Wolf Warrior II Review

It's always one last job----Jing Wu as a Special Forces agent who must leave his peaceful life to fight one more battle in Wolf Warrior II
                  Wolf Warrior II has some of the most impressive action scenes in recent memory. It's a shame about that plot, though. Despite its extreme love of director-star Jing Wu's native land of China, this is no less generic than any standard American action film save for the fight choreography, of course. This is yet another film about someone living a peaceful life after spending so many years being a badass who must perform one more job. This is Unforgiven, this is The American, this is Shane. There is nothing special about this story, which makes the fact that it is so grounded in Chinese culture make it feel off rather than patriotic.

                        Jing Wu plays Leng Feng, who is living a quiet life, spending time with his godson (Nwachukwu Kennedy Chukwuebuka) and beloved by the town due to a murder he committed a few years back that landed him behind bars and had him stripped of his honors. However, a group of mercenaries, led by Big Daddy (Frank Grillo) and including a cavalcade of henchmen (two are played by Oleg Prudius and Heidi Moneymaker, a wrestler and a stuntwoman who both deserve better than this.) I'm sure you can guess what this means. Leng has to come out of retirement to fight against these corrupt baddies. I won't reveal anything else but I assume I would know the answer if I were to ask you, the reader, whether or not Big Daddy and Leng are connected in some way and who will win out in the end.

                           Look---I know something like Wolf Warrior II is not trying to be particularly deep. These movies are meant to showcase some cool action and let an actor like Wu stroke his own ego as he gets to play the cool, slick hero. However, the action scenes are fairly sparse. There are long stretches where the film is trying to build up its plot and none of it works. I was fully invested whenever two people starting throwing fists at each other. In between, I was checking my watch. Wu is a convincing enough hero and Grillo demonstrates once again that he has no problem playing the no-nonsense villain but they're trapped by so many cliches I lost count after a while. There should be more flavor here, more moments to stand up and cheer with.

                          The script is credited to four writers (including Wu) and that doesn't surprise me one bit. This feels like a contrived mashup of ideas when a much more simple approach to the storytelling would have worked wonders. At one point, there are so many villains fighting against so many good guys that I just kinda gave up figuring out who was on what side. After all, the only real indication they give is the outfits people are wearing.

                             The film also seems to be portraying a slightly dangerous message that Americans (and especially white Americans) are the devil. While I think that may be a valid point in this current political climate, it comes across as off putting in what should be a relatively straight forward action film. All the head villains are white (save for one Black American henchman) while all the heroes are Chinese and African. Perhaps I shouldn't be complaining since Hollywood has done plenty of its share of whitewashing and making other nationalities into people to be feared but two wrongs don't make a right.

                                 Wolf Warrior II is an extremely enjoyable film when it sticks to its stylized, intense action. Whenever it goes back to the plot, however, it becomes lackluster and fairly dull. I look forward to seeing Wolf Warrior III (which a scene right after the credits begin assures us there will be) if only to see Wu get his story juices flowing. He's nailed the action, now let's see him nail the script.
(2 and 1/2 out of 5 Stars, The film is Not Rated)

When Original Ideas Fail.....

            So far, 2017 has brought some wildly original films that I have loved, from Get Out to A Cure For Wellness to The Belko Experiment to Baby Driver. I could spend a whole blog talking about how wonderfully written and inventive these films are. However, my readers know I'm not going to do that. Being a cynical prick who likes to complain, I would much rather make a whole post about the wildly original films from this year that have failed. This can also be chalked up to the waste of original ideas last year (see my #3 and #2 worst films of 2017.) Since such a tradition of waste has bled into this year, I feel I need to address the elephant in the room (and no, I'm not referring to Okja because I haven't seen that one yet.) I would like to focus on four films in particular, two that have been pretty much unanimously panned and two that I was extremely let down by although I seem to be in the minority---The Book Of Henry, The Bad Batch, Beatriz At Dinner and Colossal. I am going to examine each of these films, say what is unique about them and then proceed to tell everyone exactly why they failed at what they were trying to do.
     
             Firstly, The Book Of Henry, which has such an odd premise that it is almost impossible to believe that it's a real movie. It follows a young, gifted boy (Jaeden Lieberher) who finds out that the cute girl next door (Maddie Ziegler) may or may not be getting abused by her step dad (Dean Norris) who happens to be local law enforcement. Without getting into too much detail, it ends up being up to the boy's mother (Naomi Watts) to assassinate the step dad. This is all done with a Lifetime movie of the week tone and score, which makes the movie seem even more messed up than it already is. I actually don't hate this movie as much as a lot of people seem to. I respect director Colin Trevorrow and screenwriter Gregg Hurwitz's combined ballsiness to absolutely go for it. However, it all ends up being way too much and it's never as campy or laughably amateur as it should be to make a true so bad it's good movie. A large part of the reason of why this movie fails, weirdly enough, is that there is major talent both in front of and behind the camera. Lieberher, Norris, Watts and Jacob Tremblay (who plays the younger brother) are all terrific actors, Ziegler shows the makings of a future star and Trevorrow directed Safety Not Guaranteed, one of the best films of the past couple of years. Because of this, the movie doesn't stumble enough to make it truly funny. It looks too professional, the actors are giving too much of their all, you can feel Trevorrow trying behind the camera. If a group of people who had never made a film before made this, then they may have had something. As is, it's not funny bad enough nor is it well done enough to be taken seriously. Still, I respect its effort and the way Trevorrow and Hurwitz clearly dived into this premise head  first.

               The Bad Batch is a post apocalyptic thriller about a woman (Suki Waterhouse) who, missing an arm and a leg, looks after a little girl (Jayda Fink) while trying to reunite her with her father (Jason Momoa) in a wasteland looked over by a Jesus-like figure (Keanu Reeves.) This film is written and directed by Ana Lily Amarpour, who previously did the fabulous A Girl Walks Home Alone At Night, her debut film about a feminist vampire. That film was slow moving for the sake of building up extreme tension and making the audience really care for this vampire. The Bad Batch is slow moving with no real purpose. In fact, the premise is so wacky that the ungodly pace of the film ends up not mixing at all with the rest of it. As well, every actor is trapped (except for Reeves, who continues to show that he can still be amazing in his later years.) Momoa is hunky and charismatic as always but also feels completely wrong for the role while newcomers Fink and Waterhouse both feel like they don't know what they're doing in the film to begin with. The story is also muddled and confusing, with characters who are truly despicable as our heroes and the aforementioned Jesus-like figure who is trying to help everyone out as our villain. Perhaps this is an allegory or satire or both but Amorpour doesn't know how to deliver that idea. Amorpour brilliantly mixed genres in A Girl Walks Home Alone At Night but with The Bad Batch, she throws guacamole and pizza on top of ice cream. In other words, it's a lot of different solid films mixed into one huge, unsavory mess. I will still be first in line for Amorpour's next film, however.

                        Beatriz At Dinner is a social satire about a massage therapist (Salma Hayek) who gets invited to a dinner party being held by a wealthy client (Connie Britton) and who ends up feuding with the guest of honor (John Lithgow) over their political differences. Hayek, Britton, Lithgow and the rest of the cast bring their a-game, delivering a group of top notch performances. However, the Beatriz character is not the least bit believable, behaving in a manner that no one in her position would behave, the elites are way too over the top (and this is a satire about elitists) and the movie never has the courage of its convictions, pretending like it's doing something sharp and brazen before petering out every time it has the opportunity to do so. This is especially disappointing coming from the team of director Miguel Arteta and writer Mike White. Separately, Arteta has directed two truly wonderful character based comedies---Cedar Rapids and Star Maps and White has written two similarly wonderful character based comedies with School Of Rock and Orange County. Together, White and Arteta did Chuck And Buck and The Good Girl, two hilariously cringe worthy comedies. Here, however, they seem to wimp out at every turn.

                           Colossal follows Gloria (Anne Hathaway) who moves back to her hometown and catches up with old friend Oscar (Jason Sudekis) who now owns a bar. Both of them are alcoholics and after one crazy night of drinking, Gloria discovers that when she stomps around in a local park, a monster appears in Tokyo and does whatever she does. Soon enough, Gloria finds herself trying to save the forces of Tokyo against herself and something more evil than even she can create. Directed by Nacho Vigalondo, who did the excellent Timecrimes, this is a potentially fascinating premise that throws too much else at the screen. An annoying and needless subplot involving Gloria's ex-boyfriend (Dan Stevens) is clearly there just to pad the running time and there are too many extended sequences that add up to nothing and have no consequence to anything else in the film. There is a really good movie in here somewhere but Vigalondo needed to focus solely on the main premise and cut the rest out.

                              So there you have it...four films not based on any previous material that could have easily worked and just didn't. Obviously, everyone involved in these films are incredible talents who have it in them to do wonderful films. Hopefully, they will come across this and take my advice on why their films didn't work this time around.

Unforgettable Review

Don't do crazy-----Katherine Heigl as a bitter ex-wife to a hunky man (Geoff Stults) in Unforgettable
               Unforgettable is the newest in a long line of what I call the smutty thriller genre. It started in the 90s, with films like Fair Game and Single White Female and has seen a resurgence with When The Bough Breaks and The Boy Next Door among others. Of this genre, Single White Female is the best made of them and The Boy Next Door is the most fun (although how much of that was intentional is questionable.) However, I'm not here to compare movies (ignore the fact that I just did.) Unforgettable is pretty awful and yet...it could have been kinda, sorta fun but writers Christina Hodson and David Johnson and director Denise Di Novi are too lazy to make that much effort. They instead opt for  a thriller in which not much happens and then wimp out at the end by making even the throw down that the film has been leading up to insignificant. If you're going to lead up to this, at least make it count.

                      The film stars Rosario Dawson as Julia, a too-perfect blogger who is married to David (Geoff Stults, giving a performance so bland that it literally took the taste out of my mouth as I was watching it.) However, Julia meets Tessa (Katherine Heigl,) David's ex who is evil, but not evil enough to make it threatening nor comical. In fact, the movie screws up being fun bad by introducing a comically evil character in Julia's ex (Simon Kassianides) and then showing him only in brief cutaways and one scene towards the end. Kassianides's performance, mixed with the terribly undercooked screenplay, all but turn this guy into a Looney Tunes villain but he's not on screen long enough to be that funny and when he is fully introduced, the scene is  in such poor taste that it makes it hard to even laugh at him.

                        This is not to mention that the film is told in flashback, taking away any suspense from an already completely predictable story. Seriously....giving away how this all transpired in the opening scene would get someone a failing grade in a college level screenwriting class.

                         This doesn't even begin to bring up the fact that plot elements are introduced that make no sense and amount to nothing. At one point, Lily, David and Tessa's daughter, is talking to a mysterious man at a market. This is brought up later by having Julia go "who was that man you were talking to at the market?" and Lily replying "I don't know." Why even have that scene if you're not going to do anything with it?

                          Then there's Cheryl Ladd as Tessa's equally uptight, cruel mother. Ladd is at least attempting to give a fun, campy performance but the script gives her nothing to do. She's mean but why and what significance should that serve? The only thing I can think of is to give Tessa some sprinkling of sympathy but then that takes away from the fun of watching this woman ruin her ex's new lover's life. Seriously...there's such a disconnect between the actors, the screenwriters and the directors that it makes everything jarring. Heigl feels like she studied the work of someone like Bette Davis without understanding what made her performances great, Dawson seems to think she's in a Douglas Sirk melodrama, Stults isn't doing anything, Di Novi is directing this like a made for TV Christmas drama, Hodson and Johnson seem to be writing a horror film and that's not even to mention Whitney Cummings as Julia's trustworthy, wise cracking friend who gets not one funny line of dialogue, but plenty of attempts at them.

                               Yet, at the end of the day, Unforgettable sets itself up for a sequel as if that will ever happen. There's no reason to see this film. If you're going to make a film with this ludicrous a premise, run with it and have fun. If you're going to direct any film, work with your actors in a way that makes sense. If you're going to bring up plot elements, make them worthwhile. Most of all, don't be this mind numbingly boring.
(1/2 out of 5 Stars, The film is rated R for sexual content, violence, some language and brief partial nudity.)

The Lost City Of Z Review

Finders keepers-----Charlie Hunnan as Percy Fawcett, an explorer who claims to have found a hidden civilization in The Lost City Of Z
                            Love him or hate him, we should all feel appreciative that someone like James Gray exists in the world. While I haven't loved all of his films (I found We Own The Night pretentious and The Immigrant dull,) I admire him greatly and am happy that he is making them. He's keeping that old fashioned sensibility alive. Think David Lean mixed with John Ford with a dash of Alfred Hitchcock thrown in for good measure. He takes his time, he builds characters, his visuals are minimal but effective and he even manages to study his actors' faces through their every single move. It's hard to deny these traits have been lost in the age of Michael Bay and even more talented directors like Ben Wheatley and James Wan, all of whom tend to throw a lot at the screen in an effort to keep the audience engaged.

                                Gray's latest film, The Lost City Of Z, based on the famous/infamous exploration of Percy Fawcett and his proposal that there may be civilizations we don't even know about living among us, will undoubtedly bore many people and even frustrate a lot in its deliberate pace and runtime that sometimes seems superfluous but is needed to truly tell the story in its full effect. Others like myself, however, will find this story of a man who will risk everything to prove what he knew he witnessed a fascinating character study and will appreciate Charlie Hunnan's lead performance, which feels so authentic that I forgot I was watching that guy from "Sons Of Anarchy" simply play this explorer.

                                   The film follows Fawcett, who seems like a fish out of water everywhere he goes. That is, until he gets assigned to explore the Amazon River with Henry Costin (Robert Pattinson, near unrecognizable under pounds of facial hair and continuing to prove that he's an excellent actor who just once got stuck with a bad role.) On one of his journeys, Fawcett discovers what he claims is Zed, a hidden city full of people who make up their own civilization. Upon returning, he tries to convince his colleagues that he's not crazy but they laugh him out of the room, much to the chagrin of his dedicated wife Nina (Sienna Miller, also excellent.) This prompts Fawcett to become absolutely obsessed with proving the truth of what he saw.

                                       Gray never once uses an in your face shot, instead opting, as he often does, for minimal shots that say everything they need to and then some. This is a fantastic talent working behind the camera, knowing exactly what he needs and doesn't need. Toward the end of the film, Tom Holland shows up as Jack, Percy and Nina's son who demands that he and pop go explore together and this section of the film provides one of the most beautiful shots I can remember seeing in a film for quite some time.

                                          As well, the script by Gray (based on a book by David Grann) makes every single character feel authentic and relatable. The desire of Fawcett to get to the heart of the matter and prove everyone right is inherently relatable as is Henry's desire to eventually just stay out of it. These are not cardboard cut outs...they are real people who it is very easy to feel for. This is also due to the performance. Hunnan, Pattinson, Miller and Holland are all magnificent, opting to give depth to these characters rather than play them in a more straightforward manner.

                                        Of course, there are some problems with the film. The journey eventually loses steam as it becomes clearer what's going on, which makes the conclusion potentially unsatisfying for some, although I found it to be completely worthwhile. Also, there are a few times where the pace doesn't feel so much deliberate as just poorly done but those are fairly brief moments.

                                         For the most part, The Lost City Of Z works as both an interesting character study of obsession and what it drives people to do as well as a suspenseful, Hitchcockesque thriller about what could or could not be a completely misguided effort and how that effort could end up bringing more than you were hoping for. To quote Greg Kihn---"They don't write 'em like that anymore."
(4 out of 5 Stars, The film is rated PG-13 for violence, disturbing images, brief strong language and some nudity.)

The Blackcoat's Daughter Review

There's evil in that school---Kiernan Shipka as a vicious boarding school student in The Blackcoat's Daughter
               The Blackcoat's Daughter is a new horror film directed by Oz Perkins, son of Norman Bates portrayer Anthony Perkins. Simply based on the household he grew up in, it would seem logical to expect Oz to know a little more about horror than he seems to. He understands atmosphere---that's for sure, but not how to apply it. There is also the best use of sound design I can think of in recent memory, never mind the fact that it's a few seconds of a slow, tedious film. Oz also seems to understand actors, which would make sense. His five leads are all incredibly dedicated to the material they're working with, even Lauren Holly, who gets practically nothing to do but disagree with James Remar, here playing her husband.

                 The story----Kat (Kiernan Shipka) is a boarding school student whose parents leave her to fend for herself at the school over break. Seeing as Kat has some pretty clear issues, the head of the school requests that Rose (Lucy Boynton,) who accidentally informed her parents not to come until Friday, look after her. The only problem is that Rose is a troublemaker and doesn't give a damn about Kat. Oh, also there are spooky things happening in the school. In a whole other section of the movie, Joan (Emma Roberts) is a stranded teen. A couple (Remar and Holly) who are heading the same way as her decide to give her a ride and provide her with a hotel room. Never mind the story, though, because that's the very, very, very simplified version of it and it actually doesn't make any sense whatsoever as it plays out.

                  Writer-director Perkins surrounds his movie with all the creepy atmosphere that's needed to make a solid horror film. Meanwhile, however, he seems to forget that characters worth caring about and a story to get invested in are also completely necessary to be effective. If there's nothing to follow along with and no character who I can identify with, there's not much to hold my interest. Scene after scene, I wanted to lean over to someone and ask "What's going on here? What is this supposed to mean?" There's nothing significant about any of this. Yes, it looks nice and it has creepy sounds, but that means absolutely nothing when I'm left checking my watch every few minutes.

                   The story builds to a conclusion that I suppose is meant to be a big, breath taking reveal. However, Perkins makes the fatal mistake of dropping not so subtle hints into the film. Anyone who was even halfway paying attention will have already guessed what the big twist is and will have already stopped caring.

                      Perkins clearly has some talent behind the camera. He's one of those guys who you've seen in a movie if you've watched a movie from the past couple of decades. He has learned the basics of how to make a film. Now he just has to find the rhythm to go along with it and maybe hire someone else to write his screenplay.
(2 out of 5 Stars, The film is rated R for brutal bloody violence and brief strong language)

Bitter Harvest Review

Starving for something----Max Irons as a young man who falls in love and fights again Stalin's rule in Bitter Harvest
                 I knew I was in trouble when five minutes into Bitter Harvest, about the mass starvation of many innocent citizens, I thought "at least it looks like a movie." This is a case of an amazing, powerful story being turned into mush by a script so poorly constructed and director so incompetent that it often borders on parody. The appearance of such actors as Barry Pepper and Terrence Stamp, who seem to be in that part of their career where they will take on literally any project, does not help.

                   The film follows Yuri (Max Irons,) a young gent who falls for Natalka (Samantha Barks) amidst the powerful rule of Joseph Stalin (Gary Oliver, in a performance that recalls Jerry Haleva's impersonation of Saddam Hussein in Hot Shots Part Deux.) When Stalin's reign falls into Yuri's beloved country of Yugoslavia, he takes it upon himself to stop this. Meanwhile, many innocent citizens are being deprived of any food, which really happened but never mind that---it's nothing compared to the bland, lifeless chemistry between Irons and Barks as they play out a love story so dull that those who criticized the Twilight films should take a good, hard look at what no chemistry REALLY looks like.

                     Irons can be a decent actor given the right material. Alas, Bitter Harvest provides him with absolutely nothing worthwhile. Meanwhile, Pepper and Stamp, as Yuri's father and grandfather, get to sport haircuts so bad they make Max Landis's rat heap look amazing in comparison. The slight streak on top, surrounded by a big balding spot, is hideous. Pepper and Stamp, talented actors that they are, can't overcome the awfulness of those haircuts or the way their characters are written. These barely feel like people, which makes it even less impactful when (SPOILER) Yaroslav (Pepper) unexpectedly dies in the first act.

                      The film is directed and co-written by George Mendeluk, who did the 80's comedies Doin' Time and Meatballs III, neither of which are exactly great resume boosters and has gone on to be a connoisseur of mediocre Hallmark holiday films. This perhaps explains why the film looks  as if it belongs on basic cable at 3 AM. That does not explain, however, how Mendeluk and Richard Bachynsky Hoover could screw up the screenplay so bad. Stalin is little more than a cartoon character while everyone else barely registers, if at all. This story should have inherently been powerful, exciting and sad. With the people they had at the helm, however, you'd be better off watching The History Channel for your lessons, even if "Ice Road Truckers" is on.
(1/2 out of 5 Stars, The film is rated R for violence and disturbing images)

                     

Ten Worst Films Of 2016!!!!

Arguably, having to sit through these films was not the worst thing to happen to me in 2016. However, this was a truly dreadful year for film in a lot of ways. Films that didn't even make the cut include Shut In, Warcraft, American Pastoral, Masterminds and Blair Witch among others. The only reason there aren't more dishonorable mentions is because I took  a bit back for myself this year. I managed to skip Allegiant, Independence Day Resurgence and Alice Through The Looking Glass among others. So without further ado, here are the worst of the worst of 2016.

(10) Man Down

Doing a PTSD war drama is admittedly a good and well intentioned idea and casting Shia LaBeouf as the lead was a surprisingly good choice. However, Man Down was lame and boring in more ways than I could count. It's not as cynical as most on this list, which is why it's only at 10 but it was too dull not to put on.

(9) The Choice

I have defended Nicholas Sparks adaptations time and time again but The Choice bored me to tears. That's saying something when there's both Alexandra Daddario and Teresa Palmer to look at on screen.

(8) London Has Fallen

The most morally reprehensible film of the year, London Has Fallen should have never been made and I'm already done talking about this despicable piece of trash.

(7) The Boy

One of many pathetic (but not the most) attempts at horror from this year, The Boy bored me to tears. That's saying something when there's Lauren Cohen to look at on screen.

(6) Ben Hur

Upon leaving the theater after seeing this disaster, I told a buddy of mine that it was barely even a movie. I stick by that. This is a sad attempt to remake an all-time classic that was itself a remake of an all-time classic and it deservedly flopped hard.

(5) Bad Santa 2 

The first Bad Santa is a brilliant Christmas comedy but its sequel is a lazy film that tries way too hard to be as filthy as possible. If there were even 2 or 3 laughs in it, I would be willing to forgive it more. However, I think I let out a soft chuckle once and that was just because I was so desperate to find something remotely funny.

(4) Nerve

I'll give Nerve this---it has a great concept. Perhaps this makes it even more disappointing when the film is simply boring and awkward and goes absolutely nowhere with its idea.

(3) Swiss Army Man

The fact that the senior citizens filled theater I saw Swiss Army Man included people laughing genuinely concerned me for the fate of humanity. Perhaps the fact that people, even older ones, would like this disgusting, puerile, unbearable comedy explains why we have the president-elect that we do.

(2) The Neon Demon

I've always found Nicolas Winding Refn to be a pretentious filmmaker who is all style and no substance. If ever there was a film to prove that, it would be The Neon Demon. This is an unbelievably pretentious, ugly, mean spirited pile of trash with not a single worthwhile moment in it. It made no money in its opening weekend (in wide release, mind you,) proving that sometimes moviegoers are smart enough to know when to stay away.

And the worst film of 2016 is......

(1) The Forest

The Forest takes real life tragedy and turns it into a cheap, boring horror film. This makes the film not only terrible but incredibly offensive. It also doesn't help that leads Natalie Dormer and Taylor Kitsch give two of the worst, most lifeless performances I have ever had the displeasure of seeing. Don't even get me started on the ending, too. What a massive heap of junk this film is. Everyone involved in the making of it should be ashamed of themselves!

Silence Review

A mission and a prayer----Andrew Garfield as a priest who goes looking for his mentor (Liam Neeson) in Silence
                   Silence is an incredibly well directed, excellently acted, beautiful looking film. So, why then, did I find it such a slog to sit through? I don't think I have ever turned from excited to see a movie to antsy for it to be over so quickly. I doubt it's the fact that I, as an atheist, had trouble buying into a film all about the power of faith. I have enjoyed films like this before, after all. Nor do I think that it is because this kind of story goes over my head. Rather, I think it is because of the way in which the film presents its ideas. It is way too long (this is coming from the one person who thought Martin Scorcese's last film, The Wolf of Wall Street was a perfect length) and ends up at a conclusion that could be seen coming from the very beginning.

                    The film stars Andrew Garfield and Adam Driver as Rodrigues and Garrpe, two priests who decide to travel to Japan after a Father (Ciaran Hinds) tell them that their mentor (Liam Neeson) has inexplicably given up all faith in God. Once in Japan, they encounter religious persecution that tests their willingness to God.

                     Scorcese and cinematographer Rodrigo Prieto shoot the film beautifully. Every shot is breathtaking and, even though the film is at least forty minutes too long, the shots themselves never feel wasted. As well, individual moments are undeniably riveting. The idea that these priests may ultimately have to accept God different from how they see him creates some fascinating moments. One moment in particular where Rodrigues yells at a group of people as they are getting ready to die is powerful.

                       However, the screenplay by Scorcese and Jay Cocks (based on a novel by Shusaka Endo) is fairly weak. It makes the same point over and over and over again and features far too many scenes of people getting tortured for their beliefs. Persecution is a powerful concept but the film goes too far in telling the audience that. In fact, the second half of the film is almost entirely Rodrigues and others getting tortured. Why not use some of that time to explore the reason why the Inoue (Issie Ogata) feels the need to make those who do not agree with him suffer? Some may argue no answer is more powerful. To that I would say that torture without context is meaningless.

                         Also, Garfield is out of place here. He's a great actor and his performance is never anything but well done. However, he looks too modern, too handsome, too neat to be playing a 17th century priest. Driver looks more the role, which is why it's so disappointing that his role is more of a supporting one.

                           I can not at all call Silence a bad film. It would be hard to find a film that is better looking and Scorcese continues to show that he has more energy than directors half his age behind the camera. However, by the time the film wraps up, the point has been made and it  was all too obvious all along what that is. Perhaps you should see Silence for yourself. I can't say that it wouldn't be right up your alley. I, however, found it mostly redundant and dull.
(2 and 1/2 out of 5 Stars, The film is rated R for some disturbing violent content.)