Isn’t Glass Onion more straightforward than Knives Out was? The latter actually changed scenes between the first and second time we saw them, so it was harder to put the clues together. Glass Onion didn’t do that and played with an open hand from the start.
We must have seen different films or I’m massively misremembering. Glass onion actively hid scenes so you couldn’t piece things together yourself, only showing those scenes when they wanted the big reveal.
Yes, it hid scenes (though arguably not ones that are necessary to figure out who the killer is). But Knives Out literally changed scenes, the ones we saw the first time weren’t the real scenes. That seems much worse?
Honestly, I’m not exactly sure what you mean by changed scenes. Do you have any examples? I’ve seen it 3 times and don’t really have any knowledge of this.
Do you mean the flashbacks that are different based on who’s telling the story? Because those are clues in themselves.
Yes, some flashback scenes literally have multiple versions. E.g. the one where the old guy goes down the stairs, and his son tells him to go back up - it’s not just cut differently, the person going down the stairs is literally a different person.
This is much worse from a classical “whodunnit” perspective. I’m not saying it’s bad! But Knives Out broke the genre conventions harder than Glass Onion did.
Different versions of the same event in the past being shown is great. A detective will get different stories from different people. They don’t even have to lie, memory is not perfect.
Not according to the genre conventions. Hearing different versions? Sure. But seeing different versions means the audience can’t trust what they’re shown, and can’t figure out what’s happening based on their knowledge.
Again, my whole point isn’t that this is bad, it’s simply that Glass Onion was more “honest” towards the viewer than Knives Out was.
Isn’t Glass Onion more straightforward than Knives Out was? The latter actually changed scenes between the first and second time we saw them, so it was harder to put the clues together. Glass Onion didn’t do that and played with an open hand from the start.
We must have seen different films or I’m massively misremembering. Glass onion actively hid scenes so you couldn’t piece things together yourself, only showing those scenes when they wanted the big reveal.
Yes, it hid scenes (though arguably not ones that are necessary to figure out who the killer is). But Knives Out literally changed scenes, the ones we saw the first time weren’t the real scenes. That seems much worse?
Honestly, I’m not exactly sure what you mean by changed scenes. Do you have any examples? I’ve seen it 3 times and don’t really have any knowledge of this.
Do you mean the flashbacks that are different based on who’s telling the story? Because those are clues in themselves.
Yes, some flashback scenes literally have multiple versions. E.g. the one where the old guy goes down the stairs, and his son tells him to go back up - it’s not just cut differently, the person going down the stairs is literally a different person.
This is much worse from a classical “whodunnit” perspective. I’m not saying it’s bad! But Knives Out broke the genre conventions harder than Glass Onion did.
Different versions of the same event in the past being shown is great. A detective will get different stories from different people. They don’t even have to lie, memory is not perfect.
Not according to the genre conventions. Hearing different versions? Sure. But seeing different versions means the audience can’t trust what they’re shown, and can’t figure out what’s happening based on their knowledge.
Again, my whole point isn’t that this is bad, it’s simply that Glass Onion was more “honest” towards the viewer than Knives Out was.