‘Glass’ movie won’t shatter your expectations – Do Not Publish Yet

From a new hire- Do Not Publish Yet – SJ

“Glass” is a film about separation. I know this because I wanted to separate from my theater seat halfway through the movie. However, it wasn’t because the film’s exactly terrible, it’s just boring.

Being that this is the latest entry into M. Night Shyamalan’s “Unbreakable” series, it’s almost inevitable that a critic would compare it to its prequels, being “Unbreakable” and “Split.” In comparison, this film is considerably less enjoyable. “Split” at least had the kidnapping horror element to fall back on, which is a niche sub-genre that can scratch the itch that movies like “Saw” or “The Hills Have Eyes” might not have been reaching in recent years. “Glass” instead falls comfortably into the grey marshes of the action genre, of which contains scores of better films to watch.

In “Glass,” David Dunn, portrayed by Bruce Willis, barely shows any emotion on his task to blandly apprehend a man with over a dozen personalities, usually referred to as The Beast, portrayed by James McAvoy, but a character named Elijah Price, portrayed by Samuel L. Jackson, works behind the scenes to create what is seemingly a comic book plot by teaming up with The Beast and working to reveal the existence of super-beings to the unknowing masses.

I may have hinted at it before, but I’d like to come out and say that the performances in this film are downright dreadful. Willis barely acts at all, Jackson phones it in on almost every line he delivers and the supporting cast doesn’t help drive character choice for any of the leads. However, it’s very clear that it was poor directing and not poor acting chops that lead to these subpar displays. I refuse to believe that Samuel L. Jackson cannot play off of the stellar performance that McAvoy gave.

It’s almost surprising how clearly McAvoy steals the show here. Whenever the editors didn’t make his character roar with stock lion sound effects, The Beast is a fantastically demented character to see perform.

While credit is being paid where it’s due, the cinematography and visual editing in this film are gorgeous. Some shots are so breathtaking that it almost makes you forget the poor direction the actors were given.

With that said, we all know why people read reviews of M. Night Shyamalan films. You want to know how the ending is. Without spoiling anything, the twist ending falls flat without being terrible enough to warrant real discussion. It’s not as incomprehensible or nonsensical as some of Shyamalan’s previous works, but it fails to deliver on the shock factor that Shyamalan is known for. This adds to the mediocrity of the film, almost painfully so, and I heard justifiable groans from my audience-mates in the theatre when the twist was revealed.

All in all, “Glass” can be summed up by saying that it’s less than the sum of its parts, like a mirror that was put together with pieces still missing. Do yourself a favor and don’t step on any of the shards that are left. Watch “Split” instead.