जब एक युवा लड़की लापता हो जाती है, तब जो उसे बचाने के मिशन पर निकल पड़ता है, लेकिन उसे जल्द ही भ्रष्टाचार और सत्ता के दुरुपयोग का पता चलता है.जब एक युवा लड़की लापता हो जाती है, तब जो उसे बचाने के मिशन पर निकल पड़ता है, लेकिन उसे जल्द ही भ्रष्टाचार और सत्ता के दुरुपयोग का पता चलता है.जब एक युवा लड़की लापता हो जाती है, तब जो उसे बचाने के मिशन पर निकल पड़ता है, लेकिन उसे जल्द ही भ्रष्टाचार और सत्ता के दुरुपयोग का पता चलता है.
- निर्देशक
- लेखक
- स्टार
- 1 BAFTA अवार्ड के लिए नामांकित
- 24 जीत और कुल 78 नामांकन
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
'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
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
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.
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.
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.
In the realm of cinematic artistry, Lynne Ramsay's "You Were Never Really Here" emerges as a film that defies the conventional boundaries of its genre. It is a film that, with its dreamlike cadence and haunting visual poetry, captures the viewer in a grip as tight and compelling as the narrative it unfolds.
Joaquin Phoenix delivers a performance of such raw intensity that it becomes the beating heart of the film. His portrayal of Joe, a man whose life is a mosaic of trauma and violence, is both a towering achievement and a deeply human one. Phoenix's Joe is a man of few words, but each silence speaks volumes, each glance carries the weight of a thousand emotions. He is the weary titan of this story, carrying the burdens of his past with a stoicism that is as heartbreaking as it is admirable.
Ramsay's direction is nothing short of masterful. She weaves a tapestry of images and sounds that are as beautiful as they are disturbing. The film's score, a dissonant symphony by Jonny Greenwood, is accentuating the film's atmosphere of disquiet. The cinematography is a chiaroscuro of the soul, painting each scene with the shades of Joe's turbulent inner world.
The narrative structure of "You Were Never Really Here" is a bold choice. Ramsay opts for an elliptical storytelling style that mirrors the fragmented psyche of its protagonist. This choice is both the film's greatest strength and its most significant challenge to the viewer. The plot does not unfold; it reveals itself in shards, each piece a glimpse into the abyss that Joe stares into every day.
However, this very narrative choice may also be where the film falters for some. The disjointed nature of the storytelling, while thematically resonant, can at times leave the audience grasping for a thread to hold onto. The film demands attention and patience, and not all viewers are willing to give it the concentration it requires.
The violence, while never gratuitous, is visceral and unflinching. It serves the story, but it also runs the risk of alienating those with a more sensitive disposition. The film's resolution, too, may strike some as abrupt, leaving a lingering question as to the ultimate fate of its characters.
"You Were Never Really Here" is a film that, like its protagonist, is not easily forgotten. It is a challenging, evocative piece of cinema that dares to delve into the darkness of the human condition. While it may not find universal acclaim due to its unconventional approach and somber themes, it stands as a testament to the power of visual storytelling and the enduring strength of a well-crafted character study.
Joaquin Phoenix delivers a performance of such raw intensity that it becomes the beating heart of the film. His portrayal of Joe, a man whose life is a mosaic of trauma and violence, is both a towering achievement and a deeply human one. Phoenix's Joe is a man of few words, but each silence speaks volumes, each glance carries the weight of a thousand emotions. He is the weary titan of this story, carrying the burdens of his past with a stoicism that is as heartbreaking as it is admirable.
Ramsay's direction is nothing short of masterful. She weaves a tapestry of images and sounds that are as beautiful as they are disturbing. The film's score, a dissonant symphony by Jonny Greenwood, is accentuating the film's atmosphere of disquiet. The cinematography is a chiaroscuro of the soul, painting each scene with the shades of Joe's turbulent inner world.
The narrative structure of "You Were Never Really Here" is a bold choice. Ramsay opts for an elliptical storytelling style that mirrors the fragmented psyche of its protagonist. This choice is both the film's greatest strength and its most significant challenge to the viewer. The plot does not unfold; it reveals itself in shards, each piece a glimpse into the abyss that Joe stares into every day.
However, this very narrative choice may also be where the film falters for some. The disjointed nature of the storytelling, while thematically resonant, can at times leave the audience grasping for a thread to hold onto. The film demands attention and patience, and not all viewers are willing to give it the concentration it requires.
The violence, while never gratuitous, is visceral and unflinching. It serves the story, but it also runs the risk of alienating those with a more sensitive disposition. The film's resolution, too, may strike some as abrupt, leaving a lingering question as to the ultimate fate of its characters.
"You Were Never Really Here" is a film that, like its protagonist, is not easily forgotten. It is a challenging, evocative piece of cinema that dares to delve into the darkness of the human condition. While it may not find universal acclaim due to its unconventional approach and somber themes, it stands as a testament to the power of visual storytelling and the enduring strength of a well-crafted character study.
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.
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.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाAccording to the director Lynne Ramsay, the scene where Joaquin Phoenix's character lies down on the floor next to the agent and begins singing was improvised by Phoenix.
- गूफ़Scott gives the security code as 4392, but the first number we see Joe punching is on the upper right of the keypad.
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिटThe indistinct conversation from the diner continues through the end credits, even when the music changes.
- कनेक्शनFeatured in WatchMojo: Top 10 Amazing Movies You Missed This Spring (2018)
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is You Were Never Really Here?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइटें
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Nunca estarás a salvo
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- Astoria, क्वींस, न्यूयॉर्क शहर, न्यूयॉर्क, संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिका(Elevated subway platform)
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $25,00,000(अनुमानित)
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $25,28,078
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $1,32,829
- 8 अप्रैल 2018
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $93,60,514
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 29 मिनट
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.39 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें