Thursday, January 17, in the Russian rolling out the superhero Thriller by M. night Shyamalan “Glass” — the final part of the trilogy, which included “Invincible” and “Split”. In the new movie characters of the previous parts meet, villains United, the usual category of “antagonist” and “protagonist” are blurred. At the time of publication of the article the rating of pictures on Rotten Tomatoes was 42% is very unsatisfactory result. On why the critics are wrong in relation to “Glass”, and the final comic book universe Shyamalan can be considered ideal at RT.

  • Frame from the film “Glass”
  • © IMDB

Caution! The text contains minor spoilers for the film “Glass”.

Philadelphia, the second half of 2010-ies. Since described in the “split” event has passed few months, the train crash in “Unbreakable” occurred 15 years ago. Superhero David Dunn (Bruce Willis) is old, he opened his own security business, is glad that the media picked up him a good alias (“Overseer”), and regularly patrol the streets, hoping to find Kevin “Horde” of Crumb (James McAvoy). The latter again kidnapped several Schoolgirls (this time four), to sacrifice them to one of his 24 personalities — the Beast.

When the characters finally meet, they fight rudely interrupted by the SWAT team led by psychiatrist Stapl Ellie (Sarah Paulson). Dunn and Crumb are taken to a mental hospital, where for a decade and a half contains genius terrorist Elijah Price — Mr. Glass (Samuel L. Jackson). Stapl tries to convince all three that they are not supermen, but only an incredibly gifted person who developed delusions of grandeur.

Perhaps this line in the form in which it is formulated Shyamalan, is the only worth mentioning disadvantage of the picture. At a certain point it begins to seem like the words of the psychiatrist addressed not only to the patients: the audience may start to doubt whether the characters apply the prefix “super”. The viewer temporarily there is an uneasy expectation of the speedy deception: over the past two films it gently down to the idea of the existence of people with superpowers in this universe, and in the third part seemed to have turned everything on its head.

The idea is to briefly introduce the viewer astray is good, but it is not implemented in the best way: Stapl arguments are not very convincing, and the prescribed timing is a little loose. Because of this, the end of the second third of the film there is a feeling that what is happening on the screen is a little testprivate. However, after a couple of minutes this feeling disappears, and plot twists start to crumble one after the other.

Glass works well as a standalone novel, but first and foremost it is, of course, is topped by a comic triptych Shyamalan and “Unbreakable” with the “split” before going to the cinema should reconsider at least for enhance the effect.

Released and flopped at the box almost 20 years ago Thriller with Willis and Jackson broke off in mid-sentence and left behind an uncomfortable feeling of incompleteness. It is not clear to the end, I wonder whether the Director of a trilogy initially (over the years he gave many controversial interview on this subject), but in the press it appeared the rumors of a possible sequel to “Unbreakable”. In 2016, the final scene of “split” has suddenly linked the two films, and uniting all the heroes trikvel was only a matter of time.

Given the heterogeneity of the career of Shyamalan, who directed and great and mediocre paintings against the “Glass” had serious concerns. The first two tapes were not devoid of flaws (especially “Invincible”), but in the end turned out to work rather good, though, and purely entertainment in the dry residue. Introduced two years ago the “Split” made the rental much better than its predecessor and loved by critics, but suffered from an excess of exercise McAvoy in acting (which he is — in fairness — you did amazing).

In the “Glass” Director — consciously or not — took into account all the bugs, polished the product of their work almost to perfection and filigree accents. McAvoy is both slightly more and slightly less (demonstrated personalities already 13, not five, but they replace each other at the speed of light), Willis as a performer the most boring role — minimum quantity, and Jackson still waited for a well-deserved benefit your character. The word that best completes the trilogy, most likely, and it could not be.

  • © kinopoisk.ru

However, Western observers disliked the last picture Shyamalan (42% “fresh” on Rotten Tomatoes and 44 points out of 100 on Metacritic). The Director seems to understand, but deliberately continues to bend the line.

Suddenly “Glass” is much more profound from a philosophical point of view piece than “Immune” or “Split”. Somehow the Director managed to say a new word where all the words seemed to have said.

Not by chance in the promotion picture the three main actors is credited as “Hero”, “Villain” and “Mr. Glass”: the usual coordinate system “protagonist — antagonist” here twisted into a Mobius strip. At the time the opening credits of “Glass” doubt who is good and who is bad, no. However, the credits of the final villains in the history no longer remains. This is not the case when well written anti-hero is sympathy and understanding or is a secret protagonist. Towards the end of the bet several times increased, and in the new circumstances, the villains suddenly turn themselves admirable martyrs.

  • © kinopoisk.ru

In the “Glass” clearly reverent attitude Shyamalan to the child: he is sad from breaking up with Elijah, Kevin and David, but he understood the need for good-byes. The Director brings together all — important function in the film takes not only a former victim of Crumb Casey cook (Anya Taylor-joy), but the mother prays together with his son Dana. They are played by the same actors in “Unbreakable”: the old Charlan grown Woodard and Spencer Treat Clark. There is here and the Shyamalan cameo — his charming character left to sell drugs at the stadium, where he worked as the character Willis in the first part, and find yourself a legitimate income.

Most difficult, perhaps, was to figure out how it will end this long to build the story. Shyamalan managed to finish the story fat point, and leave the door open to a universe where it has evolved. And the audience has no choice but to applaud the perfect finale.