Glass (2019) Poster


User Reviews

Review this title
1,485 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Give James McAvoy every acting award of 2019
Chiller718 January 2019
This is a thinking person's movie. It's largely dialogue heavy and not afraid to take its time. It's a movie that takes itself seriously. It's the kind of smart movie that confuses critics who prefer light easy-to-digest popcorn entertainment. When it shifts into full thriller or action mode, brace yourself, because it gets totally intense.

Director Shyamalan doesn't get much respect from the critics, but screw the critics, he did brilliantly here from writing to directing.

And James McAvoy deserves every acting award for 2019. Might as well just give him all of them now, best actor, best actress, best child actor, etc., all of them, because no one's topping this performance.

And about the action, I saw director Shyamalan talking in an interview about how he's mainly interested in drama and that action is not his strong point, but he was really downplaying his handling of the action, because the fight scenes here are legitimately awesome. Glass thankfully features none of the shaky rapid-editing style that plagues so many other action movies. It is all well shot, so you'll have no trouble following the action. We even see lots of unusually artistic camera shots during the action, such as showing long close up shots of people's faces while they're in the middle of fighting. My favorite was a long held shot from the point of view of being inside a van while we're seeing a fight happening outside, as the combatants are circling around and slamming into the van. That was just plain cool, the kind of shot that's just mind-boggling to think about how they managed to pull it off.

And don't trust the rotten critics. Just don't. They're so worthless, those critics. They're wrong about almost every movie these days. Glass just continues the critics' rotten streak of being totally out of touch with what's really good or bad.
1,050 out of 1,362 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Beautifully weird
breneff11 January 2019
Let me start by saying the critics are just flat out WRONG with this one. And this is coming from a guy who has only enjoyed about half of this guys movies. If you are going in their to watch a superhero movie check yourself at the door. This is a dark twisted psychological horror with a chaotic like thread that reminds you of noir films of the past. It's like a Picasso painting in movie form. The ending is divisive and risky, which I love! It's not for everybody, but I think that's why I loved this movie.
937 out of 1,225 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Not the Avengers
gianthaole18 January 2019
Ok, my wife and I just got back from opening night of Glass. We talked about the movie from the end of the movie all the way back home. WOW!!!! We had a lot to talk about. As my title reads this is not an Avengers movie. Do not expect non-stop action. Expect action, story, details, dialogue, emotion, more story, and then some more action. This is a great movie to start off 2019 and James McAvoy deserves an Oscar. Like any M. Night movie you will either love it or hate it. My wife and I LOVED IT!!!!
502 out of 685 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
The conclusion of a perfect trilogy
Eumenides_025 January 2019
Warning: Spoilers
My trusty sidekick IMDB tells me that the last time I bothered to write a review in this website was way back in 2013.

Never in my wildest dreams did I see myself coming back, let alone to enthuse over an M. Night Shyamalan movie. Sure, I liked The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, but the good bits in Signs didn't hide an obvious decline. For the next years I only heard about Shyamalan whenever a friend griped about another dud; his output seemed to be getting progressively worse.

I was so uninterested in Shyamalan's movies I only crossed paths with them whenever Honest Trailers released another mockery. And so it was that Split flew under my radar - I now regret I didn't pay money to watch it on the big screen - until I clicked on its Honest Trailer back in 2018, expecting another belly of laughs... and for once they actually praised it. A lot. That was unexpected. More importantly, I learned it was an Unbreakable sequel. What?

Of course I knew the rumors from yore that Unbreakable was intended as a trilogy; but as the years went on and nothing happened, I figured the projected had been abandoned. And a good thing too because Unbreakable was still the best superhero movie ever made after The Incredibles, and it didn't need to be ruined by Shyamalan's decline. But Split seemed interesting and meanwhile the trailers for Glass were coming out, and they were so exciting I had to watch them for closure.

So I watched Split and it was as if Shyamalan had made a smooth transition from Unbreakable to it; it's as if he hadn't made anything else in between. Here was the inventive, sensitive, spiritual filmmaker I remember admiring all the way back in 2000. Here was another one of his beautiful, slow dramas about ordinary people discovering extraordinary gifts and learning to cope with them. And it was packaged as a tense thriller about a kidnapped girl trying to escape from a serial killer with multiple personalities who discovers he's more than human, like David Dunn. It was also an emotional story about finding the courage to face up to our inner demons. Thinking about it now, if I didn't cry at Split's beautiful ending, it's probably because I was subconsciously saving them for Glass.

Ah, Glass. A movie so reviled by critics you'll think it was directed by Tommy Wiseau. I don't understand what happened, I don't know what they expected, and what they saw. For my part, I saw the fitful ending to what is now one of the rare perfect movie trilogies.

Glass builds on the previous movies and maintains its tone and pace. By tone I mean it's a low-key superhero movie grounded on realism. Like in hard sci-fi novels, frequently the characters will discuss plausible theories for feats and powers that seem extraordinary. By pace I mean it's mostly a character drama spiced with tense situations and spliced with trappings from horror, sci-fi, mystery, and thriller.

Were people really expecting a 2-hour showdown between David and The Beast? On Titan, perhaps? When were Split and Unbreakable action movies? Strange thing to expect from the sequel to a movie whose most iconic scene consists of a man standing in a train station being touched by strangers.

Glass is a slow burner like its predecessors. By now we've had the characters' origin stories; they've accepted their roles as heroes and villains. We know who they are; we've grown to love them. The focus, then, is no longer on David and Kevin but on Elijah. His goal has always been to show the world that superhumans exist, in order to find a role in the world for himself, so he won't feel like a mistake anymore. As such the movie revolves around his plan to escape from a mental facility where all three are being held. Of course they'd end up there, because that's where people go who claim to be superhuman. They may believe in their powers, but the rest of the world doesn't. This is consistent with the rules Shyamalan has been playing with from the start. And even the reasons for this realistic disbelief get a twist in the end.

Basically, this movie focuses on Elijah's transformation into Mister Glass, a genius supervillain; and since he's the cerebral villain you shouldn't expect action but displays of genius. And that genius is shown in the way he plots the escape and also in the third twist ending. (By my count the movie has 3 twists in a row.) Those who want to see David fighting The Beast - that's what I wanted - won't be disappointed. There are two well-directed, fluid fight scenes that seem like fossil records in this age of shaky cam and fast-cut editing. But this is Mister Glass' movie and it's all about his uber-plan; in the end, David and Kevin are just pawns in his plan to justify his existence to himself.

While the plot unfolds towards its gut-wrenching climax, Shyamalan elevates the most mundane scene with odd angles, the use of color, and games of light and shadow. He imbues the movie with an atmosphere of enigmatic dread. I missed James Newton Howard's score; although West Dylan Thordson composed some very good tracks, and Shyamalan uses them to add tension and sentiment to the scenes, I wish I had heard more of the original score. Although Bruce Willis doesn't have a meaty role, nobody can complain about the performances by Samuel Jackson and James McAvoy. And then there were the little things I only picked up on the way home: the leitmotif of the train station used in the three movies. The beautiful symmetry of the ending, with Mister Glass not just bringing David and Kevin together, but also three strangers who loved those three extraordinary beings to honor them. The more I think about the movie, the more I marvel at its intricacy.

I didn't feel bored for a moment. Before I knew it, the climax was on. And this is where many people say the movie was ruined. I think the fury viewers are showing is a sign that Shyamalan imparted these characters with life and so they're real to a lot of people. I wish their fates had been different. But I don't begrudge the decision nor do I think the execution was flawed. Some seem to think David deserved a more dignified ending. As someone who's been reading superhero comics since the age of 9, I sympathize with that; I personally love a heroic sacrifice, going out in a blaze of glory, one outnumbered guy holding off the line. That never fails to get me. But once again, reality-grounded rules apply. The truth is many good, heroic people don't receive a dignified ending; many, like Dunn, never even receive any recognition for their deeds.

I understand that the climax is upsetting in an industry where superheroes "die" turned into dust after a magic finger snap; and stay "dead" while trailers announce one of the "dead" heroes' is not too "dead" that he can't star in another money-grabbing movie, around the same time another movie will officially undo all the "dead" heroes' deaths because they also need to star in some more movies, whether they're alive or "dead" - we can't let Disney's shareholders be kept away from money they make exploiting true creators like Jack Kirby and Jim Starlin. I can understand why so many are upset in a world where people have been trained to treat superheroes as their indestructible, unkillable, cool-one-liners-spouting virtual best friends who'll never abandon them, so long as they keep buying tickets. I mean, what kind of sadistic imbecile would kill his cash cows? Like I said, it's a testament to Shyamalan's ability to impart real life to his creations. It's funny, I've been reading DC and Marvel's superheroes for longer than I've known David Dunn; I've spent thousands of hours with them, much more than I ever did with him; I only saw Split last week. And yet nothing in those superficial, pandering, glib adaptations of my favorite superheroes has ever elicited from me the bliss I felt watching Glass. The kind of bliss I only get from well-written, well-acted, well-made human drama. I never imagined that I'd leave a theater room in 2019 crying from a M. Night Shyamalan movie.

What's sadder, though, is that the critics will frighten viewers away from a movie that's better than 90% of what comes out every Summer. In a world where any crappy, soulless, mindless blockbuster makes 1 billion dollars easy, this movie probably won't even make it to 300 million. Split didn't and had better reviews. And so we'll continue to get bad thrillers, action and superhero movies full of CGI, pointless explosions, and boring, by-the-numbers, sequel-hinting storytelling everyone wants - and cynical shareholders will continue to get richer while creative filmmakers see their opportunities dwindle. Funny, even in that Glass was grounded on reality: in the end the faceless villains we never suspected existed, chilling out in elitist restaurants we can't get in, always win. Curiously, that's one of the messages in the movie: the gifted are always being held back, overshadowed by the uncreative, those who enforce normalcy. But as the ending shows, the creative ones always find a way to outsmart the bureaucrats of normalcy. I hope that with time more people will come to know the truth that the critics have been hiding.
218 out of 294 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
The critics got it wrong
bellalikespink13 January 2019
This movie exceeded my expectations! It was visually stunning, entertaining, and the storyline was incredible! I could not have predicted the ending, I was so surprised!! Totally recommend.
524 out of 761 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
If you liked Unbrakable and Split, you will enjoy this one too
arabnikita16 January 2019
This is not a superhero movie or an action packed sci-fi flick, this is a psychological thriller with people having supernatural abilities...or do they really have these abilities and are they really supernatural?? Just like in Unbreakable and Split, you will have your doubts and theories but in the end it all ends up going in another direction and then another one.

M. Night Shyamalan tries his best to keep the movie closer to real life than to fiction by essentially eliminating special effects or any kind of CGI. Keeping a steady pace from the opening scenes until the credits, he fills the movie with clever dialogues that bridge the gap between the three movies and adds gritty action to keep the audience engaged. Overall, this fuses into a picture with a 2000s Old School feel about it that cant be seen in too many movies nowadays.

James McAvoy is absolutely incredible in his transitioning between different personalities which happens a lot more than in Split. Sarah Paulson brings a new character and Sam Jackson with Bruce step right back into their old shoes. Cinematography is solid with an effective use of colors and in the music department Shyamalan took a page out of Nolan's last movie. M. Night is a 50/50 director and this movie lands on the good side with a couple of twists at the end that make you wonder if this is the end or just the beginning.

Watch both Unbreakable and Split and if you enjoy them then go for this one. The movie wont make sense if you dont see the previous two.

movies.shmovies on instagram
327 out of 469 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Underrated by the Critics, but Too Talky & a Little Bit Messy
Yee_Reviews17 January 2019
Good: The acting across the board from the main cast: James McAvoy, Samuel L. Jackson, and Bruce Willis are great. However, like in "Split" McAvoy is definitely the standout portraying so many personalities one after the other is fascinating to watch. Although the setup is great and intriguing, it feels glossed over to get to the main plot. Shyamalan's direction with camera angles and shots also standout and help capture the scenes along with the color scheme as seen in the other movies. I appreciate the overall theme of the movie and the message Shymalan is trying to tell, but suffers in the end and pacing...

Bad: As a film that started off with "Unbreakable" and supposed to be the long awaited sequel to it, Bruce Willis' character does not have much depth and is more on the sidelines. There is a lot of talking and some parts definitely drag making the film feel longer than it actually is, however even with this not much seems to develop and happen.

Overall: The film is getting bashed way too hard by the critics, but overrated by the audience. The film's tone is more like "Unbreakable" than "Split" with more talking and a few action scenes here and there.

297 out of 447 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Im Angry!.. With the critics
balthier0316 January 2019
This is the first time that i posted a review in a while, its just because I'm so angry with the critics, I cant stand them to bringing down Shyamalan like this, giving the film a bad word of mouth. This completes his comeback, Critics are crazy giving this even 5/10. I get that the twist won't appeal to some. but for me its a very smart and realistic way to end the series, very grounded ending.

Loved Bruce's David Dunn as always. but Mcavoy Just wow! what a performance, he stole the movie with his performance, the only thing I can say bad about this film is the second act might be dragging or slow but it works (just like unbreakable). then it Explodes on the final act. One of the best trilogy in my list.

'm angry with the criitcs but i liked that cuz of them I went with low expectations then i went out of the cinema thinkin are the critics crazy? Loved the ending very satisfied with the ending.

Go watch if for yourself and decide. II'll give you guys a fact about this film, THE CRITICS ARE F*ing WRONG!!!

10/10 FOR ME!

Welcome back Shyamalan!
405 out of 619 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Keep an open mind - and prepare for it to be blown away!
saarvardi15 January 2019
Wow, Glass actually got me writing a review after many years of absence. So I'll try and keep it short - this movie is most logical and beautiful continuation of the characters and stories we first met in Unbreakable and Split. James McAvoy is a true act of nature, as is Samuel Jackson, and I really loved the fact that Spencer Treat Clark reprised his role as Wilis's son Joseph, 19 years after first portraying him as a kid. It just adds that much authenticity to the story.

The twsts hit hard and fast during the third act, and knowing Shyamalan you'll try to work things out as the movie progresses - only to find out you got duped by the Twist Master. However, unlike some of his previous signature twists, these one actually serve the plot and the characters, so when the credits roll it all just makes perfect sense and leaves you smiling and feeling content.
318 out of 485 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Left me feeling half empty
cricketbat18 January 2019
I was completely onboard with Glass for most of the movie, but then it decided to go off the rails. I was invested in the characters and was willing to overlook the clunky exposition and monologuing-until the finale. I feel like M. Night Shyamalan was so determined to surprise the audience that he forgot how to satisfactorily finish a story. To be honest, Glass left me feeling half empty about the whole trilogy.
390 out of 599 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Masterpiece on the inner nature of people
unbreakable197612 January 2019
Glass is truly a cinematic jewel, which closes the delicate and complex analysis begun by the two previous films.A journey to discover the inner strength (or weakness) that each of us has as a human being.Shyamalan directs this film, interpreted in an excellent way by all the protagonists, without smearing and will surely disappoint all those people who will go to the cinema with the hope of seeing a cinecomics or an action movie.Glass tackles the mystery of souls and does so in an intelligent and almost delicate way. A truly excellent product, Cinema for high and sensitive minds. Show to reflect on our existence using archetypes and almost alchemical references. Suffice it to think of the continuous and stressed reference to number 3 or the events of the Ulysses of the Odyssey of which the film is full of quotations from the attentive spectator.Bravo, Shyamalan. Thank you so much for this wonderful spiritual journey veered only apparently in the world of comics. Standing Ovation.
375 out of 581 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
1/2 Of It Was Good But Mostly Disappointing
MadMax271018 January 2019
Warning: Spoilers
This movie concludes a 19 year trilogy in a mediocre way. There's some good and a lot of bad. Great performances from the cast especially McAvoy carry this movie and make it watchable. Some scenes required him to switch from multiple personalities within seconds of each other. The action is also exciting when it is happening. The camera work is something that is spectacular to look at. The POV shots are immersive and there are some creative uses of color throughout. The first half was interesting and engaging which was good but then you get to the rest of the film.

The second half makes this movie end with a sense of betrayal as the entire buildup of the last 2 movies and the first half are ruined. The ending wastes a lot of potential that these movies have set up and trades it in for a conventional message to the viewers. Some of the scenes are laughable but not in the right way.

Overall, this movie was ok. It had some great moments but the ending ruins it. The movie has some nice references to the people who have seen unbreakable and split sprinkled in there. One of the twists is pretty good while the other just doesn't work.
264 out of 418 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Loved it until the end
sobelman-3840610 January 2019
This is coming from someone who has been looking forward to this movie for a long time. I thought the acting was fantastic, especially James McAvoy who plays all the personalities fantastically. Bruce Willis doesn't phone it in and actually does a good job. If you're expecting a superhero movie, you're not going to get one. This is most definitely and physcological thriller that happens to have superheroes. This film is filled with incredible memorable moments that you'll certainly remember walking out of the movie. However, the end will turn a lot of people off, as it goes in directions that are very divisive. If you go in with an open mind, I think you'll enjoy most of it.
234 out of 374 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
As the conclusion to this original superhero trilogy, Glass feels unfinished and empty.
LloydBayer18 January 2019
As with most of his films, Writer-Director M. Knight Shyamalan's widely appreciated trait is to pull the rug under our feet during the film's closing minute. Which is why we all thought Split was a psychological horror film until the last minute, where that final unbroken shot sweeps across a diner until it stops over Bruce Willis' David Dunn. That's when we realised we were watching the sequel to one of Shyamalan's best films - Unbreakable. When Spilt revealed that it existed in the same universe as Unbreakable, it instantly positioned those films as two-thirds of a trilogy. And almost immediately after, Shyamalan revealed that Glass would be the finale to an idea gestating for nearly 20 years. That itself sounds like a labour of love for Shyamalan who not only embraces but also defies popular comic book logic.

Picking up roughly a few weeks after the climactic events in the previous film, Glass has Willis' vigilante David Dunn, James McAvoy's deeply disturbed serial killer Kevin Crumb, and Samuel L Jackson's titular criminal mastermind assemble for a face to face showdown for the first time. You just have to wait for nearly the entire length of the film for that to happen. To get there, Shyamalan takes us through a long and elaborate setup where he's showing us one thing but secretly doing something else; His preferred modus operandi maybe, but this time employing the illusion of delusion. Which is where Sarah Paulson joins the story as a psychiatrist whose speciality is in debunking people deluded into thinking they are superhuman. Read that again. In other words, there may have been others who think they are superheroes. This is the single most commendable idea in the entirety of this trilogy. It simply means that unlike popular characters from the Marvel and DC comics, Shyamalan's superheroes are not from another planet, or a result of lab experiments gone wrong. It's an idea that has immense potential, not only for this film but also for any indie filmmaker who wants to tell a superhero story in the future. Shyamalan got this right, but only in theory.

The execution is a different story, and why Glass is a shattered mess. As much as Dunn, Crumb and Mr. Glass are fleshed out characters on their own, they are strangely incompatible together. It's as if Shyamalan has invested so much attention on their individual character development that he has overlooked the whole purpose of what they were meant to become. Instead, a lot of time is spent reintroducing the same characters again. That's an unforgivable mistake for the final episode in a trilogy. The passage of time is also another questionable flaw. Dunn is seen in his rain poncho from 19 years ago and he is helped by his son Joseph track down petty street criminals. If not for a fully grown Spencer Clark Treat as Joseph, you would think nothing has changed since the first film. On the other hand, McAvoy was praised for his outstanding versatility in Split. Shyamalan knows that and so gives us a triple dose of McAvoy cycling between Hedwig, Kevin, Barry, Dennis, Patricia and even more of growling and wall crawling from The Beast. The air of mystery and terror turns to repetition, which feels like a stall for time and a full hour before Jackson's catatonic Mr. Glass has anything to say. Have you ever seen a film where the notoriously verbose Samuel L Jackson does nothing but blink?

In time everything falls to pieces. The biggest problem with this film isn't how disjointed the narrative is, or the unnecessary recap of the previous two films at laborious pacing, or even the complicated attempt at another twist ending. The problem is that despite nearly 20 years in the making, Glass feels unfinished and empty. Akin to the concept in the film, it's like finding a solid gold bar and then throwing it out through a window.
249 out of 404 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Slow Movie In Malaysian Cinema This Year Goes To Glass ( Score 4.9/10 ⭐ )
ymyuseda23 January 2019
My God that psychologist was annoying !! Slow , mess and weak !! The acting by James Mcavoy was good but became way overdone !! I was waiting for this movie to end !! The movie was enough to make me falling asleep under air conditioning !!
174 out of 283 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
BiiivAL7 March 2019
This is a rare set of nonsense, pathos, pulled by the ears of plot twists and useless characters. With this cast, make a completely empty and meaningless film - we must still try.

"Give us your consent to the boy," says the heroine Sarah Paulson, after she tortures with water a citizen of the United States who was imprisoned in a hospital for the mentally ill without trial. That is, it is assumed that without his consent she will say "sorry, then we will not bother you anymore"? And this scene is the quintessence of all the stupidity, illogic and ill-considered film. There is a feeling that the script was written to him for the night on his knee. If it was at all: the dialogues are so bland that you fall asleep under them, the ending would be nice if there were not one and a half hours in front of her in front of her. Why, why, we were shown about five minor characters and in the end didn't really reveal any? Yes, and the central heroes got out like dusty toys from the old box, shook, broke, and thrown out. And we finished it all with a humanistic "believe in yourself!"

Believe in your health, Mr. Shyamalan, but do not forget to do your job somehow. Viewers need to pay extra money to watch this movie, and not vice versa.
106 out of 177 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Meh, disappointing as I expected more, much more.
TheTopDawgCritic16 January 2019
Not sure what's worse, this film or the fake 9-10/10 reviews.

Not what I expected - in a disappointing way. Then add all the ridiculous praising 10/10 reviews and it takes more away from any positive aspects this film had.

For starters, outstanding performance as usual by James McAvoy, and he perfectly brought back his Split characters. Samuel L. Jackson was great as always and even Bruce Willis actually showed interest in performing for this film.

My issue was that the writing was all over the place and the 129 min length felt like 180 mins. Maybe it was the pacing, or more needed to be edited/cut to shorten this film to a more acceptable 100-110 length. The directing was decent but nothing spectacular.

I expected more but sadly was disappointed. It's not a flop, nor is it a 10/10 like all these fake reviews. It's a well deserved 6/10. Would I recommend it? Sure if you're a fan of Unbreakable, Split and its characters. Would I see it again? Nope.
259 out of 456 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Amazing Movie
This was an amazing offering. Another movie the critics seem to have reviewed without bothering to even watch, I think. I really liked the first two in this series, but Glass is just a step above. The story, the message, the characters, for me this was as close to perfect as a movie can be. As written by others here, this isn't a standard cookie cutter super hero movie. Thankfully. We have enough of them, and they're starting to get a bit stale.

This trilogy is a modern cult classic. I do, very much, hope that this universe is explored in future offerings, and I also hope that we can get some new critics who actually take the time to watch the movies they are paid to review.
170 out of 296 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Starts as a Disappointment, Ends in Disaster
rkessleruv-6862618 January 2019
Warning: Spoilers
Here's some context before the review: I am a HUGE M Night Shyamalan fan. I will often defend him and his bizarre choices. To add to that, I am and EVEN BIGGER Unbreakable fan. Unbreakable is one of my favorite movies of all time, and upon rewatch of Split, that film is great too! Unbreakable in particular is a beautiful view of what our world would be like with superheroes. The pacing is slow but works fantastically for the film. Long dialogue-less takes allow the characters to grow and emotions to encapsulate the space. Additionally, the dynamic between Willis and Jackson (and the ultimate reveal at the end) is masterful and natural. This completely changes the film for the better. After seeing Split (and in particular the ending), I was massively excited for Glass. If Glass were great, this could've been one of the greatest cinematic trilogies of all time. Unfortunately, that is definitely not the case. Glass picks up where we left our characters at the end of Split. Kevin Wendell Crumb is terrorizing a new group of "pure" teenage girls while David Dunn (along with his son) have turned to vigilante justice since Unbreakable and have sought to track down Crumb. A promising concept, and ultimately what many people asked for. There are several noticeable detriments since the previous two films, however. For one, the overall presentation of the film is surprisingly cheap compared to Unbreakable and Split (which is even more surprising considering Split cost $11 million less to make than Glass). The lighting feels over-present, the play with colors (masterfully displayed in Unbreakable) is greatly downplayed, and there are several instances where the budget constraints are on FULL display (oh boy, we will GET TO THAT in the third act). To compare, Unbreakable and Split were able to convey so much more and add to the emotional impact of those films with so many fewer resources (despite Unbreakable's inflated budget). Unbreakable in particular contained beautiful color palettes and greatly valued darkness. Unbreakable was so powerful through its use of dark shadows and gloomy lighting, which completely fit with the tone it was trying to convey. Glass feels like the Hollywood version of Unbreakable (which...oh yes...we will DEFINITELY get to that as well). There are a handful of spectacular shots in the film (many of which are shown in the trailer), but as a whole, the visual presentation is a massive letdown. Going along with the visual presentation, the score of the film is uninspired. To compare to Unbreakable and Split once again, each of the scores for those films was used to enhance the experience. Unbreakable features one of the most iconic and underrated scores of all time, while Split features a score which works greatly when paired with the visuals (and contains one or two fantastic compositions which rival those of Unbreakable's). Glass does not have one memorable composition in sight. The choice to implement a new score COMPLETELY DIFFERENT to those of Unbreakable and Split was a massive letdown, and when the film does decide to use music from the previous two entries, the inclusion feels unwarranted and forced. So the overall presentation is sloppy. This is immediately apparent within the first five minutes. But this can be excused with a great story, right? Yes, of course. The problem is that the screenplay of the film begins repetitive and ultimately turns into a bigger disaster than The Last Airbender. No, I'm not exaggerating. The film is watchable and competent enough for the first 20 minutes, where David Dunn has an entertaining brawl with Kevin Wendell Crumb until they are eventually stopped by police and taken into a facility for "people who believe they are superheroes". Kind of an interesting plot point on paper, but the pacing of the film comes to a halt and turns painfully repetitive. Endless scenes feature Ellie Staple, Sarah Paulson's character, trying desperately to convince Dunn, Crumb,Elijah Glass, and the audience that they do not have superpowers. The problem with this concept is that we've seen throughout Unbreakable and Split that Dunn and Crumb have supernatural powers. There is no possible way for the audience to believe Staple's ludicrous claims since we've seen this all first hand. Staple's dismissals of various displays of supernatural tendencies are particularly hilarious, stating that "the metal bars in the zoo were weak after several years" and "you were able to see what Crumb was up to from the clay on his pants". No, Shyamalan. Sorry, but I'm not taking your bait. Now I'll cut to talking about the side plots of the film. Seem jarring in this review? Well it's just as jarring in the film itself. For one, David Dunn's son, still played by Spencer Treat Clark (who's acting chops have not aged over the years) is trying to find a way to break his father out of the institution. Eventually there's a hilariously bad scene (featured in every horror movie ever) where the character searches for information on Google. This is where he learns information about Crumb's past, which he will use in the worst possible way in the third act. Anya Taylor-Joy is also back in the film, but her purpose in the film feels forced and also laughable. Since the first film, Taylor-Joy has grown a bizarre affection for Crumb and is desperate to visit him. On paper, her infatuation with Crumb is understandable, since she was revealed to share a domestic-abuse history with Crumb as a child. However, there's no denying that Crumb emotionally tortured and abused her in Split, so Casey's ultimate "love" for Crumb is totally unbelievable. It's as if Shyamalan couldn't find a clear purpose for Casey in the film, but he felt he needed to shoehorn her into the film since IT IS A SEQUEL TO GLASS. Elijah's mother also returns for the film, but she is given very little to do other than what she had already accomplished in Unbreakable. Now we get back to the central story. It is revealed that Mr. Glass has been planning an elaborate and convoluted scheme with Kevin Crumb to have him fight once again with David Dunn. He misleads the audience by telling Crumb about how he should battle Dunn on top of the conveniently newly established buildings in the city (which are horrendously CGI-d into the backdrop), but Dunn stops Crumb outside of the institution once they all break out. Oh yeah, the process of them breaking out was so dumb and mind bogglingly stupid that I completely zone out. Mr. Glass is REALLY SMART I guess, so this makes him able to do anything the plot wants him to. This was able to buy in Unbreakable, but it's such a huge and outrageous stretch in Glass. This is where the film rides the line line between satirical genius and complete incompetence. The execution of the fight scene between Dunn and Crumb is so awful and sloppy to the point of becoming an unintentional commentary of the contrived and overtly complex nature of modern-day comic book movie. Once the two are outside, Dunn's son, Casey, and Elijah's mother all show up to the institute at the EXACT SAME TIME as this breakout (unbeknownst to them). Staple even states how this is a coincidence similar to one "from a comic", which could be clever, but I interpret this more as Shyamalan rolling over on his belly and acknowledging the idiocy of his convoluted plot. Mr. Glass also narrates the fight, stating how "all the main characters are here". Then this fight begins. The fight we've been waiting the whole movie for (for the second time I guess). Remember how I called the movie cheap before? Oh boy. This is a whole new level. The fight choreography is insanely weak and clunky. There are several Go-Pro perspective shots which come across as insanely sloppy. Next, one of the characters points at a GIANT CONTAINER OF WATER and says "hey look at that, it's a placed thing of water, that's Dunn's weakness!" What the **** going on? At this point, I was done. I started laughing hysterically in the theater at what I was seeing. I truly believed that this was some genius satire and that M Night had pulled off a new and fantastic "twist" with this bait-and-switch middle finger to everyone who wanted a standard comic book movie. As the film carries on, however, this theory becomes more unbelievable (and even more laughable). Dunn's son stands in the middle of The Beast and Dunn, telling him information about how Mr. Glass was responsible for killing his dad (who was on the same train as Dunn in the first Unbreakable) since the death of his dad resulted in his mom becoming abusive which resulted in his multi-personality disorder. Sound contrived? YEP. I couldn't believe my eyes. How does a screenplay this inept and terrible get approval? This results in Crumb killing Glass. Next, some more police show up, which turn out to be working for the institution, which turn out to be an institution lying to the patients because they don't want superheroes to exist in the world. So they've had powers the whole time...what a twist! One of the cops DROWNS DAVID DUNN IN A PUDDLE. Yep. A puddle. This is when Casey shows up to have a purpose in the movie. She goes over to Kevin and basically expresses her LOVE FOR HIM, which results in him turning back into his Kevin form, where he is shot and killed by the cops. Ugh. Our three main characters are dead in unsatisfying ways. Good job Shyamalan. Still not quite over. It turns out that Mr. Glass had hacked into every camera into the institution and WANTED to be recorded by the cameras so he could share the information with the world that superheroes exist, allowing superheroes hiding or afraid around the world to come out. How did he do this? Because he's a mastermind I guess. This theme Shyamalan tries to convey about this society trying to cover up this hidden society of people is actually pretty decent. This could have been really interesting in a better executed version of this movie. As it is, this movie left me broke.
160 out of 285 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
well that was interesting
trollerbrendan12 January 2019
Hmmm. Left not knowing whether I liked it or not but when I REALLY thought about I can say I did. Acting was good (even from Willis) and the last 3rd had an iconic Shyamalan sprinkle of genius. Would give it 8.2/10. If you liked the first 2 movies of this trilogy chances are you can enjoy this one.
159 out of 284 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Rating: B+
msbreviews17 January 2019
Warning: Spoilers
If you enjoy reading my Spoiler-Free reviews, please follow my blog :)

The first act is seamless. I love how David is introduced 19 years later and how his life is now. Kevin continues to abduct impure teenage girls, and after a few minutes in, we get the first confrontation between our hero and villain. I wasn't expecting an action-heavy film, and I'm glad it isn't because it would ruin the tone of the other movies. This was never intended to be a massive finale with epic CGI fights, like a Marvel or DC installment. If you're one of those people who expected Glass to be an Infinity War-ish film, I don't even know why are you reading this because you have no idea what this trilogy is about.

Sarah Paulson portrays Dr. Ellie Staple, and she is responsible for treating people who think they are superheroes. So, the second act revolves around a fascinatingly engaging yet overlong narrative which leaves the main characters (and the audience) doubting if everything they did was a product of their supposedly damaged minds. There is so much to love and hate throughout this act. The interactions between these characters are as captivating as they could be, and I couldn't take my eyes off screen. Then, there's James McAvoy ... I have no words to describe how astonishing his performance is. Portraying one character is hard. Portraying almost 20 characters is just outrageous! However, McAvoy nails each personality delivering himself to his roles in such an unbelievable way. Sometimes I chuckled because I couldn't understand how it was possible an actor being able to do what he did, several times, in one-take sequences.

Bruce Willis and Samuel L. Jackson return to portray David and Mr. Glass, respectively. The former is solid, and the respect he has for his character is evident. However, David is sort of left aside in this movie, but I'll get there. SLJ, even with less screentime than the other two, has more to do, regarding moving the plot forward. He gives an extraordinary performance, as expected from such a capable actor. During this act, these four characters offer a lot of memorable scenes, but the narrative is filled with exposition, and it overextends its stay. Shyamalan wanted to show everyone that he knows what he is writing about and a lot of times he used his characters to explicitly say, well, everything the audience needed to know, without any need to.

The third act is where everyone is going to either love or hate the film. In this genre, we all know that the "middle ground" is non-existent. Either you're part of the group who loves it and you will defend it at all costs, or you're part of the group who hates everything about it just due to its final moments. There is more than one Shyamalan twist during this final act. Truth is, I left a bit disappointed. It doesn't matter what your expectations are, it doesn't matter your preferences, at least one of the twists is always going to upset you. What disappoints me the most is that I don't really love any of them. Unbreakable has a final plot twist that completely changes its whole story, and it comes out of nowhere. It's literally mind-blowing! Split has the 17-year twist of it being part of the former's universe, which made several audiences in festivals give it a stand ovation. Glass has ... a bunch of twists. Period. There are no OH-MY-GOD-like reactions. There are no jaws dropped.

Instead, we are left with an arguably questionable decision. A couple of the twists are fine. I would even call them "good twists". However, the one that changes everything feels incredibly forced and most of all, it falls short for such a highly-anticipated trilogy's last installment. I can't help but wonder "is this really the best path you could have chosen Shyamalan? Of all the endings you imagined, this is the one you think is the best to finish a 19-year-in-the-making superhero trilogy?" Regarding the screenplay and the characters, I have the issue above and one associated with David Dunn. If Split didn't have that final twist, it would be a good thriller. Way above average, but not astounding. The link to Unbreakable's universe is what makes it a standout movie of 2017. So, I was expecting a lot of David, and I only got a small fraction of him.

I'll put this way:
  • if you're expecting an Unbreakable sequel, you'll probably leave disappointed;
  • if you're expecting Split 2, you'll love McAvoy's take on almost 20 distinct personalities, and that alone is worth the price of admission;
  • if you're expecting a formulaic superhero epic finale, filled with massive CGI fights and tremendous visual effects, all wrapped around colossal set pieces, then you are not worthy of even watching Glass, because this means you don't have a clue what this trilogy is about.

This is NOT a conventional comic-book trilogy. If you don't know this by now and you're still waiting for that last climax, you're only setting yourself up for disappointment, when no one asked you to anticipate such unrealistic stuff. Never criticize a film for not selling you something it was never even marketed to do (it's like expecting a horror movie to have a romantic happy ending). That said, I left disappointed with its conclusion, but there's still so much to love and praise. Seeing how David accepted who he was and the life journey he took, experiencing Kevin's pain and how each personality was born, understanding what Elijah's purpose is and being blown away by his mastermind plans ... These are characters so well-developed and so well-established that I can forgive some missteps here and there.

Before diving into the technical aspects, Anya Taylor-Joy, Spencer Treat Clark (Joseph Dunn) and Charlayne Woodard (Elijah's mother) deserve appreciation for their performances, even if they don't have that much impact in the overall story. Anya has more to do as Casey since her character's bond with Kevin is an explored subplot. Regarding the last two, they only serve as exposition devices which connects to one of my problems with the second act, by not helping the plot move forward in the smoothest way possible.

Concerning M. Night Shyamalan filmmaking skills, I barely have anything negative to say. The only minor issue I have is the excessive use of POV in the action scenes (a camera attached to the actor's body which provides a close-up of his face while fighting). Nevertheless, this film is yet another proof of how skillful this guy is behind the camera. There are so many memorable moments where the technique at display is worthy of awards. We will have to wait a few months to find such marvelous cinematography as in this film. Shyamalan and Mike Gioulakis (DP, director of photography) use our characters' respective colors (yellow for Kevin, green for David and purple for Mr. Glass) as the background palette of each scene in glorious fashion. The gradual change in color tells the audience so much about what our characters are going through, elevating one of the best dialogue sequences in the entire movie (the pink room).

The editing is sublime, and I love how Shyamalan uses close-ups to show how remarkable his cast is. McAvoy's performance is one of the best this year is going to give us, but part of it is even better due to the camera work. The unfocused background stunt work in a character's close-up is the art of filmmaking at his very best, and Shyamalan knows how to film it beautifully. The score is not as memorable as Unbreakable's, but the sound design is on point. Even with a low budget (compared to the other superhero movies), Shyamalan is able to produce a technical showdown of all his attributes as a sensational filmmaker. And this, my fellow readers, I will defend until the end of his career.

All in all, Glass doesn't live up to my extremely high expectations, but it does more than enough for me to enjoy it. I can't help but feel disappointed with the way everything ends and the path that Shyamalan chose, but there's still so much to love. James McAvoy offers you a performance worthy of any price of admission. Watching him portray over 15 characters is something you won't experience maybe ever again. Going through the layers of suspense, disbelief and mystery that the screenplay is structured by is itself an adventure filled with twists and turns which grabbed my attention until the very end.

An almost flawless first act delves into an overextended second act where the story lacks consistency and even logic, at times. However, the performances and the main thread of the film keeps everyone enthralled until the polarizing third and final act, where the significant plot twists occur. How can a movie be so fascinating and frustrating at the same time? Shyamalan, ladies and gentlemen. This masterful filmmaker lends all his skills to the film, and technically it's close to perfection. Disappointing? Yes. Frustrating? Yes. Does it ruin the franchise? No, not even close. This isn't The Matrix Revolutions, but it's not Return of the King, as well. It's a good ending to a superhero trilogy that might not be the best of all-time, but it's up there, and it's definitely unique, imaginative and the closest to what our real world would be like if superheroes were a real thing.

If you're a comic-book fan, this trilogy is mandatory. If you love Marvel or DC, don't you dare use the word "grounded" without watching this saga first. Shyamalan, see you around!
133 out of 239 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
How to break unbreakable
karlcloono18 January 2019
Warning: Spoilers
This movie was so bad it manages to ruin one of my favorite movies of all time unbreakable by not expanding or adding anything interesting to the lore or the characters. If anything it's just makes it stupider. As I'm writing this I'm trying to remember anything interesting that happened in this movie but I can't it's so forgettable. I don't understand how this script got green lit it's terrible there's so much pointless dialogue I kept zoning out for most of it. This movie has nothing going for it other than a few interesting camera shots and some good acting. James McAvoy is great but that's the only high point of this dragged out mess and this movie felt like it would never end and when it did I was so disappointed in that ending i was going to explain it but I can't remember what's happens but basically the 3 main protagonist after having a "showdown" are killed by a Secret group of people who just kill superheroes no matter if they do bad or good I can't remember why. And it has this ending message about all of us having a superpower inside us. Well I think that's what it was trying to say at that point I just wanted to go home. All in all I would not recommend this movie in any shape or form it's hot garbage save your money
168 out of 309 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
What a mess
rayan22-186-74511917 January 2019
Seems to be hit or miss with Shamalayan. This one was a miss, the movie had incredible potential. But it became a mess. James macavoy acting was superb tho
180 out of 337 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Don't see this movie if you liked Unbreakable
showergrape18 January 2019
Warning: Spoilers
Shymalan takes one of the 2 good movies he has ever made and flushes it down the toilet (almost literally) with this instantly forgettable garbage.

It's not clever. It's not thought provoking. You can see Unbreakable, Split, and the trailer and basically put it together in your head.


He makes it so, so much worse by giving one of his very very few memorable characters one of the most shameful, degrading deaths in cinema history.

I can't curse here so from the bottom of my heart: screw this movie. Screw it to death. And screw M Night Shymalan too.
102 out of 187 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Complete drivel and I want my money back
steve-0968420 January 2019
I made the mistake of reading the good reviews and then going to see the movie. It cost me $40 for 2 tickets, one large popcorn and a small soda. Still, I thought it would be worth it - stadium seating; an evening downtown; a fun experience. Wrong! I was completely duped by lying reviewers - played for a sucker. They must all be friends of the director or investors in the project - because this movie absolutely stinks. It may be the worst movie I've seen in at least 10 years. A complete disjointed mess and I want my money back!

But since they don't offer refunds for terrible movies - even ones as horribly bad as this - the next best thing I can do is save you from making the same mistake. Do not waste your money on this garbage. Do not support this lazy, garbage-filled excuse of a movie. Better to give your money to a stranger - or toss your cash into a fire just to watch it burn. That alone would be more entertaining than this pathetic movie. It is astonishingly bad; hopelessly slapped together. An inept regurgitation and a complete embarrassment for anyone associated with the project.
129 out of 246 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews

Recently Viewed