Glass

Mr. Shy divertiu-se muito com isso. Trabalha de forma consistente com o potencial dramático de todas as três personagens principais e as suas interações de aprofundamento/aproximação dentro duma casa, gradua e entretém a explorar e revelando a essência dum tema brilhante que criou há 19 anos e com o qual continuou há 3 anos (a ideia mágica de heróis de banda desenhada estarem presentes na realidade), e fá-lo com o seu típico prazer de criatividade visual, referências temáticas, e, no final, dois pontos de partida. Mas apesar do facto de tudo isto encaixar e se tornar adequadamente conspiratório, original e ousado em relação às expectativas do espetador durante o primeiro ponto de partida, não tenho a certeza absoluta de que o quisesse. Para não mencionar o segundo ponto de partida, que não deveria estar lá de modo nenhum porque o filme não foi absolutamente construído para ele. (20/01/2019)

M. Night Shyamalan goes back to his roots and disappoints badly. In everything. Glass is a film that will probably make you a little embarrassed for the filmmaker himself. It looks televisual, but above all it's all incredibly stupid and self-aware at the same time. The twists and turns are absurd, the pacing is awfully slow and any attempts at philosophising are inhumanly off, and the decent Bruce Willis and James McAvoy can't pull it up to average. Watching Glass is like watching M. Night Shyamalan destroy his own legacy for two hours. And it's not a pretty sight. (16/01/2019)

Well… Given that I was mentally prepared for the worst, I’m not disappointed. In fact, I’m relatively a tiny bit pleasantly surprised that, at least conceptually, it makes some sense. IMHO, it is well though-out. In Glass, Shyalaman explores a well known but slightly different motif of comics films - how it would be in the real world - without the viewer actually anticipating it until de last moment. For the closure of a trilogy, it makes sense overall. Unfortunately, the film is almost impossible to enjoy purely at the level of the viewer, but only after it finishes, if you are able and willing to appreciate its structure. There are several stupid moments that ruin what could be a pleasant experience, along with empty dialogues and inconsistent performances (I like Sarah Paulson, but here she was badly cast). What’s utter nonsense is the character of Taylor-Joy (what she’s forced to do there is unbelievable), as well as the final alliance of some of the characters. (13/02/2019)

I understand where the director was going with all of this. Unfortunately, I don’t really get how he filmed it. While  Unbreakable is a fundamental movie of American cinema in my eyes, and Split set out to be the same, Glass connected the stories of all participants in a way that was not only unnecessary but it also spoiled my impression of the two previous films, which ended perfectly… and should have remained that way. But M. Night Shyamalan turned his superheroes into such strange figures that even though I still liked James McAvoy’s unrestrained acting, the movie as a whole made me really unhappy. It felt like a complete mess. But it’s still Shyamalan, so if you can endure the boring madhouse-like middle of the move, the finale can be quite intriguing from a screenwriting perspective. You certainly have to give him that. (14/06/2019)

With the themes, the involvement of the three, Paulson's role in the action, and the plot arc (across the episodes as a whole, not just this one), this is undeniably an interesting yet logical culmination of the trilogy, and one that works particularly well on a meta level, as since Unbreakable, we are now in the "cinematic age of the superhero". That's exactly how it works in the fist hour, and with that in mind, it goes down some interesting paths where Shyamalan isn't afraid to toy with expectations. The problem, and quite a major one, is the second half, when it doesn't so much shift in place as shuffle backwards on a square inch. It unfolds hastily in scenes where you always know safely in advance what is going to happen and how it is going to happen and where it is going, so that sometimes you wait for tens of minutes before it finally happens and then it is explained to you at length. Even the potentially powerful "whispering to the trio" scenes are stripped down and not for a moment convincing. This is doubly disappointing, because the second half pretends "as if the whispering worked and made the people in question angry", which no one, thanks to the unconvincing delivery, can believe for a second. On paper, it all might have made sense to Shyamalan and seemed on the level of Unbreakable, but the execution stalls, and despite a solid pacing and a supportive overall plane, the crappy second half sinks it cruelly. It's not bad, it's not unintentionally funny, it's just very good at first before it becomes very boring. (07/02/2021)