Glass (film): Decent film but a terrible "twist wrap-up"
If you know anything about M. Night Shyamalan you already know that all of his films (or at least all the ones I have seen) have some sort of shock ending that you aren't supposed to be able to see coming. For me, my first experience with this was in the hit horror/thriller The Sixth Sense and while there are some people out there that say that they could see the ending coming I was not one of those people. When the ring falls on the ground at the end I was completely taken aback and that made the entire movie experience so much better.
I can't really say that the rest of his movies were as shocking and in particular I thought The Village was too easy to figure out long before the big reveal at the end.
With Glass I knew there was going to be some sort of "shocking ending" simply because of the director. That's his thing. Unfortunately, it just kind of fell flat not just with me, but I think with most people.

src
I don't know if Unbreakable was always planning on being a trilogy, but I am pretty glad that it turned out that way even though at the time of its release, I didn't really care for the first film. I thought it was an interesting take on superheroes and villains but mostly found the various characters to be kind of lame.
In the first film we meet David (Bruce Willis) and Elijah/Mr. Glass (Samuel L. Jackson) but we don't meet "The Beast" (James McAvoy) until the movie Split
In Glass they all finally get put together when they are all kidnapped and put inside the same mental hospital where some doctor is apparently trying to help them to realize that all their perceptions of having superpowers is just a figment of their imagination.

src
We find out as the film progresses that this is all actually part of a master plan by Mr. Glass to get them all together because Glass' superpower is his mind, which works in ways that normal people cannot even comprehend. I don't want to spoil the film, but basically he pretends to be in a catatonic state the entire time while he is working together a plan for them to all escape and make the world know that superheros exist.
We are re-introduced to all of their various superpowers as the film goes on, and the best interactions are between "The Beast" and David and I kept thinking about a line from The Dark Knight where Joker says "This is what happens when an unstoppable force meets and unmovable object"

src
These are all great parts of the film and the fact that the humans are lead to believe that they have figured out the weaknesses of all the superpower-containing humans is pretty great too. I am particularly impressed with how James McAvoy really bulked up for this role despite the fact that he is not actually a very big person. He is only 5 foot 7 (170cm) and generally weighs around 150 lbs (about 70kg). So him turning into a fearsome muscle-bound "Beast" is extremely impressive even if they did use some CGI and camera tricks in the process.

src
The performances by all the main characters is pretty fantastic and nobody does a bad job outside of some side characters, including M. Nigh putting himself in there for some reason, who are not good actors and likely just knew a producer or ARE the director who wants to pull a Stan Lee in be in all of his films.
The reason why this film is just kind of "meh" is because the turn, the twist, the "shock ending" is in fact shocking, but it is so convoluted that they have to spend about 20 minutes of screen time explaining it with narration. I'm all about a shock ending, I think it is what separates a lot of good films from shite films, but if you have to tell, rather than show, that much of it, there is a big problem with the script/screenplay.
it does a good job of tying the narrative strands together, but it tries too hard and fails to provide "something uniquely brainy" to the superhero genre
Most of the professional reviews tore it to shreds but there are a bunch of regular people that kind of balanced that all out. While the professional score is around 3.5/10, the audience score rates it about 7/10, for me, it is something in-between these two.
One thing that is worth noting is that if you haven't seen the previous two films, Glass is going to be even more incomprehensible to a viewer than it already is and trust me, it's pretty incomprehensible even if you HAVE seen them.

src
The fights in particular are fantastic because they aren't like Superman picking up a care and throwing it across town or Tony Stark flying to the middle east in a homemade suit in 10 minutes. They seem just a bit out of reach for normal humans and this follows in line with the underlying tones of superheros being just a bit more special than normal people.
The ending probably could have been done a lot better, and I am not going to spoil it for you because for a lot of people, this one is worth seeing just because it is, at its heart, a much more interesting look at potential superheros existing among us than anything Marvel or DC cranks out.
Should I watch it?
Honestly, if you are going to only watch one of the films out of the Unbreakable Trilogy I would watch the second one named Split. It is a standalone film and requires no knowledge of anything else to enjoy it. If you like that one enough, then watch Unbreakable and if you are still interested then watch Glass. Do it any other way and I think you will walk away from them. Glass is going to be really tough to understand if this is the only one of them that you watch. Even if you do watch all of them, I think you will find this one as a mid-level something or other that is trying really hard to be original and it is specifically because of that reason that it ends up failing in that endeavor.

Glass is available to stream with HBO Max or Cinemax-coupled subscriptions. It is also available to rent or buy on just about any other major streaming service
I watched the trilogy in order when the movies were released originally at the time not really being aware it was a trilogy which really made them work for me. At the same time, I only really remember the main concept of the movies but have forgotten all the details. Not sure if I will ever rewatch it as it kind of lives in my mind as a good memory while a 2nd watching won't have any of the major surprises.
its not really apparent that they are a trilogy until the 3rd film. Maybe it was never really planned to be a trilogy and that is why "Glass" seems such a mess. Perhaps it was written after the fact because they were making money on the first two but didn't really have a 3rd character to introduce and this is why the tie-ins in the last film seem really far-fetched and kind of stupid.
Oh yo vi fragmentado y me gustó mucho, sabia que habia salido esta, pero no me animé a verla en su momento, ahora que me la recordastes, la tendré en mente para este fin de semana proximo. Excelente reseñas y los argumentos que planteas me hace darme cuenta que debo prestar atención en los detalles. 😊
Oh, I saw Split and I really liked it. I knew this one had come out, but I didn't get around to watching it at the time. Now that you've reminded me, I'll keep it in mind for this coming weekend. Excellent reviews, and the points you make make me realize I need to pay attention to the details. 😊
well, like I said in the writeup. If you don't know Unbreakable, Bruce Willis' character is going to be very confusing to you. so if you do watch them, watch that one first but set your expectation bar a bit lower, because "Split" is definitely the best of the 3 and you've already seen it.
A film that is so complicated that it requires a guide to try to understand it has little chance of being a box office success, although it may be interesting and in the future become (somehow) a cult film.
well it was a box office success but it kind of tarnished M. Night's reputation a bit because it was the first film he had done (that I am aware of) where what was released seemed to be released for the sake of making money even though there wasn't a real story in place.
Sometimes that can happen; I've read about actors who accepted roles they didn't really want because they were in a crisis and needed the money to get by. Those kinds of situations can take their toll, and if things go very badly, they can permanently damage an artist's career.
oh yeah. There are a ton of actors that have done that. Nick Cage rings a bell 😀
The real mystery with this last film in Glass's famous trilogy is whether or not it was adapted from the original work. If I remember correctly, these films are adaptations of various novels, but unlike Unbreakable and Split, Glass seems to stray too far from the main topic. In other words, on one hand we saw an indestructible man struggling against his existence and the dilemma of whether to be a hero or not, While on the other hand we see the origin and development of one of the darkest and most multifaceted antagonists that exist.
In the end, they reduced it all to a cheap imitation of Zak Snyder's Batman vs Superman. In other words, everything we saw in the previous Split movie was for nothing. Besides the fact that the moral dilemma was exploited quite a bit throughout the film, I feel that some of that essence of M. Night in Glass was missing. I don't know, it lacked more twists, more blood, more mind-blowing things like this director knows how to do. But well, perhaps the pressure or influence of superhero movies at that time made Night give us that bitter ending.
It is for these reasons that "adapting" a work is not simply recreating everything a novel tells on the big screen, but is much more than that. And as a fan of the original, Sometimes I prefer a completely different reinterpretation of a work to an imitation or something so predictable and boring.
Good review, as always.
that's an excellent way of breaking down the 3 films. I couldn't have said it better myself. I remember reading that the reviews for "Glass" actually brought M. Night to tears and he suffered some sort of depression because of it. Awwww, poor multi-millionaire... haha
LOL! I can just imagine the guy crying and wiping his tears with hundred-dollar bills. 🥴