Justiça Brutal

I was surprised It was so well done. I am a movie connoisseur and highly recommend this movie to all who like cops and robbers movies. All are not bad they just have made some choices in life that others would have not. It was not what I expected.

This film is a difficult watch for the first half. There are many who may even say it is boring, tedious and laborious. And I would be one of them. And yes, perhaps some scenes could have been quickened up and other scenes re-shot to give the opening half of the film more pace.

Having said that, this was unquestionably a serious character-driven film that had many sad and serious undertones but also welcome moments of light humour. I believe this was absolutely deliberate by a very out-there and intelligent director who brought an initially slow script to life and copperfastened by excellent acting throughout, particularly from Gibson and Vaughn.

For me, it is the real-life questions that are asked of us, the viewer, not during this excellent film, but long afterwards, that mark this film out from many others which have considerable less impact.

I would most definitely recommend this film as an excellent watch. But you will need to pass the endurance test of the first half or so, and then you will get your reward over the second half.

S. Craig Zahler films are a genre onto themselves. Much like Woody Allen or David Lynch movies. So keep that in mind.

Admitted, it's not one of his best, and about 30 mins too long, but it's an anti-hero story.

Characters like this exist in our world. Real life problems are a part of this movie too. Unfortunately, like life, theres not always a happy Hollywood ending.

I enjoyed this movie. Then again, I enjoy S. Craig Zahler's style of story telling

The reviews on here are more polarised than I think I've seen before. So which is it - a low scoring film worth 3/10 or less, or a film worthy of 7/10 or more? I think it is the latter. The current IMDB average of 7/10 seems about right. It is not perfect but it is very good. The answer for you depends on what you are like and what you are prepared to bring to it.

My aim in writing a review was to try and give ways to separate the one-out-of-tenners from the high scorers so you can tell if you want to give it 150+ minutes of your time. Here goes.... If you love the 10+ minute scene of a gunman trapping a fly in his gun at the start of Once Upon a Time in the West, give this a try. If it drove you nuts, don't. If you've ever enjoyed an early Takeshi Kitano (a master of underacting) and the inactivity as well as cinematic poetry are enjoyable to you, and the flare ups of sudden violence are acceptable to you, give this a try. If you often watch a film with your phone in your hand and your attention split - just don't bother with this. If you always need fast-paced action, shouting, loud music and overacting this is not for you and you will end up with a rating of less than 3 or 4. If your cinema diet is mainly fast, loud blockbusters, don't bother with this. This is not for those that need the film to constantly poke at them to keep them engaged. If you are one of them then just move on to another film. Don't waste your time. A lot of the one star reviews basically just say nothing more than "boring", "slow" or "worst film ever." They say nothing about the film unless you know the reviewer. Do people really mark films down for "moral ambiguity" or because some questionable characters do ok and don't get their come-uppance? Come on! It's not a fairy tale - the world is not fair. This film rewards concentration. It is dark (visually and in tone) but even has some quiet humour. If you appreciate some of the more subtle or poetic films that are not afraid to be understated with their acting and sparing with their action give it a try.

I am no great fan of Mel Gibson. He probably peaked with Mad Max for me as far as enjoyment of his films. Vince Vaughn is growing on me but I would have avoided him completely not too long ago. There is certainly no star loyalty inflating my score here. The film is languorous at times. It lingers. Deliberately. The camera is almost fixed for each scene which feels like it is deliberate as well - your eyes get time to explore. It is not as poetic and metaphor-laden as Kitano but it is very nicely visually put together and immerses you in the world the director has built. The lighting and pace fit and are cohesive and consistent with the world of the film. The lack of soundtrack is quite stark - the only music during the film is from characters' car stereos. There is no flashiness or gimmickry. Relative to most films there is a lack of close-ups or zooms. The runtime was not an issue for me - there is not much padding out. It could probably have a light trim without losing much. It has the pace and character focus of a good quality TV mini-series (maybe 3 episodes) and if it was one I suspect people would accept it more. It is not typical of the films we seem to generally be served up. And that is a good thing for me.

Hopefully this may guide you on whether you should align yourself with the 1 stars or the 7+ stars..... before you watch and invest 2.5 hours. Enjoy. Or avoid.

I haven't stopped thinking about this film since I watched it randomly the other week on Netflix. I had skim read reviews on here prior and saw lots complaining about the length and how slow it was. However, I thought I'd make my own mind up. I found the pace really authentic. The character development was brilliant. At first I did find the constant unnatural one liner back and forth dialogue between the two protagonists forced. But it is forgotten by the brilliant storyline. This film really takes you on a trip, it'll make you feel all sorts of emotions which is what makes a good film in my opinion. This film turned out to be one of the best films I've seen in years. And it will be one I watch again. I think the issues with length and taking offense from the film are generational. And that's reflected in the reviews. Definitely.