 |
| Scene from Glass |
It was two years ago to the week that M. Night Shyamalan did the unthinkable: he resuscitated a superhero franchise without telling anyone. Split was a horror movie that took James McAvoy's scenery chewing capabilities to its heights before pivoting into the reality that it was a sequel to Unbreakable: a film released back when audiences adored the filmmaker. It was back when his movies made bank at the box office and he was hailed as the next Spielberg. In 2019, he returned to the franchise, now named Eastrail 177, with Glass. It promises to be the conclusion to a trilogy connected thematically and now literally with a trio of characters that may not be the most super of characters, but who use Shyamalan's mythology to dive into what it means to be a hero and a villain. The results, much like everything of the past 15 years, find Shyamalan getting sloppy in his ambitions but proving to make a film that is entertaining enough. It's not a masterpiece that summarizes everything succinctly, but it will entertain those who can buy into its kooky world building.
If there is one thing that is inherently felt from the first frame, it's the feeling that this is more of a graft than a methodical conclusion at times. Shyamalan was a master story teller, so it's possible that he's always had this trilogy planned, but at the same time Unbreakable wrapped itself up so perfectly that there wasn't a need to expand. It was a happy miracle that Split was a rip-roaring good time. If anything, it benefited from being tonally different from its predecessor. Here, Glass attempts to clash everything together in a hodgepodge of ideas that at times capture the philosophical depth of Unbreakable and the chaotic action of Split, but not often effectively when placed alongside each other. The film wants to feel big and does everything in its power to get there. It's clear that Shyamalan is having a lot of fun with one of the most original superhero trilogies in modern history, though it comes with a hubris that isn't totally met.
For instance, it does feel like Split is at the front of Glass' mind. McAvoy's multiple personalities are back, and they all get to have extended cameos. Sometimes it's breathtaking to watch the actor change characters both verbally and physically. Others come across as fan service, as Shyamalan feels the need to remind everyone of The Beast's muscular powers every 15 minutes or so. It's not a terrible thing, but it does feel more impressive to watch McAvoy take its shape than fit into the plot at large. There's small moments that exist for the pulpy direction that Shyamalan has begun going in, where his Blumhouse productions allow him to push his potential to be goofy and ribald. It's fine, but clashing with Unbreakable's seriousness is a challenge that he's lost the touch for, and in its place is a cacophony of fascinating moments clanging together. It's a mess, but what a beautiful one.
The film's titular character Mr. Glass (Samuel L. Jackson) is likely to strike some as odd in 2019. Whereas comic book movies were new in 2000, his heavy use of exposition and self-awareness has become an obnoxious trope of pop culture. The third act is riddled with him pointing out plot devices which feel unconventional and plain off from the realism that the film is trying to present. However, those familiar with the original film will know that this is a feature more than a bug. Shyamalan's franchise was always about the philosophy and ideas behind the heroes than seeing them perform grandiose missions. It's why Unbreakable is arguably a better comic book movie than most movies based on comic books. There's a passion for the medium, and it comes across in how he frames his shots. For what Shyamalan lacks as an action director, he makes up for with his writing.
Much like the first film, the heart of this film is the idea of opposing ideologies coming together. It has evolved past good and evil to something more complex. There's now the idea of what is real and fake, legal and illegal, or even sane and insane. The film's third act is one that's likely to overwhelm those not willing to embrace the winding road of ideas, which are laid out in a way that has already frustrated many. However, it does feel like a puzzle that will reward viewers looking for depth and deconstruction of a genre instead of a convenient (maybe even satisfying) ending to a series that ran almost 20 years. Sure, there's parts that feel rushed, but at the end of the day Shyamalan is an ideas man and it's in the exposition that the characters get to feel like something greater. After all, Mr. Glass has brittle bones and David Dunn (Bruce Willis) is vulnerable to water. That's not terribly interesting as an action film. Unbreakable wasn't much of one anyways. It's the conversations and approach that create a world where mythology is created instead of dictated. These characters impact lives in subtle ways, and the fact that Shyamalan is just as interested in the comic book creators within the film as he is the leads shows just how deep this film's universe goes.
What is great about Glass is that it concludes the Eastrail 177 trilogy on a very unpredictable note. It doesn't exist in a modern age of convention, instead choosing to make bold decisions that may baffle and even anger, but are wholly original. Shyamalan may be far from his auteur days, but he's creating art that is challenging popular notions still, and it's a relief that he's found a way to be thematically consistent in his trilogy without just making carbon copies. Is the film perfect? Not really. There's a lot of blubber to nitpick about. However, it's one of his better recent films and one that captures an enthusiastic filmmaker with a lot to say about comic books. It may not have Iron Man or Captain America saving the day, but it has plenty of provocation in its place. There's no mistaking this for a Marvel or D.C. movie. It's a film that reflects a world where superhero cinema was allowed to be experimental and maybe even dangerous. For all of its faults, it's a film that concludes the trilogy on a note crazy enough that it will leave audiences thinking about what it means. Maybe the nitpicks will tear this film away in time. Maybe it will be called a misunderstood conclusion. Whatever the case may be, Glass doesn't go out with a whimper. It goes out with a singular vision and Shyamalan leaves it up to you to determine just how satisfying it is. Few superhero stories give you that anymore, and for that we should be more grateful of films like this.
Comments
Post a Comment