Silence

Après les chefs-d'œuvre du genre qui ont réussi chez moi, Scorsese se lance encore une fois dans quelque chose de plus difficile. Et tout comme dans "La dernière tentation" ou "Kundun", il aborde à nouveau la religion. Un film lent, presque sans musique, basé sur des dialogues, des images atmosphériques et des sons subtils. Sa structure rappelle un peu "Apocalypse Now" de Coppola. En tant qu'athée, j'ai été étonnamment captivé par l'analyse psychologique des personnages, la réflexion philosophique sur l'importance et les conséquences de la foi, ainsi que la responsabilité de ceux qui la propagent. Garfield est vraiment, vraiment bon. (16/01/2017)

An artistic statement that is not as thought-provoking as The Last Temptation of Christ, yet it is a beautiful piece of filmmaking, thoughtful, with first-class visual compositions. My relationship with this film is ambivalent. The main characters – the Christian priests – didn’t have my sympathy because they were spreading the gospel in a culturally different country where no one asked them to (and where Buddhism was strongly rooted) and at the cost of immeasurable suffering for the common folk, bleeding and dying, but at the same time, this account of Scorsese as a deeply religious man is so honest that you have to admire it, even if you might be ideologically inclined in a different direction. Scorsese wanted more, to show that the people of the distant past deeply believed in symbols and that strongly rooted beliefs cannot be broken, no matter how hard the hostile environment tries. Everyone believes in something. Some believe in the power of nature, some in the power of family, others in the power of money, and Scorsese and other Christians in the power of the Christian God. And I, an ordinary person and a mere atheist, have no right to deny and question this belief. Although I will still side with Father Ferreira (Liam Neeson) and prefer the aforementioned The Last Temptation of Christ, which was deeper. PS: Garfield was brilliant. I was already intrigued by him already in The Social Network and I knew we would hear a lot about this guy. (03/06/2017)

It’s clear already from the name of the director of this movie that this won’t be just an ordinary movie. Martin Scorsese has the gift to make revolutionary movies and this one will be no exception. The only problem is that he’s not offering a simple, meaningful and logical plot. You see the Japanese are anything but easy to understand for us and you need a lot of time to study them. And that may be why this film is so interesting and that may have been the reason why Martin Scorsese decided to make a movie like this. And I totally understand the silent camera which has the image of what’s going on in the scene speak for it. You see, this film is so interesting that it’s actually incredibly hard to understand. You be the judge of that. The movie takes 161 minutes. For most of the movie, what you get is silence, destruction and two priests who are evidently somewhere where they shouldn’t be at all. The viewer can’t even by surprised by what they see. What I was surprised by, however, was Andrew Garfield’s acting performance, who is no longer the underage Spiderman who I took him to be. He finally got a chance to show himself. And along with the absolutely amazing cinematography, these are two reasons why this movie is worth watching. I was ecstatic. Silence may not be an easy film, but it’s full of incredible moments. And those sure are worth experiencing! (27/02/2017)

I admire Martin Scorsese for reaching for matters of the heart without hesitation, even after audience-pleasing films like The Wolf of Wall Street or Shutter Island, knowing that it may not be successful commercially. And as is customary with matters of the heart, one reluctantly leaves out, limits, or shortens one's expectations. The fight for truth, against suffering, and with one's own ego, is portrayed in a way that is a destructive spectacle, thanks in large part to a phenomenal performance from Andrew Garfield. It raises a hundred and one questions, but mostly focuses on the same topic, which inevitably becomes tiresome even for the most accommodating viewer given the copious running time. Through Rodrigo Prieto's captivating camera work, Silence is visually stunning, but due to the sluggish screenplay, it is a bit challenging to engage in conversation about it. (24/02/2017)

A powerful story and fantastic visuals. Nothing to fault in terms of acting. Garfield is perfect. The philosophizing about faith in contrast to the cruelty of life in Japan back then is really darn powerful. Go on, pray! (17/02/2017)

Personalities like Martin Scorsese have the power to make the general public interested in subjects they choose. Such a personal topic for Scorsese was the novel "Silence" by Shūsaku Endō, which he presented to Western viewers 45 years after its original Japanese adaptation Silence. However, it is very difficult to establish a personal connection to the story of Portuguese Jesuits on a Japanese mission in the 17th century. The spiritual atmosphere and beautiful landscape are certainly captivating, but A-list actors like Andrew Garfield, Adam Driver, and Liam Neeson are naturally more suited to a different context. (22/02/2024)

The silence of a directorial genius. It has gorgeous cinematography, but that’s something I take for granted and consider mandatory in world-class filmmakers; the dialogues have something to then, and the message is morally unquestionable, carved into the viewer with a surgically precise pace and methodical narrative rhythm. BUT steady pace does not equal quality pace, and I personally didn't become a staunch defender of the art of filmmaking in order to patiently stoke my faith in a director's divine abilities, which began to fade after a few dozen emotionally catatonic minutes, and even after 160 long minutes, it didn't even come close to rediscovering itself, unlike the steadfast protagonist. To fully appreciate the film on a purely narrative level, I guess I wouldn't have to be such a die-hard atheist and hardened ignoramus of man's blind faith in supernatural forces and the hellish consequences of betraying one's own beliefs; to enjoy it as a visual self-questioning catharsis, it wouldn't have to talk and repeat so much simple, universally understood religious motifs. God bless Scorsese for taking on such heavy and massively impenetrable material in the first place, but this time I dare to tread on his sacrament and I can honestly say that if Bruce Wayne had popped up behind Liam Neeson's back at the end and kicked his ass with kung fu, I might have been a lot happier with the outcome. Kundun, although with a less serious subject, was much more enjoyable. (21/02/2017)

Si vous hésitez entre Silence et Jackie, allez voir Jackie. Moi, j’ai fait le contraire après avoir été invité à l’avant-première de Silence par mon ami Enšpígl. Étalé sur trois heures, le thème s’en trouve extrêmement épuisant et certains n’ont pas tenu le coup, quittant la salle après une heure. Il aurait fallu raccourcir, élaguer, dramatiser. Je ne dénie pas au film une certaine qualité, mais je me réjouissais constamment d’arriver à la fin, ce qui n’est jamais bon signe. De plus, en tant que fan de Neeson, j’ai craint pendant longtemps que celui-ci reçoive aussi peu d’espace que dans Gangs of New York. Scorsese aurait mieux fait de revenir aux bons vieux truands et gangsters de tous poils ! (03/02/2017)

I often give three stars to some crazy nonsense, but Silence is not nonsense. It just catches up to the fact that Scorsese, especially in his later years, can't work very well with visuals and imagery. A humble, slow, intimate, spiritual theme is not, in my opinion, ideal for stimulating with so many words, so many graphic shots that clearly explain what the scene is supposed to be about. As a result, the film breaks into four parts, where the first hour is like a cut from a TV Noe production (half-measured combo of quiet sensitivity and humility), which then breaks into classic sequences of abuse, during which we watch scene by scene the protagonist's breaking under various influences. This ends with part three, which is an essential dialogue with his teacher, and the rest of the film is a bad adaptation of the book in the style of a voice over saying "There were Dutch merchants in the harbor" and we have a shot of Dutch merchants. I completely understand Scorsese's fascination with the subject and his respect for it, but there's more of the subject than there is of the actual film and that's not how it’s supposed to be. I'll keep knocking on the door of The Revenant, McQueen, or Tarkovsky for religious movies. Those films may not be smart enough, but they have the potential to give the viewer more of a boost than the filmmakers themselves intended, which Silence doesn't have. (17/04/2023)

One star for perfect cinematography, the rest fell victim to utter boredom and annoying Catholic propaganda. The answer to most of the questions asked by Father Rodrigues could be: "Because you came here forcing your delusions on us!" Fortunately, the Japanese did not make the same mistake as the Aztecs and Incas. They allowed the Catholics to become martyrs, thus avoiding the Conquista and the Holy Inquisition. The film was awfully long, and the story was so monotonous it dragged on like a snail soaked in honey. I wished the main characters a slow and painful death, and I was secretly hoping that one of the Japanese would finally run out of patience, reach for a katana and create a ‘pagan's cut,’ cutting the film shorter by at least a third. (07/01/2020)

Martin Scorsese belongs to the directors whom I adore, and it's evident that at his age, he already knows how to make a film, how to make it captivating and beautiful, and how to convey some thoughts that you can ponder. This was done in the film Silence. Great performances, but above all stunning cinematography and direction. (21/04/2017)

If Martin Scorsese didn't have a hand in this, I'd probably avoid it in a big way. Unfortunately, I have to say that his contribution is not very good this time around, and except for about three very interesting camera shots, the whole film is very monotonous and at times drags incredibly. I understand what Martin Scorsese wanted to convey and it certainly has a concept. But in the end I suffered through the whole two and a half hours more out of respect for the director than for any other reason. (28/04/2019)

Bien que je sois athée, ou peut-être justement parce que je le suis, les films à thème religieux font partie de mes préférés ; ils sont pleins de questions et de contradictions, et celui-ci a parfaitement joué sur ma corde sensible. Et le meilleur de toute cette expérience, c’est que j’ai vu les personnages principaux comme les « méchants » de l’histoire. Inutile de s’étendre sur le sujet, ce film vaut vraiment la peine d’être vu. Tout fonctionne comme il faut, et de manière surprenante, compte tenu de sa durée et de la quantité de dialogues, il n’y a pas de passages à vide et on ne s’ennuie pas une seconde. Andrew Garfield se montre étonnamment bon cette année, et quant à Adam Driver, bien qu’il ne lui soit pas fait autant de place ici, je ne peux m’empêcher de faire à nouveau son éloge. Il me plaît et m’émeut dans tous les rôles qu’il joue (enfin, sauf dans Star Wars :D). (17/03/2017)