Sicario : La Guerre des cartels

Pros: The story was well told.

The characters were engaging.

Benicio Del Toro is a God.

An honest portrayal of a sad reality.

Cons: one character should have remained how he was, that would have been a fitting send off for his character. Is it better than the first Sicario? Yes. Why? No moral compass, it doesn't exist in the real world.

Film starts really well. Gritty, violent, miltaristic. Relevant and exciting. Cool photography and sound. Interesting plot line. Seems like a solid follow-up to the excellent original. Helicopters, machine guns, explosions, mercenaries and black ops. But about halfway through it comes to a screeching halt that it never recovers from, even as there are some scenes that give you hope that the pace will resume.

But the film commits itself to going with a train of events that are not engaging or exciting. It never follows up with what could have been supremely interesting, the cartel war that the planned and executed event was supposed to trigger. Instead it undoes itself with the embarassingly obvious attempt to set that stage for another sequel. We get a lot of wasted time on the way, with story decisons that make no sense, and a convoluted and boring backward human-smuggling idea with political motivations.

The other major annoyance is the young gangster character. He does not act, at all, and his one-expression face alone is extremely unpleasant, not in a menacing way, but punchworthy. Highly ineffective and off-putting. Really bad casting.

First half was great. Second half was a joke.

This is one of those action movies that it only job is to give you as real as possible experience with its beautiful cinematography. It doesn't feel as real as ''Children of Men'' and it probably won't get a Oscar but it serves its job. The movie may not be as masterful as Villeneuve's original, but it achieves to keep you on the screen. There are really good heart-pumping scenes that beautifully blended with the score in its convoluted plot. Just like in the first movie, the story gets darker and darker. It reflects real-life situations, that's why it's so dreary and compelling. All the events is a buildup to our main story. It all ties together perfectly in the end. And even though key cast member Emily Blunt no longer here, the movie stands alone as a powerful modern-day Western, thanks to the Josh Brolin, Benicio del Toro, and Taylor Sheridan who also penned the screenplay of the first movie.

I'll definitely watch this again.

Where the original Sicario was carried by the suspence created by the contrasting naive FBI-agent Macy (Emily Blunt), the cynical CIA-agent Matt (Josh Brolin) and the vengeful Alejandro (Benicio del Toro) as ruthless sicario turned against the drug carlets operating along the US-Mexico border, the sequal lacks this tension and becomes an analogue and rather predictable story. Decent acting performances, and attempts to recreate the original dark athmosphere cannot save the weak plot, where several interesting issues launched at the start are not followed through. This makes for a rather unfulfilling experience, despite hints of another sequal.

Once you get over a bit of a slow start, the film proves to be entertaining and engrossing, and it draws attention to the inner, sometimes dirty, machinations of government and the jurisdictional "system". The acting is also pretty much all-around top-notch.

The only thing that I found as a slight negative, is that it really doesn't have any kind of re-watchabilty factor. Once you've seen and enjoyed it, as much as one can enjoy a film of this nature, I don't find that there is any allure to ever watch it again.