Glass (2019).

Okay, there's no way for me to discuss my biggest problem with Glass without it seeming slightly spoilery so I would ask you to stop reading this review now if you have yet to see the film. I still dislike spoilers, and I am not one of those people who thinks it is okay to spoil movies for other peopler if it is a movie that I personally disliked (and I did dislike this), but I was rooting for Glass to win me over for about 3/4 of the runtime. Then the finale locked all of the pieces into place, and that's where it lost me. Because after giving us a great, unique, superhero origin tale with Unbreakable, M. Night Shyamalan decided to make Split a surprise supervillain origin tale connected to that movie. It wasn't as good as Unbreakable but the cast helped to make it work and the ending had a lot of people (including myself) quite excited. So you have one origin story, another origin story, and then M. Night Shyamalan squanders the opportunity to make something truly memorable by cheekily turning this third entry in what is now a trilogy into . . . a third origin story. Yep, that's really what this is. And that may please Shyamalan, but it's less likely to please those who expected something more.

Here's the basic story. David Dunn (Bruce Willis) now patrols the streets and tries to seek out, and stop, criminals. He is helped by his son, Joseph (Spencer Treat Clark returning to the role that last saw him acting onscreen as a child), and all is going well until he bumps into the dangerous multiple personalities of the character, Kevin/Dennis/Hedwig/etc, played by James McAvoy (let's just call him Kevin from now on). Caught in the middle of a fight, David and Kevin are locked up in a mental health institution, where another notable patient is Elijah Price (AKA Mr Glass, Samuel L. Jackson). Dr. Ellie Staple (Sarah Paulson) wants to convince them that the ideas they have in their heads, the notions that they have superpowers, are merely delusions, potentially dangerous ones. The doctor may soon find herself out of her depth.

Shyamalan still has talent. That's what perhaps remains the most frustrating thing about him, the biggest obstacle to his success is himself. Of course, I am saying this without knowing the general majority opinion on this movie (which, for all I know, could be loved by many people). But his good points are as obvious as his failings. The guy does well with plotting, the look and feel of his films, and I'd argue that he is often also very good at being able to get the pacing just right. Shyamalan rarely makes films that hurtle from start to finish, but he shoots the quieter, slower, moments so well that they are still engrossing in between any more exciting sequences. He also tends to get great work from composers, and the score here by West Dylan Thordson is no exception.

On the flipside, he often creates scripts that seem designed to showcase how good he is with his words and ideas (as good as he views himself, anyway), and he often builds his movies around one major idea or twist. That's all well and good when everything works, as happened with his solid run of four movies spread out around the turn of this century, but not so good otherwise. He's a gambler who continues to bet big with the hope that the last card turned over will be the one to give him the unbeatable hand. That card isn't always drawn, leaving him with a large investment on the table and nothing good enough to lay down at the end.

The cast all do well here, with McAvoy arguably getting to play around even more than he did in Split (and he's the best person onscreen). Willis at least looks present for a number of his scenes, which is more than can be said for many of his other performances in recent years, and Jackson clearly loves the chance to reprise the role of Price. Paulson is fine as the doctor, Anya Taylor-Joy (who was so good in Split) continues to prove herself as an intriguing and excellent screen presence, and it's nice to see Clark as the boy still trying to look after his "superdad".

Breaking everything down to their basic elements, Glass is not a bad film. There are a number of good moments throughout, the script is serviceable, it often looks great, and a couple of the leads are giving it their all. It just fails to come together by the end, and it fails in such a way that genuinely sours the films that came before it, which surely couldn't have been Shyamalan's intention. That failure is enough to drag it down by some margin, and I almost considered going even lower with my final rating.

5/10

You can buy the movie here.
Americans can buy it here.