Respond to these rapid questions in our Glass quiz and we will tell you which Glass character you are. Play it now.
“Unbreakable 2” is more like “Split 2” than “Unbreakable.” M. Night Shyamalan has finally delivered his first direct sequel, a mash-up titled “Glass,” which brings together characters from two of his most popular films in one package. As the film’s conclusion hinted, “Split” took place in the same universe as Shyamalan’s 2000 film “Unbreakable,” which is widely considered to be his best work to date. In “Glass,” Shyamalan’s vision of the Freudian brain is realized through the uncontrolled id of DID-afflicted Kevin Crumb (James McAvoy), the regulating force of the super-ego in David Dunn (Bruce Willis), and the moderator between the hero and the villain in Elijah Price aka Mr. Glass (James McAvoy) (Samuel L. Jackson). For the second time, Shyamalan is experimenting with comic book tropes, this time by injecting his own twists into monologuing heroes and villains who are remarkably self-aware of their own genre arc. The film “Glass” has the makings of a truly ambitious film, and I do mean “buried.” The problem is that Shyamalan can’t seem to find the story, allowing his narrative to meander and never gain the momentum that it requires to be effective in the first place. You can say whatever you want about “Unbreakable” and even “Split,” but they both had a pulsating energy that is lacking here, at least in part because any sense of relatability has been removed. “Glass” is a misfire, and it’s the kind of depressing misfire that hurts all the more because of what it could have been and what it could have been.
The protagonists of the films “Unbreakable” and “Split” are thrust into life-altering situations. The former told the story of David Dunn, the lone survivor of a horrific train crash, who came to realize that he was more than just a human being after the accident. Both stories are told in the film; the first is about Casey (Anya Taylor-Joy), a girl who returns to the hospital after a long absence and is forced to discover her own abilities; the second is about a mentally ill patient who may be more than your average person diagnosed with DID.
David Dunn, now known in Philadelphia as the mysterious protector known as the Overseer and working with his son (Spencer Treat Clark), is revealed to be a superhero as the film opens. We also know that Kevin Crumb has a personality known as The Beast, who is capable of scaling walls and withstanding shotgun blasts. Despite this, a significant portion of “Glass” is devoted to attempting to persuade David and Kevin that they are not super in any way. Instead of forging a new path in the pursuit of yet another twist ending, Shyamalan takes a narrative step back, covering much of the same ground as the previous two films. He’s so obsessed with ending on a high note that he puts off any sort of narrative interest until then, effectively forcing his audience to tread water until then, which is a shame. Take some time to reflect on what you know at the end of “Glass” in comparison to what you knew at the beginning, and you’ll realize how pointless this entire endeavor has been.
But you shouldn’t waste any more time and start this Glass quiz.
The majority of “Glass” takes place at Raven Hill Memorial Psychiatric Hospital in New York City. In what could be considered the prologue, David/Overseer tracks Kevin/Horde down after the villainous man with multiple personalities kidnaps four young women and imprisons them in an abandoned factory, where they are tortured and killed. One gets the distinct impression that something is not quite right as soon as the two men start fighting. There is nothing particularly memorable about this showdown between two of the most memorable characters in Shyamalan’s history, and the fight choreography is not as inventive as fans would have hoped. After jumping out a window and into the arms of Dr. Ellie Staple (Sarah Paulson), the confident doctor transports them to the same psychiatric facility that has been housing Mr. Glass for nearly two decades, the pair is reunited with Mr. Glass. A deep vegetative state is maintained for Glass in the same wing as David and Kevin, in a room that is not accessible to the public. Dr. Staple attempts to persuade all three of them that they are not, in fact, super in any way. David’s strength isn’t all that unusual, and Kevin’s abilities as The Beast can be explained away as part of his character.
Glass Quiz
“Glass” reaches its climax in the middle section, when Shyamalan hits every beat more than once, nearly joylessly. In addition, Paulson delivers the same speech multiple times, and a brief sequence in which a bright light can shift which personality of Kevin is dominant goes on for an eternity… and then repeats itself. It appears that Shyamalan is determined to cycle through the backstories of these characters, even employing footage from “Unbreakable” and “Split” in flashbacks, as if he is unaware that 95 percent of viewers have already seen them. He appears to be so preoccupied with the revelations of his final fifteen minutes that he overlooks opportunities to make the nearly two hours that preceded them interesting as well. What is it about Raven Hill that makes it such a dull sight to behold? When it comes to superheroes, why is Shyamalan so adamant about making another film about whether or not they are superheroes, rather than simply building on the foundation he has laid? Imagine the cast of “The Avengers” retelling all of the origin stories and then debating whether or not The Hulk is truly a superhero or just a rage-filled jerk in a suit.
Also, you will find out which character are you in this Glass quiz.
There are glimmers of the crazy, ambitious film that “Glass” could have been, and it is these glimpses that keep it from becoming a complete “Happening”-style disaster. McAvoy is putting forth his best effort yet again, even if he isn’t receiving as much in return as he did the previous time (and is balanced by another half-hearted Willis performance in which I swear you can practically see him fall asleep). And there are just enough outlandish ideas in “Glass” that it’s impossible to dismiss the film completely, even if the ideas don’t come together as planned. That fine line between being ambitiously clunky in a way that engages the viewer and being sloppy is where it all comes down to! As a fan of Shyamalan’s early films, comic books, and films that attempt to mash-up familiar genres in a way that creates a new one, I tried my hardest to engage with “Glass.” I eventually came to terms with the fact that it was not my fault that it was not working properly.
For more personality quizzes check this: Aquaman Quiz.
