Anybody else seen silence yet? I just got back from the first screening i could get to, and i really liked it...

Anybody else seen silence yet? I just got back from the first screening i could get to, and i really liked it, but had some problems with it. I wasn't bored at all, but did notice a lot of repetition in the middle and end, and I'm not sure why Marty did it. Everybody I went with got bored tho. The constant images of Jesus being trampled on, and the constant use of crosses and torture reminders me of his non-stop barrage of sex and drugs inwolf of wall street. I wonder if His constant use of religious objects symbolizing people's belief is interesting because it reminds me of the story of the golden calf. I think there's a lot going on in here. My theatre fucked up playing it, so I got a free pass, i might go alone tomorrow

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=jCLzLqNkS_c&t=2076s
youtube.com/watch?v=pCKwtUXyU1k
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>posting the edit

I feel like he played it really safe with this one. There wasn't anything that unexpected. That is the first time I can really say that about one of his movies.

I think the idea was supposed to be the Japanese people valued religious icons more than the actual religion itself, like at the end when Liam said they only worship things they can see.

Bruty good movie, played it safe but I liked it
7/10

I get that, but the restraint and how uncharacteristically "Scorsese" the movie felt was one of the things that was unique about it.

I saw it and I didn't really like it. Tbh the religion part really bothered me. I didn't get more from it than Scorsese trying to ram God is good down my throat. I also didn't care for any of the characters or care about their journey.

I feel, kinda like age of innocence

One of my friends came back saying he thought he was an athiest after seeing it. He felt like the missionaries were nothing but selfish for watching all of those people die.

i liked it a lot
it had tons of beautiful scenes

i didnt feel that at all, the christians werent even depicted as definitively the best (although i was still rooting for them)

Did you really see it like that? Cause I thought kinda on the fence about religion in general .

One hand, it made those people who live shitty lives happier to live shitty lives but on the other hand it lead to all kinds of horrible things.

I think the movie had a very clear anti-colonialist messege, but it could could also be read as anti- immigration in today's political climate. I really don't want any political shitpostting, just wondering what you guys think

Could Christianity have survived in Japan if they hadn't been killing all of them? What would the negative consequences have been on japan? This movies really got me thinking holy shit.

>I really don't want any political shitpostting

You're on Sup Forums, it's only a matter of time

I thought it was neither, they only briefly touch on the colonial aspects and at the end you see they let foreigners into the country, provided they don't bring in any Jesus stuff. I think it's more about how the people in charge didn't what anything to change at all, and that meant having everybody be Buddhist or at least not have any new religions enter the country.

well japan has a very unique history when it comes to colonialism, different from many african and other asian countries, so this is more of a faithful depiction than a statement about politics

Yeah, he's a link to the full movie.

youtube.com/watch?v=jCLzLqNkS_c&t=2076s

Why did he start going crazy when he saw Jesus in the river?

A couple technical notes: I noticed some shoddy adr, I wonder if they didn't have the time they needed in post, didn't have good enough sound on set, or if the studio did something.
Also this is one of the few Scorsese movies where barely any camera movements stood out to me. Mostly I just noticed a lot of shot-reverse shot conversation and big close ups, but those are kinda scorsese's way of tradittionaly showing different types of required moments such as a good shot-reverse shot for exposiory dialogue, or a big close up for extreme emphasis. Aside from that there were only a couple scenes where the editing stood out for me, rare for scorsese, but probably a good thing because it helped me stay immersed in the story. If he had done it all showy like Wes, or pt anderson, or inarittu, it would have ruined the immersion completely. I liked his use of v.o. too, made it feel classic.

I think he might have realized he was worshipping himself rather than looking up to the heavens. Think of narcissus looking in to the pond.

Yeah what happened to Liam Neeson (and Garfield) in the end really surprised me.

Marty was very conservative with the camera in this film

Anybody else notice that funeral procession that looked like chimes at midnight or othello, I think it was followed by the closing shot from citizen kane, the camera zooming in to the fire.

Wow its like no movie is allowed to be unashamed to be about religion and you need to have a wacky Samurai sidekick who denounces religion in a sarcastic and edgy way every 5 minutes just to keep things balanced to enjoy it.

What was the point of that guy and his relationship with spiderman? It seemed like for testing his faith, but at the same time it could just show Garfield error for being so trusting.

First time I've ever fallen asleep in a theater

Dour, repetitive, overwrought. Cinematography was awesome though, of course

I'm really excited to go, but I'm weary about how this premise can hold up for nearly 2.5 hours. To any non-christian the hypocrisy of missionaries like this seems sort of obvious and self explanatory, I'm hoping the film has more to say than just exposing that.

>That is the first time I can really say that about one of his movies.
Have you not seen anything of his made in the 2000s? Or Casino, even?

It probably would have opened them up to the west sooner, lessening the need for nationalism and possibly even avoided their involvement in WWII altogether.

The film is more about religion in general (the good and the bad) rather than just hypocrisy.

youtube.com/watch?v=pCKwtUXyU1k


it's not a bad movie but yeah too repetitive and long. wolf was like 30 min longer and felt like it took half as much time

it doesn't really expose anything. it's just a matter of people getting persecuted if they don't apostatize in various ways until garfield finally does it, even though we obviously know he still believes but does so to finally save the people's lives. big woop. still better than kundun at least

I haven't seen casino, I loved the aviator, liked gangs of new York even tho it was slow, and everything from the departed through wolf of wall street was amazing. I really feel like he's been pushing the boundry, and this feels like a step in the opposite direction. Maybe he had to fight to keep in the content he had, he has to get that r rating, can't offend too many christians.

If this is your vid, then kill yourself.

no you kirr yourserf christfag

This this this. I just got home from seeing this movie myself, but I'm too tired to expand.

It's a beautiful film and a testament to Scorsese's skill as a director, but something was missing for me. I think I didn't find Garfield's character that interesting, despite his performance.