Glass (Cristal)

I can describe Glass as an entertaining experience, but not solid enough to be an appropriate closure of the Unbreakable-Split-Glass trilogy.

While I can see what Mr Shyamalan wanted to do, I don't think he managed to deliver with the characters and the plot the necessary complexity to answer all the questions the audience raised in the previous two movies. Many things have been left unanswered especially about Kevin, while David Dunn is just a shadow that doesn't do much in the movie.

The real star in this movie is supposed to be Mr Glass, but not much about his past is told, either. Everything is absurdly summarized in a way that, in the end, we don't really know - or care - about who Mr Glass or Kevin were. There isn't enough character development or closure going on here.

Sarah Paulson's talent was wasted on a character who could be played by anyone. She is a brilliant actress but the character was poorly written and brings nothing new or dramatically useful to the plot.

Cinematography is fine just as the pacing of the movie. Like I said, it is entertaining, definitely - and perhaps it will please the audiences who are used to the almost shallow plots of superhero movies. But if you were expecting a more deep and challenging story about humans with supernatural powers, you will be disappointed.

In the end, Mr Shyamalan couldn't make a superhero movie, and couldn't make a deep, mind-bending metaphysical movie either. He merely brushed over both worlds, but didn't dive deeply into either of them. It is a pity that a plot that had potential and that showed up to be brilliant in "Split" had such an underwhelming and unremarkable closure.

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

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.

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.

3.5/5

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.