MovieChat Forums > Glass (2019) Discussion > DO NOT listen to the critics

DO NOT listen to the critics


This is on a par with the previous 2 imho (not that they were absolute classics but pretty strong **** out of ***** movies). The critics probably dont like it as it isnt metoo enough or not enough strong female roles or something

Basically if you liked Unbreakable and Split this is an interesting conclusion and doesn't disappoint (except maybe [spoiler]Dunn's fate[/spoiler])

reply

i dont listen to them they all curropt and work for disney

reply

I imagine the current metoo climate is something to do with it.. critics probably aren't happy with Sarah Paulson [spoiler]being duped by Mr Glass ...or Taylor-Joy being sympathetic to her captor from previous movie or the cheerleaders in the opening[/spoiler] triggers their timesup fury or something like that

Believe me if Glass was crap I would either say so or post nothing. I dont revere UB or Split just think they are pretty good movies (didn't dig Split much actually but its a decent movie) so didn't really have much invested in Glass other than wanting to see something on a par with those and before I got the inevitable end twist spoiled and since the reviews were saying its terrible was prepared MNS going all 'Happening'.. and that didn't..happen

reply

Do not waste your money on this garbage. Do not support this lazy, garbage-filled excuse of a movie. Better to give your money to a stranger - or toss your cash into a fire just to watch it burn. That alone would be more entertaining than this pathetic movie. It is astonishingly bad; hopelessly slapped together. An inept regurgitation and a complete embarrassment for anyone associated with the project.

reply

Why do you keep copying and pasting the same thing against other threads. You really think this is a golden piece of literature you’ve written it needs reposting over and over again. It’s not mate. Understand you don’t like the movie but don’t be so lazy and Instead why don’t you respond with applicable reply to relevant conversation within posts.

reply

They wasted my time with 3 movies full of dead air. If you add up all the dead air in the movies (Where characters are just staring off into space), it adds up to more than half of the watch time. My time is money, and these people wasted it big time. Not with just one movie, but with three!! It's gonna end. I will always fight back against anyone who wastes my time, and try to let as many people know that i can so they don't waste their time too. It's a complete cop out on the director's part to make all this dead air. He is doing it because he doesn't actually have enough content for a full movie. That is not proper or fair to the audience. This clown will be exposed as i have not only been leaving this comment, but many more like it all over the interwebs. No one wastes my time, and gets away with it. NO ONE. BTW, i just got done with The Watchmen, and that movie has no dead air whatsoever. That is a real super hero movie for adults. This slow burn garbage from Shyamalan is total trash. If we let these sorts of directors get away with releasing half-assed BS, they will continue to do it since it's actually much cheaper for them to do so. If you're not on the front lines battling these scamtards back, then you're just rolling over and taking it. Not me. I hope that answers your question. Have a nice night.

reply

At first I thought you actually replied to me and was impressed but you have used the same text in another thread? Expect for a line at the end. Why do you do this? It’s very lazy

reply

I realized that since i'm trying to reach more people that not only am i going to respond to you here, but i will also make a thread for the issue so people can find it easier. This is serious business here man. If we let them keep getting away with this, we'll never have good movies again. Soon everyone will catch on that the braindead masses don't realize what good cinema is anymore, and accept all this dead air. We are not being lazy here. This is the opposite of lazy. We are getting in their faces, and letting them know it's over.

reply

Do you not think your insisting your opinion too much. I get you don’t like the movie and appreciate your opinion but your aggressively trying to dictate others to your view which is not the way about it. I feel the marvel universe movies are a big cash cow franchise where the studios churn out the same linear plot of characters over and over again, afraid to step out of the comfort zone which m night does. You can say the last avengers they did something bold but you know the next movie supposedly has an element of time travel hence the undoing of this movie and bringing back there cash churning characters to make another 10 years of cash! I could go about this and paste this all on the marvel boards but I don’t as this is my opinion and not the opinion of others so ease down on your aggressive stance and let people that watch the movie make up Their own minds. Peace

reply

The difference is that Marvel is not filling the screen with dead air. Dead air is dead air. There is nothing going on. No substance. That is not fair to the viewer. Try to get a job in radio and give the audience dead air and see what happens. You'll be fired on the same day. No one wants dead air. Having a similar plot is like having similar Metallica Albums. It's really not that bad compared to dead air. Imagine listening to an album where there's no music for minutes at a time. That's a whole different ball game. You would be so mad you spent the money, and wasted your time. There is no excuse for dead air, and yes the people need to know about this going in because if we let these directors get away with it, they know it's cheaper, and soon that's all we'll get. Stand up and say NO TO DEAD AIR!!!

reply

Your statement clearly shows that this is not the type of film for you. You said dead air but what I saw was slow paced build up(nothing wrong with that)to the inevitable climax. Every scene had dialogue or actions there wasn’t any scenes with nothingness or ‘dead air’ as you put it. Also what are you going on a About comparing to radio?? Your can’t apply the same criteria. This ain’t radio you can have quiet scenes in movies(a quiet place)as it’s a visual experience . And your ref to marvel films! Your joking right? Dr strange and the first iron man was pretty much the same structure movie. You not realise your watching something very familiar? Every marval origin movie has a throw away bad guy that gets beaten at the end of the movie. It’s tired formula! At least this movie tries something different! There are flaws but at least it’s Not teeing up another movie like all of the marval movies! Even this trilogy, each movie could be a stand alone movie. Your argument is flawed and you need to take a step back and look at what your saying.
Lastly to add the director actually funded this movie himself. He is being creative and I have no issues with directors being creative rather than pleasing the studios and teeing up that next sequel.

reply

Oh he funded it himself?! No wonder he's being such a cheapskate then. Oh, and if he can trick a huge swath of people into thinking its good (by leaving thousands of fake 10/10 reviews on imdb), then he profits BIG TIME!! So, he has motive to be cheap. When i say dead air, i'm not talking about slow buildup to a major scene. I'm talking about when the characters are just staring off into space, and the camera slowly pans away from them for like 30 whole seconds of NOTHING!! It is done again and again in this film, and also in films like "You were never really here" or "Drive" or "Signs". More and more directors are filling the gaps with these long zoom in or zoom outs to fill the time. My argument is not flawed. No one actually wants to see long zoom ins of a blank stare on actors faces. Maybe once or twice like The Shining did when Jack was going insane. That is ok. But to constantly fill the movie with these types of long draws is not ok, and is a cheap move. He should not have made a trilogy. He didn't have enough dialog or content for that. He had enough for one movie, and tried to stretch it into 3 so he could cash in even more. I will never back down from this position. I have seen many, many movies in my day, and I KNOW what good cinema is by now. I'm not saying he has to model it after Avengers. Did you see Watchmen? Many innocents die in that movie, and the heroes lose, but it is a masterpiece with literally no dead air whatsoever. Those are the types of movies we should be encouraging. Movies that keep your attention. Yes, i am comparing to radio, but only for the keeping attention aspect. Zooming into Mr Glass's face for 60 seconds OVER 10 TIMES IN THE MOVIE IS NOT CONTENT, AND YOU'LL NEVER CONVINCE ME IT IS!!

reply

I’m not trying to convince you. That’s his style of directing. You don’t like it then move on. I like slow burner movies that are unique and don’t follow the same path I’ve see a dozen times!

reply

I like slow burn movies too. I don't like extra long zoom in scenes on actors blank faces creating filler for minutes on end.
Here's some slow burn movies that don't have a ton of filler with people staring into space:
Prisoners (2013)
The Thing (1982)
Get Out (2017)
Chinatown (1974)
The Revenant (2015)

reply

It’s his creative license to do what he wants in movies. You don’like it then don’t watch. That simple. I liked it. It wasn’t great but it’s wasn’t terrible. Your too hung up on this dead air crap . The guy is a creative genius. He writes and directs. Do you know how many directors do that? Not many.

reply

You're missing my mission which is to inform others to not watch this type of crap anymore because it's really cheap and easy to make, and is a complete cop out. Signs was crap, and so was this trilogy. What does this guy write that actually makes sense? Like the gun scene in Unbreakable!! What a joke that scene is!! Why not just try to poke him with a sewing needle first? Instead he goes for a gun?! HORRIBLE UNREALISTIC WRITING, THE GUY SHOULD BE RAN OUT OF THE INDUSTRY, AND AFTER THIS TRILOGY, HE'S GONE IMO.

reply

Glass was a huge disappointment

reply

This is your opinion. I don’t like slap stick comedy’s and other people do but I’m not going to dictate to People not to watch them.

Also just to add about your comment on unbreakable and the gun scene. The purpose of that scene was for tension. If you want guns going off then watch a Michael bay movie.

Lastly Quentin Tarintino has gone on the recorded stating that unbreakable was the best movie of that year and one of his favourite comic book style movies. So are you saying he doesn’t know what he’s talking about? I hear dead air coming from you ....

reply

You're not listening. The gun scene was bad writing. I didn't want the gun to go off, i wanted the scene to make sense. No son would try to shoot his dad to see if he's a super hero. First, he would try to stab him with a sewing needle or maybe a knife in the leg. Not a gun. It's too drastic, and unrealistic. He would not be willing to take such a risk in real life.
Quentin's movies are even MORE unrealistic, and he has no business commenting on the realism of any movie. If The Overseer can be killed in a puddle, then how does he even drink water or take a shower? The ends don't line up. Maybe Quentin is friends with Shyamalan, and they both prop each other up. Why should it matter what some butt buddy in hollyweird says about another? What matters is the final product.
Last night i watched a slow burn movie that blew all Shyamalan's movies OUT OF THE WATER!! It's called Hell or High Water, and you should watch that if you want a realistic movie that is also slow burn. Get over it, there's thousands of people online talking about how silly that gun scene is; it's not just me, and many other scenes from the trilogy as well. Shyamalan is losing credit big time, and his movies only get worse and worse. You'll see, after a few more years, no one will even risk going to see one of his contrived messes ever!! Like the last scene in Split. No one on the net would take a random clip of people running around in a parking lot tipping cars over seriously. They'd probably just pass it off as fake or fan made blair witch type movie of such. A real writer would have had Glass pipeline the entire story to a reporter friend of his who could break the story properly. It's simple things like this that expose Shyamalan's bad writing, and I could go on all day, and will if you keep pressing me (No dead air here)

reply

Your a walking talking contradiction. You obviously don’t like this director then why did you even watch this movie? This movie was for the fans that liked unbreakable(more so)and split. Sounds like you liked neither so why torture yourself and watch glass? You set yourself up to not like it before you watched it!

Baffles me why you would do that?

Bottom line is you don’t like this directors style and movies so why don’t you not watch anything else from this director? Save yourself some pain yeah?

As I’ve said before I don’t think this is a great movie and was disappointed as I liked unbreakable. There was not enough Bruce in it and felt he could have been utilised more. The movie has its problems but also has some great strengths. Why don’t you watch Chris Stuckmanns spoiler review. Its very detailed and nitpicks all the pros and cons. He’s a well established critic and is respected throughout the YouTube community. He doesn’t once Criticise your main point about ‘dead air’ not once. It’s a very well balanced review.

You go on about that gun scene in unbreakable. You gotta let it go. It’s a good scene in my opinion and very well acted especially by Bruce and the young boy.

Your now having a go at Quentin? Not even going to entertain that. Your opinion.


reply

That's all ya get left then? I do what i want, and critique what i want. It doesn't mean i'm a contradiction. It just means that I don't stand for people propping up bad movies. I want to see the movie industry morph more into a solid industry, and with Directors like Shyamalan, it is slipping badly. So, i'm just out here doing my part to rid the industry of such outlandish movies. If we let Shyamalan get away with it, more and more directors will add the dead air to save money, and we'll be swamped in garbage.

reply

I was editing during your reply my last comment as it published before I finished

reply

This will be my last response. You say about getting rid of outlandish movies. I have watched many many movies and I can tell in the first 15 mins when watching a new movie the similarities to other movies. I just don’t get surprised very often which is a sad thing. Hence my previous comment on marval movies. Hand on heart when I watch m night movies they are always unique and I never know what direction the movie will go in. That excites me as watcher. Yes he’s missed the mark on some movies but I would rather watch his movies then the generic popcorn crap that’s coming out of Hollywood. As said in previous comment watch Chris Stuckmanns review.its very well crafted and unbiased as you seem to be the other way.

reply

I'm saying to get rid of poor writing, and long extended shots when they are not really necessary or building any sort of suspense. I don't even really like Marvel movies, and just mentioned that i watched "Hell or High Water" last night, and it's a slow burner with a ton of great writing, and no slow 30 second camera zooms into blank stares. Every camera shot was expected, and flowing.
Quentin and Bruce Willis are friends, so it's normal for him to prop up his bud's movie.
I'll go check out Stuckmann's review, but keep this in mind:
https://cdn.theatlantic.com/media/old_wire/img/upload/2012/08/17/m-night_.png

reply

If you want guns going off then watch a Michael bay movie.


Man, Michael Bay cant get no love.

Outside of him directing movies and blowing shit up I've read in interviews he is somewhat a socially awkward endearing person. ...so I've read.

I for one will always have respect for him for at least bringing Transformers (2007) and a little bit of Pain & Gain to the screen.

reply

fzane, am I reading you right, that you watched all three movies in this trilogy, even though you despised the directing style?

reply

Destinata,
Did you learn nothing from the Godfather? I keep my enemies close, and i study them endlessly. I mean, how else can you call yourself a critic? :-)

reply

I know. If you say you wouldn’t like a movie, detail everything that’s been written about it, detail what even the fans say about it and explain it’s not actually a good thing — and why, they’ll come after you saying, “How would you know you wouldn’t like it if you didn’t see it?”

I gotcha.

reply

Destinata
Hey, i'm out here on the front lines trying to make sure the studios don't get away wit making crap. If we let them,it's actually waaaay cheaper for them, so they'll keep doing it, and before ya know it all movies will suck. Consider me a soldier on a mission from the movie Gods. :-)

reply

The movie was garbage filled?? I must have miss large parts of the movie where camera focus on a bag of garbage.

reply

It was filled with dead air. When we're talking about a cinematic product, dead air is the equivalent to garbage. Imagine listening to an album where there's no music for minutes at a time. You would be so mad you spent the money, and wasted your time. There is no excuse for dead air, and yes the people need to know about this going in because if we let these directors get away with it, they know it's cheaper, and soon that's all we'll get. Stand up and say NO TO DEAD AIR GARBAGE!!!

reply

Stop repeating your comments! That’s more boring than your dead air!

reply

Bond998 was asking about why i said it was garbage, so i gave him the reason. People need to know why we should stop this type of movie making. Ya know why they never had the battle at the top of the roof of that building? That would have cost Shyamalan more money, and he funds his own stuff, so he decided to just have it in a parking lot instead, and keep the change. So, we got an inferior parking lot scene when we could have had a grand building scene. Just another reason why this movie was a pure rip off!! Oh, and i don't buy that the girl would fall in love with some split personality psycho that tried to kill her many many times. If you keep pressing me, i will continue to take apart this BS film with even more reasons!!

reply

Enjoyed it. James McAvoy was THE SHIT in this though. Watching him switch was a pleasure

reply

Agreed. The acting was good. They should have done away with all the dead air in all 3 movies, and just combined them into one big one with 3 subplots that converge. That would have been perfect, but instead they added a ton of dead air, and made 3 movies. To me, that is a gimmick, and must be called out.

reply

You don’t need to have a political agenda to dislike this film.

reply

I disagree - I think this movie ain't it. But you should listen to whoever you want and trust. If it's not the opinions of critics or your peers, then just go see it if you want to and make up your own mind.

reply

I actually liked Dunn's fate. Agreed, not the best movie, but underrated. Often happens, people who miss the boat with Shyamalan films end up not liking them.

reply