Glass

7

JPKJul 11, 2019

Fine, But Disappointing
Glass is definitely a disappointing film because of how much of a comeback Shymalan had made, But it’s still a decent film.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

7

d0vla11Jan 20, 2019

A perfect ending to a trilogy. Even though Split is the best to me, this one delivers it too. Awesome acting, pacing is great - it kept me interested until the end of it. You should watch it! :)

4 of 9 users found this helpful45

All this user's reviews

7

SWEEPtheLEG175Nov 6, 2019

If you liked the other 2 films you will enjoy this film. Unbreakable is one of the most amazing superhero films I have seen. Split and Glass fall short, but they are still good installments.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

Kirollos-NoahFeb 22, 2019

Glass is directed and written by M. Night Shyamalan, with a simple role as we saw him in Unbreakable and Split. Starring James McAvoy, Bruce Willis, Samuel L. Jackson, Anya Taylor-Joy and Sarah Paulson.
Bruce Willis returns as David Dunn asGlass is directed and written by M. Night Shyamalan, with a simple role as we saw him in Unbreakable and Split. Starring James McAvoy, Bruce Willis, Samuel L. Jackson, Anya Taylor-Joy and Sarah Paulson.
Bruce Willis returns as David Dunn as does Samuel L. Jackson as Elijah Price, known also by his pseudonym Mr. Glass. Joining from Split are James McAvoy, reprising his role as Kevin Wendell Crumb and the multiple identities who reside within, and Anya Taylor-Joy as Casey Cooke, the only captive to survive an encounter with The Beast. Following the conclusion of Split, Glass finds Dunn pursuing Crumb's superhuman figure of The Beast in a series of escalating encounters, while the shadowy presence of Price emerges as an orchestrator who holds secrets critical to both men.

Glass was one of my anticipating movies list since I watched Split and surprisingly reveal that it's a sequel to the 2000's Unbreakable, which I liked. So yeah, I was very excited to see these three characters gathering together in one movie.. sadly it's the last movie of that trilogy.. and we will get to that ending in the spoiler review. But for now, let's do the spoiler-free review!

Okay, as the title says "Underrated, but disappointing" the movie is underrated, but let me say that it's not, because not everyone is gonna like this movie.. yeah, maybe underrated, but still disappointing. The first act of this movie was pretty cool, I loved it, the third act also is pretty, no no.. the final fight, because it was pretty epic I enjoyed it very much.. the conclusion and the ending were a little bit messy, the twist was cool, but the "character" wasn't that convincing, and I felt like it's not how this character should've been, because it reminded me with Unbreakable, and how it was rushed, Glass is giving us a little more surprising one, but not well crafted.

The second act is my biggest flaw with this movie, it was super slow, and confusing.. like how Glass is getting out of his cage? How is he just getting in any room he wants with no keys? Also it's not what you wanted to see from these characters, especially Anya Taylor-Joy, I loved her in Split, but in this one.. she's just there. I mean Spencer Treat Clark had a better role in this movie. Sarah Paulson is also bad, I didn't like her character which was "You're not that, you're that!", even her performance was emotionless and in the second act she was just there to go to a room from a room to say and to give us info we already know or ones that we don't care about! So yeah, the second act was new for this trilogy,but still it lacks a lot!

James McAvoy is pretty good in this movie just as he was in Split, once more he's the best thing in the movie but I have a flaw with it, which is a spoiler so, I'm gonna talk about it in the spoiler review... Bruce Willis is very good as well, but I have the same flaw which I found with James McAvoy's character, but even more! Samuel L. Jackson is not there most of the movie, but once he's there, he gave the movie a good spirit!! He has also one of the best scenes in the whole trilogy, as we saw in the trailer, when he was moving with his wheelchair and the beast the killing some people behind him, that was pretty cool!

Glass disappointed me, but still it's a fresh movie and I'm gonna give it a positive review, don't get me wrong, but I like Split more, but in the mean while, I liked it a little bit more than Unbreakable. I'm gonna give Glass a B!

Thank you, guys as always for reading my review, look forward for my spoiler review, and if you liked it, you can click on my name up above and read my other reviews.… Expand

4 of 5 users found this helpful41

All this user's reviews

7

ABAwesomeJan 19, 2019

It's good, not great. And it's a lot of good, with the exception of two or three major things (mostly plot points, but one thematic element that's just super sophmoric more than anything else) but it could've been worse. It's not what IIt's good, not great. And it's a lot of good, with the exception of two or three major things (mostly plot points, but one thematic element that's just super sophmoric more than anything else) but it could've been worse. It's not what I really wanted to the final chapter of this trilogy I never thought would happen, but it's an ending, anyway. It's not perfect, but definitely not a disaster. It's also quite funny, and not unintentionally like several other Shyamalan films. James McAvoy is easily the MVP and kills every time he's on-screen.… Expand

11 of 18 users found this helpful117

All this user's reviews

7

MNfilmloverJan 18, 2019

Loved Unbreakable and really liked Split. Glass was good, but left a few things on the table. Acting by Willis, McAvoy and Jackson was STELLAR! I think Paulson was seriously miscast. She just didn't fit the part. Sorry, far too manyLoved Unbreakable and really liked Split. Glass was good, but left a few things on the table. Acting by Willis, McAvoy and Jackson was STELLAR! I think Paulson was seriously miscast. She just didn't fit the part. Sorry, far too many injections in the face-no movable parts. Her character may have needed to be stoic, but not frozen from enhancements. SO many other actresses out there. She really stuck out for me.… Expand

6 of 13 users found this helpful67

All this user's reviews

7

HighHeelKnightJan 24, 2019

"Glass" is a good movie, but it is not good enough for 2019. "Unbreakable" came out in 2000, the year that "X-Men" sparked a superhero renaissance. If "Split" and "Glass" could have shifted back 6 to 10 years, as the MCU brought a new"Glass" is a good movie, but it is not good enough for 2019. "Unbreakable" came out in 2000, the year that "X-Men" sparked a superhero renaissance. If "Split" and "Glass" could have shifted back 6 to 10 years, as the MCU brought a new renaissance, then Shyamalan's trilogy would have been brilliant. Today, superhero projects dominate movies and television, from "Watchmen", "Deadpool", "Avengers", and the Arrowverse to "The Incredibles", "Big Hero 6", "The Lego Batman Movie", and TWO types of Teen Titans. All seven of the main actors of "Glass" have been in superhero or comic book projects as well. The world has elevated past with Shyamalan wants to offer. "Glass" is worth seeing, but it is too late to the superhero party. Don't see it in Imax either.… Expand

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

7

Jmorgan62Jan 24, 2019

NO SPOILER TIME Glass is the final movie to M. Night Shyamalan's trilogy that started with Unbreakable in 2000 and I have to say I really enjoyed this movie. The plot and story telling was pretty good but the way it is presented inst theNO SPOILER TIME Glass is the final movie to M. Night Shyamalan's trilogy that started with Unbreakable in 2000 and I have to say I really enjoyed this movie. The plot and story telling was pretty good but the way it is presented inst the best, Its better for a movie to let people figure things out. and how the movie is told is very similar to how Unbreakable was which was pretty good. there is minor things in this movie that all adds up and can annoy you, well at least it did to me as far as camera angles, editing, and writing. the performances was great especially Samuel Jackson and James Mcavoy, Bruce Willis could've done better and I mean a lot better but he wasn't given much to do. Some character were defiantly not needed even towards the end because it'll show why they are not needed. toward the end/ third act things kinda took a weird end that some people will not expect and might be disappointing. The structure of the movie was a little unbalanced and which is why I say Bruce could've done more. Towards the end also He quote on quote "Shyamalaned" it but He still has a lot to learn and improve on for himself and I praise this man for his hard works. go see it if you love the previous movies

SPOLIER TIME YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED

Glass is the final movie to M. Night Shyamalan's trilogy that started with Unbreakable in 2000 and I have to say I really enjoyed this movie. The plot takes places fairly close after the events of Split from what I can remember from the movie, and from how it is laid out it was also really good but I wish the directing would have left a lot of the surprises for the audience to figure out and theorize about instead of it being told to us about what happened. the pace of the story telling was fairy close to unbreakable's pace, a nice slow burn. I really wanted the movie to expand to more than just the asylum and a few other minor locations. We never ended up going to tallest building made and that would've been sweet to see but we were just teased. The theme of the movie fitted everything in a nice way but not much was done for to make it a thriller, Split was a thriller movie and that felt like one but this one was great on the theme of sci-fi and drama with action mixed in. The art was pretty good and seeing Mr. Glass new suit looked fresh and everyone had their classical outfits that made it a charm to watch and not much other stuff to say about the art. Cinematography was interesting, new and sometimes plain annoyingly not wise, the angles that looks like it takes a lot of time to do was fine but there was so many extremely close up shots and awkward angles, but it wasn't too annoying to the movie because the cuts were about evenly good nothing to go off on. Same goes with the editing, it was interesting and wasn't anything annoying. The fonts at the start of the movie kinda got in the way but it was a style choice I'm assuming. Acting was about 50/50. I loved Samuel L. Jackson as well as James Mcavoy, and they did a great job. As far as Bruce Willis I wanted him to do more in this movie because I felt as though he was pushed to the side a lot and he could've given a better performance I know he could've. and more could've been better from pretty much all supporting casts. Anya Taylor-Joy in my opinion had no reason to be in this movie and served no purpose in my opinion. Spencer Treat Clark also did a great job too, almost perfect too. the writing of this movie was pretty good, there was a lot of things that could've been done smarter. Kevin could've wrapped a pillow around his head, Mr. G didn't have to do this suicide mission, and my goodness the ending of this movie was not satisfying, everything before the main characters death was great and enjoyable and I find it disrespectful to the fans of these characters and the way they went out and it was all in silly ridiculous ways and the people who saw it will most likely agree. Music was good too and every piece fitted every scene just fine. as far as originality it fine and I really do see this as an origin story to maybe M. Knight's next series of films, possibly. The secret organization wasn't really needed but we have it and it sets up a few questions. It kinda doesn't make since this organization didn't go to David's house when they heard a man survived a train crash so these people were forced in. Overall This movie was good and enjoyable and if acting was done a tad bit better it would've been even more better. The ending sets up a possibility for more superhero like moves from M. knight but we will just have to wait and see. There is a lot of small things M. knight needs to work on from here on and I applaud him for sticking with this movie and finishing it. He is truly a good man and has a passion for movies like very few others. Please see Unbreakable and Split before this movie and after those two. If I were to grade this movie it would get a 86 percent, but for reviewing over all it gets a 7 out of 10… Expand

4 of 5 users found this helpful41

All this user's reviews

7

FedericoSierraFeb 4, 2019

GLASS will shatter the expectations of anyone who comes in looking for a satisfying conclusion to a trilogy that never was. Like both its predecessors, UNBREAKABLE and SPLIT, they are all standalone movies in their own right. That being said,GLASS will shatter the expectations of anyone who comes in looking for a satisfying conclusion to a trilogy that never was. Like both its predecessors, UNBREAKABLE and SPLIT, they are all standalone movies in their own right. That being said, GLASS is an audacious social commentary about the superhero landscape that's been paved in mainstream cinemas. GLASS is a flawed movie, but I respect it for having its own identity, and even more for the reflective ending that makes us question who the villain really is.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

7

RadReviewerFeb 8, 2019

This movie is legitimately a 8.5-9.0 until the last 20-30 minutes of the movie. This makes the outcome even more disappointing. M. Night does what he does best and overplays his hand with an awful twist and no grounding to be seen.

4 of 5 users found this helpful41

All this user's reviews

7

CriticalBwepFeb 11, 2019

Shyamalan's take on the popular superhero franchise truly stands out from the rest, making an overall intriguing and original movie. Despite this, I'm ashamed to admit that I was disappointed on after my first viewing of the film, as IShyamalan's take on the popular superhero franchise truly stands out from the rest, making an overall intriguing and original movie. Despite this, I'm ashamed to admit that I was disappointed on after my first viewing of the film, as I expected so much more from the last movie in the 'Unbreakable' trilogy. The positives of 'Glass' really do shine, however, I found that the movie dragged, and the poor pacing was the movie's largest and most noticeable flaw. James McAvoy returning as Kevin and the other personalities was a real pleasure to see; his performance was fantastic. Although McAvoy stole the spotlight, every character in the movie, even supporting characters, played a significant role and made the film work. Although I would have loved to have seen more from certain characters, their setup during at least the first half an hour of the movie was done perfectly. For me, the movie started to lose momentum around the middle. The pace was much slower and it was hard to understand where the film was actually going. It is until the end where it makes sense and for me, the film's finale saved it from becoming painfully average. Overall, M. Night Shyamalan has made a decent follow up to the previous films. It is certainly not a bad movie; it is a good movie, even though I felt disappointed after my first impressions of 'Glass'. I am satisfied with the way it turned out.… Expand

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

7

OdinMovieBlogMar 5, 2019

After many years M Night Shyamalan finishes a trilogy that many of us never knew we wanted until Split came out a couple years ago. Though the first two acts are extremely slow, he climax and conclusion of the film leave you wondering andAfter many years M Night Shyamalan finishes a trilogy that many of us never knew we wanted until Split came out a couple years ago. Though the first two acts are extremely slow, he climax and conclusion of the film leave you wondering and will likely split many audiences. Personally I find the twists that the director throws in at the end to be thought-provoking and interesting. all of us could likely think of an infinite number of scenarios in endings that may have suited this story better, but this one really isn't all that bad. This is is one I would definitely want to see again to see if knowledge of where the story goes affects how one might view the rest of the film. B-… Expand

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

7

Brando217Mar 9, 2019

A bit disappointing, but I must give it the credit to have the balls to end things where it did.

3 of 6 users found this helpful33

All this user's reviews

7

LarianApr 4, 2019

One of M Night Shamalans better efforts. Some did not like the twist, but that's to be expected. I would say that the end kind of left me annoyed, but it is MNS... "shurg"

3 of 6 users found this helpful33

All this user's reviews

7

allensajiMay 28, 2019

A good movie with a descent twist..... A usual M Night shyamalan movie. Must follow previous movies of the series (split,unbreakable).

5 of 6 users found this helpful51

All this user's reviews

7

LORDtroldemort1Jun 22, 2019

Even though its not quite the spectacular finale people were hoping for, Glass still delivers an entertaining and quite satisfying end to the, unbreakable trilogy.

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

7

DawdlingPoetMar 26, 2022

I've seen both Unbreakable and Split and so I wanted to give this a go. I know M Night Shymalan's films aren't especially liked these days (for the most part) and at first I felt more confused and bewildered than any other emotion. As I say,I've seen both Unbreakable and Split and so I wanted to give this a go. I know M Night Shymalan's films aren't especially liked these days (for the most part) and at first I felt more confused and bewildered than any other emotion. As I say, I've seen the previous films that are referenced in this film but I certainly hadn't watched them esp. recently and so I couldn't remember perhaps the level of detail about characters and events that would have likely helped explain what was going on. It all seemed a bit too 'all over the place'-ish but I admit that by the end, I found myself more hooked than I'd initially expected. James McAvoy gives a great performance as the clearly troubled DID patient (known by any number of multiple personalities - DID being the more contemporary name for multiple personality disorder. I believe it stands for Dissociative Identity Disroder). Also reprising their roles from previous films are both Samuel L Jackson as the comic book store guy from Unbreakable and Bruce Willis as the train survivor, also from Unbreakable and Anya Taylor-Joy, who was one of the DID patients victims in the film Split named Casey Cooke.

I thought the film becoming more absorbing and tense towards the end, though I'm not sure I can entirely explain why. I did think Taylor-Joy gave a convincing performance as Casey. Her fear looked pretty genuine to me - infact i'd say the vulnerability element to this film is done pretty well. Of course the film is called Glass and its no wonder why - glass as in shards or fragments, that make up the DID patient. This is a film that comes across as primarily a quirky comic book style film, for obvious reasons, with perhaps a hint of the supernatural and even the super villain about it (think the opposite to superhero's - there's no Superman here). Its not a film likely to appeal to all but it does end fairly suspensefully and I did think it was pretty absorbing and entertaining by the end, though if I had to decide after the first 20-30 minutes whether to keep watching it, I may have chosen not to bother. I don't think I'd actively recommend this film as such, unless your especially keen on the cast or really want to view this as a conclusion to the story that came from M Night Shymalan's previous films - 'Unbreakable' and 'Split'.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

ProfAmateurMar 1, 2023

Two people with supernatural powers and a third person who wants to see them fight each other. A fantasy thriller that has strengths and weaknesses.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

movielover28Jul 2, 2020

I watched this movie for the first time on HBO after missing it in theaters and I was surprised at how good this movie was. It had many clever twists and it was just a smart movie.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

TVJerryJan 25, 2019

M. Night Shyamalan reunites the stars of his 3 biggest films (Bruce Willis, Samuel L. Jackson and James McAvoy) into a sort of trilogy finale to Unbreakable and Split. Willis is not reviving his role from Sixth Sense, he's playing anotherM. Night Shyamalan reunites the stars of his 3 biggest films (Bruce Willis, Samuel L. Jackson and James McAvoy) into a sort of trilogy finale to Unbreakable and Split. Willis is not reviving his role from Sixth Sense, he's playing another character with superhuman powers. This trio is brought together in a psychiatric hospital, where Sarah Paulson's talky character tries to convince them that they're just deluded. While the premise starts with some promise, the rambling pace and sometimes confusing writing keep it from paying off. There is a conclusion (that may even augur a new world of superheros), but it's more frustrating than satisfying. A few moments of intensity don't make for a taut thriller.… Expand

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

6

JoeCoolApr 14, 2019

Some really great acting by McAvoy, Jackson and Willis, but the doctor pretty much ruined all chances of this being a great movie and that's a darn shame. It could have been a much better movie with a more believable Elie Staple. She comesSome really great acting by McAvoy, Jackson and Willis, but the doctor pretty much ruined all chances of this being a great movie and that's a darn shame. It could have been a much better movie with a more believable Elie Staple. She comes across as being somehow off in her role. Her performance just isn't on par with that of the other actors.
I didn't see Split (yet), but as a standalone movie the story seems somewhat strange. Maybe as a series it makes more sense, but for me it was rather unsatisfying. Giving it a 6 for McAvoy's performance which is simply outstanding.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

kiwijinxterJan 24, 2019

I tried hard to go into this movie without any expectations. I mostly succeeded although I had read some reviews ("normal people" user reviews - not the useless professional critics' reviews). Some user reviews gave me the impression thatI tried hard to go into this movie without any expectations. I mostly succeeded although I had read some reviews ("normal people" user reviews - not the useless professional critics' reviews). Some user reviews gave me the impression that there was a fantastic major twist at the end that's bigger than Sixth Sense. Yes, there was a twist at the end but not quite at Sixth Sense levels. Still it was a nice twist.

Overall the movie had great veteran actors in the 3 main "superhero" parts who all gave very good performances for their parts - James McAvoy, Bruce Willis and Samuel L Jackson. You'd expect that, and you got that. Their performances held the movie up. The movie itself - without giving anything away - wasn't as "twisty" as I expected but it does keep you on edge due to the tenseness of all the characters, particularly McAvoy's "Split" character. In the end I did get the similar feeling I got when I watched Unbreakable. (I haven't watched Split yet). It was OK satisfying but not over the top. I think the problem M. Night Shyamalan is that Sixth Sense was so extraordinary that it is very hard for him to top that. Overall, it's a reasonably satisfying movie, but I felt that I wanted more fleshed out. Personally, I give it a 6/10… Expand

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

6

artardmosheaFeb 25, 2019

I think this movie would be impossible to enjoy without seeing both Unbreakable and Split, even taking that into account I think this movie was the weakest of the three and suffers greatly for needing to take so much time building the bridgeI think this movie would be impossible to enjoy without seeing both Unbreakable and Split, even taking that into account I think this movie was the weakest of the three and suffers greatly for needing to take so much time building the bridge to the first two without retelling the story and not spending enough time creating it's own story.

So what you are left with has very little weight to it and comes off as a goofy sub-superhero movie with no flash of a big blockbuster and no story that you would hope for.

McAvoy does all the heavy lifting, Jackson was good, Willis wasn't given much to do.

The ending was jarring and unsatisfying.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

moviemitch96Jan 18, 2019

So I was really looking forward to this once it was revealed that the films 'Unbreakable' and 'Split' were tied together and that Bruce Willis and Samuel L. Jackson's characters from 'Unbreakable'would be meeting James McAvoy's from 'Split'.So I was really looking forward to this once it was revealed that the films 'Unbreakable' and 'Split' were tied together and that Bruce Willis and Samuel L. Jackson's characters from 'Unbreakable'would be meeting James McAvoy's from 'Split'. For those unfamiliar with the stories to both those films, in 'Unbreakable', Bruce Willis and Samuel L. Jackson play individuals with unique traits and abilities. Having gone his whole life surviving several severe accidents and realizing he just might be immortal, David Dunn (Willis) uses his superhuman strength and psychic abilities for good and helping others, while a fragile and crippled man named Elijah Price (Jackson) acts as a resentful villain to Willis's hero. In 'Split', McAvoy plays Kevin Wendell Crumb, a man who not only kidnaps young women, but also happens to have multiple personality disorder, one of these personalities being a large, dangerous, and aggressive one known as 'The Beast.' This film unites these three characters together and ultimately pits them against one another. While this premise had been in the making for years and sounded so cool as an idea and the way it was teased at the end of 'Split', I have to say that I was quite underwhelmed with the execution of said idea in this film. I really felt like it had great potential, but this film really took forever to get moving at a decent pace and mostly felt like build-up and set-up, with the final half hour being the only somewhat exciting portion of the film. It just seemed to take a while to find its footing and wasn't sure what it wanted to be. Another thriller? Another action film? A drama? It certainly felt like a drama to me, as it took forever to get into the action and thriller elements that made 'Unbreakable' and 'Split' pretty solid films. I will say that as expected, the acting from all was outstanding, with McAvoy once again juggling and shifting back and forth between so many different personalities and expressions seamlessly, and Willis and Jackson both having some great and worthwhile moments of their own as well. Overall, the acting was definitely a highlight, and on paper, the premise sounded so perfect and cool, but the film's uncertainty with its pacing and exactly what genre it wanted to be or stick with made it fall short of my hopes and expectations unfortunately. But if for anything, see it for the nostalgia from Willis and Jackson, as well as for McAvoy's brilliant performance (or should I say performances thanks to his multiple personalities.) Seriously, he's easily steals the show, just as he did in 'Split'! Oh and of course, since it is M. Night Shyamalan directing again, you're right to expect some sort of twist at the end.… Expand

5 of 8 users found this helpful53

All this user's reviews

6

Voodoo123Mar 21, 2020

This film feels like a real fringe project from Shyamalan cashing in on Willis' cameo at the end of split with a full on ensemble 'comic book' movie. The concept here is fascinating and if you can switch your brain to 'full cheese' mode thenThis film feels like a real fringe project from Shyamalan cashing in on Willis' cameo at the end of split with a full on ensemble 'comic book' movie. The concept here is fascinating and if you can switch your brain to 'full cheese' mode then you will definitely get more from watching this. I got 'feels' in the showdown but really it was a huge tease to get to that point. Samuel L felt criminally underused here and you have to wait some 20-30 mins just to see his face :( Again the screenplay and direction are not the strength but the production is solid although I get the feeling most of it was spent just to get Jackson and Willis onto the project. More entertaining than I thought it would be!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Meth-dudeJan 23, 2019

While it's not awful, it's no masterpiece either. The acting is generally good, although watching McAvoy's character constantly changing personalities was cringe inducing, the cinematography looks good, and the ending was fun. Unfortunately,While it's not awful, it's no masterpiece either. The acting is generally good, although watching McAvoy's character constantly changing personalities was cringe inducing, the cinematography looks good, and the ending was fun. Unfortunately, the movie is quite boring and the plot twist at the end was predictable. It's not a bad movie, it's just very average.… Expand

4 of 7 users found this helpful43

All this user's reviews

6

SSRJan 19, 2019

Not as good as Unbreakable, and a notch lower than Split, and although it still has some interesting moments and some great performances they are letdown by an overwrought story.

9 of 13 users found this helpful94

All this user's reviews

6

HotelCentralApr 27, 2019

I'm not sure how this could happen without one of us being drunk or stoned but I appear to be more or less in agreement with the "average" of reviews on MetaCritic.

Glass is basically a blah. It's fairly entertaining because the cast seemsI'm not sure how this could happen without one of us being drunk or stoned but I appear to be more or less in agreement with the "average" of reviews on MetaCritic.

Glass is basically a blah. It's fairly entertaining because the cast seems to promise so much with virtually every scene, but Sarah Paulson gets stuck with the "superpowers are just a delusion" plotline (yawn) and ultimately the film goes nowhere. Yes, there's a fight that goes on and on a while, but the finale leaves one wondering if the people responsible for making the movie just ran out of ideas.

OK, if you're really really fascinated by people comparing events in "real life" to things in "comic books", and a lot of talk about plot devices, then you might be totally delighted.

Here's the thing: there's a new giant-sized skyscraper that's opening up. This gets built up along the way so you can be sure the final climactic finale is going to intrude on the skyscraper's opening ceremony. But then the finale happens in a parking lot. Very anticlimactic and probably a lot cheaper to film. And it's indicative of my reaction to the film as a whole.

Like the old Joni Mitchel song says, "...you don't know what you've got til it's gone, They paved paradise And put up a parking lot..."… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

6

halo124Aug 24, 2019

the movie has great pacing, acting and great use of colour but the ending is the one thing in the entire movie which annoyed me so much you have to see the movie to believe it and i dont want to spoil it.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

GLADIADORJun 3, 2019

Esse filme é ok, mais poderia ter sido melhor, a ação não empolgar nenhum pouco e é bem lento e arrastado, mais o final surpreende de certa forma

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

qbaseApr 7, 2019

Τo «Glass» στερείται της αγωνίας, των ανατρεπτικών ιδεών και της υποβλητικής κινηματoγραφικής αφήγησης των δύo πρώτων ταινιών της τριλογίας. Επιπλέον δεν oλοκληρώνεται, δυστυχώς, η εξαιρετικά ενδιαφέρoυσα απόπειρα του Σιάμαλαν για μιαΤo «Glass» στερείται της αγωνίας, των ανατρεπτικών ιδεών και της υποβλητικής κινηματoγραφικής αφήγησης των δύo πρώτων ταινιών της τριλογίας. Επιπλέον δεν oλοκληρώνεται, δυστυχώς, η εξαιρετικά ενδιαφέρoυσα απόπειρα του Σιάμαλαν για μια πρωτότυπη και ανορθόδoξη ανάγνωση του μύθου των υπερηρώων, στην oποία o παράγoντας του αβάσταχτου πόνου είναι καθoριστικός για την επιλογή του καλού ή του κακού στρατoπέδου...… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

onyxhFeb 2, 2019

Many audiences believe that the film did not meet their expectations due to its "disappointing" ending, and many of them are idiots who do not understand the theme of M. Night Shyamalan's trilogy. It is suppose to give superheroes a moreMany audiences believe that the film did not meet their expectations due to its "disappointing" ending, and many of them are idiots who do not understand the theme of M. Night Shyamalan's trilogy. It is suppose to give superheroes a more realistic perspective if they were ever a possible existence in our world. Glass provided us with an anticlimatic ending because it stayed true to its theme. Audiences were expecting a linear story where a final showdown in some sort of grand stadium occurs with the hero winning and going home. This would probably be what would've happened if this was any other superhero movie like X-men. However, realistically, the super-humans probably would've just fought in a more common area in the society they lived in, and they probably would've been condemned quickly by authorities. There are many subtle messages and hidden clues laid out all over the film. If move critics watched the movie a couple more times they would likely see it in a different light, but they usually only care about racing to be the first people writing a review on the movie. They are making the same mistake they did 19 years ago when Unbreakable first came out...… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

6

MoviezNPAug 14, 2019

I am extremely happy that the Eastrail trilogy exists, but I extremely sad about how it chose to go off. I will recommend it, but man, I feel so mixed about it. .
.
Good : Shyamalan gives us a potentially great movie with some unforgivableI am extremely happy that the Eastrail trilogy exists, but I extremely sad about how it chose to go off. I will recommend it, but man, I feel so mixed about it. .
.
Good : Shyamalan gives us a potentially great movie with some unforgivable flaws. The setting and the concept looks really incredible. Bruce Willis looked really good after a very long time. He cared for his role and was great as David Dunn. Naturally, James McAvoy gives an incredible performance as Kevin and the other personalities. Samuel Jackson kills it as Mr. Glass yet again. He is not in a role that we usually see him in, and he hasn't lost the touch in perhaps the most "against type" role he has ever done. The first act and how all the three lead characters are brought together is quite good. There are emotional scenes and deaths. All of them hit the perfect note for me. I was almost crying in those scenes. There were some characters I never wanted to see dying, but they do. I would've never minded if they were unrealistically resurrected, but they aren't. It's not a spoiler at all. It made me realize how well Shyamalan wrote and directed those characters and how amazing the respective performances were, and how much I liked each of them. Also, I loved how Shyamalan used some of the deleted scenes from Unbreakable in this movie. .
.
Mixed : We got to see a lot of Kevin's identities than in Split, but I think the less was more in this case. McAvoy did a great job, but many parts felt as a forced spot for some random character to pop out. Anya Taylor-Joy gives a great performance, but we don't buy what she does due to a poorer writing and underdeveloped emotional weights. She does her job very well to elevate the material, and I loved what she did. But in the end, it wasn't so believable. Honestly, I don't think she was needed in the film. And finally I admire Shyamalan's guts to send off the main characters in the way he did. But, the way they went off didn't do a proper justice to them. The same thing could've been done in a much better way. .
.
Bad : The most frustrating part would be the arc given to David Dunn. It was the most poorly done part of the movie. In particular, the way they sent him off was the most frustrating part of the movie. I can accept the way how the others were sent off, but not him. He deserved a lot better than this. It felt as if Shyamalan wanted to do it properly, but couldn't because of the budget or studio interference. And the last two twists. The first one was something I have seen in some horror films, and I have started to feel that such an interpretation is the most blant thing to do. The second twist involves Mr. Glass. The twist gives a feel good moment, but since it involves Mr. Glass, the f**king terrorist who killed a lot of people, it didn't feel right in the direction they went. Lastly, there are some plot hole type of stuff there. The way they decided to control Kevin's personalities could've been avoided if he would cover his eyes. The way they use water as a "kryptonite" for Dunn was stupid and totally different from the one done in Unbreakable. Mr. Glass' plan seem to work perfectly, but it feels as if he knew how every single thing would turn out in the end, which is impossible. Also, there are some comic book panels which show the exact stuff that happen in Split, and makes a little to no sense. There are shots which tend to establish a link between Casey and Dunn, but I don't know how that worked. .
.
Conclusion : Only I know how much I wanted to give it an absolute 10/10 and an A+. Sadly, I cannot do it. I read somewhere that it was supposed to be a 3.5 hour long movie. I am really eager to watch the Director's cut. It doesn't feel like the exact movie Shyamalan planned to do. It feels like a really great movie trimmed down. Not choppy editing. I feel as if the ideas that were in this movie were not completely explored. As a Shyamalan movie, it is in my top 5. It's way better than some s**t he gave us, earlier this decade. But still, Sixth Sense and Unbreakable remain the ultimate greats he has given. .
.
Rating. .
.
Score : 6.7/10
Grade : B+
.
(Only I know how bad I am feeling to assign these ratings to this movie)… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

lcamoviereviewsApr 19, 2019

Where to start. Well. Let me begin by saying I enjoyed "Split". James McAvoy has a excellent performance in that and he again steals the show in this film even among top tier talent. I have never seen "Unbreakable" and after seeing this film,Where to start. Well. Let me begin by saying I enjoyed "Split". James McAvoy has a excellent performance in that and he again steals the show in this film even among top tier talent. I have never seen "Unbreakable" and after seeing this film, I don't have much motivation to see it now. The ending and third act of this film greatly affect that. The film does indeed start with promise. We get reintroduced to Bruce Willis's character from "Unbreakable", in my case, a new introduction. I liked this but there was still a lot of mystery to his vigilante acts and it ties nicely into his hunt for McAvoy's beast. We get some moments of humor in there to which again is a fine touch from M. Night's films. There is not many M. Night films that I have been a big fan of. "Lady in the Water" was a complete dud as was "The Village". Then there is "Signs" which is just OK. I am more partial to his TV work with "Wayward Pines" but even that when way off the deep end in season 2 and lost me greatly. Seems like it did with a lot of people as the show was then canceled. The first 30 minutes or so of this film is entertaining and interesting with Willis hunting down McAvoy leading to them being captured by Dr. Ellie Staple, played by the always great Sarah Paulson. She is another one that steals this movie. This film is very much the McAvoy and Paulson show. I thought the capture sequence was a bit odd and didn't quite feel right but I won't complain about this. The sequences in the intution are well acted and really bring the performances for the entire cast. Anya Taylor-Joy was a welcome return from "Split" and I thought here scenes with McAvoy were heartwarming and touching. If there is one thing that I can take away from this film, it's their scenes. I really enjoyed them and really felt their moments until the end. Here is where I have some issues. Number 1, Sam Jackson is very underused in this film. I have to question why this film is named after him. He doesn't have much to do nor does he have a great deal of screen time. I understand that the motivation in the end is his but this film does not deserve the title. This is still very much McAvoy's film and The Horde is the driving force of this film. More of a "Split" sequel I'd say. Bruce Willis is just alright here as well. I expected so much more considering the screen time he gets in the beginning but he sort of just fades into the black as the film goes on and his end is very disappointing. But then again, so is the while final act. Without going into too much spoiler territory, I can just say that the final act makes "Unbreakable" and "Split" almost feel redundant. Poor story choices and big picture explanations are just confusing and I felt myself shaking my head through the last 10 minutes. This as a whole hurts the film entirely. I wanted to like it, I really did. I just left the theater feeling disappointed and asking why did M. Night make these story decisions. Grade: C-… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

wayrezMay 14, 2020

Despite the good acting game James McAvoy film turned out very weak in many ways.
It's a pity that this happened because it could have been a longer series of films in this universe.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Sarian263Mar 15, 2021

This movie wasn't too bad. It was not great by any stretch of the imagination but it wasn't as bad as critics make it out to be. All three leads (Samuel L Jackson, James McAvoy and Bruce Willis) all do a great job in their own parts. TheThis movie wasn't too bad. It was not great by any stretch of the imagination but it wasn't as bad as critics make it out to be. All three leads (Samuel L Jackson, James McAvoy and Bruce Willis) all do a great job in their own parts. The movie starts strong but I think if you go into this movie with high expectations (Like I did) you may come out a bit disappointed. By the 3rd act we knew what was going to happen and how it was going to end. Not bad but could of been more for me personally.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

tharikleoApr 19, 2021

Desapontador em todos os sentidos, apesar de manter o ritmo frenético da franquia peca pelos excessos e o final deprimente.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

TyranianSep 17, 2019

Has a vaguely intriguing story and decent acting but has too many plotholes and dumbities.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

Compi24Jan 19, 2019

Fans of either "Unbreakable" or "Split" beware, "Glass's" blatant disregard for its central trio of characters may just infuriate, disappoint, or otherwise disturb you. The movie's first three-quarters had me so rapt, riveted, and drawn in,Fans of either "Unbreakable" or "Split" beware, "Glass's" blatant disregard for its central trio of characters may just infuriate, disappoint, or otherwise disturb you. The movie's first three-quarters had me so rapt, riveted, and drawn in, but it's the ending that ultimately left me feeling like Samuel L. Jackson's "Elijah Price" at the beginning of this trilogy's first installment -- alone, small, and misunderstood. I thought I was on the same page with Shyamalan when it came to the rules of this world, the import of these characters, and the direction at hand. I suppose I was wrong, and I'm crestfallen as a result. Ugh.… Expand

7 of 15 users found this helpful78

All this user's reviews

5

NightReviewsFeb 12, 2019

The time is 2019, and as an audience member and lover of film and cinema in a contemporary world, one has to understand and come to terms with the fact that superhero films are here, and seem to be here to stay for an unforeseen future. WhileThe time is 2019, and as an audience member and lover of film and cinema in a contemporary world, one has to understand and come to terms with the fact that superhero films are here, and seem to be here to stay for an unforeseen future. While many claim to be tired and exasperated with the not so recent trend of the superhero genre, it seems that the numbers don’t really reflect the attitudes. While sighs are heard every time a new trailer for a Marvel or DC Universe film is revealed from a majority, the box office for these films just keep getting bigger and bigger with each new character, entry, sequel or prequel.
Yet, while Marvel and DC aren’t the only ones pumping out superhero films, and well before the Marvel Cinematic Universe became nomenclature for many, it seems that M. Night Shaymalan was well ahead of the curb when it came to creating his own universe of superheroes and villains, we just were not aware of it at the time.

While Split revealed a very exciting fact in the closing credits scene, it seems that the secret is out on Glass, Shaymalan’s newest film. Less of an emotional twist ending and more of a narrative one, Split revealed that the film existed in the same universe as Shaymalan’s highly applauded and loved origin superhero film Unbreakable.

Yet, while many believed that Shaymalan’s golden days were behind him as a director, Split seemed to have revived the once untouchable then plagued director back into the spotlight. After the massive success of Split and the idea to connect his two creations into one universe and have them collide in Glass, was a risk the studio was willing to make, especially given the director’s modest budgeting range. While Unbreakable was made on an unusually large $75 million dollar budget back in 2000 (which was unheard of then, but thanks to the immense success of The Sixth Sense, studios were hopeful), the film only brought in only $250 million worldwide, which only paled in comparison to the director’s hit The Sixth Sense, a film that brought in almost $700 million on a miniature $40 million budget. Yet, after a string of massive critical failures, including Lady In The Water, The Happening, The Last Airbender and After Earth, with only one of those films being a box office slump in Lady In The Water, Shaymalan went from critical darling and wonder-kid, to a running gag within the film industry. Yet, after almost a decade of making terrible films, Shaymalan resilience brought him a return to form, thanks to his comeback film and going back to his horror roots with the low-budget indie film The Visit, thus resurrecting the once ostracized filmmaker.

With new life and his origin intentions of creating a trilogy based superhero universe well before Marvel and Kevin Feige was even in the picture, Shaymalan began extending his superhero world with Split, unknown to audiences at the time. With a budget of only $9 million dollars, Shaymalan focused less on spectacle and created a superhero universe grounded in character study and depth; focusing more on ‘what’ makes a superhero/villain as opposed to the challenges they face once they are fully evolved. For Glass, another modest budget of $20 million shows just how little faith the Hollywood studios have in the once dominating director, especially when that amount of money barely pays for a headlining actor or a marketing budget. Yet, nineteen years later, here we are with Glass, the finale of what’s being called the East Rail 177 trilogy.

Dissecting Glass for too long, one may very well make the whole film shatter; but as fragile and tempered the film really is, the ambition behind an almost two decade long dream, is quite remarkable, especially during a time where superhero films are pumped out faster than human life is. One of the many satisfying factors of Glass is Shaymalan’s ability to round-up characters from the first two films, and each character never skipping a beat in Glass; the performances are easily the best parts of the film.

Picking up right where Split left off, David Dunn (Bruce Willis) and his sidekick son and tech savvy partner, providing Dunn with his eyes and ears, Joseph Dunn (Spencer Treat Clark, the original son in Unbreakable which was great to see) use the internet, social media and surveillance technology as tools towards capturing the troubled Kevin Wendell Crumb (James McAvoy). After successfully tracking down Crumb before he takes the lives of another innocent group of teenage girls, Dunn and Crumb engage in a very muted and underwhelming face-off, until they are both captured by the authorities, accompanied by “comic-book therapist” Dr. Ellie Staple (Sarah Paulson). Brought to a psychiatric ward where Dr.Staple is keen on giving realization that both men are in fact not superhuman, they both soon realize that Elijah Price aka Mister Glass (Samuel L. Jackson) is in the same hospital following his terrifying acts in Unbreakable.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

5

AndremaxFeb 4, 2019

Glass is a rollercoaster between genuine acting and grotesque moments of fail that doesn't even passes by less attentive eyes.

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

5

eagleeyevikingJun 28, 2019

While the overall theme of “Glass” regarding superheroes resonate, the film itself never churns to life mainly because of twists that don’t work and a tone that feels strangely flat.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

ScienceAdvisorJan 22, 2019

The last third of the movie is exposition city, describing what is going on instead of doing it. The degredation of the writing is shockingly poor with plot holes and contrivance that leaves the buildup as disposable. The Shyamalanic twistThe last third of the movie is exposition city, describing what is going on instead of doing it. The degredation of the writing is shockingly poor with plot holes and contrivance that leaves the buildup as disposable. The Shyamalanic twist is disappointing to say the least, and the big reveal ranges from yawn-inspiring to soul-shattering. The dropped continuity of two murderers (the largest mass murderer in history and the other a cannibal of young girls) suddenly being treated their powers are a positive, is downright demented and betrays the previous two movies in yet another attempted retcon by Hollywood. The final objective point is that for a movie called Glass, it would have been nice if he was in the first two-thirds of the film. When he finally does arrive it does pickup, but by that point the writing has degraded to the point where even McAvoy and Jackson can save it. The combat is decent in the first third, and lackluster and disappointing for the rest of the movie.

I guess all the people handing out 10s while suggesting the reviewers are wrong were not really paying attention to the series, and are treating Glass as a stand-alone movie, when it is the third part of a trilogy. As a single movie it would be better by one point, but as the climax to a nearly 20 year series it just falls flat. You would have to be not only easy to please, but have a comprehensive disorder to truly enjoy Glass. Either that or use some form of temporary method of achiving that state. If you have seen the previous two movies (Unbreakable and Shattered) you will have to see it for yourself, but set your expectations very low as it all falls apart in the end. Great performances from McAvoy and Jackson as well as the build up, but sadly the delivery is unsatisfying. Stand alone movie 6/10, as the end to the trilogy 5/10
Breakdown by thirds (out of 10): 8, 5, 3… Expand

4 of 9 users found this helpful45

All this user's reviews

5

AcaciaJan 22, 2019

I have seen all of M. Night’s movies, good and bad. For me, this one falls somewhere in the middle. I did not enjoy this movie and had a pretty hard time figuring out what was going on. I thought it was very confounding and often just kindI have seen all of M. Night’s movies, good and bad. For me, this one falls somewhere in the middle. I did not enjoy this movie and had a pretty hard time figuring out what was going on. I thought it was very confounding and often just kind of stupid. For those of you who really liked it, I am happy for you, because I really wanted to like it too. Unfortunately, I just came away feeling very disappointed. So much of it didn’t make any sense to me.… Expand

5 of 9 users found this helpful54

All this user's reviews

5

PipeCMar 28, 2019

M. Night Shyamalan hovering between hero and villain in the final chapter of his mini-universe of extraordinary beings.

Let me be clear: Shyamalan's one of my favorite directors working right now and I will fight tooth and nail to stand upM. Night Shyamalan hovering between hero and villain in the final chapter of his mini-universe of extraordinary beings.

Let me be clear: Shyamalan's one of my favorite directors working right now and I will fight tooth and nail to stand up for him. My duty as a reviewer, however, must always overcome any subjective approach, any dishonest desire. But, why do I say all this? While it's true that the last act of this third installment is insanely brilliant, off-kilter, twisted, as everything surrounding the filmmaker, and cinematically fabulous, act one and two are practically a mess, a deadening pileup of weird decisions that instead of infusing new perspectives into the nowadays suffocating superhero genre, indirectly undermines the exciting plot threads and the style/artistic exercises of the two previous prequels. We're talking about Shyamalan, a name attached to both bewilderment and surprise; for better or worse, "Glass," a film I followed carefully throughout the production, is not the first disappointment of the year, but it does be the most bittersweet yet entertaining ride a movie buff will have in the first two months of this new year. There are serious issues all around the first and second act, among them the tragic absence of something the director has stood out for from the beginning. In the first acts of his best pics, the story drags a sense of restlessness, an enervating discomfort that illuminates the way for the big finale. In the second acts, tension and uncertainty reach unimaginable heights, forcing audiences to keep their breath all along the controversial climax. It's inconceivable then that the first half of "Glass" is a havoc of flat scenes, lacking charm and tact, soul and suspense, in very large part by defective editing.

It must be said that young Charles Xavier hands down saves the entire second act to be an outright disaster. The intervention I refer to takes place halfway the feature film between Kevin Wendell Crumb and Dr. Ellie Staple in the one-color psychiatric ward, and is a masterfully performed, planned and filmed, is terrifying, ironic and impressive in unison. James McAvoy steals the entire movie and takes, again, all the interpretative praises. Patricia, Dennis, Hedwig and some of the other cool personalities are back, who, thanks to the laborious performance of the "Atonement" actor, are fully credible, plausible despite his imposing physical. The actor jumping from one character to another knocks us all out, we're in front of a different person in every change. "Split" is still the one that treasures his tour-de-force, but McAvoy is phenomenal here leading it with a performance worthy of cult status.

I guarantee you, you're not ready for the grand finale. Talking about plot twists and the last thirty minutes, personally, is pretty much the same thing. It's fascinating how it realistically blends comic book structures into storytelling, moving along within the canons of the all-time comic book proceedings. But this is Shyamalan, so you better look closer. The long-awaited showdown and its corresponding adjunct are as good as they can possibly be, bathed with powerful realism and pessimism that some fans — because this is a movie for fans — will have to think twice to swallow what just happened on screen. Likewise, its low key set-pieces, the trio of performances and the stealthy but aggressive writing moves make up a glorious, intelligent and above all human ending. "Glass" by M. Night Shyamalan is by no means one of the filmmaker's top works. You have to see at least "Unbreakable" — which it's most related to — to understand everything this last installment, which should serve as an integral, standalone film such as "Split", tries to unpack. The film has no identity because of the strange ingredients it mixes up to prove it's unlike the other superhero flicks out there; it's neither a thriller, a fantasy/drama nor a suspense pic, it's all of them at once, a terrible phenomenon coming from a lazy, flat and cinematic energy-free first act. Aesthetically, it doesn't stand out; yes, it's not a big-budget production, but Chris Trujillo's production design and Mike Gioulakis' peculiar cinematography doesn't fit in with each other or the most groundbreaking genre incursions. On the upside, the movie's saved by James McAvoy, who's superb as Kevin and all his personalities once again, a slightly exciting score by West Dylan Thordson — who blatantly borrows "Split" compositions, — a commendable, delicate resolution by Shyamalan and a third act so well executed that it'll surely leave you speechless, something that, in one way or another, the filmmaker keeps doing masterfully.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

5

abm0Feb 14, 2019

I'll give it a passing grade because it kept me intrigued almost up to the end, even though the final disappointment dragged it down to a 4/10 for me, honestly. The action was lackluster even compared to Unbreakable, every fight scene lookedI'll give it a passing grade because it kept me intrigued almost up to the end, even though the final disappointment dragged it down to a 4/10 for me, honestly. The action was lackluster even compared to Unbreakable, every fight scene looked like the characters were convinced in their own heads they could make it impressive yet just couldn't translate that thought into action no matter how hard they tried. Beyond that, almost all "meta human" material revolved around James McAvoy's ability to change personalities at the flip of a switch, something that got old very quickly. The "payoff" was not all that original, and so unimpressively presented that I think I might've been less disappointed if they had finished it on that other possible conclusion they kept hinting at in the first half (still would've been a disappointment but maybe a bit more tolerable).

If you liked Unbreakable, don't worry about Glass, you can skip it and you'll be fine. It doesn't add anything to it, possibly quite the contrary. If you haven't seen any of the 3 movies, just watch Unbreakable, and if you're bored one day give Split a shot, it's not that bad and doesn't intersect with Unbreakable much at all. But skip Glass, it's not a movie anyone needed. Much less any continuation they left it open to.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

joeyabukiApr 13, 2019

Not a bad movie... but not a good movie either. I think the better word that defines this movie is DISAPPOINTING. M. Night Shyamalan ruins his own universe/world with this one. Shots are well achieved, clean and pure, colours are also veryNot a bad movie... but not a good movie either. I think the better word that defines this movie is DISAPPOINTING. M. Night Shyamalan ruins his own universe/world with this one. Shots are well achieved, clean and pure, colours are also very well used. OST non-existent. Nothing happens in all the movie (although that's not bad), it's really slow, it cooks slowly and it's the best part (unless we are thinking that), but suddenly everything goes to hell in the final act when it started to go up level, A PIECE OF **** suddenly a sect appears that wants to destroy superhumans, it doesn't matter if you're good or bad (every good part is in the **** trailers and clips). The only thing that raises the film is James McAvoy's performance. Don't go to watch this, don't waste your money and time. In the end i wanted to end this torture, there were people who were yawning.

P.S.: In the last 3 mins. Shyamalan tries to fix it with one of his famous plot twist but it was too late already.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

5

JLuis_001Feb 18, 2019

Before Split we didn't need a sequel for Unbreakable. I'm telling the truth and considering that it was the last great Shyamalan film, it was evident that it could end up damaging his legacy.

Split wasn't really bad, at all, although it wasBefore Split we didn't need a sequel for Unbreakable. I'm telling the truth and considering that it was the last great Shyamalan film, it was evident that it could end up damaging his legacy.

Split wasn't really bad, at all, although it was hardly a memorable film and set a good base for a very interesting confrontation in the closing chapter and with Glass, Shyamalan could have done something impressive but he couldn't.
It seems he was afraid of his own ambition. He tried to overanalyze something that it shouldn't and he also locks up his characters when he should have freed them and unfortunately constructs a conclusion as laughable as uninspired.

Bonus points for its three main actors. McAvoy incredible, he effortlessly steals the scenes to Samuel L. Jackson and Bruce Willis.

Glass is unfortunately one of those cases in which the expectations end up killing the product delivered and it's a pity because I really wanted this to be a great film… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

5

GrantD243Jan 22, 2019

Glass takes a bit of a different approach to the story than I expected. I appreciate how it all comes together in the end with Mr. Glass, but a lot of what happens before that (including "the twist") left me scratching my head. I also foundGlass takes a bit of a different approach to the story than I expected. I appreciate how it all comes together in the end with Mr. Glass, but a lot of what happens before that (including "the twist") left me scratching my head. I also found David Dunn's arc to be incredibly disappointing. It's a mixed bag, but I am glad that M. Night Shyamalan was able to end this trilogy how he wanted.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

5

Vitor007Jan 28, 2019

The conclusion of a universe "unpublished" of cinemas is not a disaster, but it cannot be good. The end of a trilogy that originates from the classic "Unbreakable", makes us anxious in "Split", falls into "Glass ". With a naïve script, theThe conclusion of a universe "unpublished" of cinemas is not a disaster, but it cannot be good. The end of a trilogy that originates from the classic "Unbreakable", makes us anxious in "Split", falls into "Glass ". With a naïve script, the film tries to emscore new connections only in its conclusion, to try to revive the public, after hours whose no surprising event occurs to revive its script. The interpretation of the characters, although they fall from income, remain well synchronized. I'm not saying I can do better than that, but we all know it could have been better. 5.7/10… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

5

clarkaddisonJan 30, 2019

A disappointing third movie in a trilogy. With two many loose ends and a long ridiculous ending, this movie just disappoints. Without some great music and acting this movie would be even worse off.

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

5

Bolt86Jan 18, 2019

Watched Glass on 01/18/2018. I have mixed feelings about the movie. While I thought many parts of the movie were interesting and worked well, the conclusion was just very underwhelming. Admittedly, I left the theater somewhat disappointedWatched Glass on 01/18/2018. I have mixed feelings about the movie. While I thought many parts of the movie were interesting and worked well, the conclusion was just very underwhelming. Admittedly, I left the theater somewhat disappointed that I had sat through two hours only to be given such an anticlimactic ending. I don't think Glass was a great movie, nor do I think it was terrible. It lies somewhere in the middle for me.… Expand

5 of 12 users found this helpful57

All this user's reviews

5

Sam11Jan 19, 2019

The only thing that keeps this movie from being awful is James McAvoys absolutely stunning performance. Unfortunately he alone cannot save this movie. As a conclusion to it's amazing prequels it ultimately disappoints with an ending that willThe only thing that keeps this movie from being awful is James McAvoys absolutely stunning performance. Unfortunately he alone cannot save this movie. As a conclusion to it's amazing prequels it ultimately disappoints with an ending that will most likely sour your experience with these 3 movies.… Expand

4 of 10 users found this helpful46

All this user's reviews

5

movieseeerJan 27, 2019

GLASS #9

I wasn’t particularly thrilled by M. Night Shyamalan’s split personality film before this one called, indeed, Split. But here is its sequel Glass, which finds the 3 ‘bad guys’ of the core of these films, Unbreakable, Night’s bestGLASS #9

I wasn’t particularly thrilled by M. Night Shyamalan’s split personality film before this one called, indeed, Split. But here is its sequel Glass, which finds the 3 ‘bad guys’ of the core of these films, Unbreakable, Night’s best film to date, in a Psyche facility as prisoners. There is The Beast, the split personality character from Split who calls himself the Horde. Glass himself a mostly comatose character throughout the film who is the mastermind behind the train wreck in Unbreakable and of course Bruce Willis reprising his Unbreakable self from the same named film.

All three share a wing at this insane asylum but I was glad that the film had some action before the shrinks got ahold of the story. Nothing scintillating but at least there’s something to go on. After the opening the three have long and useless chats with the resident psychoanalyst, Dr. Ellie Staple. Most of the supposed ‘events’ in the film concern The Beast where actor, James McAvoy can try on a few lisps and mannerisms, that do feel contrived and mostly Hollywood in tone and circumference. The movie really is missing action as the main story is if these three are ‘Special’ with a capital S, are they Superheroes, like Superman or as the analyst demands, are they ordinary men with delusions. Not a bad supposition but here in Glass there is in the end a somewhat secret society that thinks these ‘insane’ should be suppressed. One does wonder what for, as these ‘freaks’ really aren’t likely to get any traction in larger society. 5.5 Out Of 10

Glass reaches it’s harebrained conclusion but takes some time in getting there, by then there doesn’t seem to be all that much going on. The ‘nuts’ are all dead, and the ‘clowns’ the general public are all put back to sleep. The last scenes of this are oddly ineffective but Shyamalan’s dreadful fear of anything happening at all dangerous etc., is thankfully for him, put down. #CLAYSMOVIEREVIEWS #movie #movies #film #films
#cinema #instamovie #instamovies
#moviefan #moviereview #review
#critic #filmcritic #critical #moviecritic
#rated #cinema #reviews #moviereviews #GLASS #MNIGHTSHYAMALAN… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

SryRealJun 2, 2019

Disappointing finale to an underrated series. Plot travels nowhere, deflating ending, pointless lacklustre film.

MNight does a fine job directing, but not enough to save film

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

5

NickTheCritickNov 2, 2021

I really loved "Split" but I can't say the same about Glass. This one seems to me a confused movie, based on a confused screenplay and directed by a confused Shyamalan. The ending seems like the director is trying tu put some puzzle piecesI really loved "Split" but I can't say the same about Glass. This one seems to me a confused movie, based on a confused screenplay and directed by a confused Shyamalan. The ending seems like the director is trying tu put some puzzle pieces together. Puzzle pieces that he tries to take from the previous two movies of the "Ubreakable thrilogy" in order to assemble them together resulting in a messy movie. This is a strange thrilogy where the second movie is incomparably better than both the first movie and the third one.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

ColginatorFeb 10, 2019

To give a quick overview of how I feel about Shaymylan's work, I believe he has made only two good films. One of those films is Unbreakable, a great take on comic book mythos telling an interesting story about an ordinary man trying to comeTo give a quick overview of how I feel about Shaymylan's work, I believe he has made only two good films. One of those films is Unbreakable, a great take on comic book mythos telling an interesting story about an ordinary man trying to come to terms with the fact that he may have extraordinary abilities.

Unfortunately Shyamalan's films after that ranged between being OK to being so bad that they end up feeling like an SNL parody sketch of what a bad film would look like. But then 16 years later, Shyamalan came out with Split which revealed in the end credits that it was a secret sequel to Unbreakable and that his next film would be a crossover where the unbreakable man meets the unstoppable force.

And it certainly starts off like that, with David (once again played by Bruce Willis) hunting down Kevin (James McAvoy) to end a killing spree he has been on since the end of split. However after a brief confrontation, a psychiatrist played by Sarah Paulson arrives with armed guards and puts them in a psychiatric facility where Jackson's Elijah has been since the end of Unbreakable and she tells them that they are all suffering from psychological delusions that they are super powered beings.

Unfortunately after this a lot of the rest of the film rarely has the main trio of actors being in the same room as each other. This is likely due to budgetary constraints or scheduling issues as even in scene's where they are supposed to be in the same room, it's shot in a way that makes it clear that they came in to film in separate days.

The lack of time together causes two big problems for the film. Firstly the leads don't get enough screen time to build up a good arc in the film, with Willis absent through most of the build up to the climax and Jackson not becoming involved until over half way in to the film. And I know that Jackson has a busy schedule appearing in every film ever made, but you'd really think the title character would get a bit more screen time.

Second, part of the reason why people were interested in the crossover is to see these characters interact. What David's relationship with Elijah would be like knowing he was responsible for killing every person on the train. Or how he interacts with McAvoy's 20 plus personalities. But we don't get that because there is not enough time for the actors to bounce off one another and develop their personalities or relationships.

Instead of spending time having these characters interact, most of the film is spent with Sarah Paulson's character trying to convince the trio that they aren't super powered. But we've already spent the past two films exploring whether they are really super-powered beings and have already had their powers confirmed. We've seen McAvoy literally physically transform in to the beast and Willis perform impossible feats of strength, so spending so much time getting the characters to question this feels wasted when it could have been spent exploring new ideas.

Having said all that there are some films that work well in the film. Once again McAvoy pulls off a great performance as the 20+ personalities that make up Kevin. Seeing him switch between these personalities mid shot is really impressive and shows off how well he can develop each of the characters personalities and traits. Plus for the low budget that the film had the few actions sequences that they have are shot in an interesting way. Shaymalan uses quite a few perspective shots and close ups which give the sequences quite a claustrophobic feel.

It also does have several trademark Shyamalan twists. These will probably be the thing that divide the audience the most in this film. Personally I think one of the twists works at deconstructing the comic book mythos, whilst the other twists just don't make practical sense and should have had the characters figure out the twists far earlier in to the film.

Unfortunately this is a weak end to Shamylan's trilogy of superhero films. There's so much wasted potential from this film with Shaymalan rarely giving his characters the time to develop or bounce of one another. Or better yet, after spending the past two films with the characters coming to grips with their own extraordinary powers, wouldn't it have been interesting to see more of how the world reacts to these powers? The film actually hints that it might explore this idea at a few points in the film, but it never really goes anywhere with them.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

4

tropicAcesJan 18, 2019

I loved “Unbreakable” and “Split” was pretty good (until its climax), but this film...just...ugh. It’s slow with no purpose and just kind of Shyamalan’s itself in the climax. Not totally awful just a disappointment given the talent and allI loved “Unbreakable” and “Split” was pretty good (until its climax), but this film...just...ugh. It’s slow with no purpose and just kind of Shyamalan’s itself in the climax. Not totally awful just a disappointment given the talent and all the toys it had at its disposal.… Expand

5 of 12 users found this helpful57

All this user's reviews

4

mijxeroApr 16, 2019

I was very excited for this movie and oh boy, did it take a giant dump on the previous movies. It was painfully boring at the beginning with a few drawn out scenes explaining how they were just regular people despite their obvious abilities.I was very excited for this movie and oh boy, did it take a giant dump on the previous movies. It was painfully boring at the beginning with a few drawn out scenes explaining how they were just regular people despite their obvious abilities. Then the movie had a bit of action, followed by the dumpening, where they just ruined everything. Imagine Yoda being suffocated with a plastic bag, that is how this movie felt.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

4

vlxeditsMar 11, 2019

First 50 minutes are in the same place with no excitement to catch my eyes from closing.

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

4

Rebecca31Jan 25, 2019

Just take a moment to think about the fact that M. Night Shyamalan set up a more successful film Universe than the dead on arrival Dark Universe. I'm sure none of you actually wrote to M. Night requesting a sequel to Split/Unbreakable but ifJust take a moment to think about the fact that M. Night Shyamalan set up a more successful film Universe than the dead on arrival Dark Universe. I'm sure none of you actually wrote to M. Night requesting a sequel to Split/Unbreakable but if films aren't part of some franchise anymore will anyone even bother seeing them? So here we are anyway. The third film in the M. Night Universe, well that is until he decides The Sixth Sense fits into this mess somehow. M. Night is no fool, most of his films (not you Lady in the Water) make a huge amount of money no matter what you think of them. In today's climate superhero movies and horrors are nearly always a sure thing when it comes to financial success so why not combine the genres and see what you get, so we've gotten Glass. A film somewhere in the area of better than The Happening but not as good as Split. But what does it matter what I think of it, or what anyone thinks of it? Glass has only been in cinemas a week and it has already made five times its production budget and you just know this isn't the last we've seen of the M. Night Cinematic Universe. For those of you who do want to know what I thought of it, please continue to read because in case you couldn't tell I didn't like it.

David Dunn (Bruce Willis) is back from Unbreakable and has adopted his vigilante persona as "The Overseer" a raincoat wearing stalkery superhero who beats up bad guys. He turns his attention to Kevin Wendell Crumb (James McAvoy) who is still at large and currently mutilating girls around the town. We also have the return of Elijah Price (Samuel L. Jackson) cause reasons. Meanwhile Doctor Sarah Paulson apparently specialises in this area of mental illness because why not, sure it's the M. Night Universe and anything is possible. Look closely and you might even see a little cameo from M. Night himself. I don't mind a directors cameo but seriously don't give yourself lines you're not an actor. Leave that to the actual actors. Although the only one doing any real acting in this is McAvoy. He's outdone himself yet again and if you thought Split was impressive then watch him transform into all twenty-four personalities before your eyes. Willis on the other hand doesn't look like he cares at all about this film, it's a look of "give me my damn pay cheque and get on with it." I'm beginning to wonder if we just took him out of the film altogether would it even make a difference. Glass will force you to question the possibility of real life superheroes or is it all just happening in their heads, either way don't worry because the movie will stop and explain everything to you every few minutes, and I do mean every few minutes. Split was guilty of this unnecessary plotsplaining only it's somehow worse in Glass. The story felt like it was trying to be more impressive than it was, and although it did try to bring the superhero genre in a new direction I found myself getting repeatedly bored and the only thing that was keeping my attention was McAvoy's performance. As with Split, he is carrying the film and he is honestly the only reason you should give Glass the time of day. Not recommended unless you really have nothing better to do with your time.… Expand

5 of 9 users found this helpful54

All this user's reviews

4

JP32Jun 15, 2020

...The big fat problem with Glass is the writing. You see, it is stuffed with hackneyed garbage. The dialogue especially is a chorus of comic book hokum about heroes, villains, delusions of grandeur, and master plans. It comes from just about...The big fat problem with Glass is the writing. You see, it is stuffed with hackneyed garbage. The dialogue especially is a chorus of comic book hokum about heroes, villains, delusions of grandeur, and master plans. It comes from just about every character, but worst of all is The Horde, played terribly by James McAvoy.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

TrevorsViewJan 31, 2019

Let’s reflect on comic book history, and also compare it to why M. Night Shyamalan’s cap to the Unbreakable trilogy continues his negative artistic streak. In 1897, The Yellow Kid in McFadden’s Flats became the first comic, somethingLet’s reflect on comic book history, and also compare it to why M. Night Shyamalan’s cap to the Unbreakable trilogy continues his negative artistic streak. In 1897, The Yellow Kid in McFadden’s Flats became the first comic, something perfectly straightforward in its simplicity, unlike Glass, which relies on superfluous flashbacks instead of conflict between the three patients who lead the story. The film also diminishes anyone with Brown skin to the background in ever-so-subtle hints of unintentional racism, which feels too much like 1937, when comics evolved into monthly “funnies.” What Shyamalan comments on about the history of superheroes forgets to put Superman’s influence on the subtext, or any true knowledge about the platinum age of comic books. Not just that, he doesn’t even bother to speak up on the reality of superheroes leading psychiatric patients into a dictatorship.

The disloyalty goes on to the comics’ golden age as well, that time when Batman, Wonder Woman, Captain Marvel, Flash, Green Lantern, and others came around. Each of these heroes are still instantly recognizable now because they’re all more sympathetic than the returning Samuel L. Jackson role, Elijah. Here is shown a flashback of his mom watching him get hurt on a carnival ride as a child, yet any internal pain of his remains intangible. Even if he along with the two other freaks are believed to be superheroes, actual comic books have better-analyzed heroic theories. At this rate, I’d rather see Samuel L. Jackson hop off the wheelchair to start preaching Ezekiel 25:17 again, and not have to keep wearing that obvious wig for a now-dated story arc.

Onto the silver age, comic books began to be seen as corruptive to the youth, thus the Comics Code Authority began, which caused an eventual bright, campy tone to take over; think Adam West’s Batman as a strong example. Shyamalan actually handles that well without feeling out of place alongside the established golden age grit. Remember how Batman & Robin was almost all Dutch angles? A similar style is used here to suggest how Elijah reads his interactions, or how a hysterical perspective of “the Beast’s” victims is seen upside down when he crawls on the ceiling. To switch back on cheesiness without the unintentional (or failed) humor, dangerously deep focus on closeup shots block out distractions, working off a pink hallway designed by Chris Trujillo (Stranger Things) to mimic a supervillain’s lair. It’s like every frame here is a legit comic book panel!

It compensates for the way Sarah Paulson (12 Years a Slave, Carol) keeps an insincere face throughout her entire performance, even more so for Anya Taylor-Joy’s (Thoroughbreds, The Witch) absent sense of rhythm in her expressionless eyes that look like Natalie Portman sobbing, “Anakin, you’re breaking my heart.” Yet the almost completely untalented cast ironically works to the advantage of James McAvoy when his killer portrayal shatters barriers immediately upon introduction.

An odd sense of fulfillment breaks through as the three leads fit nowhere, much like how the bronze age lead to comics taking on a realistic tone. Plenty of disturbing images shed mortality to familiar comic book images, particularly a line of high school cheerleaders chained up, all of which are enhanced by the musical score’s stressed strings—a ticking bomb that signals time to break for impact.

Then finally comes the dark age of comics, when antiheroes, particularly Watchmen and Deadpool, got their origins. Shyamalan’s three antiheroes could make a valid case for criminal actions… if consistency exists anywhere. Probably the most noticeable logical inconsistency is how bright lights change James’ character personalities, but it really gets out of hand throughout the ridiculous third act. It attempts to comment on the climaxes of other comic book movies, except this happens after the entire feature proves unable to decide which scenes are fiction or fact.

Thus, the audience appeal winds up weak, mainly to the fault of M. Night Shyamalan’s screenplay preaching the old comic book idea that love heals (ugh). He cannot authenticate the full potential of such a gross idea in any way, and even takes the wrong turns to explore it; one of those approaches includes a legitimate case of Stockholm syndrome!

So today, with all our comics becoming strong cinematic/television properties, it tells our minds to honor having super abilities greater than our own God-given abilities. It tells us that anyone considered a freak is a psycho with a mind set to rule the world. Shyamalan’s commentary is dead-wrong.… Expand

0 of 4 users found this helpful04

All this user's reviews

4

KeithDowJan 18, 2019

The scope and ambition of 'Glass' is to be commended, but too many drawn out monologues and obvious plot twist setups shatter the films full potential.

4 of 10 users found this helpful46

All this user's reviews

4

Jk9785Jan 23, 2019

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Shyamalan's most disappointing film since Airbender, considering everyone knew After Earth was gonna suck. This film has no meaning, and telling one why would require spoilers. So from here on out, SPOILER ALERT is in effect. The first third of this film is some of Shyamalan's best work, with some suitably creepy scenes involving Kevin (James McAvoy) and his multiple personalities. Enter David Dunn (Bruce Willis) who releases the girls that Kevin was holding captive, and then fights "The Horde". Long story short, Shyamalan kills all the main characters off in the most anticlimactic way possible. Mr. Glass (Samuel L. Jackson) dies of internal bleeding, Kevin gets shot and dies, and David Dunn, considering his weakness is water, drowns while Dr. Staple watches. And of course, everything is connected with the train crash that David Dunn survived, while Kevin's father was killed. This movie is disappointing, and it is only the first act that keeps this from being one of M. Night Shyamalan's worst films.… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

4

SquaredRenJan 20, 2019

I give all the credit to James McAvoy, he did an awesome performance every time he was on screen. Now, for the film itself the 1st act was carried by James and Bruce. 2nd act was so slow I almost felt asleep, and the 3rd act was a huge letI give all the credit to James McAvoy, he did an awesome performance every time he was on screen. Now, for the film itself the 1st act was carried by James and Bruce. 2nd act was so slow I almost felt asleep, and the 3rd act was a huge let down. Bruce got forgotten once the 1st act ended, the only good parts was when James was on screen, and the "twist" at the end was like..."are you serious?".

This is just not a good movie, lots of fans are trying to justify it but NO!. Wait for it to come on Netflix, don't spend a dime on this one.… Expand

4 of 11 users found this helpful47

All this user's reviews

4

WhateverHoweverFeb 9, 2019

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Why didn't Dr. Staple kill them all right after she caught them, instead of putting them in the mental hospital? If she didn't want the world to know about Human superpower.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

4

BatareykinApr 18, 2019

Good thriller turned into a bad comics-farce. Although the play of the actor James MacAvoy is superb.

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

4

ahmedaiman1999Jun 24, 2019

This is a sequel I didn't know I didn't need. It's borderline lame!

(4/10)

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

4

BodOpsJan 19, 2019

'Glass' review (no spoilers):

This doesn't do the previous films justice. From my perspective, 'Unbreakable' was a gem. M Night Shyamalan's uncanny ability to handle trauma and melancholy made it unique. The ‘hero’ aspect was secondary to'Glass' review (no spoilers):

This doesn't do the previous films justice.

From my perspective, 'Unbreakable' was a gem.

M Night Shyamalan's uncanny ability to handle trauma and melancholy made it unique. The ‘hero’ aspect was secondary to the exploration of fragile family relationships. You cared about David because of his personal grief, his hopes of patching things up with his wife and son, and his growing sense of fear and bewilderment.

With 'Split', you came for James McAvoy's head-spinning performance, but you stayed for Anna Taylor-Joy's compelling and heart-breaking backstory (and hopefully the epic end-credits reveal too). Shyamalan has many detractors - but when he's on form, he conjures character depth effortlessly.

You lie in wait of the gut-punch monochrome reveals, but his artful exploration of deep (and often, uncomfortable) emotions is what carries his stories through.

‘Glass’ does, at times, carry weight. In fact, the first 30 minutes are brilliant – and even when it falls away after that, there *are* parts that drag you back into the slipstream of the intended experience.

However, those false dawns emphasise how bafflingly convoluted and hollow the ending is – and thus, how much of a disservice it does to the story as a whole.

After the credits rolled, the first words that came to mind were ‘massive production problems’.

Lo and behold, the day after the Premiere, Samuel L Jackson admitted:

“There was a different ending when we first started this that kind of needed to be changed because of the way society is and what's going on in the world and what it would have looked like.”

Cancel culture 1. Artistic vision 0.

Summary: One of the most confusing and disappointing experiences I’ve ever had in a cinema. And that includes the time I caught my foot in a drinks-holder and accidentally threw a super-size sprite in a child’s face.… Expand

5 of 12 users found this helpful57

All this user's reviews

4

oakley07Jan 28, 2019

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Ohhhh dear... I waited 18 years for this... Left the theater feeling like I was going to cry. 18 years to see David Dunn again as his amazing superhero self. Waited and waited! Could never understand what was taking so long. Then, nearly jumped out of my seat at the end of Split when, there he was, so nonchalantly sitting in a diner. Finally, my favourite hero was back. At the beginning of Glass, I was thrilled to see a cast of familiar faces. First 20 minutes seemed ok... bit odd that David's big comeback consisted of him beating the crap out of two delinquent youth, but hey, he was back. The scene in the factory was great, but it all happened along a super hyper timeline. From then on the disappointment in my heart grew. I walked out believing that Shyamalan must have just wanted the whole trilogy to be over, like he'd been pressured into doing Glass, and his heart really wasn't into it. So much potential... came off seeming... tired- just like David Dunn. All that aside James Macavoy rocked his 'characters'. Sam-U-L was great, but poor Bruce ... he simply wasn't given enough time in the light... And that, my friends is a travesty.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

4

alvindinoMar 11, 2019

This film provides an alternative from the point of view of psychology on superhero stories, the majority of which are only embedded in the form of supersticious science. The plot and twist is awesome too. It's just that there are a number ofThis film provides an alternative from the point of view of psychology on superhero stories, the majority of which are only embedded in the form of supersticious science. The plot and twist is awesome too. It's just that there are a number of minor issues: light and water detectors that are very cheap and inexplicable, then silly deaths in water puddles.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

4

RobertFloydMay 27, 2019

Glass had allot of hype surrounding it especially for me. Unbreakable is one of my favourite movies and I thought split was not Emnites return to form but pretty good. The twist was okay, but I thought that glass kinda stunk because its soGlass had allot of hype surrounding it especially for me. Unbreakable is one of my favourite movies and I thought split was not Emnites return to form but pretty good. The twist was okay, but I thought that glass kinda stunk because its so convoluted with crap that it made the movie to confusing and the ending sucked. People would not think that it would just be cool and superheroes are real, they would question it. Emnite had pure talent bu now it's gone.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

4

PeterBradshawAug 25, 2019

It feels like Glass tries to be a sequel to two very different films and it doesn't succeed in my view. I'm sure fans of Split will enjoy watching Glass more than fans of Unbreakable.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

akshatmahajanAug 1, 2021

This movie is the weakest entey in M. Night Shyamalan's Unbreakable trilogy. This movie was literally unnecessary and was made just to kill all the protagonists. It looked like the movie was made to forcefully end the trilogy.

The suspenseThis movie is the weakest entey in M. Night Shyamalan's Unbreakable trilogy. This movie was literally unnecessary and was made just to kill all the protagonists. It looked like the movie was made to forcefully end the trilogy.

The suspense built-up was bad, unlike the first two parts. The movie was unable to blend suspense, drama and horror together. Everything felt forced or unnatural, especially the story. I only liked the performance of James McAvoy. That was the only thing which kept the movie standing otherwise it was too weak. I didn't expect that Shyamalan would end this strong trilogy with such a weak story.

Overall, this movie was unnecessary, forceful and weak ending of a great trilogy. Can't understand if I should recommend this to you or not but you can try this only if you have watched Unbreakable and Split.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

MrJPrimeMay 21, 2022

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. What a piece of garbage. You spend decades building these characters to kill them in the most pathetic ways possible. Four for good acting and Umm again the characters were fun. Soo much wasted potential.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

3

torgnyhylenApr 15, 2019

What a muddled mess. It takes too long to get to the psych ward and once there nothing happens. McAvoy seems to be enjoying his Horde... but the others phone it in. Too many points of view. Nobody to root for. Too many bystanders. Just notWhat a muddled mess. It takes too long to get to the psych ward and once there nothing happens. McAvoy seems to be enjoying his Horde... but the others phone it in. Too many points of view. Nobody to root for. Too many bystanders. Just not very clever and ultimately a predictable bore. If you liked unbreakable and split, you will NOT enjoy this luke warm half baked offering.… Expand

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

3

EikoxJan 24, 2019

So you saw Unbreakable, you enjoy Split and you are ready for Glass!! But after 20 minutes of watching suddenly you notice something odd, oh yes is the poor will of Bruce Willis in his acting where he can be replaced easily for a obscureSo you saw Unbreakable, you enjoy Split and you are ready for Glass!! But after 20 minutes of watching suddenly you notice something odd, oh yes is the poor will of Bruce Willis in his acting where he can be replaced easily for a obscure silhouette with his voice or a random double with a green poncho. Is sad that one of the most iconic character bring down the whole movie, where you can find a decent plot carried by the marvelous performance of McAvoy and the always reliable Samuel L.J.
From the side of the plot is good see this three character collide (more of ten if you count the multiple one of McAvoy) and continue with the developed under the influence of each other.
From the technical aspect is nothing from another world, if you pay enough attention you will encounter some mistakes in the continuity but still for sometimes seems a movie filmed for a project and not a jewel of hollywood so dont expect to much, as I say McAvoy and Jackson carried the movie in their shoulders.… Expand

2 of 7 users found this helpful25

All this user's reviews

3

KayVen17Mar 20, 2019

Deutsche Review

Pro: - gute Schauspielerwahl - der Plot ist interessant Contra: - der Film zieht sich wie Kaugummi - der Showdown ist ein Griff ins Klo - der Film will nicht zum Punkt - Potenzial der Schauspieler wird nicht richtigDeutsche Review

Pro:
- gute Schauspielerwahl
- der Plot ist interessant Contra:
- der Film zieht sich wie Kaugummi
- der Showdown ist ein Griff ins Klo
- der Film will nicht zum Punkt
- Potenzial der Schauspieler wird nicht richtig verwendet
- das Ende ist sehr unbefriedigend… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

3

JDIGITALJan 24, 2019

Movie Review, I saw Glass and it was Ass. The three main characters from there respected movies are interesting but they just got smushed together in this boring, lackluster film.

5 of 12 users found this helpful57

All this user's reviews

3

bhappenstanceApr 2, 2021

A promising first hour gradually devolves into a preposterous mishmash of pretentious nonsense. Unbreakable remains one of Night's best films, and Split was a welcome return to form, but the dude just can't help himself. Given a slightlyA promising first hour gradually devolves into a preposterous mishmash of pretentious nonsense. Unbreakable remains one of Night's best films, and Split was a welcome return to form, but the dude just can't help himself. Given a slightly bigger budget, and a few inches too much creative oversight, he loses his goddamned mind. There's a relatively great 90-minute movie here that gets suffocated by **** "comic book" metacommentary (would not be surprised in the least to find out that Night has never read a comic book in his life), and a completely nonsensical "twist" -- his worst yet, for anyone still counting -- that leads into a final few minutes that make no sense whatsoever. I loved Glass at first and absolutely hated it by the time the credits rolled. Please restrict this particular filmmaker to $5M budgets. His ego simply can't handle anything more than that.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

AdamBeamJan 26, 2019

Unbreakable is the best film Shyamalan has ever done, and Split was a genuinely nice surprise, but sad to say that Glass breaks your heart if your fan of either film, and is just a complete mess. A film that fails as a sequel, and as aUnbreakable is the best film Shyamalan has ever done, and Split was a genuinely nice surprise, but sad to say that Glass breaks your heart if your fan of either film, and is just a complete mess. A film that fails as a sequel, and as a competent movie as well, just a very upsetting disappointment to start the year off with. Glass waste all the potential and interesting concepts it offers, and whatever good graces the film still had with audiences or my patience will be immediately dashed in the last 15 minutes, where the twist(s) absolutely destroy the film and all hopes it had. Seriously your best bet with the film is either skip the movie, or leave before the last 15 minutes and just imagine a better ending than what we're actually given.… Expand

6 of 12 users found this helpful66

All this user's reviews

3

LuzioonApr 13, 2019

I'm disappointed with it, i was expecting more from this, more action, more feeling, more story.

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

3

amheretojudgeJan 18, 2019

Split Into Disappointments.

Glass Shyamalan's conclusion to his beloved project is a disappointing loose thread that thoroughly convinces you to hold on to it, but barely is ready to be the host for it. There is too much going behind theSplit Into Disappointments.

Glass

Shyamalan's conclusion to his beloved project is a disappointing loose thread that thoroughly convinces you to hold on to it, but barely is ready to be the host for it. There is too much going behind the screen- his signature move- that when it is reveal it does leave you in an awe of it, but when it comes to show definite figures on screen, the numbers are often mismatching. There is no romance in either the characters or the storytelling. And it is the primary reason why it shatters so vigorously. Without any whatsoever flow, the storytelling often comes off as news, which too frankly isn't intriguing. To be informative is one thing and to be a narrator another.

What it does get right, is the mythology that Shyamalan has constructed in his mind. His sincere respect to the concept itself can easily be filtered out in his mannerism. His film lives on glorifying these characters to their limits. He gives them enough range and room to flaunt in their persona and the impact it creates to the surrounding of it. And clearly he has kept McAvoy at the front of it, the time, space, energy and range he has offered to that character, is all admirable accepted by McAvoy, and the result is stupendous.

His awe-inspiring performance both challenges and mocks his fellow actors, his commitment on the nakedness and innocence of each personality is the soul reason, he emerges as the only survivor from this tale. Challenging him with few good scenes, resides Jackson's thirst for the quest and abomination. With very little to do, he makes sure he leaves a last longing impression on the viewers. Paulson has a bit edgy character to portray, either way, she never is able to enchant us nor overpower us through her schemes.

Willis, as probably the biggest disappointment, is playing a cameo, with very little finesse on his performance. The other supporting cast like Johnson and Treat Clark too falls under the same pit. Shyamalan has always managed to build up the hype like no one else, he aces in it, but when it comes to reveal the cards, they are often disappointing or rushed over. In this case, the physical sequences are not only dull and off putting but annoying, which is mostly mutilated by the eerie camera work that is there to actually enhance the momentum of the scene; irony.

Aforementioned, his last thought on this big war of comic books, is sharp and illuminating, it shifts our perspective to a whole new dimension. But before any of it scrolls open, it is already too late. While its first act maps out the characters in a different state, the second one that ought to be husky and cunning; especially since Jackson is in control of the ride, it isn't thoroughly justified with very little skin in the whole "mastermind" game. Glass aches you more than you would anticipate, the beloved characters over the years, they deserved much more and so did we.… Expand

6 of 14 users found this helpful68

All this user's reviews

3

Supergaz27Jan 22, 2019

Third act is horrendous, nothing original or clever about it. They could of cut out about an hour of Sarah Coulson monologuing and perhaps it wouldn't of been as boring.

If you're a fan of the the other two I'd say avoid it. Left a bad tasteThird act is horrendous, nothing original or clever about it. They could of cut out about an hour of Sarah Coulson monologuing and perhaps it wouldn't of been as boring.

If you're a fan of the the other two I'd say avoid it. Left a bad taste in my mouth.… Expand

6 of 13 users found this helpful67

All this user's reviews

3

P3ERJan 18, 2019

What a disastrous final act. It just completely falls flat on its face. Everything which lead to this just gets thrown out the window and replaced with an underwhelming conclusion. I have to admit that the the first hour and a half was reallyWhat a disastrous final act. It just completely falls flat on its face. Everything which lead to this just gets thrown out the window and replaced with an underwhelming conclusion. I have to admit that the the first hour and a half was really good, but I wonder why the movie just took a 90 degree turn and just decides to bodge a seemingly alternate ending. I really wish I can give this a better score, but this movie just leaves me with a sour taste.… Expand

4 of 17 users found this helpful413

All this user's reviews

3

JazzwazlerJan 20, 2019

3.2/10

5 of 12 users found this helpful57

All this user's reviews

3

hnestlyontheslyOct 7, 2019

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I saw Split last year without any background information, not having seen even a trailer, possibly, with Friend at the Capitol Drive-In. I’m someone who’s had a love-hate relationship with Shyamalan, like I think a lot of people.

My older brother told me a story of going to an advanced screening of some festival movie and sitting through the trailers of a kind of cool horror film about the devil on an elevator or something, and the moment that Shyamalan’s name popped onto the screen, everyone in the theater started laughing and booing. I was 10 years old when Unbreakable came out. That was one year after The Sixth Sense. Shyamalan made The Village when I was 14, and I still hold a warm place in my heart for that movie, ditto Lady in the Water, which I appreciated as the offbeat comedy it appeared he intended to make. I know a lot of people made fun of Avatar: The Last Airbender, but I was just so psyched to see that movie on screen that I let a lot of things slide. Hell, I even saw The Visit, which, like did anyone else see that dumpster fire? I walked out of that movie having sweat through my whole shirt, because I’ll be damned if it didn’t set me on edge.

Even so, when the end scene of Split tipped its hand as a sequel, I couldn’t contain a surly **** off, Shyamalan” or the automatic gag reflex that followed. He had taken a perfectly good, standalone film staring one of my favorite young actors of the decade, Anya Taylor-Joy, and succeeded in making me sympathize with a truly creepy villain. Why **** that up with a trilogy twenty years in the making that no one asked for?

I’m not doing anything brave by sniping a month late at the final installment of a substandard trilogy by Shyamalan, but there was just so much potential here for the guy to actually comment on the state of comic book films after twenty years of reflection and the street cred to make a statement, á la Birdman or the Incredibles. Split had bought him time and goodwill to tell a challenging story, but instead we have a series of disappointingly bland close-up fights, a lot of awkward running on all fours by McAvoy, a lot of navel gazing, and cloying self-referentialism (including a too long explanation of the director’s second cameo).

Bruce Willis looks like he couldn’t be bothered to show a range of emotion beyond tired and bored. The premise for their treatment facility is pretty bonkers, as is the reason cited for allowing a teenage girl into the same room as her murderous abductor. The false bottom endings don’t feel clever. They feel cheap, like someone’s trying to get away with a windowless bedroom by putting hotel art on the wall.

We’re not mad, we’re just disappointed.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

TheEventsOf1989Jan 11, 2020

Maybe, if you go searching, you can find some examples of good story. Maybe even some examples of post-spielberg film language, but at the end of the day, "Glass" has many errors, and many missed opportunities.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

2

danteabadApr 8, 2019

What it seems to be a different kind of superheroes film mixed with psychological ideas... ended up being a pretty boring 3/4 of a film made exclusively to achieve an "expected" twist plot ending where.. quite frankly didnt exort any kind ofWhat it seems to be a different kind of superheroes film mixed with psychological ideas... ended up being a pretty boring 3/4 of a film made exclusively to achieve an "expected" twist plot ending where.. quite frankly didnt exort any kind of surprise feeling.
I was intrigued to find out how were these 3 characters trying to co-live in the dullest sanatorium ive seen in movies ever... but i think i didnt miss anything during the 2h of the film because they dont even interact with each other in any way until the very end.
Weird camera angles not suitable for the scenes or emotions they "tried" to achieve. Bruce Willis was kinda sleep most of the part of the film just as Samuel Jackson.… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

2

JohnnyCanuckJan 26, 2019

There is a nugget of a better movie in the first 1/3 of this film. But what remains is absolute horsesh*t. The logic of the universe just does not add up and the rest is just sloppy. 3 super powered people - and 2 orderlies to watch themThere is a nugget of a better movie in the first 1/3 of this film. But what remains is absolute horsesh*t. The logic of the universe just does not add up and the rest is just sloppy. 3 super powered people - and 2 orderlies to watch them all. makes sense. SOmeone wake up Shymalan.… Expand

6 of 12 users found this helpful66

All this user's reviews

2

RudygerApr 2, 2019

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. ATROCIOUS ENDING
I'm not one of those people who kneel before Unbreakable. I found it deeply boring. Split was ok, except for some character's huge stupidity. The begining of Glass was ok, but the ending is soooo anti-climactic. If you think about the whole trilogy, what was the point? Have people believe in themselves? Yeah, we surely needed 3 films for that.
Not much character development, by the way.
I didn't like the plot of Glass. The psychiatric ward, with having the audience guessing "was it all in their head despite seeing them do superhuman stuff?". I didn't buy it at all. Though, I like the fact that they tried to do something different, rather than a classic superhero movie. But I would've liked something inbetween.
My review is messy. So is the movie. I understand why people liked it, despite its dumpster fire ending.… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

2

Daniel_EndureJan 18, 2019

Glass is interesting at times, no doubt, but it's one of those sequels that takes away a little something from its predecessors just simply by existing. Glass's biggest problem is that the script never gives a clear reason to care about anyGlass is interesting at times, no doubt, but it's one of those sequels that takes away a little something from its predecessors just simply by existing. Glass's biggest problem is that the script never gives a clear reason to care about any of its three protagonists, instead promoting their lock-up as ultimately justifiable when all is said and done. The entirety of the second act is even a first-class trip straight into boredom. Any and all attempts at humor, which usually come from one of McAvoy's many personalities, in particular, Hedwig, come off flat and usually are more striking as random than humorous. Lastly, if you still can't muster skipping this one, prepare for Shyamalan's signature unnatural-feeling character interactions, directing, and acting from those supporting the main players of the cast.… Expand

6 of 16 users found this helpful610

All this user's reviews

2

JackusBlackusFeb 7, 2019

I suppose that if you have seen two other movies by M. Night Shyamalan, Unbreakable and Split, you might quickly figure out that this is the sequel that was previously alluded to, and it might be what you have been waiting for.

You will beI suppose that if you have seen two other movies by M. Night Shyamalan, Unbreakable and Split, you might quickly figure out that this is the sequel that was previously alluded to, and it might be what you have been waiting for.

You will be disappointed. The movie starts out well, but soon deteriorates into a formula super-hero action movie with some mystery, horror, and suspense thrown in. It is a M. Night Shyamalan movie, so it has a twist at the end, of course. Unfortunately, the twist is ridiculous and absurd, and it adds nothing. I suspect that its sole purpose is to set up yet another sequel in which the two twenty-somethings get married and have a baby with mutant powers.

Bruce Willis does a good job playing the stoic hero and James McAvoy handles his role with precision. Samuel Jackson plays Samuel Jackson.… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

2

AfonsoCarlosJan 24, 2019

Holy hell that was disapointing, I knew going in that Glass wasn't going to be anywhere near decent, but how did they manage to miss this by such a longshot? This property had potencial but i feel like they just ran it into the ground. TheHoly hell that was disapointing, I knew going in that Glass wasn't going to be anywhere near decent, but how did they manage to miss this by such a longshot? This property had potencial but i feel like they just ran it into the ground. The story was not captivating, the sets were boring and i feel like they wasted the awesome characters they had built... In conclusion, when Im asked about what movie disappointed me the most, despite already having low expectations, i will answer "Glass" (2.4/10)… Expand

3 of 8 users found this helpful35

All this user's reviews

2

addict-insaneApr 6, 2019

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Congratulations Shami, just you killed the three reasons any of us had to go watch any of your future films.

You also magically minimized the talent of one of our generation's greatest, Sarah Paulson, by directing her into making a resting B*tch face with a holier-than-thou attitude for the whole film. The whole Film! After she blew our minds in the few minutes she was in Birdbox, you took such a great talent, and your direction to her was "make this one facial expression, and do not emote for the rest of the movie". AND, you took James McAvoy's greatest flamboyant display of acting prowess, and put it in 2019's worst movie. McAvoy is acting for the Oscars, Shami is directing for the Razzies. Oh, and while McAvoy is personality shifting mid-conversation, you focused the camera on the other actors, or on the wall, not on his incredibly nuanced changes in facial gestures, because if you don't deserve an Oscar, then by hell is anyone in your movies ever getting any as well!

Are you secretly trying to make bad movies because your real dream is to have a rapping career? Like that guy from Final Fantasy? Not trolling. Honest question.… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

2

TonyCalziniDec 1, 2019

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. As somebody who Loves movies of all sorts. Including the terrible ones that give us something to compare the great movies to, This Movie is a huge let down. Of all the different directions MNS could have went, He decided to Pull this terrible ending out of his **** Slap his name on it and call it quits. Seriously. He should've hired the guys here making reviews to help develop a decent plot.
Hes all over the map through out this whole movie, flashing back to pointless scenes, repeating insignificant information, and worst of all, cramming a variety of lost imagery onto a fight scene that could've been depicted better by a high school film class.
1: David is unbreakable and supposed to be super strong, yet a cop can drown him in a puddle (easilyforeshadowed when the tank busted) and wasnt his son standing like 30 ft away with momma glass and homegirl?
2: Mr glass is like 60 years old. How's his mom still alive. She should have died and the character been replaced with a wife or brother. Seriously she stayed the same age the whole film. What's she eating? Asking for a friend
3: why would you reveal a hidden organization at the end of a movie, leaving absolutely no room or opportunities for sequels, which if this **** had done, MNS could've made history with the basis for this story line. A four leave clover? Come on man. Gathering in a hotel bar to discuss something so hidden and organized? With what looks like random people? Just why?
4: killing off all the main characters without maybe hinting that their family has powers too? Initiating another movie.
5: back to the fight scene. I've watched high school girls throw better punches. If the beast has enough power to bend steel bars and walk like a **** grudge demon, he should be able to RIP his opponent apart. Neither characters showed any bruising, bloody lips, redness... **** anything.
6: should've given Casey did as well. Giving her something to relate to with t
Kevin. Would've made a great twist.
7: please explain the beginning of split... hedwig states that Casey helped him find those two girls... wtf. And why didnt he spray her when he entered the car like he did with the other two girls?
8: What kind of Psychiatric facility has one guard. Then 3 guards in the basement, and two who are in cars lol that place also looks like the school from the simpsons.
9: it took David maybe 4 tries to break down that door. How would a few pressure washers stop him. Its water not fire. He not only escaped being wrapped in a pool cover, completely submerged, but also being choked under water in the tank, which was stupidly brittle.. also hes out in the rain like 5 different scenes.
10: How did Mr. Glass not be seen on any of the cameras while removing the piece from the machine when the doc said it was being live streamed all times, which is why she woke him up and sedated him before taking him to the machine. How did they not see him and report it as soon as it was happening, or see him removing the piece?
Dude..I get trying to get the viewers to walk away thinking, but this just leaves too many unanswered questions. I came into this devoted and invested with high expectations. Now I'm sitting here with a stank face writing this review while my wife get to sit there with pride. She suggested the Twilight series. I failed as a husband. I wish I would've watched the sparkly vampires..… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

1

Hectic101Jan 20, 2019

If you care about Unbreakable and Split then I suggest leaving this movie when the third act begins, because it's a doozy. The movie is rather dull and redundant up until then but still ok, but that last 30 minutes or so really takes a dumpIf you care about Unbreakable and Split then I suggest leaving this movie when the third act begins, because it's a doozy. The movie is rather dull and redundant up until then but still ok, but that last 30 minutes or so really takes a dump all over everything with a REALLY dumb ending and lazily annoying twists. Gets a "1" strictly because of McAvoys performance, otherwise it'd be a "0" it pissed me off that badly. Massive step down from the last two movies of this "trilogy". Wish I had listened to my concerns going in and not seen it. Now I don't know if I can ever watch Unbreakable again without thoughts of this dumpster fire ruining it...… Expand

7 of 16 users found this helpful79

All this user's reviews

1

StHoustonJan 23, 2019

Вы когда-нибудь ловили себя на мысли что в кинотеатре вы смотрите не на экран? Добро пожаловать на просмотр данного фильма.

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

1

froglegsApr 3, 2020

Some of the most nonsensical plot elements ever written, all the best acting in the world can't salvage this train wreck of a script. I bailed about 40 minutes in, could no longer take the idiocy.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

Glass

User Reviews