really expected to dislike this review since i enjoyed the film so much and appreciated its critique of state power, but these are really great points that i hadn’t considered before now
I just saw the movie, and I agree with most of what you mention in your review. But I disagree with Sean Penn's performance which I found lacking in any attempt at portraying the bad guy or antagonist. It's as if he had his own spin on what a villain of this type would typify, and he missed the mark. A little subtlety would have intrigued me more, but his over-the-top sneer and strange, wooden gait left me thinking, "Is that all he's got here to make this guy come to life?" It just didn't work for me. Honestly, with the uneven storytelling and long stretches of boring sequences, I felt as if I'd been taken hostage for nearly three hours. I even imagined walking out if I hadn't been watching it with a family member. I liked Anderson's Licorice Pizza. But the others? A definite no to Boogie Nights, Magnolia, and Punch Drunk Love. I should've known better!
Whew! Based on the reviews, I was really looking forward to this. Now I'm not sure. This review is almost the opposite from what I read in Variety and from another Substack critic. The latter review did mention one thing that concerned me: there are nuns in this film that grow marijuana. I'm surprised you didn't bring that up since this is a Catholic Substack. However, considering all the issues you had with the movie, I guess you thought that was the least of its problems.
I was going to mention it, but to consider them actual nuns would be an insult to all religious sisters, so I didn't really tie it in. It was just more examples of unlikeable characters and I felt I had already beat that horse to death.
Yeah, I wonder what the motivation is behind that choice of characters besides mocking religious vocations. I mean, why nuns? And this ties into your point about the suspension of disbelief the film requires: why would there be a secret convent full of outlaw "nuns" growing marijuana in the middle of nowhere if it's not because the writers just want to mock religious vocations?
The nuns are not supposed to be Catholic, but instead are based on real-world marijuana "nuns." There is something to be said about the world's need to ape Catholicism even when trying its best to reject it. Something too powerful in the Church, perhaps.
Weird, and I definitely have a problem with these people, but I don't fault the film for including these people as yet another example of the strange ways radical leftism presents itself.
really expected to dislike this review since i enjoyed the film so much and appreciated its critique of state power, but these are really great points that i hadn’t considered before now
I just saw the movie, and I agree with most of what you mention in your review. But I disagree with Sean Penn's performance which I found lacking in any attempt at portraying the bad guy or antagonist. It's as if he had his own spin on what a villain of this type would typify, and he missed the mark. A little subtlety would have intrigued me more, but his over-the-top sneer and strange, wooden gait left me thinking, "Is that all he's got here to make this guy come to life?" It just didn't work for me. Honestly, with the uneven storytelling and long stretches of boring sequences, I felt as if I'd been taken hostage for nearly three hours. I even imagined walking out if I hadn't been watching it with a family member. I liked Anderson's Licorice Pizza. But the others? A definite no to Boogie Nights, Magnolia, and Punch Drunk Love. I should've known better!
Whew! Based on the reviews, I was really looking forward to this. Now I'm not sure. This review is almost the opposite from what I read in Variety and from another Substack critic. The latter review did mention one thing that concerned me: there are nuns in this film that grow marijuana. I'm surprised you didn't bring that up since this is a Catholic Substack. However, considering all the issues you had with the movie, I guess you thought that was the least of its problems.
I was going to mention it, but to consider them actual nuns would be an insult to all religious sisters, so I didn't really tie it in. It was just more examples of unlikeable characters and I felt I had already beat that horse to death.
Yeah, I wonder what the motivation is behind that choice of characters besides mocking religious vocations. I mean, why nuns? And this ties into your point about the suspension of disbelief the film requires: why would there be a secret convent full of outlaw "nuns" growing marijuana in the middle of nowhere if it's not because the writers just want to mock religious vocations?
The nuns are not supposed to be Catholic, but instead are based on real-world marijuana "nuns." There is something to be said about the world's need to ape Catholicism even when trying its best to reject it. Something too powerful in the Church, perhaps.
You mean they're a real thing? Do you have any sources for that?
Sure. I'm not an expert, I've just heard about them before. They're called the "Sisters of the Valley" and you can easily find stuff online.
Here is an article about them: https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/california-weed-cannabis-nun-sisters-valley-1272595/
And here is a video from the AP about them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYLQ807yCQ8
Weird, and I definitely have a problem with these people, but I don't fault the film for including these people as yet another example of the strange ways radical leftism presents itself.
Yeah, after reading that, I realize that the mockery of religious vocations is being done by those "nuns" rather than by their inclusion in the film