What gets me is M. Night is clearly talented and creative and original in many ways. It's a shame the he continues to pump out crap. I haven't seen this movie so I can't judge, but I don't understand how that happens.
I don't know if this is the case with Shyamalan, but I'd imagine as you grow more popular and well-respected as a director you gain a degree of independence from studio interference that you wouldn't have enjoyed before. Many times the studio can interfere negatively in a production, but other times they may curb the director's own bad choices and tendencies.
I actually think he's very good as a director at setting a mood and building suspense, he just needs a "no man" at his side at all times to prevent him from writing himself into the script as a writer who saves the world or to point out glaring flaws in story logic like the fact that aliens who are allergic to water probably aren't going to visit a planet covered in it whilst announcing their presence beforehand despite having cloaking devices (to name just two of the countless flaws in 'Signs,' which I still liked in spite of that).
Even in his worst movies there are some genuinely scary and creepy parts: the grassy-pancake-wolf-thingies in 'Lady in the Water' were kind of freaky despite being ridiculous, and the mass suicides in 'The Happening' were creepy as hell until you find out it was an attack by environmentally conscious greenery. So, I don't think directing a compelling or frightening scene is his problem. He just needs a strong filmmaking partner to work with him from start to finish, I think.