“Glass” is good, but not groundbreaking

 New movie is a disappointing finale for an otherwise great trilogy

Janessa Hammers
Staff Writer

If “Glass” was a fruit, it would be a granny smith apple. One that is light, crisp, and delicious looking on the outside, but once bitten into, surprises the taste buds with its tartness, making your teeth ache.

What started out as a promising ending to the M. Night Shyamalan trilogy including previous movies “Unbreakable” and “Split”, “Glass” had a twist ending that may not have fully paid off to most viewers. 

One major issue that pervaded the film was the continuous flashbacks that not only reused the exact film from previous movies, but also confused the audience with seemingly redundant exposition. There is one major reason that Shyamalan may have decided to include these flashbacks and that is the large span of time between the movies. 

The first film in the trilogy, “Unbreakable” starring Bruce Willis, was released in 2000, over 18 years ago now which may have been enough time for audiences to forget the plot and characters of the film. The second installment, “Split” starring James McEvoy, came out in 2016. The only reference of “Split” being a sequel was the brief appearance of Bruce Willis at the end of the film who was the main character in the first film.

Because of the distance created by the 16-year hiatus from directing the trilogy, the movies seem fractured and unharmonious. Flashbacks are techniques filmmakers can use to give the audience more information without having to break up the current timeline and can seem sudden and obvious unless used correctly.

The flashback sequences in “Glass” were obvious and numerous, trying to make all the connections for the audience which did not help the already sloppy plot. Like I said, the beginning of the movie was fabulous, it got me on the track of a psychologist thinking about how a superhero’s psyche may so precariously walk the border-line between supernatural and schizophrenic. 

In the film all three of the main characters, The Beast (Kevin), Mr. Glass, and David, are being kept in a psychiatric facility cared for by Dr. Ellie Staple. She is a specialist in the disorder that makes humans think they are superheroes or villains and tries to convince each of them that they are mentally ill.

The movie is marvelous in its real-world breakdown of how the mind of a superhero would be defined by certain psychologists. For example, feeling as if you are a god and responsible for saving people sounds pretty nuts if someone believed that in today’s world, let alone actually dressing up in a costume and running around the city in it. 

But the question that really got me thinking was, “How do you know who is good and who is bad?” This question was directed at David, to which he replied, “It’s a feeling I get.” But really, how could anyone know a person from just looking at them; thinking someone is dangerous and then attacking them for no apparent reason would make you the dangerous one? 

I would highly recommend this movie for any psychology majors or minors out there, but if you’re looking for a satisfying ending to the trilogy well, you will not find it here. 

Feature photo courtesy of the Associated Press.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: