jakob
Full Member
Posts: 827
Likes: 698
|
Post by jakob on Jan 20, 2019 4:05:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Viced on Jan 20, 2019 4:36:06 GMT
Full review in the above link!
|
|
jakob
Full Member
Posts: 827
Likes: 698
|
GLASS
Jan 20, 2019 5:00:30 GMT
via mobile
Post by jakob on Jan 20, 2019 5:00:30 GMT
Full review in the above link! RESPECT ME
|
|
The-Havok
Badass
Doing pretty good so far
Posts: 1,155
Likes: 552
|
GLASS
Jan 20, 2019 7:39:24 GMT
via mobile
Post by The-Havok on Jan 20, 2019 7:39:24 GMT
This was awesome.
|
|
Film Socialism
Based
99.9999% of rock is crap
Posts: 2,557
Likes: 1,389
|
Post by Film Socialism on Jan 20, 2019 16:10:29 GMT
really good, not quite on the level of the first film. probably will be in my top 10 of the year.
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Jan 21, 2019 21:41:28 GMT
4/10
After a strong first act (and an ace opening-credits score), this gets progressively worse and fatuous until its abominable ending.
Shyamalan tweeted while working on the script: “Writing climax of the new film. Had to step away. Heart pounding. Too scared and worried for the characters.” He also tweeted (a week before filming) that “blocking is a lost art” and he truly proves that point during the big climactic scene, which is a masterclass, to filmmakers, in what not to do. It zaps the movie of momentum, it’s manipulated, self-aware and contrived to the point of parody yet entirely humorless and lazy and melodramatic. The second act is so far from being believable I was stuck uncomfortably thinking between: could it be that stupid or could it be so clearly telegraphed? The answer is: both.
Sam L is given little-to-nothing to do. McAvoy gets some funny lines (“I watched a documentary about space. Real big.”) but even he becomes a repetitive toy of mental illness. Anya Taylor Joy is reduced to falling in love with him, the man who ate her friends lol. Bruce still has some classic presence but he also isn’t given much.
Split (7/10) was at least, save for the flashbacks, tense, unpredictable, with McAvoy fresh, funny, frightening. The role isn’t easy to pull off. He’s a loose animal in Split, here in Glass, he’s a pet.
Shyamalan has busied this mashup sequel of sorts with strains of utter nonsense. He’s so insular and self-impressed here he probably thought he was the first person to have a character meta-comment on itself and genre. What exactly are people talking about after they leave this movie?
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Jan 21, 2019 23:56:51 GMT
What a ridiculous ending. Even intentionally, it’s... pretty bonkers.
|
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on Jan 22, 2019 0:19:09 GMT
4/10 After a strong first act (and an ace opening-credits score), this gets progressively worse and fatuous until its abominable ending. Shyamalan tweeted while working on the script: “Writing climax of the new film. Had to step away. Heart pounding. Too scared and worried for the characters.” He also tweeted (a week before filming) that “blocking is a lost art” and he truly proves that point during the big climactic scene, which is a masterclass, to filmmakers, in what not to do. It zaps the movie of momentum, it’s manipulated, self-aware and contrived to the point of parody yet entirely humorless and lazy and melodramatic. The second act is so far from being believable I was stuck uncomfortably thinking between: could it be that stupid or could it be so clearly telegraphed? The answer is: both. Sam L is given little-to-nothing to do. McAvoy gets some funny lines (“I watched a documentary about space. Real big.”) but even he becomes a repetitive toy of mental illness. Anya Taylor Joy is reduced to falling in love with him, the man who ate her friends lol. Bruce still has some classic presence but he also isn’t given much. Split (7/10) was at least, save for the flashbacks, tense, unpredictable, with McAvoy fresh, funny, frightening. The role isn’t easy to pull off. He’s a loose animal in Split, here in Glass, he’s a pet. Shyamalan has busied this mashup sequel of sorts with strains of utter nonsense. He’s so insular and self-impressed here he probably thought he was the first person to have a character meta-comment on itself and genre. What exactly are people talking about after they leave this movie? You pretty much summed up my thoughts on this perfectly. It did start out strong, but I don't know why Shyamalan chose to lock up the 3 main characters and have them barely interact with each other, and make the second act mostly Sarah Paulson's character just talking and talking. Usually I like her, but she didn't really work for me here; although, I think a lot of the blame is because of the screenplay. It felt like such a waste though. McAvoy was great, but I wanted to see more of his different personalities. Jackson was also good, but I felt that Shyamalan barely gave him anything to do. Don't even get me started on Bruce Willis. Maybe it was a budget thing because it seemed like he was barely in it, and when he was in it, there were times that I felt like he wanted to be somewhere else. Then, there was the whole thing of using a parking lot in the film's climax, and killing his character in a freaking puddle!!! I'm still mad about that. Also one or two twists would have been enough. The Glass created Kevin was a good twist. The secret organization could have been, but it was dumb, imo, the way Shyamalan set it up here. What if a party of 8 comes in for a birthday at the restaurant where they meet? Do they have to wait until the party is all gone, and then have their meeting? That could take hours. Also why 3 days? Why not just kill them and make it look like an accident? Why only one guard for the known serial killer? So many questions like that. Anyhow then there was the final twist. I'm sorry I don't buy it at all. In the era of fake news, I don't think that many people would accept that the videos were true. Sure the first stage where they went viral people would be amazed, but then shortly after the naysayers would be pointing out how the videos could be faked with CGI and point out all the other ways that they're fake. Not only that, but how long would they really stay in people's minds? The whole fast food incident at the White House was like only a week ago, and it to me it feels like weeks already because it's been pretty much forgotten about because now there's the new thing that has gone viral and/or that has upset people. Or look at the UCLA gymnast whose video went viral like a few weeks ago, and while it's still out there, now it's all about Nathan Phillips, a Native American veteran, who was surrounded by a bunch of Catholic school going teenage boys. But wait, now it turns out there's questions about the validity of the first two short videos that went viral on Saturday, and now there's an even longer that shows more of a complete picture. So I just don't see Glass's masterplan actually working with the way social media and news cycles run now.
|
|
|
GLASS
Jan 23, 2019 20:53:01 GMT
Post by alexanderblanchett on Jan 23, 2019 20:53:01 GMT
It was a decent sequel. The "Unbreakable" universe are among the best films of M. Night Shyamalan. It works because it follows its own interesting mythology and has an original origin. I also like the characters that were extremely well written and developed throughout the triology. As the final conclusion I expected a more twisted and exciting twist at the end, but the final twist was somehow an excuse for a good twist. Anyway Shyamalan knew how to use symbols and style to wrap up his story. It is a very dialogue-heavy film that really takes more time to look at the characters instead of too much plot. The result is a bit messy but far from bad. Bruce Willis was a bit pale and the most uninteresting and almost invisible of the cast. Not on par with his "Unbreakable" turn. James McCoy once again nails it. When he becomes "the Beast" he overdoes it but otherwise it is a fantastic and literarily twisted performance. Also the film improved everytime Samuel L. Jackson was on screen, especially after the first third of the film. A really great performance by Jackson and one of his best characters. Sarah Paulson was also fine, although her expressions were a bit monotone but it was still an interesting performance because you never knew whats up with her. Good to see Spencer Treat Clark back who was actually good. Nice score and look in general.
Rating: 7/10
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Jan 23, 2019 22:29:17 GMT
And how laughable is it that Willis went out like a bitch drowning in a puddle? Or that the leaked security footage would become as big as it did? 1) There’s no way people would take that as gospel or think it wasn’t staged. There’s YouTube videos with more impressive feats than that. 2) In this day and age, that would be big for one day, and then everybody would forget about it. The very next day, nobody will even care. The more I think about this ending, the madder it makes me.
|
|
Film Socialism
Based
99.9999% of rock is crap
Posts: 2,557
Likes: 1,389
|
GLASS
Jan 23, 2019 23:14:35 GMT
via mobile
Post by Film Socialism on Jan 23, 2019 23:14:35 GMT
crazy how people will take meme fincher shit that's actually self serious and goofy instead of something that is consciously campy and goofy like the whole driving point of these films has been pretty connected to the events in the last forty minutes
|
|
|
GLASS
Jan 23, 2019 23:37:37 GMT
Post by Sharbs on Jan 23, 2019 23:37:37 GMT
My favorite M. Night production.
HAAAAAATE Unbreakable. Split was my favorite M. Night before this. I went in the theater with a pitchfork; this won me over, shockingly.
If he didn't have to retell Unwatchable and Split and focused on the last hour or so and expanded upon that it would have been spectacular. Instead we get refreshers and the silliest of plot-contrivances to get our supers together, but hey whats an M. Night film w/o plot contrivances.
This is basically a prequel to the X-Men Universe in trying to repress an existence that is frightening or different, but hasn't been fully discovered.
There a lot of plot holes that will induce a head-scratching motion, but it knows its own camp in full and has a lot of fun.
7/10
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Jan 24, 2019 0:21:22 GMT
I really liked this. The personality of mine which I would call 'primal film-watcher' probably wishes that the film would be more satisfying on that very simple surface level but all of my other personalities (correctly) think that the peculiar, strange way in which Shyamalan decided to finish this story is actually more interesting and bold than any tidy conclusion would've been. It's kind of incredible to think that they marketed the film as this ultimate conclusion, ultimate battle, and that it has already made good money, when the film itself is this unfriendly to its audience's expectations, this talky and moody, this weird. I kinda perversely enjoy the fact that so many are feeling pissed off about it. The double-edged nature of everything is of key importance here and is very interesting to me. Not just in terms of the characters and how we're supposed to feel about them (I appreciate Shyamalan somehow making me empathize with these people which are by all means horrible) but in terms of the plot itself. The very ending is certainly not satisfying in that very primal sense but for me that feeling coexists with a positive impression because the idea of it is pretty exciting. Especially the fact that Elijah doesn't open the door only for superheroes to come out but for villains too, essentially creating a whole new strange world - a true mastermind. And it's funny to me how some folks are dissecting that final scene in such a literal way - that the videos wouldn't spread out this fast, that nobody in the real world would believe them and so on. Guys, come on, this is a cinematic moment, a cinematic generalization. Not everything should be taken so literally. It's less a scene of pure realism and more a movie gesture, and I quite liked it. The frustration I do understand though is with how the deaths are handled. I can get why people don't like how Willis's character goes in this one and how he's not quite front and center here, I can understand those feelings. But I liked the overall low-key nature of the film and how it was reflected in those deaths. It's kinda fitting for a hero like David Dunn, one who's always in the shadows and who's never really been up against anything too big to go out in such a simple, almost cynical way. Shyamalan is all about subverting expectations about these big comic book mashups in this movie and Dunn's death fits that line of thinking. And I also loved how he established that tower opening as a potential climactic setpiece and then just fucked with the audience's expectations about that completely. It's not a perfect movie - the reveal about the secret organization dedicated to supressing people with superabilities is one I feel least impressed with and just overall "Unbreakable" still seems like the best of this trilogy. But I found a lot of things to be fascinated by here. Even if the film doesn't always feel smooth or perfect, it's always got something interesting on its mind. Not to mention that Shyamalan's filmmaking is still on point with his shot choices, atmosphere building and work with actors - McAvoy and Jackson are really impressive and Willis's uber-restraint fits the character very well. I dunno, I thought it was quite good.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Jan 24, 2019 1:12:12 GMT
The double-edged nature of everything is of key importance here and is very interesting to me. Not just in terms of the characters and how we're supposed to feel about them (I appreciate Shyamalan somehow making me empathize with these people which are by all means horrible) but in terms of the plot itself. The very ending is certainly not satisfying in that very primal sense but for me that feeling coexists with a positive impression because the idea of it is pretty exciting. Especially the fact that Elijah doesn't open the door only for superheroes to come out but for villains too, essentially creating a whole new strange world - a true mastermind. And it's funny to me how some folks are dissecting that final scene in such a literal way - that the videos wouldn't spread out this fast, that nobody in the real world would believe them and so on. Guys, come on, this is a cinematic moment, a cinematic generalization. Not everything should be taken so literally. It's less a scene of pure realism and more a movie gesture, and I quite liked it. The frustration I do understand though is with how the deaths are handled. I can get why people don't like how Willis's character goes in this one and how he's not quite front and center here, I can understand those feelings. But I liked the overall low-key nature of the film and how it was reflected in those deaths. It's kinda fitting for a hero like David Dunn, one who's always in the shadows and who's never really been up against anything too big to go out in such a simple, almost cynical way. Shyamalan is all about subverting expectations about these big comic book mashups in this movie and Dunn's death fits that line of thinking. And I also loved how he established that tower opening as a potential climactic setpiece and then just fucked with the audience's expectations about that completely. The problem with that though, at least for me, is that Shyamalan is not a director known for his subtlety. For better and worse, he is an incredibly literal filmmaker, sometimes embarrassingly so. The closest I think he’s actually come to subtext is Signs, and even with that, his “the Lord works in mysterious ways” retconning pushes it back to that literal nature. Even if he could, I’m not sure he’s capable of doing it. Which is fine, because even if he’s not the headiest man, when he’s in good form, he’s fantastic.
Really, I think that literal nature is cemented by Mr. Glass himself, and his comparisons to his comic stories. And yeah, that was a part of his character in Unbreakable, but those were the bare minimum, and essential to show the deterioration of his character. Here, they ramp that up to 11, where he’s calling out things like “This must be where the bad guys team up,” or “All the main characters converge here.” In that regard, it started to sound like a ultra-serious Deadpool, where simply calling out those things doesn’t automatically make it funny or subversive. And that’s half of his dialogue in the movie. Honestly, after a while he starts to sound like Night’s mouthpiece, so even if we weren’t supposed to take that final scene literally, he kind of brought that on himself for treating everything before it like gospel. It’s interesting on paper, but I don’t think there’s much, if anything, to second guess.
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Jan 24, 2019 10:20:55 GMT
The double-edged nature of everything is of key importance here and is very interesting to me. Not just in terms of the characters and how we're supposed to feel about them (I appreciate Shyamalan somehow making me empathize with these people which are by all means horrible) but in terms of the plot itself. The very ending is certainly not satisfying in that very primal sense but for me that feeling coexists with a positive impression because the idea of it is pretty exciting. Especially the fact that Elijah doesn't open the door only for superheroes to come out but for villains too, essentially creating a whole new strange world - a true mastermind. And it's funny to me how some folks are dissecting that final scene in such a literal way - that the videos wouldn't spread out this fast, that nobody in the real world would believe them and so on. Guys, come on, this is a cinematic moment, a cinematic generalization. Not everything should be taken so literally. It's less a scene of pure realism and more a movie gesture, and I quite liked it. The frustration I do understand though is with how the deaths are handled. I can get why people don't like how Willis's character goes in this one and how he's not quite front and center here, I can understand those feelings. But I liked the overall low-key nature of the film and how it was reflected in those deaths. It's kinda fitting for a hero like David Dunn, one who's always in the shadows and who's never really been up against anything too big to go out in such a simple, almost cynical way. Shyamalan is all about subverting expectations about these big comic book mashups in this movie and Dunn's death fits that line of thinking. And I also loved how he established that tower opening as a potential climactic setpiece and then just fucked with the audience's expectations about that completely. The problem with that though, at least for me, is that Shyamalan is not a director known for his subtlety. For better and worse, he is an incredibly literal filmmaker, sometimes embarrassingly so. The closest I think he’s actually come to subtext is Signs, and even with that, his “the Lord works in mysterious ways” retconning pushes it back to that literal nature. Even if he could, I’m not sure he’s capable of doing it. Which is fine, because even if he’s not the headiest man, when he’s in good form, he’s fantastic.
Really, I think that literal nature is cemented by Mr. Glass himself, and his comparisons to his comic stories. And yeah, that was a part of his character in Unbreakable, but those were the bare minimum, and essential to show the deterioration of his character. Here, they ramp that up to 11, where he’s calling out things like “This must be where the bad guys team up,” or “All the main characters converge here.” In that regard, it started to sound like a ultra-serious Deadpool, where simply calling out those things doesn’t automatically make it funny or subversive. And that’s half of his dialogue in the movie. Honestly, after a while he starts to sound like Night’s mouthpiece, so even if we weren’t supposed to take that final scene literally, he kind of brought that on himself for treating everything before it like gospel. It’s interesting on paper, but I don’t think there’s much, if anything, to second guess. You know, even if I disagree I still appreciate your thoughts and do think that there's something to them. I really can understand someone not liking the extremes to which Shyamalan takes his verbalization of the comic book tropes here, or the way he does that ending. I was just somehow very much pulled into all that and found that exciting. And for me that operatic gesture of the very ending is just more interesting from a cinematic perspective than a (probably more sensible and clean) montage would've been, for instance. It may seem unbelievable or even silly but I think it's kinda wonderful.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Jan 24, 2019 15:22:10 GMT
The problem with that though, at least for me, is that Shyamalan is not a director known for his subtlety. For better and worse, he is an incredibly literal filmmaker, sometimes embarrassingly so. The closest I think he’s actually come to subtext is Signs, and even with that, his “the Lord works in mysterious ways” retconning pushes it back to that literal nature. Even if he could, I’m not sure he’s capable of doing it. Which is fine, because even if he’s not the headiest man, when he’s in good form, he’s fantastic.
Really, I think that literal nature is cemented by Mr. Glass himself, and his comparisons to his comic stories. And yeah, that was a part of his character in Unbreakable, but those were the bare minimum, and essential to show the deterioration of his character. Here, they ramp that up to 11, where he’s calling out things like “This must be where the bad guys team up,” or “All the main characters converge here.” In that regard, it started to sound like a ultra-serious Deadpool, where simply calling out those things doesn’t automatically make it funny or subversive. And that’s half of his dialogue in the movie. Honestly, after a while he starts to sound like Night’s mouthpiece, so even if we weren’t supposed to take that final scene literally, he kind of brought that on himself for treating everything before it like gospel. It’s interesting on paper, but I don’t think there’s much, if anything, to second guess. You know, even if I disagree I still appreciate your thoughts and do think that there's something to them. I really can understand someone not liking the extremes to which Shyamalan takes his verbalization of the comic book tropes here, or the way he does that ending. I was just somehow very much pulled into all that and found that exciting. And for me that operatic gesture of the very ending is just more interesting from a cinematic perspective than a (probably more sensible and clean) montage would've been, for instance. It may seem unbelievable or even silly but I think it's kinda wonderful. I will say this about it now that I’ve had time to think on it. I don’t think he succeeded, but I admire the balls on him to go wildly out there and not play it safe. He clearly had ideas, and even if I disagree with them, they were interesting to mull over. As a movie, I enjoyed Aquaman more, but I’ll probably forget about it in a week. I’m going to remember Glass (if mainly for McAvoy, who is still amazing), and if that was the desired effect, the film met it.
|
|
|
GLASS
Jan 27, 2019 1:17:10 GMT
Post by jakesully on Jan 27, 2019 1:17:10 GMT
Saw it today and thought it was decent enough . McAvoy is aces . I can understand a good amount of the criticisms with it (esp the 3rd act) but I gotta tip my hat to M Night for at least coming up with an original-ish /entertaining trilogy here that he wrote & directed. solid 7/10
|
|
Zeb31
Based
Bernardo is not believing que vous êtes come to bing bing avec nous
Posts: 2,557
Likes: 3,794
|
Post by Zeb31 on Mar 21, 2019 15:13:12 GMT
Watching this is like listening to a friend tell you a 129-minute story about something really cool that happened to them and that they're super excited about, but the whole time they're talking you're just hoping they'll get to the point and move on.
I can definitely see why it has so many ardent fans and I'm glad that so many were able to connect to it, but I just didn't get much out of it either way. It has good moments and bad moments, good performances (McAvoy, Jackson) and bad performances (Paulson), good ideas and bad ideas. It's often clever in the ways it subverts the audience's expectations, but doesn't offer a particularly interesting world/mythology either. It's okay. Hard to write much more than that about it.
|
|
dazed
Based
Posts: 2,645
Likes: 1,808
|
GLASS
May 5, 2019 15:27:25 GMT
Post by dazed on May 5, 2019 15:27:25 GMT
I thought Glass was just as good as the first two movies. I for one, loved the ending. Much better than a huge showdown that the movie was marketed on.
I watched the whole trilogy in a span of a day and it flowed very well together. It seems like that’s the best thing to do in order to get the most out of Glass. It’s a little sad that it didn’t get the same reception as the first two.
One of my favorite trilogies.
|
|
|
Post by stinkybritches on May 9, 2019 15:12:46 GMT
this film is an excellent capper to what turned out to actually be a pretty damn great trilogy.
|
|
|
Post by TerryMontana on May 9, 2019 15:47:50 GMT
Much weaker than the first two. I rate them:
Unbreakable 7.5/10 Split 7/10 Glass 6/10
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
GLASS
May 9, 2019 15:53:43 GMT
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2019 15:53:43 GMT
Why its called Glass if I heard Samuel Jackson barely speaking something? Is it somekind retarded vision of movie itself? Still hesitating if to watch this.
|
|
|
GLASS
Jan 10, 2020 0:59:26 GMT
Post by Martin Stett on Jan 10, 2020 0:59:26 GMT
This is probably the worst Shyamalan I've seen, but he's never done me wrong before and he doesn't do me wrong here.
I think that there was a deeper movie to be made if it turned more of the focus on Mrs. Price, Casey and Joseph. Casey learning to accept herself, Joseph questioning his calling, Mrs. Price... well, she could have been given some sort of arc. But the movie abandons them midway, turns Casey into Kevin's love interest (*GAG*), and fails to do them justice. In the end, they're the protagonists of this story. It is through them that we see Kevin, David and Elijah.
But what we get is a real bang up superhero movie regardless. It has big ideas and will definitely inspire discussion. Down with the MCU! Long live the Shyamalan Cinematic Universe!
|
|
|
Post by cheesecake on Jan 10, 2020 2:59:35 GMT
I'm surprised I never came to this thread before now. It's absolute trash and in my bottom five of the year.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Stett on Jan 10, 2020 3:31:12 GMT
I'm surprised I never came to this thread before now. It's absolute trash and in my bottom five of the year.
|
|