Silence (new Scorsese film [December 2016])

I finally got to see this film yesterday.

Two things jumped out (for me) within the first half hour.

1 - What on Earth are those accents supposed to be? Andrew Garfield's accent brought back vague memories of Gene Wilder in "The Frisco Kid".

2 - Scorsese sure loves Kurosawa.

Once I compartmentalized point #1 (point #2 doesn't bother me), I really enjoyed this film. I thought it was moving, thought-provoking and painted the "villains" in much subtler manner than a film of this sort (oppressor vs. oppressed) is ever likely to do.

For my two cents (or $12 plus popcorn), this is a much "better" film than a number of the Oscar-nominated films. I found it to be more honest, thought-provoking and rooted in reality than, say, "Hacksaw Ridge".

I'm always Googling and reading lists that people post on Netflix or imdb to find films that deal with existential crisis. In this case, one fell into my lap. This is a film I'll certainly watch again.

 

I haven't seen Scorsese's film, yet, but I am familiar with Masahiro Shinoda's 1971 adaptation of the same source novel.

Can you explain how Scorsese brings a Kurosawa aesthetic to his adaptation, please?

 

First off - fog, lots and lots of fog. I was immediately reminded of "Throne of Blood". Throughout the movie there were many scenes of ceremony, custom, or judicial formality played out with great patience (without music) that were permeated by the realities of outdoor life in 1600s Japan - flies, mud, dirty hands and faces, etc. that reminded me of Kurosawa's style. There was one Japanese character in particular who reminded me of characters from Kurosawa films set in the feudal period - the apostate who is sometimes repentant, sometimes Judas, and sometimes just crazed.

 

Much of that is inherent in the source material, and also in Shinoda's adaptation. I don't recall a great deal of fog in Shinoda's film, but much of it plays out in dark, rainy, dirty environments. Where the Japanese film falls down is in the poor acting/dubbing of the English-speaking actors. A similar accusation has been levelled at the voice accents employed in Scorsese's film.

I'm looking forward to seeing Scorsese's adaptation, as I was impressed by the trailer, and there is certainly room for improvement over Shinoda's film. If you haven't seen it, I recommend you view the earlier version, as it will surely inform your opinion on Scorsese's influence.

 

I was unaware of the Japanese film until the last 24 hours. I will check it out, thanks.

EDIT: It appears to be on YouTube, in its entirety.

 

I have the R2 Masters of Cinema DVD. As far as I am aware, there is no BD available anywhere in the world.

Be interested to hear your opinion, revised or otherwise, once you've seen both versions.

 

I watched the 1971 Japanese film last night on YouTube (thanks for the heads up!)

I thought it was a good, compelling film. That being said, I like the Scorsese version better. Having not read the novel, I can't say which is truer to it, but there are differences in the films (although the dialog in some scenes is almost verbatim between the two films).

The Japanese film lacks the "live action" prologue - we're told about Father Ferreira, but we don't see him on screen (as we do in the American film). In the Japanese film, Garupe is very much a secondary character, where he is of nearly equal importance to Rodrigues in the American film for the first hour or so. The American film completely deletes a character - a prostitute that Kichijiro visits on a couple of occasions. The scenes make the character less ambiguous - in the American film we're not quite sure (well, I wasn't anyway) of his sincerity. The scenes with the prostitute leave no doubt (perhaps the reason Scorsese chose to not include them). There are some major differences in the last 20 minutes of the films, and the films have radically different endings (neither of which I'll give away here).

The Japanese films suffers as much from the poor accents as the American film. The three Portuguese priests have British (Rodrigues), American (Garupe), and apparently Japanese (Ferreira) accents. Ferreira's accent may be the result of living in Japan for 20 years, and may be a plot point (which I can't mention without it being a spoiler).

Why did I like the American film better? I liked the pacing better. I've read some reviewers moaning about the film's length, but the Japanese film (at 2:10) feels rushed by comparison. The American film contains Rodrigues' narration and inner monologue, as well as a visual delusion/"sign". It gives the viewer a great deal more insight into the "silence" in the film's title. The Rodrigues character has less depth in the Japanese film, and is played with far less subtlety. The longer running time also allows for greater development of the Japanese characters, like the interpreter and the inquisitor.

 

I really like Scorsese but this one did nothing for me. I'm sure the subject matter was near & dear to his heart & I'm glad everyone else here thought it was fantastic. Give me The Departed any day.

 

Quiet here.




























Silence

A yay or nay ?

 

A huge yay from me. I really had no idea what to expect as I avoided reviews and previews, but I was very impressed with the film.

 

Can I get my 2hr 40 mins back, pretty please.

 

The trailer suckered me in.

 

I read the book in 1994 and remember it being quite penetrating. An amazing literary work really, although I don't really remember much about the story.

Just saw the film and was a bit confused as to what Scorsese was getting at. It was nice to see him make a film that was thoughtful though after the train wreck of Wolf of Wall Street.

 

But my enthusiasm was sucked out of me after watching the film

 

'the irishman"

soon, please

 

I saw the trailer and was impressed, but watched it last night and was disappointed!
I mainly watched it because I am a Liam Neeson fan, but he was hardly in it at all.
Maybe 20 minutes tops! not cool.

 

I recently read the novel, after previously seeing the film when it came out, and from what I can remember of the movie, they changed very little from the book, to the point where I'm not even sure it's worth reading/watching both.

 

i watched 'silence' the other night on one of the pay channels, meh.

i can see, regretfully, andrew garfield following the career path of liam hemsworth (SP?)....lots of movies....no hits....no idea why.

 

I definitely think the book was more impactful.

 

Watched this movie last night. Very good movie imo. Brings up universal questions and has a great storyline plus some historical teaching. Andrew Garfield deserves an oscar imo. I was afraid Driver (whom I like in moderate doses) would dominate. I was glad to see Andrew take over.

 

Watched this film last night. I thought it was a good film but not great. 7/10 for me. Could have been so much better.