Thursday, 15 March 2018
You Were Never Really Here (2017)
Let's get to the point, I'm disappointed. Joaquin Phoenix as a gun for hire specialising in retrieving children from sex trafficking. Sounds hard hitting right? Eh.
So the premise was enough to intrigue me, awful topics always do. But it's not thaaaaat bad? Of course it is, some big 'important' men are swaping children, that's horific, but it never really hit me. I might be harden by other film/documentaries handling the topic in a heavier way but it didn't quite sicken me. I know, it sounds ridiculous. But I was expecting to wince, to squirm in my seat to be uncomfortable. Some people have been. But personally, sounds awful but with a topic that sensitive it wasn't as heavy as it could have been. I think part of this is due to the rating. It's a 15 in the UK, that has some restrictions though all cut's of the film passed. I missed the violence. Along with the abuse themes the violence was often implied instead of shown. Seeing clips of Phoenix as our main man Joe tentatively selecting which hammer to use gave me a bizarre sense of expectation that didn't follow through. I understand not using violence just for the sake of violence but the main character is described as a gun for hire. There are some graphic images yes but depending on how much violence you've seen in the past I don't believe it would be as jarring as it would to others.
A big selling point for me was Phoenix. His stary eyes yo. The character wasn't what I was anticipating. They gave him a softer side, made him more human, somewhat deflated. Clearly cares for the children outside of the money. But he cares for his mother as much as needed. We are given abrupt flashbacks of his childhood, a violent scene with his parents. We never get that satisfying moment where we get the flashback in full. I guess to show that all of his actions aren't just based on one moment 30 years ago. They are just that he has a lot of moments. Kind of a shame it didn't follow that cliche because it is satisfying. It makes you wonder why it's really in the film. If it were removed there would probably be less questions to be honest.
Ekaterina Samsonov plays the kidnapped young teen that Joe is looking to rescue. She is great, has sad habits from her abuse. Though she is very subtle about it, she really captured the lack of innocence in her character.
Categorised as film noir, and it is, I was interested in the cinematography. There are a lot of silhouettes and contrasts. I enjoyed the intimacy of some of the shots. Combined with the editing some of the shots feel loud. HEY IT'S ME THE NEXT SHOT. The sound obviously helps with the abrasion. Think Drive (2011) but rougher. There some techno sounding moments that almost sound like they're being played backwards or at just the wrong speed. This feeling increases as the film progresses. It's cut with the diegetic sound cut well.
There were some beautiful moments. No spoilers but there is a scene that appears on some of the posters in water which is quite peaceful, considering the context. It doesn't spoon feed you which is complementary to the audience. But I think is almost too gentle with some of it's points. Being only one hour 30 it's not that long for a feature and again, for a feature dealing with this type of topic.
I wanted something that would stick after the viewing and for me it didn't have the lasting effect I wanted. Great ideas not as great execution 6/10
CINEMATES - A
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment