that it is highly unlikely that one man would go his entire life without tripping or falling and wondering why there was no pain or injury. His mother would not wonder why he never got Chicken Pox? His father would never wonder why his knee did not bleed when he fell on it extremely hard during some catch? His wife would not wonder why when he slipped in the shower and smashed his head on the floor that he did not feel any pain? It just seems so unbelievably silly and impossible for this to happen and for nothing to be realized until a frickin train accident at the age of 40. The movie is essentially unrealistic beyond obvious proportions. The acting performances are easy and have no depth due to the pathetic script handed to the actors only to damage there impressive careers. Put simply, this movie is bad. If you wish to take my advice, avoid it by any means… Expand
  10. JohnC.
    Jan 23, 2002
    0
    PONDEROUSLY slow and overwrought! The movie plays like a WAY overstylized comicbook origin story on Prozak! The audience is given glimpse after glimpse into the glory of something that is perhaps just a bit better than human - but instead of exploring the meaning of Willis' new found abilities or perhaps giving the audience a meaningful demonstration; we are subjected to lonnggg, slowww interludes of angst and drama. This story is a posterchild for good editing and directorial focus!… Expand
  11. [Anonymous]
    Jan 12, 2005
    1
    This movie was one of the WORST movies i have ever seen. This movie made me question M Night Shyamalan and his writing skills.

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
62 out of 100

Generally favorable reviews - based on 31 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 31
  2. Mixed: 11 out of 31
  3. Negative: 2 out of 31
  1. San Francisco Chronicle
    Reviewed by: Edward Guthmann
    50
    Even the surprise ending arrives with a thud and makes us wonder why Shyamalan didn't try something new instead of recycling his "Sixth Sense" recipe.
    Read full review
  2. TV Guide
    Reviewed by: Maitland McDonagh
    40
    A gloomy, preposterous psychological thriller.
    Read full review
  3. Chicago Sun-Times
    Reviewed by: Roger Ebert
    75
    Even if the ending doesn't entirely succeed, it doesn't cheat, and it comes at the end of an uncommonly absorbing movie.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »