Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

Discussions of specific films and franchises.
Message
Author
User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#26 Post by mfunk9786 » Thu Jan 10, 2019 12:53 pm

colinr0380 wrote:
Thu Jan 10, 2019 12:47 pm
And I kind of like The Happening, if just for the scene of Mark Whalberg nervously taking to a potted plant which turns out to be plastic!
One of the weirder things I've ever encountered on Letterboxd is Roger Avary giving 5 stars to After Earth, although Avary is pretty weird to begin with

User avatar
thirtyframesasecond
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 1:48 pm

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#27 Post by thirtyframesasecond » Thu Jan 10, 2019 2:25 pm

colinr0380 wrote:
Thu Jan 10, 2019 12:47 pm
And I kind of like The Happening, if just for the scene of Mark Whalberg nervously talking to a potted plant which turns out to be plastic!
Let me guess, the potted plant turns out to be the better actor?

User avatar
colinr0380
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#28 Post by colinr0380 » Thu Jan 10, 2019 3:36 pm

Judge for yourself! (I actually like Wahlberg's bookish performance in this film, very different from The Departed just before!)

The Happening is on my mind at the moment because it seems as if that latest Sandra Bullock film Bird Box has melded that premise with A Quiet Place's!

davoarid
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2013 12:57 pm

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#29 Post by davoarid » Sat Jan 12, 2019 10:41 pm

Just got back from a screening of the trilogy at our local Alamo Draft House and, yeah, the critics are right: Glass is not anywhere close to a good movie (and I say that as an enormous admirer of Shyamalan's work). To re-use a line from Mark Mollineaux, it's "barely even fun; it’s exactly the movie you’d daydream it being on an extremely unimaginative afternoon."

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#30 Post by domino harvey » Thu Jan 17, 2019 12:54 pm

Forbes reveals that Shyamalan personally funded Split and Glass-- I knew he did that in the Visit and it made sense, but $20 million is a lot to pony up to ensure your vision isn't tampered with. Still, while I am eager for Shyamalan to make another film as masterful as the Village (and maybe he has, since I haven't seen Split or its sequel yet), I give him real props for putting his money where his mouth is. Regardless of what one feels about his works, this is about as extreme into Auterist mode as a mainstream director can possibly go, and I can respect this kind of ego trip

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#31 Post by tenia » Thu Jan 17, 2019 12:59 pm

I actually don't understand exactly what this money allowed him to do. It's still not an indie movie, but a studio one. Did it just allow him to be the main financial backer for the movie, thus having the final word over the other producers and the studio ? Did it allow him to jumpstart a production that otherwise would have had the studio hesitating to greelight it ?

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#32 Post by domino harvey » Thu Jan 17, 2019 1:01 pm

I'm pretty sure it is an independent film distributed by Blumhouse via Universal

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#33 Post by domino harvey » Thu Jan 17, 2019 1:10 pm

Okay, interestingly, it looks like this was indeed independently funded and made by Shyamalan and then sold to Universal/Blumhouse as a "negative pickup", wherein the studio agreed to spend a certain amount on advertising &c after it was delivered

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#34 Post by tenia » Thu Jan 17, 2019 1:15 pm

Ok, thanks for the precision. That was another possibility I thought about, but the Forbes article didn't mention it.
I then guess it was the same production / distribution flow for Split : produced independantly, sold to Universal/Blumhouse for distribution handling.
Interesting.

User avatar
jazzo
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 12:02 am

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#35 Post by jazzo » Thu Jan 17, 2019 2:53 pm

domino harvey wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 12:54 pm
Forbes reveals that Shyamalan personally funded Split and Glass-- I knew he did that in the Visit and it made sense, but $20 million is a lot to pony up to ensure your vision isn't tampered with. Still, while I am eager for Shyamalan to make another film as masterful as the Village (and maybe he has, since I haven't seen Split or its sequel yet), I give him real props for putting his money where his mouth is. Regardless of what one feels about his works, this is about as extreme into Auterist mode as a mainstream director can possibly go, and I can respect this kind of ego trip
If I'm not mistaken, The Passion of the Christ was similarly funded by Mel Gibson, and then distributed by the studio. I'm not a fan of it, or any of Gibson's other work as a director (or as a person, for that matter), although he's put in some terrific performances in his four decade career, but wholeheartedly agree with Domino, that this is absolutely something to be admired. In terms of sheer belief in one's voice, it is hard to think of anything more extreme or honourable than an artist investing everything, personally, physically and financially into their art. In Gibson's case, I just tend to think that the art is shit.

Shyamalan is, and always has been a mixed bag. One or two of his projects, I've loved, others less so, and some I've actively disliked. But there's always something interesting in his instincts as a director/storyteller, and in the way he slowly reveals information. I’ve never felt like I’ve wasted my time, and any weaknesses tend to be in his writing, at least for me.

All that being said, I look forward to seeing this. I’m huge admirer of the other two films in this trilogy, and the first three quarters of The Village.

Cde.
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 6:56 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#36 Post by Cde. » Thu Jan 17, 2019 6:45 pm

I actually liked this. Some things really don't work, but it's goofiness is balanced out by its sincerity, and it manages to be self-aware without drowning that with ironic winking.

What a weird trilogy.

User avatar
Lost Highway
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:41 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#37 Post by Lost Highway » Tue Apr 02, 2019 7:01 pm

I was hoping for some underappreciated gem after loving Split, but this was a letdown, hopelessly contrived and more concerned with joining the dots than with telling a compelling story. I had to check the synopsis on Wikipedia to see whether I got anything wrong and if that was all there is to the plot but that really was all there is to it.

User avatar
dda1996a
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 6:14 am

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#38 Post by dda1996a » Thu Apr 04, 2019 1:28 pm

Turns out, and I doubt The Village and Lady in the Water will change it, but I only like Unbreakable, think Sixth Sense is just OK. The rest I consider awful.
Can't believe Glass actually made so much money, it's one if the most stupid things I've seen in a long while.

User avatar
dustybooks
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 10:52 am
Location: Wilmington, NC

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#39 Post by dustybooks » Thu Apr 04, 2019 1:34 pm

The Village is a stunningly beautiful film, I wouldn't write it off just yet. Even if you only appreciate it for the cinematography, it's more than worth seeing.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#40 Post by domino harvey » Thu Apr 04, 2019 1:36 pm

I was going to say, you are on a forum with several people, including me, who consider it by far his best film

User avatar
dda1996a
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 6:14 am

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#41 Post by dda1996a » Thu Apr 04, 2019 1:49 pm

I will watch it mostly because I know the ending and it always fascinated me even though it's sound stupid like all his twists.
I honestly can't think of another capable director with so many films I consider downright atrocious. Glass, After Earth, Signs, Avatar and The Happening I consider downright awful, and Split and The Visit are just dumb.
On the other hand, he seems to keep making loads of money, so what do I know

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#42 Post by domino harvey » Thu Apr 04, 2019 1:58 pm

That’s the thing, though, it’s not really a “twist.” I knew the reveal going in too, it mattered not one bit since other than one small detail Shyamalan plays it completely fair throughout

User avatar
dda1996a
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 6:14 am

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#43 Post by dda1996a » Thu Apr 04, 2019 2:24 pm

Considering I've watched almost all his shit I might as well. At least Deakins shot it

User avatar
thirtyframesasecond
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 1:48 pm

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#44 Post by thirtyframesasecond » Sat Apr 06, 2019 1:10 pm

I didn't watch any Shyamalan films at the time besides The Sixth Sense. Haven't seen it since 199-whatever. Having seen Unbreakable and The Village for the first time only recently, they're perfectly decent. I liked Split and The Visit. No interest in The Happening (Wahlbergphobia) or The Lady in the Water. I know his films have plot holes you could drive a coach through, but that never bothers me really.

User avatar
Lost Highway
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:41 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#45 Post by Lost Highway » Sat Apr 06, 2019 1:30 pm

I rewatched Unbreakable for the first time since its release before I watched Glass and found it to be a bit if a slog. Like most Shyamalan films, it’s ponderous and too in love with its ridiculous premise. Something which changed with The Visit and Split is that he seems to have discovered a sense of humour. That’s why I liked them better than anything yes done since The Sixth Sense. Another problem with Unbreakable is that Bruce Willis is required to carry almost the entire film on his own and he’s a drag in serious mode.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#46 Post by knives » Tue Aug 18, 2020 9:31 am

I’m a bit surprised this waits to become a pure sequel and instead more an inbetween set film for a significant chunk of the run time running the superhero genre back to its noir routes. The opening sequence really could be an issue of the Shadow or something like that. This is one of the most actively comic book films I’ve seen and I have to wonder if that sincere commitment to genre, as opposed to Marvel’s television sitcom using comic book characters, is what made critics dislike the film.

Glass really is one of Shyamalan’s best so long as you accept what he’s doing with genre. It helps that he adds in a lot of humor which unquestionably is the major difference between these Blumhouse films and the Disney ones.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#47 Post by therewillbeblus » Tue Aug 18, 2020 10:23 am

Interesting reading, though this is posturing towards my least favorite Shyamalan and not for the reasons you hypothesize caused critics to negate it. I admittedly also thought Split was overrated, yet adore Unbreakable, which as far as I'm concerned is his magnum opus. What bothered me about Glass is just how sloppy and thin the characters became, and the action scenes completely failed for me. It actually reminded me a lot of the Marvel franchise (which I don't like), not in the atmosphere but the construction; for example, how the early Marvel entries fleshed out characters like Tony Stark with empathy and then shoehorned him into the other pictures in various scenes with smartaleck quips to show off the thinnest possible dimension of his personality through idiosyncrasies. Glass appeared to suck the life out of Willis' hero to become a complete cartoon rather than the complex or anguished soul that we've tasted (and what seemed to be the focus of his solo film), and so I didn't detect the noirish thematic elements you did here but instead saw it as trying to make an edgier superhero film and still falling into the Marvel trappings.

Unbreakable, on the other hand, was a dark examination of what it means to be a superhero and how emotionally frightening and psychologically averse one is to accepting such responsibility, because that acceptance contaminates your life with a fatalism where you can no longer ignore your potential to help. The pressure is felt to the point of a horror/noir blend that can only amount to facing an immense burden that is impossible to fully satisfy. It's also a film dealing with trauma and how that trauma infects your identity to a degree where you don't want to admit that part of yourself.

Maybe I'll give Glass another go one of these days, but my issues with it were less of a problem with a unique take on superhero movies and more that it seemed like a worse version of the worst offenders of the genre playing dressup to seem like something special and different.

Edit: In full transparency, I'm really struggling to recall the first act of the film, so your illustration of the early scene for your point may very well be true to me as well on a revisit. My reading is really focused on the middle and the last act especially, as unfair as that might be.
Last edited by therewillbeblus on Tue Aug 18, 2020 10:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#48 Post by knives » Tue Aug 18, 2020 10:33 am

I do think Unbreakable is a much more mature film then this and I agree with your point that it depends a lot on the other films for its characterization, though I think that’s the film again sitting comfortably in the comic book mold. As the title indicates I think this is Jackson’s film and he gets the deepest characterization and there are a number of points of characterization that are related to him such as the twinning of the son and Mr. Glass. Willis is definitely here in a passive context mostly serving the hero role as we invest more deeply in the villainous traits. It reminds me a lot of Batman Returns now that I’m putting it into that frame.

Also I think the film is after genre largely concerned with Philadelphia and the discomfort Shyamalan feels with gentrification.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#49 Post by therewillbeblus » Tue Aug 18, 2020 11:09 am

Well you certainly know how to get my attention in mentioning Batman Returns, considering our mutual love for it and my personal opinion on it being the greatest of the greats! I get that point of comparison but the difference is that Unbreakable was about David Dunn's struggles to accept his responsibility (and so more fits with Nolan's films) as opposed to the Burton film, which wasn't ever really interested in fleshing out Wayne as a person. So the movement from one film to the next isn't all that similar between the Burtons whereas Shyamalan's franchise moreso mimics the Marvel movement from solo to group.

I also briefly discussed how Batman Returns essentially minimizes Batman's necessity by omitting him from the first act (which seems to fuel your point here, a notable one); however, his emergence, following being boxed up with brands of invisibility and thinness of characterization, uses the narrative ignorance of his identity to profess the equality of identity-diffusion that Batman experiences on the same plane as Selina Kyle or even the Penguin if we want to go down that route (though the film doesn't grant him the same empathy). In Glass or the Marvel films, there are other significant areas of focus that cause the characters to serve their comic book purposes, but I'd say in Batman Returns that's both true and then subsequently repurposed as ammo to drive home a point about how lost we all are. Batman winds up becoming subtly his most vulnerable (as opposed to the more heavy-handedness of the Nolans' sensitivity) when he unmasks himself with Selina, and risks everything just to forge a connection and be seen, and thus validated as a human being. In that sense, I see Burton's ultimate use of Batman's sidelining to be for the sake of making him more complex than Batman has ever become before or since, and if anything closer to the desperation that Dunn experiences in Unbreakable.

As usual, your ability to infer allegorical political readings in film and find empathy in places I wasn't looking is great food for thought, and I'll certainly tune closer to Glass himself and the context-specific gentrification reading if I ever get to this again down the line.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Unbreakable / Split / Glass (M. Night Shyamalan, 2000-2019)

#50 Post by knives » Tue Aug 18, 2020 11:19 am

I think we’re largely in agreement. This doesn’t stand up as the deepest example of its goals and the major shifts in style require a lot of license from the audience, but with that in mind how the story is told is great especially to someone like me who grew up with Batman ‘66 and TAS as these opposing yet complimentary models of genre.

I will say though that is think on a purely cinematic basis this is probably my favorite Shyamalan film with me constantly being reminded of Hitchcock’s experimental goal with Topaz of telling a story where the exposition is in the colors. Alongside framing I think close to all of the narrative and thematic work here is done in camera rather than script.

Post Reply