Unbreakable 2

[david icke]

The thing that puzzles me about a Jackson return as the 'arch nemesis' is that it seems the only 'evil' he was interested in was the means to the end of discovering the hero, so he could be on his way and saving people, as well as the more selfish reason of testing his theory so he could have a sense of reason and identity out of his trying life.
Of course, he was capable of great evil, so he would still have that in him, but what could shyamalan possibly come up with that would be MrGlass' motive for revenge(he seemed quite happy to show off his crime and do the time now that Dunne had been found), or a sufficently interesting reason for Dunne to go after him.
If they just have the plot that dunne goes after him just because he has escaped and is on the loose, but is not planning any more crime, not interesting enough.
If MrGlass is on the search for more heroes, blowing crap up to find them , a daft re-tread, not a good idea.
If he is on the search for more supervillans, I don't know if that would make much sense, since he was on the lookout for Dunne so Dunne could save folk, he had evil means for a good end. He did seem to be genuinely interested in Dunne being out there doing good, not just for his selfish reasons.
edit: but, I suppose he could be on he lookout for villans who are already active, in order to help Dunne find them.
Could a new supervillan emerge and Dunne has to begrudgingly accept Glass' help as his supervillan brain is too much for Dunne? Maybe a bit too Silence of the Lambs there.

that's the thing, I always imagined Unbreakable2 to be featuring a new villan due to this concept that Glass only perpetuated evil to find the hero. It wasn't like, 'I will find the hero, and then I will kill the hero.' He genuinely wanted Dunne out there doing the hero thing.

Ok, I know I am undoubtably not thinking of something, but I just hope Shyamalan has the goods to cover this and any other angles so that the logic of the first film remains intact in relation to the second.

 

[El Payaso]

Good points on the first two, but the latter is a bit misguided. Nonsensical, radical, improbable, was exactly the point of Elijah.

Oh yes, that was my point. And it's why he's such a bad villiain. Villiains that are crazy but make sense are immediatelly better: Joker, Ra's al Ghul, Lex Luthor. In the world of comic book villiains, Mr. Glass comes up as an innofenssive looney.

He lived on comic books and came to live by it's rules.

But he still had the notion that comic books are just fiction.

Admittedly however, his reasoning for seeking Bruce's character wasn't too out there. Everything does work on a spectrum, and it's only logical that if Elijah is on one end, someone could conceivably be on the other.

You don't spend your life building a spaceship to go to Krypton unless you have some evidence that Krypton exists. And by evidence I mean more than a comic book saying it exists.

Now, if Mr. Glass was that crazy, he could have still had any kind of extraordinary characteristic that would make him a worthy villiain; superpower, intelligence, etc. But he didn't, he was just a looney who anyone in the world could beat.

Any bodybuilder could be seen as the opposite of Elijah.

 

[david icke]

Then we have the hero's "weak spot": water. Now, either David Dunn is about to die every time he takes a shower or drink water - or anything that contains water, namely any possible beverage - or he (and/or Shyamalan) is mistaking for a weak spot the fact that David could die drowned if he's pushed down the water - which then again is every human being's weak spot. But most important: water being a weak spot just makes no sense at all, unless you’re the Human Torch. It was just too random.

Yes, it's every human being's weak spot, but Dunne had no weak spots until they discovered that one.
It may be somewhat random, but it's not a bad one. They played with this in a Wolverine comic when a villan jammed his claws into rock under the sea and he could not get the leverage necesary to free himelf, he wondered whether drwoning would kill him, and if it was something his healing factor would not cover if he was just left there indefinitely.

My reasoning for it being random is, why not drowning? It's as good a weakness as any.

edit: also, like the Wolverine thing, it would suggest, and make some sense, in the way that the body can shrug off bullets, is super-strong, but if flooded with water and deprived of air indefinitely, forget about it.
In the movie there is the story told about how when he was a boy he *almost* died of drowning, and was under the water for longer than anyone else could have survived, so that suggests his power did help him, but if deprived of air for too long, he's a goner.

I get Elijah has some screw loose, but was he really thinking that applying a comic book rule to the real world would work?

As a villiain he sucks. Even as a comic book villiain concept: you have to be a threat to the hero and what he represent, not merely be against them. Any cop - or for that matter any child with a bat - can beat Elijah; the only extraordinary thing there is about him is that he's extraordinarily weak and easy to defeat. Even an accidental hit could send him to the hospital or kill him. That doesn't work. He doesn't represent a threat, and I don't buy such a physically limited character could get the money to put bombs without anyone noticing it.

He is an (evil) and crazy, genius, he had an instinct for a truth that was hidden so deeply that only a combination of genius(which can be defined by finding connections between seemingly unrelated phenomena, that no-one else can see), and craziness could have uncovered.
Now, you can say he was not crazy as he was eventually proven right, but, seemingly he needed his craziness to allow him to be evil, evil enough to perpetuate the evil that enabled him to find the good hero.
It appears he *had* to be crazy and evil, to discover the hero, this plays into the maxim that good cannot exist without evil.
So, he found the hero, and also managed to work his way into the hero's affections, which caused the hero to reveal his secret weakness to the villan. If Glass had so desired he could have set some kind of trap for Dunne. Framed him for a crime, anything, but he was only interested in finding the hero of his theory and finding a sense of identity for himself.
He could have used his mind to be any type of threat to Dunne, just as Luthor does with supes.

He was a unique villan, I can recall no other villan in fiction whose evil actions were given to the end of finding the hero, so that the hero could go on to do good, *and* in the end imprison the villan himself. He did not have to admit his crimes to Dunne, but chose to do so.
It was not a case of 'Find the hero, kill the hero.', which is what the tale would most probably have consisted of in a lesser telling, but more 'Find the hero, admit the crime, do the time, but go into the loony bin sunset with the happy knowledge that your trying life had a reason behind it, and the suffering was not all for nothing.'

As for making money, he runs a gallery that sells original art, and seemed to be doing quite well for himself.

And talking about his plan: absurd. Again, I don't buy that Elijah was seriously thinking that if he would put a lot of bombs and cause a lot of accidents there was any chance that a superhero would just come up. I know comic geeks doesn't think straight but this came up as just nonsennsica. And the fact that his plan worked doesn't make it look any more plausible, even for a movie about superheroes - because in the Unbreakable world, superheroes are not a common thing, I'd understand that you might cause accidents in order to catch Superman's attention in a world where Superman already exists. But Elijah didn’t have the slightest precedent that superheroes could be real. And the fact that the only one superhero out there lived in the same city as him doesn’t help the coherence.

Someone with Elijah's intellect would take into consideration factors like coincidence and synchronicity being a major factor in life as well as in , most importantly, comicbooks.
He knew the hero would bein close orbit to him, or at the very least he just started doing things in his own backyard , as that was most convenient, and the hero showed up, so coincidence and synchronicity played it's part, just like in cb stories.

 

[Crook]

Oh yes, that was my point. And it's why he's such a bad villiain. Villiains that are crazy but make sense are immediatelly better: Joker, Ra's al Ghul, Lex Luthor. In the world of comic book villiains, Mr. Glass comes up as an innofenssive looney.

You of all people should know Joker has had PLENTY of eras where he is nonsensical and not functioning on logic.

But he still had the notion that comic books are just fiction.

But that doesn't preclude it from being interpreted (at least from his perspective) as being based on reason, in some form.

You don't spend your life building a spaceship to go to Krypton unless you have some evidence that Krypton exists. And by evidence I mean more than a comic book saying it exists.

Analogy doesn't fit. Elijah's motivation wasn't random. He executed his plans, in believing the 'law of opposites'. This isn't something exclusive to comics, it's a commonly accepted philosophy.

Any bodybuilder could be seen as the opposite of Elijah.

No, not exactly. Any bodybuilder can be hurt and are prone to the same harmful substances we are. Elijah was looking for an extreme, as he was.

 

[Art_of_Crime]

what would the plot be?
Mr. Glass gets out of jail, and Super sterile trashbag poncho man makes another anonymous call to the police? we could cover that in the trailer.

 

[Ghostvirus]

So is this thing still happening? I mean Both Jackson, & Willis are getting old. That movie is now 10 years old.

 

[david icke]

what would the plot be?
Mr. Glass gets out of jail, and Super sterile trashbag poncho man makes another anonymous call to the police? we could cover that in the trailer.

Is there any reason behind the term 'super sterile poncho-man', or are you just taking the piss/being a troll because you're not very capable of discussing and debating?
Rhetorical question btw, I already know the answer, lol.

edit: As for the time between movies, I don't see it as being a problem whatsoever, why would it be? Jackson and Willis might be older, but they are not in old folks homes peeing in bags or anything, they still make action movies.
It would be interesting to see it take place 10-12 years down the line, with Willis' kid grown up, seeing his adult perspective on what it is his dad does, and reactions to Elijah escaping.
also, to see who Willias has become that long down the line after many rescues, and whether anyone in the media suspects there is some kind of extra special vigilante out there.

 

[spider-neil]

the first one was great absolutely ruined by the ending.
M night 'I simply HAVE to include a twist no matter how dumb or contrived' shyamalamlamalalam

 

[knowsbleed]

I didn't feel the ending of the first was ruined by the twist... but the fact that once it reached a climax... it dropped the ball. It had the potential to be such an awesome showdown between the two of them... somehow. But it just concluded with a text epilogue. Lame.

 

[spider-neil]

I didn't feel the ending of the first was ruined by the twist... but the fact that once it reached a climax... it dropped the ball. It had the potential to be such an awesome showdown between the two of them... somehow. But it just concluded with a text epilogue. Lame.

totally.
unbreakable is up there with the abyss for a fantastic movie ruined by a poor ending (to be fair to the abyss the ending is fixed in the SE).

 

[david icke]

I see absolutely nothing wrong with the ending whatsoever. I guessed that MrGlass was the super-villan of the piece but did not guess in what way he had been villanous, maybe he was just after Unbreakable to kill him or whatever, but did not see the fact he caused the disasters.
*That* was the ending, not the text coming up on the screen(which wasn't originally there, but was added due to audiences in test screenings wondering what happened to Glass as a result).
Seeing it all unfold in those moments, with Glass still relating the moment to cb's, 'They're usually friends , like us.' etc, was great.
I don't think it was that contrived either, when else have you seen a villan perpetuate evil acts in order to find the hero, so the hero can do good in the world, and also reveal his crimes to the hero so the hero can have him imprisoned?
Seeing MrGlass' expression of bittersweet victory at the end was a perfect ending, he had found his place in the world, and all his pain had meant something, but he also knew he was a crazy evil bastich who now had to be locked up. Dunne's victory was bittersweet too, as originally he thought he'd found a real friend and guide. Look at how proud he is to call Elijah his friend when he's talking to his mother, compared to his look of horror and anguish after shaking his hand.
Frickin' great ending!

 

[knowsbleed]

The movie was all build up... no real climax. Garbage.

 

[david icke]

The movie was all build up... no real climax. Garbage.

Are you kidding? Are you honestly telling me that the sequence where Dunne follows the orange man to the house isn't a climax to the build up? Are you really saying that whole sequence is garbage? That sequence is one of the best things I've ever seen on film, and blows all other superhero movie moments out of the water.
In respect to what you were saying earlier about a 'showdown' with the arch nemesis, well, this is not your usual superhero movie. As Shyamalan says on the dvd extras, this movie encompasses what is normally the 1st two acts of a superhero play. The last act is missing on purpose, the arch villan 'showdown', as it was not relevant for what this movie was about, which was the origin and discovery of identity.

 

[Deaths Head II]

Are you kidding? Are you honestly telling me that the sequence where Dunne follows the orange man to the house isn't a climax to the build up? Are you really saying that whole sequence is garbage? That sequence is one of the best things I've ever seen on film, and blows all other superhero movie moments out of the water.

100% agreed. It's amazing how a scene of Willis just choking a guy for like a minute was able to feel so powerful.

 

[david icke]

100% agreed. It's amazing how a scene of Willis just choking a guy for like a minute was able to feel so powerful.

Absolutely, and with that music playing, what a rush. What's so great about that is it's so realistic, no comic-book type dramatic super punches across the room, just the most efficient way of taking down the psycho possible, and as you say, it's extremely powerful. Also, it looks like they nailed it perfectly in one take, unless they had a couple of plasterers and painters with blow dryers at hand.

 

[Doctor Jones]

The endign was great. Just to see how the two differed was more powerful than a fist fight. I don't know why anyone should expect that.

 

[spider-neil]

each to their own but the ending left me feeling flat after the marvelous build up of the entire movie and the text at the end wanted me to shout aloud **** OFF! that text is basically saying the audience is too stupid work things out for themselves.

 

[Brother Jack]

edit: If Shymalan gets his mojo back with this airbending movie I would like to see Unbreakable 2. Ach, who am i kidding, even if airbender is crap, i would still like to see Unbreakable2, I would hope he got his mojo back with that one, and even if it was bad it would not ruin the original for me. The only way movies get ruined for me is if folk go back and tinker with them.

Part of me wants to it get made because the first was so rife with potential for further exploration and is Shyamalan's best work to date, but the other part looks at The Happening and Lady in the Water and thinks that the last thing M. Night should be doing right now is directing his own scripts. He lost his mojo severely.

 

[david icke]

Part of me wants to it get made because the first was so rife with potential for further exploration and is Shyamalan's best work to date, but the other part looks at The Happening and Lady in the Water and thinks that the last thing M. Night should be doing right now is directing his own scripts. He lost his mojo severely.

I didn't like Lady in the water when i first saw it at the cinema, but I gave it another go after buying the very cheap dvd. Now I think it's an alright little movie, and that's the thing, it's a little movie, not like his preceding films.
Ok, you can take plenty of potshots at it, Shyamalan casting himself in *that* role, the thing about the film critic etc. But, it's got some originality in there too, and is quite the curious little flick. Can't think of anything quite like it.
The Happening I thought had an interesting premise, I have only seen it once and gave it some major passes as I watched it, I'm not sure i would like it as much now, I think you may be right about the directing on that one.
But, we will see with the new one, if his directing gets back up to his high standards. With Unbreakable too, i think he would be kind of safe with doing a screenplay for it, I think he would know what he was doing there.
The guy has been banging out original script after original script, and has slipped up a few times, but he had a good run for a while, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he can come back to that standard.
There are plenty of good directors who have made so-so, and embarassing films during the course of their career, and have came back with good ones. I don't see why Shyamalan is any different from them, in fact the main difference is that he has perhaps stretched himself too much by writing up original screenplays all the time.
Now, he's doing an adaptation and can concentrate on the directing, so that change in approach could well set him back in good stead.

 

[:eek:]

Shyamalan Wants To Do "Unbreakable 2"

By Garth Franklin Friday January 30th 2015 08:00AM
One of M. Night Shyamalan's most well-regarded films was 2000's "Unbreakable," the filmmaker's follow-up effort following his success with "The Sixth Sense." The film starts off as a thriller about a man with extraordinary abilities, but by the end turns into one of the more unconventional superhero origin films ever made.
Since its release there has been murmurings that the director was considering a follow-up, especially now as the superhero genre has taken off in such an extreme way. Such a project never came to fruition, but in a new interview during promotional rounds for "Wayward Pines," Shyamalan tells Collider he still has plans for doing a follow-up:

"I love those characters and I love that world. Of course, the whole world makes comic book movies now. At the time, it was completely novel. I remember when I made it, Disney was literally like, 'Comic books?! There's no market for comic books!' That's all they make now! It was a hilarious conversation."
​

Shyamalan says that despite everything that has come since, the tone of the original film and its real, grounded world would be kept for any potential follow-up:

"It feels like a straight-up drama. It's real. You're confronting the possibility that comic book characters were based on people that were real. That's the premise, so the tone has to be super grounded. It would be cool."
​

The original film generated $248 million in worldwide box-office from a $75 million budget. Shyamalan's more recent films though haven't performed nearly as well.

 

[Lily Adler]

I'm going to have to say:

 

[Urich Leeds]

I'm both terrified and incredibly intrigued. Because I know what Shyamalan has become since the first, but I'm also interested in where he can take this world next.

 

[titansupes]

Loved the first one, but don't feel good about this possibility.

 

[bullets]

I hope this is a return to form. I thought his last good film was The Village and that wasn't very popular with people .

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Loved the first, it's superb, not sure how I feel about a sequel though?