A Beautiful Day

'You Were Never Really Here' compelled me to watch it from the start. The fact that people were describing it as an unconventional thriller interested me, there are not many of those these days (speaking as a fan of thrillers), and then you have an extremely talented actor in Joaquin Phoenix in the lead role. The positive word of mouth and cool advertising added further to the promise.

Seeing it, 'You Were Never Really Here' came over as very good and very impressive. Can totally understand why it is divisive here and it is not surprising that some were alienated by it and not used to a thriller being done differently. It's hardly the first or only divisive film from 2018 so far, 'A Quiet Place' and 'Hereditary' were very different horrors that were critically acclaimed but polarising with audiences, personally loved both, especially 'A Quiet Place'. For me, that it was unconventional was a large part of why 'You Were Never Really Here' worked as well as it did. It is not quite a masterpiece and it just falls short of being one of my very favourite films of the year (though it is still towards the top).

It is not perfect. 'You Were Never Really Here' does have moments where the story could have done with more clarity, the vagueness did cause a little confusion at times.

Would have liked much more development to the supporting characters, while the protagonist is splendidly drawn the rest are sketchy.

However, there is so much to like about 'You Were Never Really Here'. The production values are extremely stylish with some very creative shots and film techniques, the rescue is particularly gritty and purposefully grainy in a security camera way. The minimal dialogue was a good choice, it let the atmosphere fully sear and the uncompromising brutality and unsettlement ensures plenty of deliberately slow-burning tension which helps make the story absorbing.

Lynne Ramsay directs cleverly, with a keen eye for visual style, letting the atmosphere speak for itself and never letting the deliberate pacing to become dull or self-indulgent. That's personal opinion, just to make that clear to anybody who will vehemently disagree. 'You Were Never Really Here' is successful in avoiding clichés and having the action scenes brief, not frequent and mostly off-screen provided to be a bold and good move. Joaquin Phoenix is excellent in the lead role, the intensity dripping off him at every turn. The rest of the cast do well but not to the same level of Phoenix, but only because he is something else.

Altogether, very good but so many great things. With better fleshed out characters and more clarity in some of the plotting, it would have been even better. 8/10 Bethany Cox

Yes I am aware that many thought this film was slow. However, it the slow and thoughtful burn of this film that makes it so unique and well done. It is, overall, a story about trauma and how this trauma has afflicted the protagonist. This is what trauma looks like. I already loved it but could further appreciate it after viewing a video by screened titled " How to Show Trauma" Just watch this video and then decide for yourself. Everything about this film was very much intentional and for good reason.

Joe (Joaquin Phoenix) is troubled living in New York City caring for his elderly mother and asphyxiating himself for comfort from a troubling past. He is hired to recover State Senator Albert Votto's runaway young daughter Nina from an underaged girls brothel. He buys a hammer and smashes his way through his crusade. He saves Nina but are confronted by murderous corrupt cops. It's the tip of a dangerous conspiracy leading all the way to the governor's mansion.

The first thirty minutes is a bit rough. It's an artsy meandering slow disjointed slice of life into Joe. I get it but it could be clearer. It does give a feel for the guy. It would be great to have a more complete flashback to his military or policing days instead of short flashes of everything. Once he gets hammering, the movie goes like a freight train with Joaquin driving hard. He delivers a great performance as usual. There is a shock ending which I don't like. Indies like to punctuate the end of their movies with a gunshot. It's a bit cheap and feels amateurish. Overall, there are some great work with a few flaws.

I saw mixed reviews for You Were Never Really Here and it made me put off watching this film for 2 years. That was a mistake to say the least. YWNRH is a fantastically shot, gripping stray away from your typical blockbuster crime drama. While this movie isn't perfect, most negative reviews I've seen for this movie are nonsense. This movie is more than worth the hour and a half runtime regardless of whether or not you're typically drawn to the genre. Without spoilers, this review will tell you what you can expect, give you pros and cons, and debunk the faulty overwhelmingly negative reviews some people gave it.

Don't believe the reviews saying there is a "nonexistent, boring plot". The people who think that are the people who need a plot spoon fed to them with in your face exposition and unrealistic, unnecessary character dialogue so they can follow along without having to pay attention. Not only is the plot very clear, it's also very well written. While I'm not sure I would call this movie a thriller, it is a gripping, gritty, crime drama. The plot, despite not being battered into the front of your brain, is straightforward and easy to follow. A man suffering from several traumatic life experiences bides his time finding, and avenging missing girls in an attempt to find peace within himself. Initially, you are left in the dark regarding the main character. His character is developed throughout the story via fragmented displays of flashbacks chopping up his daily life. Through this you simultaneously gather information regarding his daily life, his occupation, his past, and his motives. I believe the way these flashbacks are used are why some people incorrectly believe there is a weak or incomplete plot, but to be frank they couldn't be more wrong.

The use of flashbacks in this movie is not only masterful, but incredibly unique. They are not given to the viewer in their entirety, and they are not meant to give us the entire picture on Joaquin Phoenix's background. They give you enough to understand him, but serve to convey a more important point. The use of these choppy, fragmented flashbacks seen from the main characters perspective convey the hardships of daily life for someone suffering from traumatic experiences. Constantly being reminded of something they'd like to forget, but can't. The seamless and uncontrollable drift from present to the past triggered by random occurrences encountered in day to day life that takes a toll on a person. The director did a phenomenal job conveying this with her technique, while also creating a complete character.

This film is also incredibly well shot. While I'm sure someone could reference several influences this movie draws from I was taken aback at how unique each scene is in how it is shot. This movie strays from the norm and does it extremely well. This individuality not only creates very powerful, gripping, exciting scenes, but makes it easy to focus on less exciting, build up scenes as well. If only based on cinematography I would give this film a 10/10.

While the pros of this movies far outweigh the cons, no movie is perfect. One critique I have is that some of the audio during Joaquin's flashbacks is so quiet I would've completely missed it had I had the subtitles off. Because, as I referenced earlier, the flashbacks are incredibly fragmented each second really counts when establishing the main characters background. Without subtitles, while the quiet, layered audio creates a nice effect to describe the feeling in the main characters head, you lose some relatively important exposition to truly help you understand his past. It's not major and doesn't take away from anything, but it's a critique nonetheless. Same goes for dialogue in a few important character interactions. You really can't fall asleep for a second during this movie if you want to get every detail. I had to rewind another scene that wasn't a flashback just because I missed someone's name. Again, not a deal breaker, doesn't change the plot, but would slightly change your understanding if you missed it.

Overall I give this movie somewhere between a 7/8 out of ten. The only thing holding it back from a 8/9 or a 9/10 was a few minor plot holes at the end. Nothing major, especially when compared to the gargantuan plotholes most Hollywood blockbusters ignore these days, but I'm nitpicky and watch too much CinemaSins on YouTube. Great movie I would highly recommend to anyone.

I think Joaquin Phoenix has only gotten better over the years. I mean his Oscar for Joker was no accident and I thought it was well deserved. To me he's one of those actors that once he's played a part, I could imagine no one else in the role...Freddie Quell in PT Anderson's "The Master" was just brilliant and I don't think anyone could have matched PS Hoffman in that film the same way. In this film he's the hero, but not like we're used to seeing heroes portrayed in most played-out vengeance movies with bodies that took 12 months prior to filming to sculpt, or Special Forces Navy SEaL backgrounds. Instead his background represents trauma, pain and regret, which has been the subject of films many times before, but the lack of flashiness works in this movie because I think it makes his role more believable and realistic. Which when you add the acting, I don't think anyone could have played it better than Phoenix.