ATOMIC BLONDE review

Aww yeah, son. It’s finally here. All that hype is about to be tested. I love a good action film, and I love a good spy film. Combine the two with a kick-ass female to helm the project, and you’ve got me saying, “Shut up, and take my money!”

The story looks like your typical betrayal-revenge thriller, but the action does look pretty awesome… eh, for the most part. I don’t know, some of the action looks a little too… choreographed. Like once someone throws a punch, it’s like there’s an obvious pause between moves so the actors and stuntmen can get into position for the next attack. The kitchen scene feels particularly heavy in this as well as that hyped up stairway scene, albeit on a smaller scale. But who knows, maybe the finished product is much more streamlined.

Let’s take a look at this on screen talent. Starring, we have the incredible Charlize Theron (THE FATE OF THE FURIOUS [2017], KUBO AND THE TWO STRINGS [2016], and HANCOCK [2008]) and James McAvoy (SPLIT [2017], X-MEN: APOCALYPSE [2016], WANTED [2008], and upcoming films X-MEN: DARK PHOENIX [2018] and M. Night Shyamalan’s Split/Unbreakable crossover, GLASS [2019]). In support, we have John Goodman (VALERIAN [2017], PATRIOTS DAY [2016], RED STATE [2011], and the upcoming TV revival ROSANNE [2018]), Sofia Boutella (THE MUMMY [2017], STAR TREK BEYOND [2016], KINGSMAN: THE SECRET SERVICE [2015], and the upcoming TV film FAHRENHEIT 451, due out… who knows when), Toby Jones (MORGAN [2016], CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE FIRST AVENGER [2011], THE MIST [2007], and upcoming horror film THE SNOWMAN [2017] and JURASSIC WORLD: FALLEN KINGDOM [2018]), Til Schweiger (INGLORIOUS BASTERDS [2009], FAR CRY [2008], and LARA CROFT TOMB RAIDER: THE CRADLE OF LIFE [2003]), and in a bit role, Daniel Bernhardt (LOGAN [2017], THE MATRIX RELOADED [2003], and TV show MORTAL KOMBAT: CONQUEST [1998]).

Now for the talent behind the scenes. Directing, we have David Leitch, a former stuntman who has been a part of countless action films. His career stretches from HITMAN: AGENT 47 (2015), all the way back to Marvel’s BLADE (1998). He’ll be directing the upcoming DEADPOOL 2 (2018). Penning the screenplay is Kurt Johnstad, known for 300: RISE OF AN EMPIRE (2014), ACT OF VALOR (2012), and 300 (2006). And… wait a tick, this movie is based on a graphic novel? Hmm… news to me. Apparently, it was a series titled “The Coldest City.” Anywho, the composer for the score is action film veteran Tyler Bates, known for GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY VOL. 2 (2017), JOHN WICK (2014), SUPER (2010), and Marvel’s upcoming Netflix show THE PUNISHER [2017]. Last, but not least, the cinematographer is Jonathan Sela, known for TRANSFORMERS: THE LAST KNIGHT (2017), LAW ABIDING CITIZEN (2009), THE MIDNIGHT MEAT TRAIN (2008), and the upcoming DEADPOOL 2.

Overall, yeah, this could be pretty bad-ass, so I’m stoked for this.

This is my honest opinion of: ATOMIC BLONDE

(SUMMARY)

Set during the Cold War in 1989. Lorraine (Charlize Theron) is a British spy and being called in by her superiors for a mission debriefing, detailing her assignment of tracking down a missing list that contains the names of every operative working for British intelligence.

(REVIEW)

Apologies for the delay in this review’s release. I did actually see it last week, and I had to see this again. Not because it was that good, but because I had a miserable experience watching this the first time. So before I go into the review, I’m going to start with an enraged rant about being on your fucking cell phone in the movies. So if you want to skip that and go right to the review, CTRL-F and type “HPOR”. So here we go.

So I’m watching the movie and during an important exposition scene, this woman behind me starts talking on her phone. Allow me to really describe what I mean by this. Her phone is on SPEAKER, high volume so everyone can hear, and you’d swear to God that this bitch was in the middle of an important business meeting because she’s not even making an attempt to whisper. She’s talking like normal. My favorite part of the entire conversation she’s having with who the fuck cares, at one point, she apologizes. Not to the audience who is being horrendously inconvenienced, mind you, but to the person she’s talking to, as if all the people screaming at her to get off her phone are interrupting their important conversation. It took me a good five, maybe even ten minutes to finally get up and track down an employee at the AMC that I frequent and told them exactly where to find her. By the time I got back in the auditorium, everyone was in an uproar at this bitch, WHO IS STILL ON HER PHONE!!! You know what it finally took for her to hang up? Some dude got up from his seat and got right in her fucking face. Of fucking course, in that specific moment, that’s when the employee comes in, just narrowly missing out on the mayhem.

The experience, for all intents and purposes, was fine afterward, but the sheer amount of inconsideration from this incident is beyond baffling. Fine, a phone goes off, it happens. Like me, I don’t have many people who call me and talk to me, so there’s almost no reason to care about, “Alright, one last thing. Using your phone is distracting. Don’t ruin the movie!” Oversights happen and most people are generally understanding of that. But these people (she was with a companion) literally paid twenty-plus dollars just to watch half the flick and spend ten minutes of the remainder of their time there on a conference call. People, I don’t pay money to see these movies to hear your phone chats. I don’t pay money to see your cell phone screens light up. And to go so far as to talk, whispering or full blown outdoor voices? Are you fucking kidding me? How did FIREFLY’s Shepherd Book put it?

NwmkbE5

And to everyone else who is as pissed off with this shit as I am… don’t be like me, waiting ten minutes for them to stop without telling the theater staff. I know, maybe you don’t like confrontation, or don’t like missing any part of the movie, but… if you don’t take some sort of action, they won’t stop talking. You’re going to miss out on the movie one way or another. Don’t miss out on more than you, or the rest of the audience that has a set of fucking manners, need to.

(HPOR) Now for the review.

I’ve probably said this before, but spy films can be a hit or miss for me if they’re not comedies. This is because the ones that you’re supposed to take seriously, James Bond, Jason Bourne, they have a tendency to have complicated plots that my brain isn’t calibrated to follow. I eventually tune out the politics, ramifications, and junk in lieu of waiting for the action scenes or attempting to connect with the character relationships, which is always the crux of why I end up liking them. A few one-liners never hurt either. So how does this movie rank among them? It’s good. Not great. I don’t argue the “Kick-ass action,” or “…totally badass,” comments. Hell, I don’t even argue the whole, “We now have our female 007!” comments either. But… yeah, I don’t love this movie.

The smaller issue that I have with this movie is just how drenched in neon colors this movie was. This is personal, obviously, but the very aesthetic of this film is a struggle. If it’s not bright neon colors, it’s pale white and blue. I know, I know, snow and shit, and I don’t know if I could properly explain why it bugs me. But couple that with the 80’s techno music, or whatever it was, it sort of made my eyelids heavy. It succeeds in making itself distinguished among other action-spy films, but it does it in a way that didn’t agree with me. It’s that same sensation that I get when I play a first-person shooter video game; I just get a headache after awhile, which ruins the experience some. Like I said, the majority of viewers likely weren’t bothered by this, but I was.

Another smaller complaint was the lesbian scene. Now before you feminists get your pitchforks and torches, hear me out. Setting my man-brain aside who absolutely adores two attractive women having sex, pure titillation is something I reserve for porn. That’s what it’s for. However, gratuitous sex and nudity in a movie is exploitative and, frankly, annoying. It’s there just for marketing and to get asses in seats. Now, if the story is about sex and relationships, trying to do it in an artistic way, that’s perfectly acceptable. In coming-of-age films, the exploration of sexual awakening, a character who doesn’t believe in monogamy learns to fall in love, that sort of thing, then of course, the sex and nudity is more warranted and understandable. But that’s for those movies. Action films don’t always put that kind of effort into the romantic relationships. The exceptions for me are the Bourne films and the occasional Bond film. I do not believe this film does the relationship between Lorraine and Delphine justice. While both Theron and Boutella are outstanding actresses to be sure, Lorraine and Delphine barely share any screen time together before they bang and I don’t believe the sex was truly organic to the story. It’s certainly a lighter exploitation, mostly because there are good scenes between them later, which I’ll get to, and it’s not over graphic with either the nudity or the physicality, but I feel like for the relationship to carry more weight, more time should have been dedicated to them. Unfortunately, that could have also derailed the film and not kept the story in focus if not done well, but it could have been done. The two ladies could have ran around Berlin solving pieces of the puzzle together, fighting together, it could have worked.

A bigger issue that I also had was, as predicted, some of the fight scenes felt a little too choreographed. Like I said above, the action looks like… punch! Pause. Punch again! Pause, wait for stunt actor to get into place. Punch! Okay, it’s not as bad as I’m making it out, but I feel like I could literally see the actors trying to get back to their marks and waiting for their cue. It more prominent in the kitchen during the apartment fight, and pretty brief in the balcony scene toward the climax, but it’s still there and pretty distracting. Again, this may be something most won’t notice, care about, or agree with me on, but it did feel a touch distracting to me.

The biggest issue I had with the film was how complicated the story was that I could barely follow it. Okay, so a list of all the MI6 agents is now in the hands of the bad guys. We learn that the latest agent killed was a lover or boyfriend of Lorraine’s. We also learn that there’s a traitor within MI6, code named Satchel, whom Lorraine is tasked with finding as well because it’s this person who’s leaked the list to their enemies. I know that these plot point intersect and how they’re related to each other, but… why was Lorraine in that apartment? She says she was looking for clues to Satchel’s identity, but… what was she looking for specifically? We’re not filled in on her plans or strategies, so it just looks like that scene was there to showcase another action sequence. I guess she finds that picture with Percival (James McAvoy) and her dead lover, revealing them to be friends. But that information is never brought up after he admits to it and doesn’t play a further role in anything, so what’s the point? Beyond that, characters seem to take themselves from one location to the other when it feels like it should be as simple as finding the missing Spyglass (Eddie Marsan), who committed the entire list of operatives to memory. It never truly feels like anyone is on point with their objectives. And if I can’t follow the actions and motivations of the characters… it can easily bore me. So yes, outside of the action scenes, the movie is pretty boring and not overly interesting. The pieces are there, but they don’t fit very well.

But before anyone starts thinking that I hate this film, I don’t. So let’s dive into the good aspects.

First and foremost, yes, the action is great. I’ve already mentioned how I felt the action was a little too choreographed, but I do give it some credit that the action is visceral. Dude gets hit in the face with a pot or a freezer door, it really looks like it hurts. Someone gets shot in the stomach, but still attempts to fight, it looks like a real struggle. People getting punched, or thrown around onto wooden furniture or getting whacked with lamps and shit, stabbed in the neck with a cork-screw, the action is undeniably intense and gritty. Especially with all the cuts, bruises, and blood, you feel just as exhausted as the actors do. Hell, especially in the balcony scene, I know if it were me, all battered and beat up, I’d just be like, “You know what, just go. I’m done. Have a good Wednesday.” It’s pretty awesome.

The actors also churn out solid performances and work incredibly well off of each other. Lorraine and Percival are pretty funny and I enjoy their banter. I also liked the connection that Lorraine and Delphine shared. Despite the unnecessary sex, there is a really good scene with the two of them in bed together and they’re talking, Delphine comments that her eyes change when she tells the truth and the dialog goes something like:

LORRAINE
Thanks for the warning. Now I know to not do it again.

DELPHINE
Why?

LORRAINE
Because someday it’s going to get me killed.

That’s a really poignant line. It shows that someone can spot a weakness that could potentially be exploited and she now has to compensate for it in order to cover her ass. But more than that, it’s a detail that was told to her by someone that has always tried to be on her side, and wouldn’t exploit her weaknesses. So of course, I love Boutella’s performance as this semi-innocent and inexperienced field agent who is clearly way over her head. But I really liked Delphine as a character and the impact she had on Lorraine.

There’s also a deep level of appreciation for the details. I mean, in that reveal scene with Theron, Lorraine coming out of that ice cold bath tub, every inch of her body covered in bruises and cuts. It really gives you that sense of how bad-ass she is and you feel every bit of that bruising as she does. Except everyone in the audience is a pussy because y’all be squirming in your seats and she’s just all, “Smokin’ my cig, poppin’ my pills, fuck this job, I’m a bad-ass, mother fuckers.” Pretty sure I’d be on the ground crying like my mother if a swarm of spiders were just crawling over her. And boomeranging back to the stairwell scene, I’m pretty sure Theron started that scene without a scratch, but then the bruises and cuts were all over her by the end of it. I’m curious, were those bruises… real? I mean, according to the trivia on IMDb, she cracked two teeth during filming. She really was getting slammed into walls… albeit padded ones, but how far off the mark can I possibly be? Maybe they’re digitally inserted? Either way, it’s fantastic and it’s made to look like it’s all done in one take. I can probably safely assume it wasn’t, but it’s not quite quite easy to spot where the cuts may be.

Fun fact: That tunnel when Lorraine is in the car and beats dudes with her shoe? That’s the same tunnel used in CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR (2016) when Black Panther is chasing down Bucky Barnes. I part of me thought I’d recognized it, but I didn’t think much of it until I read that.

Overall, I can’t say that this is a bad movie. It’s very well done and well-executed, but I just don’t love it, or like it all that much. The visuals literally hurt my eyes and head, so it’s already hard to get enveloped by the film. Bits and pieces of the action don’t look right, and some of the character choices don’t always make sense to me, so I can’t climb on the band wagon that everyone has a ticket for. But there is a real passion behind the project that I can’t deny. To my understanding, this is a passion project of Theron’s and it really shows. It’s hard hitting, beautifully shot, fantastic acting, it’s no wonder why so many like it. I say if you like your action-spy flicks, or enjoy the cast, this is a good one to check out. It’s not a movie that I can personally see a third time, but I acknowledge it’s merits and I recommend it.

My honest rating for ATOMIC BLONDE: a strong 3/5

atomic-blonde-poster

Advertisements

SPLIT review

Who’d have thought that M. Night Shyamalan would be crawling his way out of the grave he dug himself for the last decade or so? For those of you that have been living under a rock, Shyamalan was the director and writer of one of the most celebrated horror-thrillers of all time, THE SIXTH SENSE (1999). What does that mean you may ask? Simply put, it was Shyamalan’s first feature-length film and it was such a huge hit with critics and movie-goers alike that he was thought to be a filmmaker that would change the face of cinema. Then UNBREAKABLE (2000) came out a year later and was… mixed to say the least. Some people think it’s great, others think it was a sign that maybe Shyamalan was a one trick pony. Then in 2002, we were given SIGNS. Personally I loved this film, and it seems to be pretty popular with the masses as well. But there is a small group of people that don’t like it and when intelligently pointing out the flaws, it’s hard to deny the film’s true colors: it wasn’t very good. From that point on, the downfall of Shyamalan was only getting faster and harder. THE VILLAGE (2004), THE LADY IN THE WATER (2006), THE HAPPENING (2008), all culminating into penultimate failure of his career, THE LAST AIRBENDER (2010). His movies were only getting worse and worse and he became the butt of every film joke you could make.

But then a surprise hit appeared in the shape of 2015’s THE VISIT. If you were anything like me, that movie looked like it would be another bad Shyamalan film, but maybe with a little more self-awareness; that maybe he’d embraced his horrible writing and decided to make fun of himself. Though, to be honest, the movie was actually a pretty solid flick to most. On a personal level, I thought it was just okay, but in rating a Shyamalan picture, “okay” is probably code for “fantastic.” Some even declared the film his comeback movie. Again, I think a trend needs to happen in order for conclusions to be reached, and one movie that was just okay doesn’t mean he’s on a comeback.

Which now brings us to his latest venture. It looks like it’s a story about a man with multiple personalities kidnaps three teen girls and holds them hostage somewhere as their escape attempts are thwarted and aided by the man’s many personalities. I still think it looks like a silly film, but as I have yet to see it, it’s best if I don’t judge it outright. But early ratings seem to give it high praise. IMDb has it at an impressive 7.5/10 (as of 1/13/2017), and RottenTomatoes has it at a 78% (as of 1/13/2017), but all of that will change in a few weeks, so we’ll see how it all turns out.

Let’s talk about the cast. First up, we have the ever talented James McAvoy. Say what you want about WANTED (2008), this movie put him on the map. So much so that it landed him the coveted roll of young Charles Xavier in X-MEN: FIRST CLASS (2011), which solidified his popularity with most audiences, especially his turn in its sequel and arguably the best X-Men movie ever made, DAYS OF FUTURE PAST (2014). Despite X-MEN: APOCALYPSE (2016) not being the best of the franchise, he himself still held up pretty well. So it’s safe to assume that even if the movie isn’t great, he always will be. He’s charismatic and knows how to act, I just hope Shyamalan doesn’t forget that and sap all his talent out in this flick because… damn, he doesn’t look like he’s going to be good in it. Next up, the rising star of Anya Taylor-Joy. 2016 was a pretty big year for this young lady, having been in the popular horror film, THE WITCH and MORGAN. THE WITCH was one of the best horror films that came out that year and Taylor-Joy knocked it out of the park. MORGAN was… less than stellar, to say the least. Not the worst movie ever made, by any means, but it was definitely knock off of a lot of other movies that were better. This is obviously no fault of Taylor-Joy, young actors needs to work and get their names out there and don’t always have the luxury of choosing their films lest they fade from relevance. And again, Taylor-Joy wasn’t bad, it was just the movie that should have been better. Despite having been in only so many movies, she’s got mad talent and I’m hoping to see her get crazy famous in the future. Finally, Haley Lu Richardson. In the blink of an eye, for me, she became one of the most hated things that came out of 2016. Why? THE BRONZE, that’s why. Though, it’s hard to blame Richardson for that because, once again, young actors need work, and despite having a much longer list of credits to her name, it doesn’t have a lot of titles that many may recognize and THE BRONZE felt like it could potentially hurt Richardson’s career horrible. Thank the big man upstairs for THE EDGE OF SEVENTEEN (2016), though, as she bounced back wonderfully in that. While mostly indifferent to her herself, I still see her talent and as long as the rest of Hollywood is merciful enough to keep her away from more horrible films, I think she’ll do alright and I’ll be open to more of her work.

Now for behind the scenes. Obviously, writing and directing is Shyamalan. I’ve ranted enough about him, so let’s move on. Composing the music is West Dylan Thordson, known for JOY (2015). Finally, the cinematographer is Mike Gioulakis, known for IT FOLLOWS (2014).

Overall, despite initial high praise, it still looks like a silly movie. I’m not completely sold on it, but I’ve been Popstar’d before. So maybe I’ll be pleasantly surprised.

This is my honest opinion of M. Night Shyamalan’s SPLIT.

(SUMMARY)

Cassidy (Anya Taylor-Joy), a quiet and non-social teenager, has been invited to Claire’s birthday party, though not entirely by choice. As the party closes and they’re about to leave, Claire’s parents offer Cassidy a ride home. But before they get going, a strange man with multiple personalities (James McAvoy) kidnaps the two and Claire’s friend Marcia (Jessica Sula), and locks them away in a room where they meet the other personalities. Some of them kinder than others. But the longer they stay around him, the more they realize that a new ominous personality is coming that could very well spell disaster on more than a few levels.

(REVIEW)

I know the critics are going absolutely nuts for this movie, but I have to voice my disagreement and say that it’s… meh. Not bad, but not nearly as good as the critics are making it out to be.

I think it’s best to mention the controversy that’s been circulating around the film. The film’s been coming under fire for it’s harmful and backward representation of people with multiple personality disorder… er, dissociative identity disorder. Not entirely sure the difference; I don’t study psychology. Sorry. There’s even a petition going around to have the film boycotted. I’ll post a couple links below.

http://movieweb.com/split-movie-boycott-petition-mental-illness-shyamalan/

https://www.yahoo.com/movies/m-night-shyamalan-on-split-controversy-his-enduring-love-for-lady-in-the-water-and-why-the-village-is-so-relevent-today-154940627.html

I don’t know, I don’t think anyone involved with that has actually seen the film and is jumping to conclusions. Having seen the movie, I don’t recall a moment where the movie outright, or even subtly states that people with this disorder should be feared and have a bad reputation for kidnapping. It’s just this one guy. Granted, it never addresses that all people with this disorder shouldn’t be feared and that this is an extreme and unique case, but maybe by simple implication that Kevin has twenty-three, almost twenty-four personalities sounds a bit extreme in itself. But what do I know? Maybe those that do know more will see this movie and be able to point out what exactly was harmful. But I also like to think that the vast majority of audiences seeing this movie are smart enough to know that… it’s a movie. It’s not real. No one is taking it that seriously. But like I said, I wouldn’t know. All I do know is this: I don’t fear people with this disorder, I do not think this movie is an accurate representation of them, and I think it’s just a movie.

Speaking of the movie, let’s get to this review, eh? As I said, I think it’s just, meh. Not nearly as awful as Shyamalan’s previous work, but I’m still not convinced he’s on a comeback.

First and foremost, and this is going to sound unbelievably hypocritical, I think the idea behind the movie is actually ingenious. At least, at first glance. These three young women have to interact with each personality to see who will help them or who will ultimately make their escape harder, it’s brilliant. At least… that’s the idea I got from it. Even in the trailer, that’s not how the idea presents itself. All you get is some build-up to a monster-like personality. And once you see the movie… yeah, no, that’s exactly what the movie is. You kind of get some of the “see which personality can be trusted” bit, but it’s not the focus of the story. And that’s my biggest problem I had with the movie; the potential was there, but it was horridly squandered. Out of the twenty-three/twenty-four personalities that are referenced, you see maybe less than ten of them, and fewer of those get any development. For as much marketing as there is around “23 personalities” it seems pointless to make his condition seem more severe than is actually portrayed in the story. I feel like it would have worked better if the audience didn’t know how many personalities were inside Kevin, or… you know, shorten the number of personalities that he actually has.

Also, anyone expecting a psychological horror or a tense thriller of any kind should leave those expectations at the door. It’s not suspenseful at all. Maybe with the exception of this coat-hanger scene with one of the ladies trying to escape from a room, that scene was pretty well done, but a scene that lasts somewhere between five to ten minutes out of a two hour flick? Yeah, this is a drama with a thin psychological border. Kind of misleading.

But before anyone starts thinking that I only have negative things to say about the film, I do have a few positives. First off, I absolutely love Taylor-Joy’s performance as Casey. Her performance is surprisingly nuanced and there’s an emotional payoff later that makes everything about her make perfect sense. That’s actually one of the bigger surprises with this script is how interesting he made these young women and how there’s a kind of role-reversal in their portrayal. What I mean by this is Claire is the determined, “We need to stand up to this guy and fight him” type, usually associated with an action hero protagonist in traditional movies, and Casey’s the “Fighting won’t help us, we’re so screwed” type that’s associated with the hysterical ones that die first. But in this case, Casey is the one the story focuses most on and despite Claire’s determination, she’s a supporting character. And neither character is really unlikable. They’re not really annoying or shameless cardboard cutouts of bad characters from other bad movies, which is awesome. Maybe the character Marcia isn’t memorable by comparison, but not memorable is better than memorably annoying, like most of Shyamalan’s characters.

McAvoy also does a… ninety percent good performance. About the only issue I took was his portrayal of Hedwig, the nine-year-old boy. I don’t know, the way he talks closer resembles a five-year-old… a really bad portrayal of a five-year-old. But I guess someone could argue that it’s not meant to be an accurate portrayal of a nine-year-old, but rather what Kevin perceived as a nine-year-old. And the Beast was a bit silly and anti-climactic, but everything else seemed pretty solid. His wardrobe, his accents, his mannerisms, it was a damn good series of roles all from one dude. I liked it.

***SPOILERS***

***

***

I guess now it’s time to talk about the big twist in the film that wasn’t given away in the trailer. At the end of the film, before the credits role, the news reports about the incident that happened with Casey and the now affectionately named The Horde, referring to Kevin and his many personalities, and patrons at a diner talk about “a similar incident fifteen years ago,” to which Bruce Willis is revealed to say the name, “Mr. Glass,” the nickname given to Samuel L. Jackson’s character in UNBREAKABLE (2000). So… yeah, this is essentially a sequel to that film, and… I guess the twist is that the audience thought that they were watching a psychological horror or thriller, but turns out it was a supervillain origin story. Uh… yeah, okay… in the words from Robot Chicken, “What a twist!” I think this twist and how awesome you think it is solely depends on how much you liked UNBREAKABLE, but I do have to admit that the possibilities are… intriguing. Willis’ David Dunn, the invincible man, squaring off against The Horde? Yeah, I’d like to see that. I’m even considering to write an editorial about what I’d like to see in that possible face-off.

***

***

***END SPOILERS***

Overall, I hate to use this pun, but I’m split about it. On the one hand, Shyamalan clearly improved on creating compelling and interesting characters and continues his string of good ideas. On the other hand, his inability to cash in on the greatness of his own ideas and settle for mediocrity continues as well, which does hurt the film. By no means bad, and I might recommend it for anyone who is interested in a Shyamalan film that isn’t downright bad, or genuinely thinks he’s on a comeback, but there’s still too many problems for me to even consider it above average. I don’t love it, but I don’t hate it either.

My honest rating for M. Night Shyamalan’s SPLIT: 3/5.

split_poster-2