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!!
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!
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:
The Thing (1982)
Get Out (2017)
The Revenant (2015)
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.
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.
Glass was a huge disappointment
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 ....
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)
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.
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.
I was editing during your reply my last comment as it published before I finished
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.
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:
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.
fzane, am I reading you right, that you watched all three movies in this trilogy, even though you despised the directing style?
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? :-)
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?”
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. :-)