Sicario (2015)
- Thread starter Rathgar_sl
- Start date
Arbitrary
Tranny Chaser
- 27,092
- 71,701
Everyone does a good job, it looks good, the soundtrack is good, and a lot of the film is very good but overall the story is just kinda weak. Emily Blunt's character is too naive and too idealistic over what really isn't all that big a deal. She takes stands at different points in the movie that I can't really get behind given the circumstances. Really, you're going to tell a CIA spook to his face that you're going to tattle on him? Her character has this weird arc where she starts out as a FBI badass that leads her own team of operators and by the end of the movie she's a scared little girl. It's like she performed a reverse Ripley. I think that a recut of the movie and focused on Benicio Del Toro's character would have been something I would have liked more. His performance and his character do all the heavy lifting.
It's stillwellinto the Good category. It just could have been a 10/10 with a little better story instead of the 8/10 we got. It doesn'tquiteall come together but everything else is so good it makes for it.
It's stillwellinto the Good category. It just could have been a 10/10 with a little better story instead of the 8/10 we got. It doesn'tquiteall come together but everything else is so good it makes for it.
chaos
Buzzfeed Editor
- 17,324
- 4,839
I get where they were trying to go with it. As much of a badass as she is, she can't operate in this environment and in fact people like her make the problem worse. Through no fault of their own, they are trying to operate by a code of law against an enemy who has no respect for that. But yeah, ultimately they could have done a little better with that.
Arbitrary
Tranny Chaser
- 27,092
- 71,701
She's an FBI agent that leads a kidnap response team. We see what her team looks like at the open. That is a crew of operators that she leads. For her to have earned that position and to have done so as a woman would mean she was tougher than a coffin nail. For the rest of the film we never see her as the character that could have accomplished that. One of the first things she does is pitch a fit when two car fulls of armed gunmen that are flanking the convoy she's on get shot dead with zero civilian casualties on a mission that had approval and support from the Mexican government.
The two people on her team (herteam) that got killed are not ever brought up again. Maybe make that a bigger deal? She's young and those are the first people she lost and she lost them in a booby trapped house that was full of corpses. That's some horrific shit. It's never brought up past the opening 12 minutes. She goes on to never really see or do much of anything.
The two people on her team (herteam) that got killed are not ever brought up again. Maybe make that a bigger deal? She's young and those are the first people she lost and she lost them in a booby trapped house that was full of corpses. That's some horrific shit. It's never brought up past the opening 12 minutes. She goes on to never really see or do much of anything.
Gask
Bronze Baron of the Realm
- 11,895
- 44,971
From my point of view this wasn't a movie in the usual sense, it was more of a statement about how things can truly function when the decision is made somewhere. It wasn't entertainment. At least I didn't find it to be as none of the characters were particularly sympathetic and as such there was no suspense when they faced danger despite their best efforts (the music in the tunnel scene defined heavy handed). Instead of any sort of build up we were left in the dark just as much as the protagonist and so there was nothing to really ponder over or anticipate; we were just along for the ride like she was. Her character wasn't meant to be anything more than a foil to this other side of the government. It was partly effective but terrible from an entertainment standpoint.
Where the film failed for me was the lack of challenge it presented to the audience; if you are going to make a film like this then it should evoke some hard questions and real thought. In the end the only people who got hurt on film were presented as scum or connected to them so who cares, aside from a small mention about the Medell?n Cartel there were no other implications or consequences to ponder beyond the protagonist's vague and ineffectual grumblings. It was weak.
Where the film failed for me was the lack of challenge it presented to the audience; if you are going to make a film like this then it should evoke some hard questions and real thought. In the end the only people who got hurt on film were presented as scum or connected to them so who cares, aside from a small mention about the Medell?n Cartel there were no other implications or consequences to ponder beyond the protagonist's vague and ineffectual grumblings. It was weak.
- 5,660
- 6,178
Fucking FINALLY able to watch the movie, after saying earlier in this thread I would for sure see it in theaters. Watched it with some family here for the holidays and after banishing an annoying family member who wouldn't shut the fuck up during the movie, I really enjoyed it. It has that same kind of dark "Prisoners" or "Zodiac" vibe to it (same director from Prisoners). My only real complaint:
Think the story let the movie down a little on the back half, but the cinematography was absolutely beautiful. The gorgeous south/west Texas & Arizona skies, similar to scenes from No Country For Old Men and There Will Be Blood. Definitely recommended.
The Bridge scene was absolutely phenomenal, the whole Juarez extraction was just incredibly tense. I went back and watched it multiple times. Posting it in spoiler.
At one point, unless I am dreaming, Del Toro says in the briefing room before the Juarez extraction that he was ex-Colombian enforcer. So I felt it made it too obvious what was going on.
The Bridge scene was absolutely phenomenal, the whole Juarez extraction was just incredibly tense. I went back and watched it multiple times. Posting it in spoiler.
I do agree with this sentiment, although I do believe it was still decently entertaining even from a film perspective. It is certainly carried by the way it was shot, and some sobering realism that this is the way the world works. I agree with Arbitary where this could've been a 10/10 film, instead we got a not quite as great 8/10. Still very much worth watching.
chaos
Buzzfeed Editor
- 17,324
- 4,839
Man I had a big ass post typed out but on reflection yeah, i think they missed a huge opportunity with this movie now. Replace Benicio with someone else and this movie immediately drops a grade or two. Still a good movie but there is so much they want to imply and don't quite get across that it leaves you wondering wtf.
Fight
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 4,565
- 5,370
No, he says he was a mexican prosecutor (i.e. lawyer), now he goes where he is sent, and most recently was sent from Cartagena.
I liked the movie more than I thought I would; I also concur with all the statements about Blunt's char. Even assuming you were absolutely dead set on "doing it by the book", there are so many times where it's obvious that her pie in the sky brand of law doesn't at all work for the shit they need to do, and that everyone who is connected to her and above has given the go ahead for everything. She is on a raft by herself, in extremely dangerous situations. As mentioned, if she had all this experience that she was leading her own team, it should have been obvious to the char that a breakdown on her part could not only endanger herself, but everyone else involved.
I found the whole thing really far fetched, and sort of contrived. Like she was just there for comparison or something.
But still really liked it. The last few scenes with Del Toro were really money.
I found the whole thing really far fetched, and sort of contrived. Like she was just there for comparison or something.
But still really liked it. The last few scenes with Del Toro were really money.
Mahes
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 4,699
- 5,365
Since anybody can watch this movie at yifitv, I am not going to bother spoiling stuff at this point. There were parts in this movie that were perfect and other parts that confused me. As others have stated, Emily Blunt's character was the focus of most of the confusing parts. It was as if she was two different people in the same role. I could see how her character would fall apart but surely she would not have been so naive as to not understand what was going on. Her reaction to the car scene was really awful. The only thing I can figure is that perhaps that reaction was an extension of the house scene. Given the close proximity of both events, it could be she had not fully recovered from losing two people on her watch. I was hoping she was going to pull that trigger at the end. That was a serious mind fuck to have a guy on your side threatening to off you and make it seem like a suicide. This after he shot her twice and she still let him walk.
I liked the movie as it shows the brutality that occurs in Mexico and is spilling into our country.
I liked the movie as it shows the brutality that occurs in Mexico and is spilling into our country.
- 3,104
- 2,711
I think a lot of you guys are kinda missing the point of Blunt's character. She is you. Well the general movie going audience. Soccer moms and pastors, dudebro's and cat ladies. Sally Q Public. People who's first and only thought on the war on drugs is that drugs are bad so they should be illegal and has never given that line of reasoning a moment's consideration for the utter chaos and shit that it is responsible for.
She represents the naivety of that simplistic view on drug prohibition and as the story unfolds she maintains this willful ignorance/naivety to the consequences all around her, despite the fact that she should wake up an accept the shit that is happening she refuses to do so. Just like american's do to the horrors and futility of the war on drugs. The apocalypse now comparison is an apt one. This isn't a movie about the war on drugs itself, hundreds of films and documentaries have been made showing every aspect of it and it's effects on the world we live in, this is a film about the costs of waging a "war" we have no means of ever winning, that was never meant to be won. It's about the fatalistic acceptance that our best case scenario is some jaded nostalgia of "order", moving the "front lines" of the war off of our door step and back to Colombia, which is itself an impossible task. (this only applies to people in the heartland, the urban communities will always be the frontlines since the war on drugs is responsible for the gangs and gang violence which have claimed the inner cities).
In the end she is forced to swallow it, everything. She is forced at gunpoint to sign an approval of everything that happened, she must acknowledge that her beliefs and the futility of them is complicit in all of this shit. She is traumatized by the events but she never takes a critical look at herself and her culpability in what happened. she does not mature or change. That is the point.
She represents the naivety of that simplistic view on drug prohibition and as the story unfolds she maintains this willful ignorance/naivety to the consequences all around her, despite the fact that she should wake up an accept the shit that is happening she refuses to do so. Just like american's do to the horrors and futility of the war on drugs. The apocalypse now comparison is an apt one. This isn't a movie about the war on drugs itself, hundreds of films and documentaries have been made showing every aspect of it and it's effects on the world we live in, this is a film about the costs of waging a "war" we have no means of ever winning, that was never meant to be won. It's about the fatalistic acceptance that our best case scenario is some jaded nostalgia of "order", moving the "front lines" of the war off of our door step and back to Colombia, which is itself an impossible task. (this only applies to people in the heartland, the urban communities will always be the frontlines since the war on drugs is responsible for the gangs and gang violence which have claimed the inner cities).
In the end she is forced to swallow it, everything. She is forced at gunpoint to sign an approval of everything that happened, she must acknowledge that her beliefs and the futility of them is complicit in all of this shit. She is traumatized by the events but she never takes a critical look at herself and her culpability in what happened. she does not mature or change. That is the point.
Vulg
Golden Knight of the Realm
- 245
- 173
I think this nails it. I spoilered it in my earlier post in the thread because the movie was so new at the time, but this is what I said about her character: "You feel for Blunt as she devolves from a top agent with great instincts to somebody who tries to cling to some semblance of morality while getting played badly".
The contrast between how strong and badass she is early vs. how helpless she was by the end was pretty cool, with Del Toro offering the perfect juxtaposition in the closing scenes.
I was actually reminded of Nicholson's famous scene from A Few Good Men when the movie ended, since Blunt basically lived through the 'grotesque existence' that Nicholson was trying to convey to Cruise when he said "you don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall -- you need me on that wall."
I enjoy strong character development in a movie, but having a person with relatable morals and values dropped into an extreme situation and watching them get excruciatingly fucked with was refreshing and interesting.
Arbitrary
Tranny Chaser
- 27,092
- 71,701
I get that she's the audience perspective character. The problem is they wrote her as the leader of a FBI kidnapping response team and after the first 12 minutes of the movie not only is her backstory not relevant anymore but her actions are mostly incongruent with what we are told about the character. We never see the person that was so tough and so good that she was able to achieve what she achieved and do it as a woman. She doesn't hardly seeanythinghappen. Her morality is never on the line. Then she cries and the movie ends. Either she needed to go through some horrible shit (stuff more like what happened to her in the open) or she needed a different backstory. Writing her as a mega hard ass makes her emotional decay absurd.
Lanx
<Prior Amod>
- 60,600
- 132,620
She's supposed to be a badass leader, even in the meetings to recruit her, we see them play her up. Then she just becomes jelly and more jelly with every scene. Blunt plays her well, but i believe the character was horribly written wrong, or re-written many times, as her character is the worst one.
The whole tunnel scene was a whole gaggle of fuck ups, just on her.
The whole tunnel scene was a whole gaggle of fuck ups, just on her.
Szlia
Member
- 6,560
- 1,318
Spoiler alert obviously.
My gut feeling is that there must be a version of the scenario where Del Toro's character is the main protagonist. I mean, he is the titular character and is the only one with a back story and personal motivations. From there, to take some distance from an ambiguous main character, they added a kind of Watson: a squeaky clean, point of view character, with the added benefit of now having someone that discovers things like the viewer does. For additional contrast and to avoid a sausage fest, they made that character a female.
The problem is that they need a justification for the presence of the character. They try to be clever with it, with an official one (she is very good / task force) and officious one (someone with the proper jurisdiction is needed to sign papers), but they quickly forget the 'she is very good' part, they add a double crossing sub-plot where she is both a damsel in distress and a bait and finally they decide to forget about this whole POV thing and keep the grand finale from the first version of the script.
It's all a bit strange.
My gut feeling is that there must be a version of the scenario where Del Toro's character is the main protagonist. I mean, he is the titular character and is the only one with a back story and personal motivations. From there, to take some distance from an ambiguous main character, they added a kind of Watson: a squeaky clean, point of view character, with the added benefit of now having someone that discovers things like the viewer does. For additional contrast and to avoid a sausage fest, they made that character a female.
The problem is that they need a justification for the presence of the character. They try to be clever with it, with an official one (she is very good / task force) and officious one (someone with the proper jurisdiction is needed to sign papers), but they quickly forget the 'she is very good' part, they add a double crossing sub-plot where she is both a damsel in distress and a bait and finally they decide to forget about this whole POV thing and keep the grand finale from the first version of the script.
It's all a bit strange.
