Seven Psychopaths

Mickeroo

Deleted User wrote: »

I've been trying to build up the interest to go see this but so far I've failed. The trailer did absolutely nothing for me, it just seemed like the film was trying too hard to sell its self as hip and trendy. Add in the fact that last time I saw it I was with a friend who seemed to think it was the funniest thing ever made and pretty much fell out of his chair laughing and I'm thinking its a film made for those people go think Tarantino is God's gift to cinema. Far as my friend is concerned and this is from his Facebook "Seven Psychopaths and Django Unchained are the best films of 2012". The fact that he has seen neither doesn't enter into it.

It's a pretty different film to what the trailers depict.

Mickeroo

Mickeroo wrote: »

It's a pretty different film to what the trailers depict.

Properly head to see it tomorrow when tickets are cheap. Don't get me wrong I like McDonagh, the cast is fantastic and there concept seems fun but I just can't get excited for it especially after seeing both Skyfall and the Master last week.

krudler

Deleted User wrote: »

I've been trying to build up the interest to go see this but so far I've failed. The trailer did absolutely nothing for me, it just seemed like the film was trying too hard to sell its self as hip and trendy. Add in the fact that last time I saw it I was with a friend who seemed to think it was the funniest thing ever made and pretty much fell out of his chair laughing and I'm thinking its a film made for those people go think Tarantino is God's gift to cinema. Far as my friend is concerned and this is from his Facebook "Seven Psychopaths and Django Unchained are the best films of 2012". The fact that he has seen neither doesn't enter into it.

Give it a go, I think its annoying that people are calling it Tarantino-esque, when it just a lazy comparison. Its non linear and people have good dialogue, cos nobody but Tarantino can do that sure. The trailer sells it as something it isnt as well, can't go into more about it but it doesnt give anything away about the actual plot, you think the trailer gives the entire premise away but it doesnt.

krudler

krudler wrote: »

Give it a go, I think its annoying that people are calling it Tarantino-esque, when it just a lazy comparison. Its non linear and people have good dialogue, cos nobody but Tarantino can do that sure. The trailer sells it as something it isnt as well, can't go into more about it but it doesnt give anything away about the actual plot, you think the trailer gives the entire premise away but it doesnt.

I do plan on seeing it just not excited for it is all. For me the Tarantino comparison is a negative as I find him to be a rather dull and derivative film maker who can produce an enjoyable film but not one with any real originality kinda like the other McDonagh brother whose the Guard was beyond bad.

don ramo

handsomecake wrote: »

One of the worst films I've ever seen. ****ing horrendous

go watch a lot more films please:),

it was an ok film, as usual walken, rockwell and harrelson deliver some funny performances, but i thought they could have done more with them TBH,

the cut scene at the end was funny, totally forgot about that guy:D:D

an enjoyable film that id happily recommend seeing, but its noting special,

krudler

Deleted User wrote: »

I do plan on seeing it just not excited for it is all. For me the Tarantino comparison is a negative as I find him to be a rather dull and derivative film maker who can produce an enjoyable film but not one with any real originality kinda like the other McDonagh brother whose the Guard was beyond bad.

its worth seeing for Rockwell alone he steals the entire movie. Walken is..Walken but he's got some of the best moments, I'd compare it more to Shane Black than Tarantino tbh. Its not amazing or anything but definitely worth seeing, little overlong in some sequences but when its good its hilarious.

Raekwon

I went to see this over the weekend and was very underwhelmed by it. I really enjoyed In Bruges but this had none of the charm and dry humour that made that film so popular.

It all felt very contrived yet it meandered all over the place and the jokes felt very forced and fell flat for the most part. In saying that the people behind me were in hysterics so I suppose it wasn't as bad I thought.

I really liked Tom Waits character but I thought Olga Kurylenko had far too little screen time, I could literally stare at her all day, so that made it all the more disappointing for me personally.

catallus

Saw this last night, one of the best movies I've seen all year, definitely the most interesting and charmingly funny film of the year. It's genuinely intelligent and funny at the same time, the actors were brilliant,

even the hooker was great!

, the story was entertaining. Very impressed and it was a great experience. It's actually the most I've laughed all year.

Table Top Joe

Just back from this,im very much in the "warmed over Tarantino,not as clever as it thinks it is" camp,its enjoyable enough but largely forgettable,without the cast attached it would have vanished like a fart in the wind

Hank Schrader

What a let down


Tripe with one or two small bits of icing

handsomecake

Mocha Joe wrote: »

You must not have seen many films so...

dya reckon so son

Went to see this tonight and I must say that I bloody enjoyed it. Really was one of the more entertaining trips to the cinema in a long time. Yes the film is a bit of a mess, the whole breaking of the fourth wall, the meta thing felt forced and contrived and I'd imagine that McDonagh was using it simply because his script just wasn't good enough. It seemed to me that much like Martin in the film the title came first and everything after that was hard work.

The Tarantino comparison in my mind is unnecessary and unfair to the film, it's far more enjoyable than any of Tarantino's more self indulgent films. The film reminded me a lot of Adaptation, it pretty much was Adaptation with splosions. Sure the film could with a recast be perfectly at home on the bottom shelf of the local video store back in 1994 but McDonagh was smart enough to ensure that the weighty moments such as

Hans tape recording

were more than trite melodrama.

We actually felt for the characters as their world went to shit. A lot of this is down more to the exceptional performances than to the script, Rockwell in particular was brilliant and his Irish accent was the films comedic highlight for me. Speaking of comedy, I have to say that I didn't find the film particularity funny. There were a number of chuckle worthy moments but nothing out and out funny and a lot of the laughter in the cinema seemed to be very forced though I'm one of those people who believes that if you slapped a laugh track on every film a good portion of the audience would laugh because they were being told to. But as my friend said after I do laugh at what others would find inappropriate so perhaps I'm not he best judge of comedy.

Special mention has to go to the soundtrack and score which were both excellent, it really complimented what was occurring onscreen and I'm already downloading it and looking forward to sticking it on next time I sit at my computer and write.

Seven Psychopaths is not a perfect film, it's not even a particularly great film but it knows that and while the whole meta thing is nowhere near as smart as McDonagh thinks it is, in fact it stinks of self indulgence but you know what none of that matters as the film is a hell of a lot of fun.

Forgot to mention, but did anyone else catch the Crispin Glover cameo during the Harry Dean Stanton segment?

johnny_ultimate

Kind of on the fence about this one. If I was to use one word to describe it, it would be 'underwritten' - lots of good ideas, but not quite there.

I really enjoyed all the flashbacks and tangents - thought they were consistently intriguing and unusual from 'the priest' to 'the Quaker'. The graveyard sequence was a giddy highlight of the film's metatextual nature. A good strong cast, even if none of them really play beyond their established types. Nicely shot film too - a little on the orange side, but the desert sequences particularly looked great. Great to see Kitano on screen, even if it's only for five seconds

Still, there was something 'off' about it as a whole. Definitely nowhere near as witty or amusing as it thought it was. Ironically, I agree that McDonagh's self-depreciating jabs about genre and female characters only drew attention to those very same issues - why laugh at yourself when you make absolutely no attempt to address the same? Abbie Cornish and Olga Kurylenko drew the short stick, no doubt about it. A film of clichés that jokes about clichés - a very odd proposition indeed. The second half was a particular mess I thought, and the film was top-heavy with uneven subplots and characters. I love Tom Waits, for example, but I really don't think the film would have suffered too much if his stuff had been excised (although I did enjoy

the killing of Zodiac sequence

)

Tarantino isn't the right comparison here - Adaptation is. There was a film that followed through on all its postmodern ideas and scathing deconstruction of screenwriting formula. Seven Psychopath tries, but stumbles repeatedly. I undoubtedly enjoyed it due to some well-realised sequences and ideas, but they were ultimately overwhelmed by rough edges and the very same problems the film threatens to dismantle.

Edit: I might be imagining it, but did

Aaron Eckhart

make a cameo in the courtroom sequence?! Really, really looked like him.

Mr E

Just got back from seeing this now. Pretty poor overall, with little nuggets of genius and a small handful of really funny bits. It's like McDonagh was making it up as he went along, then shot the first draft. It had a very good cast, but the writing and the story definitely let it down.

Mr E

Mr E wrote: »

Just got back from seeing this now. Pretty poor overall, with little nuggets of genius and a small handful of really funny bits. It's like McDonagh was making it up as he went along, then shot the first draft. It had a very good cast, but the writing and the story definitely let it down.

To me it felt like many of the short vignettes and outlandish moments such as the grave yard shoot out we're something McDonagh wrote simply to amuse himself while suffering thorough the writing of the script. I think anyone who has sat in front of a blank page with no idea where to go next has of e it. The only difference is the everyone else deletes those pages and isn't so self indulgent as to Belueve them worthy of inclusion in an actual film.

Queen-Mise

Just back the cinema after seeing this and I thoroughly enjoyed it. I was laughing from the very first kill (albeit on my own a lot )) I adore this black humour and liked the 4th wall aspect of it. And I'd watch Christopher Walken do anything in a movie.:)

I read the other reviews above and can't really give a pro/con view of - if it entertains me for 90+ mins, then it is a success.

The recurring jokes/ideas going through the movie were very good -

monk (was not expecting that take on the monk), alcoholism, and the dig at England was genius.

I'd describe it as In Bruges-esque/Born Again Killers/Six Characters/and a bit of Beckett...


It is a hard film to talk about without sounding like a complete tool.

Kev_2012

I went to see this last night and absolutely couldn't stop laughing for half of the film. I though it was very good! I noticed that Colin Farrell's accent was really odd (almost american) at the start and seemed to become more and more North Dublin as the film went on!

I think the highlight of the film was

where Billy told his story about how the final shootout should go. Especially where he couldn't emphasize enough how much Kaya would get "mown down". Hilarious!

Potential-Monke

Well i can always count on Boards.ie Film forum for one thing: if the majority of people on here don't like it, i probably will.

Personally think it was one of the best films i've seen in a long time. I'm not a film process guy, i like being entertained. I usually don't deconstruct a film. I don't notice the cliches, this meta thing that's been talked about, or the 4th wall which i think i know what that is. I do notice great (albeit typical) performances, and i really felt for Hans. Walken done a terrific job, but i'm slightly biased by him anyway. On equal standing was Rockwell, but he was always good as the crazy guy.

For me, 10/10, as an average joe film fan.

Savman

Have to admit this was something of a guilty pleasure for me anyway, Rockwell steals the show but Walken has a killer deadpan delivery.

Funnier than most box office 'comedies' and it's nice to see a film that doesn't take itself too seriously, even pokes fun at itself.

WindSock

Didn't know anything about this film going to see it last night and have to say I enjoyed it. It was refreshing and I didn't think it was trying to be as clever as it's made out to be from the reviews here. I laughed for much of it and loved Rockwell's character. I guess I just didn't have as high expectations going in so could switch off and watch it without a critical eye.

I agree about parts of the plot and dialogue being stitched together, I didn't take to

Walken's bit about the Vietnamese psycho. I definitely think that was a bit of a baseless shoehorn moment, especially with the Vietnamese speaking hooker who they are trying to give another dimension to a female character to.

The bits where they call characters fat / nagger / polack and Irish drunk are of course not highbrow moments but that's where I think that its just a film not trying to be more than it is.
It's not the best film I have seen this year but it is certainly not the worst.

The Princess Bride

I did enjoy this,but had expected it to be more polished, based on McDonagh's previous efforts.

Walken was brilliant-worth seeing for him alone.

Galvasean

I've seen it twice now. It's kept me out of the Hobbit so far, which is a big achievemnet considering how much of a geek I am.

DanceLover13

i have to admit i really enjoyed this film, it wouldnt normally be my type of movie ( i like the girly ones, notebook etc etc) but i thought this film was very good. the plot and storyline where very well written. i would give it an 8/10

nyarlothothep

7 Psychopaths, not a half bad film, a lot of people gave it negative reviews but I thought it was quite good though nothing exceptional. As always Christopher Walken lifts it with his distinctive delivery. I was expecting to dislike it based on the way it was portrayed in the trailer but it was completely different and therefore entertaining. I didn't think it was trying to be clever, I got the impression it didn't take itself seriously and that there was a certain freeform element and disregard for rules pertaining to the fourth wall, it would almost be the filmic equivalent of a drifting, listless conversation, the dialogue reflected that.

augustus gloop

its trying to be clever as people have said, and anyone i have known to like it are the type of person who thinks they are clever enough to see "deeper" for want of a better word into the layers and dialogue deliveries....
biggest event of the movie for crowd entertainment was Rockwells oirish accent.
very poor flick imo:(

Liam McPoyle

Saw this last night and thoroughly enjoyed it.

I'm a big Sam Rockwell fan and loved him in this.

I felt it was a really good commentary on the modern cinema expectation of the majority of the cinema going public ie they expect a big pay off at the end and when they don't get it they bitch and moan,my own experiences of leaving a packed screening of No Country For Old Men springs automatically to mind.

Really liked this and it's definitely on the to buy list.

I've not seen In Bruges so maybe I had no expectations of this as that was very well received by the majority of people I know that have seen it.

MagicMarker

Turned it off after 30 minutes, woeful.

FloatingVoter

I liked it...not as good as In Bruges but the same sort of dark comedy. The meaning of life is not contained in the picture and I don't think it was intended to be. Bit like Oceans Eleven - you get the impression everybody was having a good laugh making the movie.

NinjaK

Though it was good, give it 3/5. Didnt like the Irish references.

0ph0rce0

NinjaK wrote: »

Though it was good, give it 3/5. Didnt like the Irish references.

:rolleyes:

FloatingVoter

NinjaK wrote: »

Though it was good, give it 3/5. Didnt like the Irish references.

ehhhm...we are renowned worldwide for our little drinking habit. Especially our writing brigade.

NinjaK

FloatingVoter wrote: »

ehhhm...we are renowned worldwide for our little drinking habit. Especially our writing brigade.

And the Jews are known to to tight with money, doesnt mean they like it.

e_e

The drunken Irish stereotype does make me roll my eyes too. Especially when the Irish themselves feel they need to live up to it, ridiculous.

FloatingVoter

NinjaK wrote: »

And the Jews are known to to tight with money, doesnt mean they like it.

Nope, we don't and they don't. The Scots also have that reputation but both groups are aware it exists and let it pass over their heads in the main just as Colin Farrell does in the movie. The fact it was an airhead making the statements helped make it realistic. Christopher Walken who is playing a far smarter character didn't give a toss.

Mickeroo

MagicMarker wrote: »

Turned it off after 30 minutes, woeful.

Watch the rest, the film takes quite a turn in the second half. You'll probably still hate it, but the film really can't be judged on the first 30 minutes imo.

GHOST MGG

worst movie ive seen in years tbh
even the wife who loves christopher walken was like wtf did i just sit through.
woeful 1/5

Rabidlamb

Bought into the premise & loved it.
Most enjoyable film I've seen in a long time.

Easily 4/5

2ndcoming

I'm amazed at the wild swings of opinion on this, if Django Unchained is as good I'll be pleasantly surprised.

People complaining it felt thrown together, well it kind of had to given the premise. That kind of meta-narrative and self-awareness is an extremely hard thing to get right on film. Brendan O'Carroll could certainly learn a thing or two from it on how to subtly break the fourth wall.

The extremely critical review earlier in the thread complaining about mobster scumbags being racist, abusive... scumbags, would you suggest a more delicate dialogue would better suit these... scumbags? The complaint about the blatantly undeveloped female characters as well, not every film has to conform to over-sensitive 21st century political correctness, they weren't major parts in this film, no big deal. I basically disagreed with the entire review, don't rush out to watch Gran Torino anytime soon, it might hurt your feelings.

gambithh

first half excellent,runied by a shambolic second half.
a film flawed for trying to be too clever for itself.a real shame.2/5

Psychedelic

It was okay but not that memorable, a few mildly funny bits, and like others have already said the meta narrative just doesn't work here and the whole thing is a mess. I just didn't care about the plot or connect with the characters so by the end the whole film just felt pointless.

I love meta-fiction in films and books and when it's done right, as in Adaptation, it's great, but done wrong like in Seven Psychopaths or Rubber, it comes across as forced, and so obvious in its attempts to be clever that it becomes annoying and show-offy, but with no real substance behind it. 5/10

cassid

I liked it, like Farrell so maybe that influences me somewhat

The Pontiac

MagicMarker wrote: »

Turned it off after 30 minutes, woeful.

I managed to last 40 minutes. Tripe.

Hunchback

e_e wrote: »

The drunken Irish stereotype does make me roll my eyes too. Especially when the Irish themselves feel they need to live up to it, ridiculous.

Yes. This is exceptionally irritating:mad:

Can someone explain the Vietnamese thing a bit more? I was watching it with my Vietnamese gf and as if the "drunk Irish guy" stereotype wasn't enough for me, they throw in the My Lai Massacre and what felt like a random "psychopath" Vietnamese monk who dreamed about revenge but self-immolated instead.

The scene wasn't really great viewing and I couldn't even explain it, it being lost on both of us. We really enjoyed the movie up to that point but afterwards, it felt like this director is a bit obsessed with putting hookers and the subject of Vietnam in the same scene just like In Bruges.

indough

i think it was somewhat of a ham-fisted attempt to add some substance to a film which is essentially about nothing. i did quite enjoy it in parts but as a whole it didn't really work.

Fysh

Deleted User wrote: »

Can someone explain the Vietnamese thing a bit more? I was watching it with my Vietnamese gf and as if the "drunk Irish guy" stereotype wasn't enough for me, they throw in the My Lai Massacre and what felt like a random "psychopath" Vietnamese monk who dreamed about revenge but self-immolated instead.

The scene wasn't really great viewing and I couldn't even explain it, it being lost on both of us. We really enjoyed the movie up to that point but afterwards, it felt like this director is a bit obsessed with putting hookers and the subject of Vietnam in the same scene just like In Bruges.

I think it was meant to be a comment on the whole "difficult second screenplay" thing, in that there's this character (or, being honest about it, these seven characters) who are described as "psychopaths", but there's not really any story around them or any depth to their character.

Given the starting point provided for the Vietnamese psychopath, the story given by Walken is about as meaningful a conclusion as you're going to get, clunky and daft though it is. Which I think is a not-as-clever-as-McDonagh-hoped comment on the difficulty of writing a film involving interesting characters and good dialogue while accommodating Hollywood studio notions of how to make a film with "broad audience appeal".

I could, of course, be completely wrong

Tar.Aldarion

Saw it tonight, overall a great film, but you can see how it thought it was cleverer than it was, a bit over the top. Still, great watch and a departure from the crap I've been seeing.

Also notice in the graveyard scene Hans is standing next to a grave marked Gruber