Silence - Spiderman and Han & Leia's kid go on quest in feudal Japan for Gawain

Always wanted to write one of ‘those’ topics. Achievement unlocked.

Oh. Yeah. It’s an upcoming movie.

Silence (2016)

I have nothing against Adam Driver, but man is he weird-lookin’ in some shots.

Critics really seem enthusiastic-- a highlight of Scorsese’s career.

I really liked Black Robe (was that 25 years ago) which tells a parallel story, set among the Hurons instead of the Japanese.

Saw this last night, and it’s tremendous. First of all, every frame looks like it was carried down to earth by a host of angels. Rural and coastal Japan feels like another planet in this movie. I’m not sure a film has ever taught me this much about the landscape of another place.

All the performances are remarkable, but the Japanese actors were downright astonishing, male and female. This guy was great. And this guy. Him too.

From the perspective of historical recreation, this seemed to me like a masterclass. (Not that I’m an expert.) Some beautiful prop work, in addition to amazing costumes and set design throughout.

So how about the story? It’s long, and it takes its time. Okay, I don’t think anyone will be too surprised about that. It’s also really about only a handful of things. But they’re deep things. This is a deep dive into the nature of faith, suffering, responsibility, and pride.

I would love to talk to folks about it because I think where it goes and how it ends is so full of fascinating contradictions and mysteries. Who betrayed their faith and who didn’t?

This is highly, highly recommended if you go into it with the right expectations: This story is about faith and the limits of faith, almost singlemindedly. Many people die in gruesome ways as part of the Japanese persecution of Christians, innocent people. It has a drawn-out ending that gets more ambiguous the more you think about it.

I have to imagine @tomchick would be way into this, as a film that interrogates religious faith. This would be a killer movie to do for the podcast, in my opinion.

EDIT: Oh, I forgot to add the one small thing I wish the movie had done differently: At one point, Andrew Garfield and Adam Driver’s Jesuit padres split up and the film sticks with Garfield for most of the rest of the movie. I felt this was kinda too bad, as I found Driver’s character and characterization more interesting to watch than Garfield.

I learned from reading reviews that the movie was actually shot in Taiwan, so the Japanese landscape that impressed me so much was just Hollywood fakery! Boo! Next thing they’ll do is hire Sean Spicer to do the narration.

I did not find it overly violent or gruesome, but I did walk away from it feeling very disturbed…thought about it for a bit and I felt as if I had watched a spirit/soul be dismantled. The questions I left with were had to do with the whole purpose of Garfield’s life - did he make things better for some or did he make it worse? Was it arrogance and pride at the expense of others? And in the end, when he had performed the action they had been asking of him, were all the deaths and suffering that had gone before meaningless?

A good performance by Garfield. Driver needs to eat something.

All the UK reviews I’ve seen have been pretty down on it, to the extent I’m giving it a miss despite being a huge Scorsese fan.

Are the Qt3 folks going to be doing a podcast on it?

I loved this and I can’t understand the negative reviews I see here in Spain. I think some sort of backlash might be happening. I dunno, but either those guys can’t stand a film about faith or they are too young.

The movie is slow and perhaps overly long (I think a shorter version might have been equally effective, but it’s hard to say, given the nature of the story). But it works, man it works. the story has a very classical feel to it. It focuses and explores on the main themes (faith, sacrifice and pride) instead on trying to go for emotional power. As a member of the audience, I feel you have to invest in the movie, and can just be a more passive onlooker and let plot and drama carry you through the footage. But if you decide to invest in what it’s telling you, it’s beautiful, and I don’t use that word often.

It is more similar to the Last Temptation than to any other Scorsese work. Certainly very different to his last movies, so definitely don’t go in expecting something akin to The Wolf of Wall Street or The Departed. It is NOT that kind of movie. It comes from his other, brainier half.

But it is equally technically excellent. Not only he basics (editing -slow, deliberate- and framing) but also a lot of narrative devices taken directly from the Japanese Masters (there’s quite a lot of Ozu and Mizoguchi references I caught, specific shots and editing schemes), up to the acting, which is sometimes (varies from scene to scene) not the contemporary, more subdued and internal acting we are used to today, but the acting style of the 50s and 60s Japanese movies (I’m thinking about Kichijiro mainly, although the leads do sometimes spring into this acting mode to). So it’s also a love letter to Japanese cinema, on top of an exploration of faith.

The only thing I was a little bit ambivalent on (other than the length) was the voice over. I thought it was unnecessary most of the time, and that it’s absence would have made some scenes more poignant. It might also have made the film more impenetrable to the casual moviegoer, so maybe that’s why it’s there.

After watching the film I knew it was not going to be popular and it is definitely heavy. I don’t think film watchers have a taste for a film like this and it was more ‘story’ than ‘performance’ by the cast if that makes sense. I don’t think many people would see it as entertainment,

I totally agree. I just expected film critics to be able to appreciate it. It’s not such a different experience than watching some classic works.

Nothing intelligent to add yet, just got back from seeing it, it’s after midnight here, and I’m still processing it. But I loved it.

So what do you guys think of the ending?

(ALERT: SPOILERS I’m not going to bother blocking out.)

Seems to me there are three possible readings of it:

  1. Rodrigues was worn down by the inquisition, and in betraying his faith he was unable to ever recover it. The last priest in Japan was lost and Christianity in Japan hit its worst point in the history of the mission.
  2. Rodrigues secretly ministered to Christians in Japan, using his position as an apostate accepted by society to reach those Christians he could until he died.
  3. Rodrigues made the ultimate sacrifice–more precious even than his life–and gave up his own faith to save the persecuted Christians from torture and death. He never really believed again, but some Christians were able to continue living the faith without persecution for awhile. The revelation in the funeral pyre is more a symbol of hope of forgiveness than of abiding faith.

The scenes with Kichijiro leading up to the end of Rodrigues’ story could answer the question, but they were very ambiguous. Are we to assume that the icon Kichijiro wore around his neck was given to him by Rodrigues? That would show that for as inconstant and idiotic Kichijiro was, he remained a Christian with the support of the padre. I don’t know what to think of his begging for confession. Rodrigues seemed to reject the request, and even be surprised it was asked of him. Although at the end, he put his hand on Kichijiro’s head. Was this a sign of absolution? I tend to think not, exactly. But then we need to square this abdication of his priestly duties with the object in his hand at the end.

Thoughts? Where did Rodrigues land?

I read it as a variation of 2. I don’t think he ministered, but certainly protected those few remaining Christians.

[spoiler]Well, there is the “Our Lord” comment from Ferreira towards the end of the film. I think it was an acknowledgement that they both believed. Obviously Rodrigues had instructed his wife to sneak the little totem with his body. So I have no doubt both remained Christians.

However, the disassembly of their outward signs of faith to totality by the Japanese masters is the real story in this film imho. The theme “Christianity doesn’t work here” is always running and it is quite interesting. Initially, they are unwaivering. Ultimately, they agree.

I think Garupe was killed because they detected he would not be swayed. I believe the “Trample” scene tipped you off to that.

[/spoiler]

Does anyone know who provided the voice of God Rodrigues hears at the end? It’s not credited at IMDB, but it sounded familiar.

found this in Reddit :


You probably already saw an answer, but the guy’s voice was the actor from near the beginning of the film who was telling the priests about Ferreira, the guy’s name is ciaran hynes, he’s one of the wildling dudes from Game of Thrones I think too. But yeah as to whether it was supposed to be God or his own thoughts we don’t know for sure

EDIT: The last name is actually Hinds

Oh, that makes sense!

The first time the voice of God spoke I thought it was Morgan Freeman and burst out laughing. Glad I waited to see this one on Blu Ray.

Just finished this. Fucking incredible. So unbelievably moving. Gorgeously shot, timely message about the practicality and limits of faith. One of my favorites of last year.

I’ll go with this assessment as well. AS someone is continuing to move away from the Christian faith, my views were skewed into thinking it showed the complete impracticality of faith and prayer in dire situations. The silence of God spoke to me as the silence I have heard for years. The promise of paradise is utterly useless, however, if you do believe in it, why not choose death now? If your loved ones have died or in heaven and the place is so damned wonderful, why are we aiting around here? Obviously there are passages trotted out to convince us to keep up the good fight, but that happens throughout scripture. You point out where something seems ridiculous and there is an addendum somewhere that keeps you from coming to a logical resolution.

Anyway, it was a good time for me to watch it, but if its intent was to show the any hope to be found in the continued practice, it fell on deaf ears. For much of it, I saw it as a journey I have been through in my 47 years and I am at the end and practices of older, more practical religions make so much more sense.