The Big Picture - M. Night Shyamalan’s ‘Glass’ Is a Twist On Superhero Box Office Power | Exit Survey (Ep. 119)

Episode Date: January 21, 2019

We react to ‘Glass,’ veteran director M. Night Shyamalan’s final installation in an almost-two-decade-long trilogy that includes ‘Unbreakable’ and ‘Split.’ Where does the movie, which st...ars a cast of James McAvoy, Samuel L. Jackson, and Bruce Willis, fit into a catalogue that includes home runs like ‘The Sixth Sense’ and lows like ‘The Happening?’ Host: Sean Fennessey Guest: Justin Charity Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Transcript
Discussion (0)
Starting point is 00:00:00 Hey, it's Liz Kelley, and welcome to The Ringer Podcast Network. True Detective is back, and The Ringer's Chris Ryan and Jason Concepcion are our guides as we navigate the twisting pathways of Season 3's plots, themes, and characters on The Flat Circle, a True Detective aftershow. Follow Jason and Chris as they chase down leads, explore each episode's cultural context, and discuss true crime cases that mirror the ones in the show. Join the guys live every Sunday night after True Detective on The Ringer's YouTube, Twitter, and discuss true crime cases that mirror the ones in the show. Join the guys live every Sunday night after True Detective
Starting point is 00:00:27 on The Ringer's YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook pages. I specialize in those individuals who believe they are superheroes. Good for you I'm Sean Fennessey editor-in-chief of The Ringer and this is The Big Picture a conversation show about some of the maybe or maybe not superheroes in the known extended universe I'm joined today by one of my superheroes Justin Charity Justin what's up show about some of the maybe or maybe not superheroes in the known extended universe. I'm joined today by one of my superheroes, Justin Charity. Justin, what's up? Yes, my superpowers are understated, but I am not.
Starting point is 00:01:12 Justin, I've asked you to be here because you are interested in, as am I, the films of M. Night Shyamalan. He has a new movie out this week. It's called Glass. I'm hoping that if you were listening to this podcast, you have seen it because we will be spoiling the heck out of it. But it's an interesting thing to talk about because, of course, Glass is the third movie in this triumvirate of stories that M. Night Shyamalan's been telling since Unbreakable, which is almost 20 years ago now. You know, Justin, when we first started talking about this movie, you and I, you were like, I'm very interested in and a big fan of Unbreakable. And I really wasn't. I don't dislike it, but it just wasn't really on my radar.
Starting point is 00:01:51 What was it about Unbreakable particularly that struck you? Well, first of all, it's like the context when I first saw it is like when it was out in theaters like nearly 20 years ago. Right. And it's sort of it's after the sixth sense. It's Bruce Willis andis and m night shamalan together again and the fact that it's a superhero movie is a thing that creeps up on you about the movie um like certainly in its last couple scenes its origin storyness for bruce willis uh for the bruce willis character david dunn and for the Samuel L. Jackson character, Mr. Glass, feels like a real comic book-y thing. But I think until the end of that movie, it's in a very creepy way, sort of like sneaking its superhero premise onto the viewer.
Starting point is 00:02:40 And I like the feeling of that. Like, I like how uneasy that movie feels and how it's sort of seducing you into a superhero movie as opposed to just sort of being a superhero movie from the onset. Yeah. And that's a, you know, that time is a very interesting time in superhero movies, right? 2001 is well before the MCU has come along. It's, you know, in the early stages of the Spider-Man movies and the X-Men movies and the idea that superhero movies run our lives was far from pervasive at that time. And the slow reveal was very clever, you know, and it left you really wanting more. It's kind of a mic drop movie in a lot of ways, right? I mean, a lot of his movies are mic drop movies, but this one in particular, I thought, had a unique confirmation
Starting point is 00:03:26 with the Elijah Price character, Mr. Glass, and kind of revealing who he is and what he is and what David Dunn's character is, Bruce Willis's character. Now it doesn't feel quite so kind of quaint and charming and surprising because we live in a world of superhero content, candidly. And also, I don't think that you're really
Starting point is 00:03:45 a superhero movie fan at this stage of your life. Is that fair to say? Yeah, like certainly now I'm not. I was into the, I would say, the Spider-Man movies and the X-Men movies. I don't think I liked any of them, not even Spider-Man 2 as much as I liked Unbreakable. But definitely now,
Starting point is 00:04:02 in the context in which Glass is coming out, yeah, I don't really watch a lot of the Marvel industrial complex. So, you know, obviously a couple of years ago we got Split, which we learned at the end of Split was essentially a follow-up to Unbreakable. I don't really know, honestly, what you think about Split. In your piece that you wrote on the site, you don't really talk about it too much. Obviously, that story introduced a new character played by James McAvoy, a person who struggles with split personality disorder,
Starting point is 00:04:32 and there are many characters that he plays that are collectively known as the Horde. What did you make of Split? Split I like a lot. I specifically like Anya Taylor-lor joy a lot in that movie like i i think the direction that that movie goes with the relationship between her character casey cook and with uh james mcavoy's several characters in that movie as the horde i think it's interesting i think i think there are moments of it where it gets a little dicey because the premise of that movie is like uh you know james mcavoy kidnapping three teenaged girls and it's it gets a little like too tense for its own good i think
Starting point is 00:05:12 um but i like that i don't know that i necessarily like it as sort of using like what feels like a very real conversation about mental illness as also... I think that movie's sense of how to blend a conversation about mental illness with a conversation about superpowers is actually a bit more troubled and a bit more spotty than Glasses is. But I otherwise like Split a lot more than I like Glass. Just because the performances in it, I think, are really good. I agree. I mean, McAvoy is kind of incredible. I think everything that he's doing here, what he's asked to do, and then the way that he takes it
Starting point is 00:05:54 on, the characterization is kind of amazing. I think it's fair to say that it's a pretty incredible performance that he is putting in these two movies. Even if you're right, it's a little bit dicier. Unpack what you were just saying about how you think Glass you're right, it's a little bit dicier. But unpack what you were just saying about how you think Glass actually handles that aspect of things a little bit more carefully
Starting point is 00:06:09 and thoughtfully. So if we take Split, right? Like Split, the Horde have kidnapped these three teenage girls. And it's this very like intimate movie where a lot of it, a lot of that movie happens in the context of like that captivity and the girls trying to escape that captivity whereas like glass sort of formalizes the themes
Starting point is 00:06:31 of the previous two movies and just puts these characters all in a psych ward together um and so in a ways it's it's less subtle it's it's not really trying to do the thing that unbreakable and split do where it's one kind of movie until the end and then you realize oh this is a superhero movie uh glass is sort of engaging from the very beginning with a more explicit conversation about like how much is superhero mythology really about delusions of grandeur and how healthy is it? Like, you know,
Starting point is 00:07:06 the fact that like, apart from there being so much comic book content in the world in 2019, the fact that there are also, uh, secondary conversations about how healthy fandom is and, and, and like, why are we so obsessed with this particular mode of popular mythology and storytelling?
Starting point is 00:07:29 This movie, especially in its middle stretch, which is where a lot of the psych ward stuff happens. Like the why people gravitate to drawing superheroes in the way that they do with these super tragic backstories and why we conceive of superheroes as just intrinsically interesting. Why do you think we do, just from your perspective? I mean, I think a lot of it is, I think the simplistic thing, I think I just say in the piece that a lot of it just seems like power fantasies. And that makes enough sense right like you know the greeks beat us to power fantasies by you know millennia right but it's it's i think the difference i think that we're not the difference because this is true in greek myth too but like the thing that's so strange about comic books that i think im night shamalan really gets hung up on and is really trying to unpack is it's
Starting point is 00:08:26 one thing to have these characters be super heroic but they're always really messed up too it's always that like this person survived the holocaust and that's why you know that's the that's the formative thing in their life that like you need to understand for why they became magneto right or they were abused as a child or they fell in a vat of acid. Like those origin stories and the fact that they sort of gravitate toward these very tragic, like fridge heavy, you know, PTSD heavy narratives. I don't know. I think that says something about how like those power fantasies aren't just unmoored.
Starting point is 00:09:04 People don't just have power fantasies aren't just unmoored people don't just have power fantasies because that's what humans do i think it's more of a sense of like those power fantasies come from a sense of helplessness and powerlessness against uh i think like the wider world and yeah i definitely think glass is is very interested in that idea, that the people that end up having these power fantasies are otherwise incredibly marginalized in their childhoods and then just incredibly marginalized even as they are living out their various power fantasies. Would you psychoanalyze M. Night Shyamalan
Starting point is 00:09:40 and say that he is perhaps a product of this kind of thinking about his career in life? I think it's not unreasonable to say that he is perhaps a product of this kind of thinking about his career in life. I think it's not unreasonable to say that, you know, he is like, he has become such a, such a visible avatar of self-belief and self-creation. And the mythology of his films is almost as interesting as the mythology of his life and work. And I'm really interested in him, even though he's come to be a filmmaker with a very spotty track record. It's been well documented that, you know, after The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, which you mentioned, and the handful of other films that he did that were pretty successful, you know, The Village and Signs,
Starting point is 00:10:15 he had a notable down period. I think it's safe to say that it started with The Happening, which is one of the kind of funniest good-bad movies, bad-good movies of all time. Bird Box, eat your heart out. out seriously that's a great call you know when you and uh kate nibs were having your conversation about bird box and the bird box phenomenon on damage control i was thinking of the happening and a very similar kind of reaction to i think the happening similarly has an interesting premise and is just so badly executed that it's it's become this it's become this beautiful vision of what can go wrong when the pieces don't fit.
Starting point is 00:10:46 And he takes a lot of risks. You know, the lady in the water, he meant to be this sort of fairy tale for his children, but is ultimately this kind of, I don't know, I thought kind of angry vision of what happens when a person who thinks their genius is being attacked and the preciousness of ideas and originality and the specialness of what he imagined his films to be. And then he enters this very strange period where he starts making movies like After Earth with Will Smith and The Last Airbender,
Starting point is 00:11:12 which many people thought should have been good and wasn't good. Where do you stand on The Last Airbender? I haven't seen The Last Airbender specifically because I've never really been into Avatar as an animated franchise in general. And he famously makes this big comeback with The Visit, which was a very small movie that he made that was essentially found footage style about two young children visiting their grandparents and all the terrible things that go wrong.
Starting point is 00:11:37 It's notable because it introduces Jason Blum, the producer and the founder of Blumhouse into his creative life. And he and Blum are the producer and the founder of Blumhouse, into his creative life. And he and Blum are clearly a good team. The Visit made a lot of money. It made $100 million. Split, obviously, was a big hit in 2016. My gut tells me, and we're recording this before we see the box office returns, but my gut tells me that Glass is going to do quite well.
Starting point is 00:11:59 I'm interested in that whole kind of mythology idea, though, because I have read a couple of interviews with M. Night now, and he has said quite clearly that he does not see these movies as a kind of mythology idea though, because I have read a couple of interviews with M. Night now, and he has said quite clearly that he does not see these movies as a kind of expanded universe. And he does not necessarily see a sequel to Glass. You know, let's talk a little bit about what actually happens in the movie
Starting point is 00:12:14 and also what you make of that proclamation. Yeah, because I will say that I watched Glass and then I read interviews. And I remember one of the New York Magazine interviews with Shyamalan where he says that he's like, And then I read interviews and I remember one of the New York magazine interviews with Shyamalan where he says that he's like, well, you know, I'm not necessarily trying to make something that goes forever, which is funny to read that and to have seen Glass. The ending of Glass feels like it is a direct contradiction.
Starting point is 00:12:39 I completely agree. That movie feels like it is begging for like 16 sequels. Yeah, I thought that was such an odd thing to say. And maybe he's just kind of playing possum with us a little bit. And there's an expectation that there'll be three more movies announced in a couple of weeks when this movie's made $100 million. But it feels like it's very much designed for continuation. It ends on four different cliffhangers. Yes.
Starting point is 00:13:02 So let's talk a little bit about the reintroduction of some of the characters you know how effective did you think it was kind of returning to david dunn and returning to mr glass in this movie we should say that at the end of split like you know as much as the very end of unbreakable ends with the big reveal that like elijah price mr mr glass is like a mass murderer as as bruce willis slowly backs out of a room away from him. Split ends with like this final scene where you see Bruce Willis' character, David Dunn, in a diner watching a news report,
Starting point is 00:13:34 sort of like talking about, it's a news report talking about the Horde, but putting it in the context of the events of Unbreakable as well. And so I think that the the setup in glass for the dunn glass feud is interesting because glass doesn't talk for like the first 45 minutes of the movie i want to say he's basically in a wheelchair and he's immobilized and uh unbreakable is like so largely defined by this running discourse between Dunn and Glass, whereas Glass mutes Samuel L. Jackson for about half of its runtime. And what a strange choice. I mean, is that really the actor you want to mute for half of your movie?
Starting point is 00:14:18 I kind of liked it at least in the stretches when it it felt like the movie was setting setting up mr glass to be in confrontation with and in conversation with david dunn i think what works less well is the discourse between mr glass and the horde because i don't know i mean i i watch split in a big part of i said this before but i the thing i like about that movie is the relationship between uh the horde and casey cook again that's anya taylor joy in split and they bring casey cook back but they bench her real hard they like bench her alongside mr glass's mom and david dunn's son she's sort of just there she's she's sidelined for the whole movie and so i had actually even more than i'd
Starting point is 00:15:13 wanted to see a showdown between glass and dunn i really just wanted to see more examination of that like very strange fraught relationship between Casey Cook and the Horde and they really don't do anything with it because they spend so much of the movie having Mr. Glass manipulate the Horde manipulate all of those personalities yeah you know you sent me a long and passionate note right after you saw the film which I appreciated and it's part of the reason we're having this conversation and I thought that the thing you really keyed in on that was interesting was just the kind of the misuse of Anya Taylor-Joy in the movie. You know, the fact that ultimately Split became in a big way about her agency and her story, which I thought in a movie that is
Starting point is 00:15:57 not necessarily always sensitive to complex situations in human life was kind of a sensitively handled approach, a story about abuse and about what happens to people in Nevada, how people who have suffered can relate to one another and understand each other better. And then it kind of, I don't know, it kind of just like uses that as a plot pivot point and glass and then moves away from it and then doesn't let her do anything. Is that fair to say? Yeah, she, it very much, you know, I think there's one early line where she explicitly refers back to where Casey Cook specifically refers back to the fact that in the previous movie, it's established that she, from a young age, was raped by her uncle who then adopts her. And in this movie, after they sort of reestablish that backstory, they just turn her into a supportive woman character for the horde right she's just sort of like nursing him and trying to like reconcile these
Starting point is 00:16:47 three superheroes slash supervillains who are being thrown into conflict with one another but that they don't really do anything else with her they just use her to do you know some tender character moments with james mcavoy what do you make of Bruce Willis in general? Kind of Bruce Willis at large. The historical phenomenon of Bruce Willis. Well, I found him to be such an amazingly, and this is somewhat true of Unbreakable, but he's such an inert force in this movie. He's obviously physically overpowering, but he's so silent and so minimal. And he's obviously a huge historical movie star, but Bruce Willis is not as present in our lives
Starting point is 00:17:28 as he was 10 years ago, or certainly not 20 years ago. And it's just, they don't give him a lot to do here. Even though Bruce Willis is still very striking and you can put his face on the poster, there was something kind of unpresent about him. He's definitely the most inert, like you said. It feels like so much of the movie
Starting point is 00:17:45 when it is sort of alive and popping is really like james mcavoy doing those wild performances as the horde or else the movie dwelling on even again even when mr glass isn't talking and is is just sitting in his wheelchair and not moving sort of dwelling on that and trying to mine tension from that through his interactions with or his non-interactions with uh the orderlies in the psych ward and sarah paulson's character um it it is strange i do think the willis inclusion feels especially for the fact that it's like built up from a movie that happened 20 years ago i know it feels flat it feels pretty flat even though i think this has been one of the most aggressively promoted movies of the year i have talked to a number of
Starting point is 00:18:31 people who have said that they didn't realize that this was part of the split and unbreakable universe and you know that had me thinking obviously those people don't follow this stuff as closely as you and i do but do you think that that matters do you think that glass stands alone as a movie could you just walk in not knowing anything and see i'm glad you asked that because i think i i don't really have a strong sense first of all of like what the the salience is of this trilogy i happen to care about it but i it's it's hard for me to sort of know or predict how many other people care about it. But I definitely think like the first 20 minutes of that movie. And again, this is very much unlike Unbreakable and Split.
Starting point is 00:19:14 The first 20 minutes of Glass feel like they are a continuation straight from whatever screening. It's like whatever screening you saw Split in never actually ended. Yes. screening it's like whatever screening you saw split in never actually ended yes like it feels so like it feels like a bum rush into a direct continuation of split in a way that i found really disorienting and i almost found it marvel like frankly like it felt very like forget like whether you've seen split and unbreakable it's like if you didn't watch them yesterday you might be like whoa whoa whoa where are we picking up from here what what's going on here and i again it's like until the movie slows down like there's there's just a point where the movie does do a hard slowdown when it gets all of the main characters together in the psych ward and it introduces dr staple i think until that point though
Starting point is 00:20:08 the movie feels too fast especially for the fact that unbreakable and split are not fast movies those movies are patient and even though they're happening like in the context of some broader universe they're very focused on like okay but this is what this movie is doing and i think glass turns that on its head it's it's too immediately about the glass cinematic universe it's like an avengers intro but i wonder if we are just now trained to watch movies that way the way we might just step into an episode of ER, you know, 20 years ago and be like, I missed a couple, but you know what?
Starting point is 00:20:48 I know that Dr. Green does this. And I know that, you know, George Clooney's character does that. And I'm kind of okay with it. So I wonder if kind of the way that we watch movies has significantly changed and that he's just kind of counting on that. Yeah, I would agree with that.
Starting point is 00:21:00 You know, one thing I think is, that is sort of visually clever is in the beginning of glass, there is the, so basically the horde has abducted for cheer, cheer, teen cheerleaders. And like they're,
Starting point is 00:21:13 they're weird synchronized body movements. I thought were really like, I thought they were amusing, but it was also tense. Cause it's like, okay, but these are four kidnapped girls. And I think if the movie had just opened with that strictly
Starting point is 00:21:25 and sort of Bruce Willis, with David Dunn, like finding out about the kidnapped girls, going to rescue them, falling into confrontation with the Horde, I think that could have been great and would have felt like, like you said, the conventional sort of superhero beginning that we've been trained to
Starting point is 00:21:45 see but there's also a lot of other stuff that's happening in the beginning like david dunn's tracking down some street hooligans to their houses and it's like if you if you cut all of that stuff out and if you're gonna sort of do a direct continuation of split like from jump i think they should have done a way more focused direct continuation. But instead, it feels like there's so much exposition happening in the beginning of that movie, and it's all over the place. Let's talk a little bit about Sarah Paulson. I'm a big fan of Sarah Paulson, the actress. She's probably at this point best known for her role as a repertory player in the Ryan Murphy All-Stars. She appears in almost every season of American Horror Story. She plays Dr. Ellie
Starting point is 00:22:29 Staple, who you mentioned earlier, who is the woman who is essentially brought to a local mental institution to clarify to these three men that they are not superheroes and they are experiencing a delusion of grandeur i'm curious what you think both about the construction of the character and paulson herself i like that concept a lot right like they they basically bring her in or at least the setup is there's this doctor and she exists to like gaslight all three of them and in it i i like it because the characters are so different david dunn, Mr. Glass, and the Horde are so different. And their levels of, like, fragility, I guess I'd say,
Starting point is 00:23:11 are so different and vulnerability are so different that it is interesting to think, oh, yeah, like, which one of them is going to break first and start doubting themselves? Will them doubting themselves mean that they become more violent, less violent. I like that as a, a sort of forging point for all of these three characters,
Starting point is 00:23:31 especially because they're, they're put in this, this definite space together. I think that the character goes off the rails a little, a little bit as, as a character. I think there are some jarring moments, for instance, that like she set up to, she's sort of gradually revealed to be a less than savory character.
Starting point is 00:23:51 And I think there's some good moments early in the movie, like when you first sort of get Casey Cook back in the mix. And mind you, Casey Cook is a rape survivor. She's emancipated from her guardian who's in jail at this point and dr staple is a psychiatrist and like casey cook goes to dr staple and dr staple's not trying to help this girl he just wants to like exploit her so he can run experiments on uh run experiments on the horde and i think that moment is not it's not stressed but it says a lot about her character early on and it sets up a lot of
Starting point is 00:24:29 what is revealed about her character later and so I think there are smart elements to how that character is constructed. What do you think of this whole idea that Shyamalan uses to sort of explain the Dr. Ellie Staple character and kind of unify the movie which is that there's this organization
Starting point is 00:24:46 that meets in restaurants. That meets in, right. That meets in the first floor hotel restaurants with open windows. Yeah, exactly. That's super organization. And simultaneously knows when to stop talking to commence meetings.
Starting point is 00:24:59 It's not at all like any ringer meetings I've ever been a part of. Help me if I'm getting this wrong. Is it essentially that this group is designed to trick actual superheroes into believing that they're not superheroes so that we don't have superheroes? I didn't get that by the end. I think the movie itself is a bit confused, but like, okay. So basically, initially, Staple is trying to convince them that like,
Starting point is 00:25:24 the way she puts it is this she's like look i have three days i have three days with you gentlemen to convince you that like this is all psychosis and that you need help but if you if within three days you still believe that you're superheroes like i'm gonna leave and something indistinct is gonna happen and at the end of the three days like they basically there's a breakout from the psych ward and that's the point at which she reveals that like well we we do believe in superheroes but we can't allow you all to exist and i was just trying to like feel out like whether you all really were these people or whether you are just disturbed individuals but otherwise sort sort of run of the mill disturbed individuals. And I don't think that I thought that the organization existed superheroes but that her whole ruse was just to be a sort of like fail safe so
Starting point is 00:26:28 that they don't accidentally kill people who are just crazy maybe even after the reveal when it's again you sort of see her meeting uh in an open restaurant and ostensibly everyone in the restaurant is a member of this shadow organization that is has made itself the global police force against superheroes it's sort of not even really carefully explained how do we refer to this organization like how long have they been around like what exactly is this organization um it the movie rushes past so much of that because it's trying to let it's trying to let dr staple articulate like her big plot twist reveal and i just think that the big picture of what that organization is even supposed to be or represent i i just get to the end of the movie and and i'm still thinking wait what no i
Starting point is 00:27:18 need that explained to me again i don't i don't really get what just happened did you make the comparison to the sort of colonel general striker character in the X-Men universe? Yeah. She seems like a sort of inverse William Stryker, right? Or I don't know if inverse is it, but it's right. She's an exterminationist, but it's almost like her sense of exterminationism is like soft, I guess is how i would put it because like striker seems like a much more aggressive character and he's operating in this context in which like you know mutants exist and humans and mutants are in very explicit contradiction with one another
Starting point is 00:27:57 at various turns whereas i think this is the problem with glass too is that like that conflict that sort of globalized conflict isn't even established yet in Split. And so her character and that organization feel like it's putting the cart before the horse, right? It's like resolving a conflict that doesn't even exist yet. Yeah, which leads me to believe that there will be more movies. It's a lot of legwork to then come out publicly and say, I have no interest in creating an expanded glass universe. Let me ask you a couple more things before we wrap up here. One, just what do you plainly make of M. Night Shyamalan as a filmmaker at this stage of his career? A troll. No, I mean, you know what i i i don't know that i have like a good top line one sentence
Starting point is 00:28:49 overview i would just say that like for somebody who provokes so much hand-wringing about like is he up or is he down i think that and like also do his movies make any sense even i think i think a bad m night shamalan movie is still interesting you know what i mean like there's something about that that it's like he is one of the few people where i don't really i don't care so much about whether it's like oh glass is uh disappointing on some level or you know the happening is bizarre like his movies are interesting he's one of the few people that like somebody the word of mouth for an M. Night Shyamalan movie could be bad but
Starting point is 00:29:31 I'm I'm still probably going to see it I think you completely nailed it I feel the exact same way I walked out of glass feeling like that was okay I read the email you sent me you were a little bit more down on it than I was but I also didn't regret seeing it. I don't regret having a kind of fluency with all of his movies. I don't regret having a sense of his career arc. He's unusual. You know, he really models himself after,
Starting point is 00:29:55 I think, both Steven Spielberg and Alfred Hitchcock. Those seem to be the kind of the alpha and the omega of his director identities. And, you know, Alfred Hitchcock made mediocre movies. Steven Spielberg made mediocre movies. I don't think M. Night Shyamalan, with the exception of maybe The identities. And, you know, Alfred Hitchcock made mediocre movies. Steven Spielberg made mediocre movies. I don't think M. Night Shyamalan, with the exception of maybe The Sixth Sense, has ever reached the heights of those guys.
Starting point is 00:30:10 But he keeps things interesting. He's just a little bit different enough that his version of a superhero movie has my brain working in a way that I don't think Avengers Endgame will. Right. Seem reasonable? Yeah.
Starting point is 00:30:22 And another way I'd put it too, because there's always this conversation around him about like good bad movies like i'll say this like i like bird box and i didn't like glass and yet i would watch glass again before i'd watch bird box i feel the exact same way although i don't know how you like bird box um would you recommend split to a person that you haven't seen in two years but you're just chatting and catching up with absolutely would you recommend Split to a person that you haven't seen in two years but you're just chatting and catching up with? Absolutely.
Starting point is 00:30:48 Would you recommend Glass to that same person? They would have had to have seen Unbreakable. Okay. And or Split. Or just Split. If they had just seen Split, I'd say, yeah, you should watch this. Do you think that they should just go re-watch
Starting point is 00:31:01 The Sixth Sense again? Yeah, it's weird. Because, I mean, for as much as like people put the appeal of that movie on its twist, like that's true. And I think a lot of people sort of write that movie off as like, okay, but how re-watchable is it?
Starting point is 00:31:15 Nah, Sixth Sense like I think is really, really re-watchable. That's the sort of why I ask you. I feel like it's actually an incredibly well-made movie that is very compelling. Justin, thank you very much for breaking down this movie that we can't recommend but also kind of enjoyed but feel ambivalent about this has been a unique version of an exit survey conversation I appreciate it thank you Sean Thank you.

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.