In Defense of Glass

2019 was the year of Avengers: Endgame, the ultimate display of unlimited budget and excess in superhero cinema. It felt as if anyone who has ever been in an MCU film appeared in the final battle, regardless of their utility to the plot. In the same year, another crossover film was released, but unlike Endgame, it was a self funded passion project of the most unique voice of a generation. 

Glass was M. Night left braining the superhero genre. He made a crossover that had the characters of Unbreakable and Split, but instead of having them spend an entire film fighting, he put them in therapy. Instead of filling every frame with CGI, he makes immaculate compositions with practically no CGI. The colors might be desaturated, but unlike the Russo’s pointless desaturation of the bright superhero colors, Glass is intentionally so desaturated. The desaturation represents the world’s cynicism with the idea of unique individuals. 

While it seems weird comparing those very different films, if you look at the negative reviews of the time, they cite these MCU films as to why they believe this movie underwhelmed them. They were looking for maximalism from a director known for minimalism. They were looking for fights, not talks. Why I believe Glass stands up above the average superhero film is the very thing that made reviewers dislike it. 

We are several years into the Multiverse saga, where every superhero film is cramming as many characters as humanly possible into a frame. The box office has been less kind to these films, and budgets are ballooning. Every film requires 20 other films worth of homework. After all the years of excess, there is something that Glass had that I wished more films had…intentionality. 

If you watch the VFX supervisor talk about Endgames lighting, he mentions that the VFX team asked them to simply backlight every character during filming, as it would look good enough, and usually the audience wouldn’t notice anything was off. While I never noticed anything off with the lighting of Endgame, I can’t exactly praise it either. It doesn’t distract or enhance. Every choice is acceptable. 

When I watch Glass I feel the opposite. Strong choices are made. The pink walls of the asylum, or the white walls of the cells really make the environment tell the story without words. You can play the film without audio and know what the characters feel. The choice of the long shot of James McAvoy riffing on the different personalities with the flashing lights and roaming camera is a strong choice. These type of shots require a strong grasp of what you’re trying to convey. It uses all the tricks in a filmmaker’s bag. I couldn’t imagine feeling the same about those scenes without those filmmaking choices. 

In summary, I strongly believe that the movie Glass is a thoughtful and unique film about a world that has lost its wonder. The cold lighting reflects a cold world. The pink walls behind the three powerful men chained up represents a world that emasculates them. The movie is intentionally low key, as it desires to center us in our real world. It intentionally (spoilers from here on out) decanters its main characters to let us know that the films goal is to make us look around every corner for special people, not just be in awe of specific individuals. It’s the opposite of hero worship (which is the basic premise of the MCU). It’s having us ask if what if the everyday world was full of wonder? What if the supernatural was among us? It kills its main characters to tell us that it was never about them. It was about all of us.