You Were Never Really Here

The outrageousness of "You Were Never Really Here"'s plot just serves as a huge, self-conscious pointer of how unimportant the story is to the film. From "Taxi Driver" to "Taken", there are just too many plot-driven movies about unwilling heroes rescuing abducted girls out there already.

Now, after the film itself admits its redundancy in terms of narrative, it can only prove its mettle as an exercise in character study and style. And quite a stylish character study "You Were Never Really Here" is, with Joaquin Phoenix carrying the whole weight of its ninety minutes of duration on his shoulders - no wonder the man had to bulk up in order to play Joe.

So, after the director Lynne Ramsay, Mr. Phoenix and all their collaborators (at cinematography, editing, music score, et c.) have shown their full flex as cinema artisans, "You Were Never Really Here" can't help but ring hollow as the last scene at the diner fades out. And that is because the movie has excused itself of the task of telling a sound story to the audience. Apparently, it seems satisfied at just being this post-Scorsese, post-Tarantino afterthought (hints at foot fetishism scattered all around included), lacking the gravitas of a believable plot at its core.

Yes I am aware that many thought this film was slow. However, it the slow and thoughtful burn of this film that makes it so unique and well done. It is, overall, a story about trauma and how this trauma has afflicted the protagonist. This is what trauma looks like. I already loved it but could further appreciate it after viewing a video by screened titled " How to Show Trauma" Just watch this video and then decide for yourself. Everything about this film was very much intentional and for good reason.

So let us focus on positives . Joaquin Phoenix is great as always. He is an amazing actor and he is in control with every character that he plays .

The movie in general has a nice premise and an interesting little plot . There is also a deeper meaning in this one to question the people around us BUT The movie is extremely boring and slow. Even the more thrilling scenes are bland. Pacing of the movie overall is very slow and camera work is also quite bad for my taste.

There are a lot of unecessery close ups and there are multiple shots from very weird angles that are not made for some context or plot , they were made to make a movie more artistic and it fails 90% of time to make it seem like that. The whole movie just feels like someone trying really really hard to make a "deep thrilling artistic" movie.

Taxi Driver has some similar scenes like this movie but they are done quite well and they immerse you into a dark world and a dark mind. This movie tries to do that but it doesn't quite work.

There are some scenes that happen in water and I think those are made great but nothing you have not already seen before.

There were times where I wanted to fast forward some scenes and not just watch a guy walk for 10 minutes and that happens quite often. That is why I think the premise is great but the plot is stretched way too much and the whole story could have been told in like 20 minutes.

I still did enjoy it to some level. I didn't want to turn it off because it intriged me to watch it till the end , to hopefuly see a big payoff or explenation of some sort for certain things.

In the end , it all ends up pretty bland and leaves a bad taste after watching it.

If you like slow paced movies with a character study that is just weird at best and sprinkled with tiny bits of deeper thoughts then this movie is for you.

If you are a casual movie fan that has seen movies from more genres or casually watch suspense thriller movies than this one will be too bland for you.

PlatinumanYT 6.4.

I'm still processing this. The comparisons to "Taxi Driver" are fair: the performances, the director's vision and exectution, the understated script..... those are some of the similarities. The major differences, for me include the depth to which the protagonist's trauma is not played out for us to view as observers, but drip-fed in increasing doses, often from a first-person perspective, which in my watching felt more like we were experiencing Joe's trauma with him, rather than seeing it played out for us. The film also has a lot of relevance to current discussions of modern masculinity, and here the gendering of social roles is presented very much more as a question than a statement.

If you prefer to finish watching a film with your friends and be able to agree pretty much without discussion on what it was about, then I suspect you might find this film pretentious or light on plot. If you're the type who enjoys discovering what your friends think they just saw, and don't mind spending a lot the movie time watching Joaquin Phoenix' face doing some really admirable acting, then this film might be as worthwhile for you as it was for me.

In the realm of cinematic artistry, Lynne Ramsay's "You Were Never Really Here" emerges as a film that defies the conventional boundaries of its genre. It is a film that, with its dreamlike cadence and haunting visual poetry, captures the viewer in a grip as tight and compelling as the narrative it unfolds.

Joaquin Phoenix delivers a performance of such raw intensity that it becomes the beating heart of the film. His portrayal of Joe, a man whose life is a mosaic of trauma and violence, is both a towering achievement and a deeply human one. Phoenix's Joe is a man of few words, but each silence speaks volumes, each glance carries the weight of a thousand emotions. He is the weary titan of this story, carrying the burdens of his past with a stoicism that is as heartbreaking as it is admirable.

Ramsay's direction is nothing short of masterful. She weaves a tapestry of images and sounds that are as beautiful as they are disturbing. The film's score, a dissonant symphony by Jonny Greenwood, is accentuating the film's atmosphere of disquiet. The cinematography is a chiaroscuro of the soul, painting each scene with the shades of Joe's turbulent inner world.

The narrative structure of "You Were Never Really Here" is a bold choice. Ramsay opts for an elliptical storytelling style that mirrors the fragmented psyche of its protagonist. This choice is both the film's greatest strength and its most significant challenge to the viewer. The plot does not unfold; it reveals itself in shards, each piece a glimpse into the abyss that Joe stares into every day.

However, this very narrative choice may also be where the film falters for some. The disjointed nature of the storytelling, while thematically resonant, can at times leave the audience grasping for a thread to hold onto. The film demands attention and patience, and not all viewers are willing to give it the concentration it requires.

The violence, while never gratuitous, is visceral and unflinching. It serves the story, but it also runs the risk of alienating those with a more sensitive disposition. The film's resolution, too, may strike some as abrupt, leaving a lingering question as to the ultimate fate of its characters.

"You Were Never Really Here" is a film that, like its protagonist, is not easily forgotten. It is a challenging, evocative piece of cinema that dares to delve into the darkness of the human condition. While it may not find universal acclaim due to its unconventional approach and somber themes, it stands as a testament to the power of visual storytelling and the enduring strength of a well-crafted character study.