Sadly Over-hyped

Pretty Good

Let's be realistic.

This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

Many of you may know that I am not a massive fan of Scorsese unlike most aficionados. In addition, you may have acknowledged the fact that I also dislike long runtimes. Silence is, ironically, directed by Scorsese and boasts a 160 minute theatrical length. Much to my surprise, this was absolutely gorgeous. Two missionaries journey to Japan in search for their missing mentor who has been captured. The Shimabara Rebellion is an important event in religious history. The suppression of Roman Catholicism in 17th Century Japan, a religion deemed dangerous by high-ranking indigenous officials. Scorsese, along with Cocks' screenplay, managed to craft a thematic adaptation that encapsulates the utmost cinematic quality. Conveying the power of religious devotion without glorifying martyrdom was always a difficult task. Resorting to blood and violence would've been easy, yet Scorsese instead focused on the everlasting conflict in human nature. Rodrigues, played enigmatically by Garfield, is pure. Forever devoted to his faith and spreading his beliefs of Catholicism to the Japanese peasants. Even during ultimatums that could result in death, he remained defiant. But the relentless acts of torture and martyrs sacrificing themselves in the name of God started to taint his ideologies. Questioning the very existence of his religion. The visual storytelling and minimal dialogue eloquently hones in on the emotion of self-doubt. You can visualise the inner torment within these characters of having to renounce Christianity. Apostatising or disaffiliating one's self from faith feels like death in itself to these individuals. Utterly powerful. Driver and Neeson both act as valuable assets in personifying the power of religion, platforming Garfield to scenes of pure emotional vulnerability. The supporting Japanese cast all performed well, although certain translations may have needed subtitles due to the lack of clear pronunciation, was slightly difficult to articulate. Prieto's cinematography was spellbinding. The darkened blue nights to the vivid green forests all captured the aesthetic beauty of rural Japan. The absence of a musical score surprised me, and felt like a double-edged sword. It managed to enhance the tension, particularly during the long takes of peasants being strapped to wooden crosses waiting for the crashing waves of the sea to drain their remaining energy. But simultaneously it reduced the cinematic presence of the film. Emotional resonance was subdued to the lack of instrumentality, and I do view that as a flaw. A few minor criticisms here and there, but for a project that has nearly spanned two decades, Scorsese should be proud. A passion project that raises fundamental questions whilst also producing a coherently beautiful story. I was silenced throughout.

In 2016 Martin Scorsese produces, writes and directs a film that was completely snubbed by both the public at the box office and the Academy Awards, despite the discrete criticism it has received. Silence cost 46 million dollars and earns only 7 at the American box office, a film that certainly deserved greater consideration but the duration of 2 hours and 40 certainly did not favor it. A really long time for a film with a very challenging plot, taken from the novel of the same name, which is however managed impeccably, so much so that time runs without this being felt, thanks to a great atmosphere that makes immediate the immersion in the film by the viewer. Of course the plot, and it can be seen even just seeing the dimensions of the book from which it is taken, is very diluted but this does not affect at all because in the most static moments, silent or anyway in which the story suffers a slight arrest, the viewer can enjoy the magnificent artistic component that makes "Silence" a real painting to be admired constantly. Thanks to a cinematography that is able to cleverly exploit the light and colors that enhance the fascinating and evocative scenographies that are the background to a story that otherwise could have been uninteresting. Admirable Scorsese's ability to make the whole film a great testimony of the Christian Church accessible and appreciable even by those who, like the undersigned, do not share its ideals but nevertheless can not remain charmed, almost envious, for the protagonists of the story paintings with great respect and admiration by the director himself. A directing from a technical point of view that is simply perfect, with intelligent camera angles and movements and extremely functional long shots, but what is missing is a greater thrust on emotions and feelings that are represented but that can not pierce the screen, probably also because of the script, obviously pretentious and introspective (positive aspects for this type of film), but that fails to excite as much as a story like this could have done, perhaps even for some slightly predictable steps and some redundancies avoidable. This is also due to the somewhat restrained interpretations, almost detached by Adam Driver, which I found subdued, and by Liam Neeson who could have given much more. While Andrew Garfield confirms his great talent again giving body and soul to a role that is anything but simple to interpret.

...or just life.for me, it is an experience more than a film. motifs - "Silence" was the occasion to discover Martin Scorsese. sure, it was not the first film by him who I saw. but it was The Film. the key. second, for Andrew Garfield. it is one of my favorit actors. I believe in his huge/admirable talent. but in this film, his work is more than a confirmation. not the last, for me "Silence" is the precise history of Christianity. rises. and falls. martyrs and the inner faith . the prices. and the gestures. the words. and the heavy duty of the priest. in same measure, it reminds to me the history of Greek Orthodox church in Japan, from the saint hierarch Nikolay Kasatkin and his fellows to our period. not the least, it is a film like a confession . to the viewer. against apparences. or illusions. a film who has its public who is not a target, not the circle around blockbusters, not the elite of many religious films. sure, for a part of viewers, it is a good adaptation of novel. but, if you see it time by time, you understand. the film. and the novel. not as a story from XVII century. not as moral lesson. not as pledge for a cause. but an exercise to give to yourself. the right answer.

There are two ways to review this movie:1. Cinematografic POV: The film is quite long so there are scenes that are "little boring" or repeating. Acting is quite good but I got the feeling that it could be beter or maybe more emphasized. Photography and scenes are great, real, but not spectacular. Rating 72. Plot/Story POV: maybe all of the "negative" impressions stated in above comment were intended so that the focus would be on the story! It happened to me while watching the movie that when I thought the scene was "boring", too long, repeating, not spectacular .. that immediatelly made me change the focus on the whole story - you are constantly forced to think about the meaning of the religion, existence, beliefs,.... And this is great!! It is very powerful and meaningful movie so don't be mislead by those who just watch movies for entertainment and give bad reviews. Sometimes we have to consider that the movie does not have to be great from all points of view to be excellent.... Rating: 9Btw, I am an atheist and from my point of view it made me even more convinced about my feelings. I think that some religions has provoked too much damage in the history of the humanity, it has lost its true nature and it is misused.But nevertheless, i enjoyed the movie and I sincerelly respect Scorsese for his effort and also for his beliefs!