Silence is kino in its purest forms

Why did nobody here tell me about this movie?
Its absolutely amazing.

Why didnt the mainstream media talk about this? Because of its trad message showing """""""colonialist"""""" white people as the good guys?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=dXfMqG6d_yo
youtube.com/watch?v=pCKwtUXyU1k
youtube.com/watch?v=c6bIV1U85kY
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

It was pretty good, but it wasn't mind blowingly great or anything.

This movie still sticks in my mind. That says something. I'm still conflicted about the message but it really is one of his best films.

"Step on your Jesus"

It was great but it's not capeshit and there's no opportunity for Sup Forums bait threads so nobody on this site will talk about it.

pretty much. It took a while to get a good thread about A Cure for Wellness too. Any Christfags have their faith tested by the movie?

I think the release and marketing was poorly done in that it was released slightly too late to gain any award season traction or hype, it wasn't heavily advertised on tv or in the theatre. If I recall there wasn't even a trailer for it until the month of its release. From what I heard it kept getting pushed back for editing or something else so it is not like there was a fully finished film to do the rounds leading up to release. Also when I saw it my theatre was only presenting one showing each day and that was at 10:30 pm.

Because of the lack of discussion or attention paid towards it, its difficult to figure out what part the subject matter and themes played into its reception. If it was involved in award talk and nominated for a bunch of shit then it would have gotten more attention, instead it simply fell through the cracks.

I honestly think there was a lot of Hollywood bias because it involved colonialism and christianity. I'm not a Sup Forums idiot but there is definitely industry bias.

I could understand that playing a part in its release and marketing, whether that simply be not knowing how to advertise it or not wanting to. The fact that any bias, if there was any, seemed to take place before the movie came out, rather than when it came out, makes it challenging for me to make sense of. There really just wasn't any talk about it when it came out, good or bad. So it isn't the case that it came out and was shot down by critics with a bias.

In terms of award snubs it is hard to tell if bias played a large part in it. Was it snubbed or forgotten because of bias about the subject matter or was it snubbed or forgotten because it was released slightly too late to be in consideration and build hype?

>white people as the good guys?
oh boy, i don't think you got the film. And the mainstreammedia didn't talk about this movie because the mainstream wouldn't enjoy such a movie. On the other hand we had some great discussions on this board. But you probably didn't see these threads because there were about 10x more threads about how boring this movie is.

Great film, recommend everyone on this shit board to watch it

Apparently trying to convert the local population into your religion is ok by OP...
mfw Sup Forums

did they get to bang their widowed Jap wives?

Garupe didnt deserve to go out like this

After watching it I still haven't decided which of the two is more of an abomination. Holy shit they're ugly-ass motherfuckers.

Unexpected brilliance
I'm so bored of Scorsese but he keeps impressing me with his films. It's getting annoying

youtube.com/watch?v=dXfMqG6d_yo

>if this film was about Jews, Sup Forums would hate it.
>film is about persecuted Christians, so they love it.
Really rattles the ol' brain box.

pretty sure you didn't watch the film user

It was a bit too ambiguous for awards-b8
The "villains" turned out to be justified, the protagonist is "broken" and it tests the limits of Christian faith.
>tldr; it makes audiences think

I did, and I liked it. But my point still stands: retards on this board spent weeks baiting about it for the very reason I mentioned, no matter how accurate it was to the film.

The horrendous acting ruined it

Mainstream media didn't like it's story of Christian evangelists. Christians didn't like it because Andrew Garfield's and Liam Neeson's characters turned out to be a couple of cucks who denounced their Lord and Savior before men and desperately tried to rationalize it.

ty for the suggestion op i'll watch it soon

>who denounced their Lord and Savior before men and desperately tried to rationalize it.
I think you interpreted that incorrectly.

This movie was boring drivel. Easily the director's laziest effort and proof that father time is taking its toll on his abilities. And thats before the wooden acting from everyone but Driver

This was one of the few places I saw talk about this movie on the internet, it was pretty good though would have preferred a different lead actor

youtube.com/watch?v=pCKwtUXyU1k

umm no sweetie....

I berieve it is pronounced Sirence.

It was pretty good, CREEESCHSCHIAAANN

I'm an atheist but I loved this movie (idk why I just tend to love things with christian symbolism)
Can some christian explain something to me?

Would apostatising and giving up your own place in heaven to protect others not be considered the ultimate sacrifice? Wouldn't that be the most christian thing to do?
And wouldn't refusing to apostatise, leading to others being tortured or killed, be a form of pride - which is sinful?

That's what the movie made me think of and IMO was the discussion it was trying to raise about faith.

>tfw your only friend dies
>you're stuck with a bunch of crazy japs around you

Meant to reply to him

I don't think so. The movie itself tries to rationalize their choice of denying Christ and ties itself in knots doing so, as if what they did was somehow okay in their circumstance. Not only did they reject their own martyrs crown but they didn't let their japanese followers receive a martry's crown either.
>But everyone who denies me here on earth, I will also deny before my Father in heaven.
Hollywood doesn't really understand martyrdom or how anyone could have such faith (like the real historical martyrs in Nagasaki) so it tries to make movies to rationalize it.

APOSTASISE

You sound autistic, the whole point of the film is questioning the logic of martyrdom, not sucking martydom's cock. Garfield survives, he lives. Everyone else he knew was killed by their beliefs but he survived and felt shitty for it. He wrestles with if he made the right choice. Can't really perpetuate your beliefs if you get killed for them, kiddo.

>Hollywood doesn't really understand martyrdom
Probably because martyrdom is retarded.

I've stopped for a bit because I need to do stuff but as a chinese japanese speaker, I'm very impressed by the settings
St. Paul's College in Macau seemed like it was faithfully replicated and the japanese jesuit bumoing into a person at the tavern which caused the guy to ask him "what are you doing?!" in cantonese felt right

Was the Japanese speech have English subtitles?

I watched this in Japan so I only understood when they spoke English

sometimes it did, sometimes it didn't

That would depend on whether or not those being tortured/killed are other self-professed Christians.

If they are, going apostate serves no purpose, as suffering and death are part of all men's due on Earth.

If they aren't, then your willful refusal is condemning other souls to Hell. Render unto Caesar's that which is Caesar's.

no waifu-bait either.

There is no single message of this movie, after Garfield's apostasy the movie is in coda mode. The final ten minutes are for you to reflect on what being a good, bad, or any sort of Christian is without the movie showing you what these men truly believed in their years as apostates.

That's basically what I said...

...

No it isn't... sweetie...
You said the rest of the movie was him wrestling with doubt and put forward ideas of what he was thinking. I'm saying the movie didn't tell us anything, it gave us sequences to ponder on without telling us what the characters were thinking at all. There was no ambiguity on the virtue of martyrdom, Driver did much more for Christians than Garfield did, it's more about what being a Christian is and can be, how far it can be stretched.

>You said the rest of the movie was him wrestling with doubt and put forward ideas of what he was thinking
The doubt at the end is literally the uncertainty with the message you stupid retard.
>There was no ambiguity on the virtue of martyrdom
Yes...there is. It's the entire point of the movie.

Holy shut, bud. Did you really not understand the film at all? The whole thing was to make you question the virtues of...well...Christian virtues.

>There was no ambiguity on the virtue of martyrdom
Literally was the point of the movie, that there is. Why can't people understand or handle nuance anymore? It's like capeshit has rotted all your brains into literalists.

All the characters who martyred themselves were unambiguously heroic. The questions were about asking others to be martyrs was the question. People who refused to be martyrs were not necessarily seen as bad, just ambiguous. The question wasn't if martyrdom was bad, it was if not-martyrdom is good. Quit having fat Black cocks up your asses just because you can do baby's first thematic reading.

Great movie but Portuguese aren't white

>All the characters who martyred themselves were unambiguously heroic
Says you, the movie doesn't. The movie is literally the question of the virtue of martyrdom. Just because you personally are a christcuck who likes the idea of suicide for a religion, doesn't mean the film does. The film is not telling you how to feel about martrydom you halfwit.

>The question wasn't if martyrdom was bad, it was if not-martyrdom is good
You sound seriously retarded, matey.

t. Alberto Barbossa

The drama of the movie came from witnessing extreme examples and frequencies or martyrdom, it was about the struggling to maintain faith while enduring God's silence. Garfield was broken after his apostasy, even if he kept his crucifix.
There's nothing less valuable than someone who can only insult people. You're a hack.

>The drama of the movie came from witnessing extreme examples and frequencies or martyrdom, it was about the struggling to maintain faith while enduring God's silence.
Half right. But again, the movie is built in a way to make you question of "is martydom worth it?" You are an enormous idiot if you missed this blatant narrative message.

I cringed everytime they said Father Ferreira.

>I'm Portuguese

Otherwise, a great movie.

No, he became a true martyr and not a poser fame seeker.

It was probably my favorite movie that year

I watched it in theaters on opening day and there was only one other guy there. Yet the latest capeshit will have full house.
Silence was Kino.

>people like movies about their own culture
>people don't like movies about cultures they hate

I think the implication is that by apostatizing you would be abandoning the other people. They would see it as God abandoning them or see that it is okay to apostatize themselves. I don't think it is as simple as making it a utilitarian discussion. Though the pride question is one that I think the film made quite explicit.

I was at the second showing in my city and there were 6 people there

>I literally hate Jews to the point where I can't watch a movie about Jews without making ten spam threads
>but the same persecution film is fine when Christians do it!
You are a hypocrite, it's ok.

I have seen some people saying that the movie is morally ambiguous. It's not. Japanese are wrong in this movie. They are evil. In the name of defending their culture they violated universal human right

>I hate Jewish culture.
>I think this is rational.

Just got on this sub. Whats kino mean specifically (or slang) in this context?

Then you are dumb.

>illegally enter a country that doesn't want you there to spread your cult beliefs forcibly on a people who don't want you around
>repeatedly ask Christians to leave, they don't
>get surprised that Christians are killed

Its slang for interracial porn. In this case gay interracial between the White man and the Japanese.

Every Asian sees the tiny bit of Asia shown in the movies.
T. Taiwanese.

Kino
Cinema
Film
Movie
Flick
Joint

Universal human rights didn't exist in this time period, also the "universal" human rights were decided on by Western governments based on Western culture and ideals.

>only the West came up with the concept of human rights
Do Sup Forumsfaggots really believe this?

the inquisitor jails and tortures his own people. It's not ok even in the name of national security.

Pretty bad desu, and I'm honestly not trying to be controversial.

The movie was paced like Age of Ultron or something. It was just awful. It's not that it was unnecessarily drawn out (though it was), it was just poorly structured. I suspect this was an aesthetic choice made to distort the viewer's sense of time, but it was way off mark for me.

I thought the movie's thematic content didn't go far beyond the same hoary old Catholic themes I've seen/read/heard literally hundreds of times before (the character of Kichijiro was particularly egregious in this regard).

Neeson was seriously underwhelming, and Garfield's performance was absurd and totally lacking in subtlety. The bizarre pseudo-Portuguese accents they chose for the two leads was ridiculous to the point of being laughable.

The movie didn't really show 'colonialists' as good guys, since a) missionaries weren't colonialists by most reasonable definitions of the term, and missionaries to Japan *certainly* weren't, and b) Inoue had time to say his piece at the end, and his point of view certainly wasn't presented unsympathetically. I think the viewer is supposed to consider the fact that Japan's more recent (20th century) prosperity was tied to its ability to keep Western influences out for so long.

I mean, I agree with what you're saying, but something about this defeatist attitude is pissing me off right now. It's probably just because the thread actually got replies.

Also, if you think this movie has a 'pro-trad' message, or whatever, you must have fetal alcohol syndrome or something.

I doubt it was bias, it's just industry shit. It got nominated for best cinematography. It's likely that most Academy members just didn't like it. Critics seemed to generally enjoy it, but the fact that it didn't do too well commercially likely played a role in its being snubbed totally. The Academy seem to care about such things.

The U.S. killed two of its own citizens and his 16-year old son (separately, he wasn't with his dad) back in 2011. Look it up.

This isn't including prisoners who get the death penalty, either. In Japan, it was a crime to be Christian. The inquisitor was jailing and torturing his own people, sure, but in Spain the Inquisition at that time was still officially going, and it hadn't declined sharply yet like it did in the 18th century.

The shit Inoue did in Silence wasn't evil at all, by the standards of pretty much every other state on the planet, from the Mughals to the Ethiopians to the Bourbons or Cromwell's England.

>implying you are ok with what the Inquisitor was doing
ok. Universal human right only applied to the west . But this movie is an American movie. the movie never asked us to justify the tortured the Japanese committed

Underrated post.

It's doubly weird when you consider who directed it

As if he's a small time nobody or something.

Also I am now aware Driver is actually a great fucking actor. I wanna see that shit with him and Tatum.

>Critics seemed to generally enjoy it, but the fact that it didn't do too well commercially likely played a role in its being snubbed totally. The Academy seem to care about such things.
Since when does the academy care about what does well commercially? They are famous for being out of touch with that kind of shit

>Libcuck thinks that his tears will change history
Rest of the world just accepted those rights.

Gotta agree with /ourguy/ on Silence.

I heard that was through and through god awful

Should I give it a torrent?

They are all evil and in violation of universal human rights.

If not why do we even bother. We can all go back to do whatever we want.

>It's doubly weird when you consider who directed it
the guy who directed kundun & The Last Temptation of Christ? lol

No, the guy who directed Goodfellas and The Wolf of Wall Street!
I kept waiting for the Rolling Stones to start playing and a murder-montage to break out lol

Saw this movie with my mom. I was going to go on my own but when I mentioned it to her she was interested in going. She was expecting some sort of feel-good type religious movie. If it weren't for the fact that I drove her there she probably would have walked out.

youtube.com/watch?v=c6bIV1U85kY

Man, that Adam Driver-looking guy in this review seems salty as fuck about this movie.

When I say they care, I mean they tend to care about whether a movie is profitable. I don't mean they like a movie when it's particularly profitable, though frequently they do (e.g. Titanic, Avatar being nominated)

>everyone who disagrees with me is a libcuck!
What you are saying doesn't make ajy sense, mate.

it's worth watching for the cinematography alone.

I can't get a clear answer from the thread. are the Christians shown to be good, evil, or just in a subjective way?

>Adam Driver-looking guy
he looks like mickey mouse

perfect

watch the film you fucking faggot

watch it yourself, we can't answer for you since it means different things to different people

so it's subjective then?

there's clear villains/protagonists in this movie (as they're portrayed) but when you question the motives on what happened historically and this movie you sort of understand it from both sides

This film did a great job taking a scene of a character telling the audience about a philosophical/religious problem and making it a bombshell moment. I guess I hadn't read up on my theology enough for this kino, because the whole concept that the Japanese had been misinterpreting the meaning of God/Deus was a great twist. Really the whole dilemma throughout the movie was a compelling one. To believe in the Christian God, don't you necessarily also believe that God holds dominion over the whole world? Can you allow for some parts of the world to exist outside of that dominion? The concept of Ferrera and Rodriguez losing their faith the moment they are confronted with the failure to spread Christianity was powerful.
What did Rodriguez believe in the end?

The Christians are definitely not shown to be evil, I can say that much with certainty.