Just saw it, a good but not great film. Stuff like the portugese characters speaking english and tons of japs being fluent in it made it feel a little hokey. I would also have prefered if Garfield's loss of faith was left ambiguous but maybe that's just me.
Atheist by the way, since faith is pretty relevant to the topic of the movie.
just watched this yesterday too. It seems Garfield gave up on his accent about two thirds into the movie. It was worth a watch if you like to watch movies, but if you're not a devout movie watcher i wouldn't recommend it.
Garfield's narration kind of hampered my enjoyment of it.
He's just not very good at it.
My mom thought the protagonist was a prideful stubborn idiot.
Will she ever understand?
huge scorsese apologist and christian here - this movie wasnt good at all. it had such potential, but scorsese botched it in almost every possible way. some of the worst casting i've ever seen in a major film. the dialogue is clunky and ineffective. somehow, scorsese manages to avoid ever establishing a strong mood despite filming almost entirely in beautiful locations. honestly, i think he was out of his depth.
if you think shes wrong, she understands better than you
He was more cowardly than anything else.
no kidding, idk how you can misinterpret the film that egregiously. garfield's character spends the entirety of the movie pre-apostasy persisting in his behavior out of pride. he is emblematic of the problem with many missionaries throughout history -- what is important to him is not truly spreading the gospel for its own sake, for the sake of love for his fellow man and god, but for pride and personal fulfillment. only when he accepts that committing apostasy and relegating himself to a life of private faith divorced from pride does he become truly faithful. he spends the entire movie making others suffer because of his pride and blind, dogmatic interpretation of faith.
It would have been so much better had Scorsese been able to cast Benecio Del Toro and Daniel Day Lewis instead of the teenage heartthrobs. I feel bad for Scorsese. He'd been working on making that movie happen for more than 10 years.
The Portuguese characters speak English BECAUSE THERE ARE NO PORTUGUESE ACTORS GOOD ENOUGH FOR THAT FILM, FILHO DE TRINTA PUTAS! AND WE ARE NOT USING FICKING BRAZILLIANS! AND DON'T BOTHER LOOKING FOR PORTUGUESE DUBBED VERSION, BECAUSE THAT DOES NOT EXIST, WE AREN'T FUCKING SAVAGES!
filhos da puta, realmente...
They're both way too old though. Driver was perfectly fine, and Garfield, uhh could've been worse I guess
the protagonidt didn't know better, he thought he was doing the correct thing to do until the jap emperor opened his eyes about japanese spiritualism and culture and show him Liam Neeson had surrendered too.
I disagree on the last part, showing that Garfield kept his faith makes it clear what his motivation was to surrender against the japs, and living that ambiguous adds nothing to the movie
Holy fuck how can you misunderstand a film so badly
>the protagonidt didn't know better, he thought he was doing the correct thing to do until the jap emperor opened his eyes about japanese spiritualism and culture and show him Liam Neeson had surrendered too.
This isn't what happened.
no, if you are a catholic priest spreading the word of god is your duty, you are offering salvation and eternal love. You just can't leave someone out of it because they belong to a different culture if you are 100% sure your god is the one and only true god.
It's sort of a film about a conversion of a Catholic Pharisee -- to the religion of a Shinto Pharisee. There's not much reference to the New Testament in the film.
What purpose do you think Kichijiro served in the plot? His entire character existed solely to explain the nuance you are overlooking. What you say is not necessarily false in the eyes of Garfield's character, but that does not mean that his particular approach to his faith throughout the film (pre-apostasy) is not prideful and, ultimately, in the eyes of the film, wrong. This is exactly the purpose of Garfield's monologue about how he is disgusted by Kichijiro -- Kichijiro commits apostasy willingly, over and over, turns Garfield's character in, does nothing but commit cowardly acts that undercut the spread of the one true faith. Yet, despite all of this, Garfield's character must love him. He still believes, fundamentally, and his apostasy and cowardly acts do not cancel out or contradict his faith. By refusing to commit apostasy, even when faced with the concrete reality that by doing so he is causing other believers, other men that he must love, he is exposing the fact that his spreading of the gospel, his spreading of the one and only true God, is not motivated by eternal love but in fact by pride.
>By refusing to commit apostasy, even when faced with the concrete reality that by doing so he is causing other believers, other men that he must love, he is exposing the fact that his spreading of the gospel, his spreading of the one and only true God, is not motivated by eternal love but in fact by pride.
I just realized I erroneously wrote this ambiguously. I am referring to Garfield's character here, and Kichijiro in the previous sentence.
>He still believes, fundamentally, and his apostasy and cowardly acts do not cancel out or contradict his faith.
Well even the Devils believe...
>You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.
James 2:19
Don't like how they portrayed the Japanese as the villains
not a fan of scorsese and edgelord here - this film was perfect in every way. best casting ever. the dialogue was really meaningful, i found. somehow, scorsese managed to create strong moods in locations which were really lacking. honestly, i'm starting to think he's a genius.
I just wish it slowed down to develop Driver+Garfield... The scenes when they're hiding out together could have had a lot more tension. We could've got to know both characters and their views on religion, but there just didn't seem to be time.
Driver also ends up dying for that random chick --why wouldn't they do something to build suspense there, or at least foreshadow his fate?
>faith
>without dogma
Well this is bloody rich.
Scorsese is one of those directors that never loses sight of his protagonist...that is a very refreshing thing these days when everyone and no one is viewed as the protagonist of a film. Garfield had a lot to convey with his character but not much to react to. Father Rodrigues' field of vision should have included some political intelligence -- no one is ever just a priest, or just a cop -- yet he fumbles through the conversation with Ferreira at the end,
More like Jap-ocalypse Now.
Has anyone here read the book? It's on my to do list.
I only have mastery of about 300 chinese characters
>faith, belief
>dogma, authoritative
It's been translated I believe.
Dogma is an essential part of faith, but a blind adherence to a particular dogmatic interpretation can lead any believer astray. Distilling the point down to "faith without dogma lol yeah right" is an oversimplification so vast it's meaningless. Debate about faith and belief will go nowhere without nuance.
Even as a big fan of Tadanobu Asano and Shinya Tsukamoto, it was difficult to stay in the theater until the end. What a boring piece of shit.
>mfw scorsese will never have the talent of his favorite japanese directors
>truly faithful
>Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
it's pseudo kino. the movie is terrible. none of the emotion it wants you to feel materializes. the talking jesus was so fucking cringey.
It was a masterpiece and all of you complaining are just Sup Forums contrarian faggots who are looking for a reason to show that they're "smart"
>he reads books in translation
it came out in the wrong time period
it would have been appreciated more a couple of decades ago
PAY FOR MY APOSTACY
>that english
>just now learning that Sup Forums is full of underage contrarian autists and literal pedophiles
It is a masterpiece though
lmao @ these people in this thread claiming that Rodriguez was responsible for people being killed because he didn't commit apostasy
>the protagonidt didn't know better, he thought he was doing the correct thing to do until the jap emperor opened his eyes about japanese spiritualism and culture and show him Liam Neeson had surrendered too.
good catholic movie.
The way that they conveniently left out the fact that Christians were being persecuted because they rebelled against the Shogun seemed needlessly misleading.
>best casting ever
I can't be the only one who thinks Garfield is fucking awful, correct?
The movie fails where a movie like the mission succeed.
Instead of helping the people, the jesuites in the movie are a burden to the japanese. They contribute in nothing apart from religion. Instead they are quite parasitic, they require food , put them in danger and gigantic pressure both from god and their daymio. And they re so stubborn they can't acknowledge the politic point of view from the japanese leaders. In the end, it try hard to depict the jesuite as good guys but proves the opposite. well that's how i pierceved it and why i disliked it.
>waaaaaaah
Fucking weebs
wasn't that the whole point?
as i said, i think the point of the movie was to show the jesuites as good guy.
It failed
>can only think in terms of "good guy" and "bad guy"
Stick to capeshit, brainlet
Can't you read ? I'm not saying reality is, that s what the movie was trying to do. Reality is always complex. But the details the movie was using was manichean, the suffering, the ending, the epilogue. It clearly wanted to show them as a kind of heroes, but if you look at the fact beyond those artifice they were only stubborn and parasitic
>Step on me. I share your pain.
Its told from the point of view of the jesuits, its literally their story. What is left to the viewer is to look beyond the direct things the narrator gives you and see the truth kf their actions. How scorsese pulls back the envelope as the movie progresses is masterful, as it mirrors the realisations of the missionaries, and their understanding of the situation.
God this movie was so fucking boring it felt like it dragged on for that fucking 3rd act should have ended when he found Qui-Gon at the end
You can't narrate a story "litteraly", you always take a side. It is not a documentary, as for the scene you show, or even the music you use. A funny exemple abusing this is starship troopers.
Scorcese is a catholic and didn't chose that story randomly, hell, i think he even say in the epilogue it's a tribute to those jesuite or something. Maybe he wanted to shed some light on their unknown story because he think they deserve it. But when i see the movie, apart from their suffering they were only detrimental. I think a movie like "the mission" is what scorcese had in mind when making his movie.
this thread is really awesome it's making me think a lot about various things