Hacksaw Ridge (Mel Gibson, November 4th 2016) Movie

Starring Andrew Garfield, Sam Worthington, Luke Bracey, Teresa Palmer, Hugo Weaving, Rachel Griffiths and Vince Vaughn.

 

This looks like it should be great

 

Looks very good. Hopefully Garfield's accent is on point.

 

my favorite part was when Garfield dropkicks that grenade ha

 

I can't pretend I'm all that well-versed in war films, but I thought this was pretty damn great. And it got a mountain of an applause from my theater

Also, give Andrew Garfield everything

 

I'm looking forward to Garfield being free of the Amazing Spider-Man series, they really derailed his filmography.

 

Anyone else see this? I thought it was really good.

 

Movie of the year

 

Definitely want to see this if I'm able to.

 

Gibson ventures into some philosophically and thematically fascinating waters, the first half or so where Doss goes to boot camp and has to maintain his nonviolent beliefs amidst the representation of a violent imperialistic regime, and grapples with that, could have led to some really interesting stuff and contextualized the following battle in really profound ways. Unfortunately he forgets about all of it and turns it into a Christian parable with no real reflection or exploration, just worship. In a film that lauds Doss for his adherence to his non-violent beliefs, Gibson indulges in horrific and gratuitous violence, but not to challenge the idea of violence and why we go to war and how meaningful it is that only one person out of so many millions was truly dedicated to aid, to peace, but just to reaffirm how miraculous an event Doss' rescue was. And it was miraculous. But when Gibson plays the violent deaths of countless Japanese soldiers as victorious and triumphant, and crafts a horrifying dream sequence that looks like anti-Japanese World War II propaganda, and utilizes gorgeous and vibrant cinematography for a ritualistic Japanese suicide to the extent where it feels like he wants the death to play as beautiful, it can't really speak to anything meaningful when treating the Japanese as such a monolithic evil. And I acknowledge that it's a war film, and the Japanese military were responsible for horrific atrocities. But Gibson even glances on the idea himself, as Doss rescues one Japanese soldier onscreen and more off, but the film doesn't even acknowledge the implication that U.S. soldiers killed defenseless rescued and wounded Japanese soldiers. Frustrating, because I do feel like there's a lot in this story that could have been profound.

 

This was a great movie.

 

is Gibson worth watching as a director? His subject matter is interesting but what I've seen of Braveheart was awful.

 

I mean he is not very subtle in his overtly Christian themes, but for this film and character I believe it's necessarily for the belief system Doss is in. That said I think Gibson has directed some of the best action sequences, with the battles on the ridge in this film probably being his best.

 

It was okay. Agree with @Nathan too. Probably shouldn't have seen this after seeing Handmaiden earlier.

 

Vince Vaughn was somehow simultaneously perfectly cast and extremely distracting

 

Haha I know exactly what you mean.

 

Surprised at how little I cared for this movie.

 

Loved this movie.

Garfield was excellent. The main rescue scene in the movie was something special.

 

Finally saw this. I loved it. Mel Gibson can seriously direct. I want more Gibson directed films in my life. Somebody PLEASE let him make his Viking movie!!

 

Oh wow, watched this last night and its fantastic. The actual story and way it plays out, esp the bootcamp scenes, were so well done. Then the battle scenes are so well shot, I think they may be the best I've ever seen. Def one of the best I've seen this year up with The Nice Guys, Midnight Special and Civil War.

All the actors were great, but I loved how Vince Vaughn and Sam Worthington were casted. I think both are good actors that have been in bad movies, so it was nice to see them in something that let them shine. Gibson is such a force behind the camera, I'd love for him to just move into directing.

 

This was great. Some of the craziest, most intense battle scenes I've ever seen in a movie. Garfield was great in this and I really liked Vaughn as well. Prefer him in more serious roles like this.

 

I think this was the perfect part for Vaughn. It was still funny which is what he does best, but not purposely making him a joke character, just with the language and way that drill sergeants yell it.

 

How can a film not reconcile it's hyperviolence when its main character is nonviolent? It could have been brilliant, and for much of the first half of the film I thought it was going to be something really fascinating, except it glorifies everything Doss stood against in its last action scenes, making him look like a superhero, dropkicking grenades. Gibson cares more about Doss's accomplishment than his humanity. He's literally raised above everybody else in the end, Gibson puts him above everybody, rather than ask how one human being, not dissimilar from any other person, was so unique in his anti-violence beliefs.

I'm surprised I haven't seen much discussion (anywhere, not specifically here) on the troublesome portrayal of the Japanese. Doss's dream sequence in the trenches could be taken out of anti-Japanese WWII propaganda, and Gibson inserts a gorgeously shot Japanese ritual suicide for no discernible reason, unless he's either further trying to "other" the Japanese as a culture, because the film paints its themes of unwavering conviction in a belief in two lights: Doss's heroic anti-violence, and the Japanese's reveling in violence. If that's the parallel Gibson is going for, it comes without any attempt at awareness of what the Japanese were actually fighting for, or any examination of them beyond a monolithic evil. I'm honestly surprised this film is as acclaimed as it is, even with the things Gibson does well as a visual filmmaker.

 

I don't know about all that. Not every movie needs to be examined to that degree, especially if it keeps you from enjoying a really well done movie.

 

Films are saying things with every frame. They communicate messages and ideas in their construction. The most skilled filmmakers do it purposefully and exactly. Sometimes, the best filmmakers can make a work so complex that there is no definitive reading of it, instead its left open to possibility after possibility. Every film can be examined to that degree and further, and for some (obviously, myself included), examination at that level can bring about the most fascinating and rewarding aspects of a film. There is always room for complexity in a discussion, nuance in understanding a work. There are conversations and thoughts to be had beyond "this was good" or "this was bad".

Others feel differently. That's completely fine. It's okay to watch a movie purely for entertainment and not think about it any deeper than that. But it's not "keeping me from enjoying a really well done movie", it's how I authentically feel. It's what I get from the work. Not everyone feels the same on every movie or album or painting or sculpture or any piece of art. That's okay. If you want to talk about anything I bring up, cool. If you don't, also fine. I'm not trying to take away anyone's experience with a work, so please don't try to dismiss mine.