Silence

Paramount Pictures | Release Date: December 23, 2016

7.6	USER SCORE Generally favorable reviews based on 348 Ratings

USER RATING DISTRIBUTION

Watch Now

Stream On

Buy on

Stream On

Expand

Review this movie

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.

Check box if your review contains spoilers

0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User score By date Most helpful

Sp_aceFeb 11, 2017

The same three scenes repeated. The only difference is the location.
"Apostatize!"..."No way!"..."Ok, then we'll kill this guy"..."NOO!"..."Lord, help us!"...repeat.
Never do we have any further character understanding, simply the sameThe same three scenes repeated. The only difference is the location.
"Apostatize!"..."No way!"..."Ok, then we'll kill this guy"..."NOO!"..."Lord, help us!"...repeat.
Never do we have any further character understanding, simply the same dialogue replayed for nearly 3 hours.… Expand

3 of 7 users found this helpful34

All this user's reviews

Jspotter89Jun 13, 2017

"Well, there's 161 minutes of my life that I'll never get back," I said as the credits to Silence rolled.

There's so much wrong wit Silence that 5,000 characters might not be enough to explain it all, but I'll try. First, and most obviously,"Well, there's 161 minutes of my life that I'll never get back," I said as the credits to Silence rolled.

There's so much wrong wit Silence that 5,000 characters might not be enough to explain it all, but I'll try. First, and most obviously, it must be said that this movie is boring. Painfully boring. When you combine the tedium with its nearly-three hour run time, you feel almost like you are a victim of the torture routinely being displayed on screen. Simply put, there is no logical reason why this film should be as long as it is, except for the fact that a legendary director considers it a pet-project, and evidently no producer or editor possessed the stones to tell him he should truncate it.

Okay, so the form itself is dreadful, but what about the content? Insulting. Puerile. Apparently, Martin Scorsese believes that human faith only goes as deep as iconography. On numerous occasions throughout the film, Christians are challenged to step on an image of Christ to signify their apostasy, and the viewer is apparently not supposed to laugh at the sheer lunacy of this. Even if one is able to accept that some of these characters believe that stepping foot on an image of Christ constitutes apostasy, the set piece is used so frequently that by the time in happens to Rodrigues/Garfield, there is almost no emotional weight left in it.

The saddest part of this whole project is the fact that it took 30 years for Scorsese to make it. Three decades, and the end result is this jumbled, aimless mess. The main conflict is less about Christians versus Buddhists in Japan in the 17th Century, and more about the nature of faith in the face of adversity. Okay, it's been done before, but when an artist like Scorsese takes on such a fundamental human conflict, it's not hard to pique one's interest. Turns out this interest was misplaced.

Scorsese doesn't really offer any tangible answer to the questions about faith that he poses. Does God speak to us in the silence? Who knows. Does suffering enhance faith or destroy it? It does both to different characters throughout the film. Is apostasy for keeps, or can forgiveness and redemption really be attained? The hell if I know, from watching this film. Rodrigues is a weak vehicle to explore these questions, although Garfield plays him as well as anyone could, given the material he has to work with. The film spends two solid hours with Rodrigues and his flock fighting against logic and sanity to remain faithful, and not apostasize via Christ-shoeing (for lack of a better term), leading the viewer to believe he will find some way to reconcile his faith against all the suffering that comes attached to it.

Nope. With 45 minutes left, and after being confronted by freshly-apostate Liam Neeson, Rodrigues steps on Christ, crossing what the film has presented thus far as an unredeemable line in the sand. But just as the film ends, as Rodrigues' body is being burned, the camera zooms to show us the crucifix that was given to him by his flock earlier in the film.

Once again, is Scorsese so infantile as to say that one can apostatize as simply as deriding an icon of Christ? And then that one can redeem oneself in similar fashion? If so, why would any of these persecuted peoples not simply apostatize for the authorities and then redeem themselves as soon as they leave? According to what Scorsese presents here, it is that simple.

In the end, the film's length, lack of urgency, and undermining of its own message serve to make it unwatchable. An exercise in self-indulgence for a legendary director who should know better.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

qamasterMar 18, 2017

This film is for believers. For whom religion is of great importance. If you are not believer, for you the film will not be interesting. Very tedious story. Full of scenes of sadism and endless reflections on God

2 of 7 users found this helpful25

All this user's reviews

ShowPonyDec 23, 2016

"Silence" | C- | Holy **** All of the critics raving about this uneven, overly long, self-indulgent, anticlimactic, snooze-fest should turn in their credentials. Well-crafted but so what! It's Scorsese & his team. Production values are a"Silence" | C- | Holy **** All of the critics raving about this uneven, overly long, self-indulgent, anticlimactic, snooze-fest should turn in their credentials. Well-crafted but so what! It's Scorsese & his team. Production values are a given. Garfield's amazing performance saves the film from a D, but Driver's awful accent is cringe-worthy. Skip it - save the 2 1/2 hours!… Expand

7 of 26 users found this helpful719

All this user's reviews

LeoManciaMar 27, 2017

Silence, una película dirigida por Martin Scorsese me parecía una propuesta muy interesante, más que todo por su ambientación, durante la persecución cristiana por parte de Japón me parece muy original y aprovecha a Japón más allá de losSilence, una película dirigida por Martin Scorsese me parecía una propuesta muy interesante, más que todo por su ambientación, durante la persecución cristiana por parte de Japón me parece muy original y aprovecha a Japón más allá de los samuráis o la primera guerra mundial que ya estamos más que acostumbrados.

Y está bien llevada… en parte.

Las actuaciones son muy buenas, los personajes llevan un desarrollo llamativo y los conflictos morales y espirituales te dejan con dudas para pensar luego.
Lastimosamente la narrativa y el guión cuando parece que va avanzar se estanca y da vueltas en el mismo punto y es así muchas veces durante toda le película, lo cual rompe la rompe , Se entiende entiende fácilmente cuál es ese Silencio que agobia a nuestros protagonistas pero no necesitamos que lo recalquen tantas veces, tenemos un secundario que sabemos que está mal, lleva la fe como si fuera un prenda que se quita y se pone con frecuencia y entiendo porque se lleva así pero la películas pierde mucho tiempo en estas secuencias que se pudieron abordar de una mejor forma

Al final creo que tenia muchas espectativas para está película , ya sea por el tema, la ambientación, el casting o lo que más esperaba el director.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

StrikeThreeNov 7, 2017

I read the book on which this film is based (Endō Shūsako's "Silence") many years ago. I didn't like it, but I was interested to see how Martin Scorsese would deal with the story in a film. In fact he stuck pretty closely to the book. So weI read the book on which this film is based (Endō Shūsako's "Silence") many years ago. I didn't like it, but I was interested to see how Martin Scorsese would deal with the story in a film. In fact he stuck pretty closely to the book. So we have little narrative drive but more or less static scenes of torture, humiliation, torture, betrayal, torture again, etc. I found the book artificial and boring, and the film repulsive but most of all boring (and I'm interested in religion and in Japan). The long-delayed appearance of the elusive Liam Neeson character had no narrative impact. His appearance contributed nothing to the film's development. Scorsese has never been noted for subtlety but his earlier films had terrific emotional drive. This film, for all its gory action, just seems lifeless. It doesn't bear comparison with the terrific 2010 French film on a similar theme (persecution of Christians in a non-Christian country), Xavier Beauvois' "Of Gods and Men".… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews