After the crushing failure of the melodramatic opus “Gone With”, created not without the influence of Madonna to make a film with her beloved in the lead role, Guy Ritchie, who had already been nicknamed “Mr. Madonna” in those years, attempted to return to the territory of the success of the tapes “Maps, money, and two trunks”, and “Big jackpot”. However, with the return to the origins, something did not work out - Guy Ritchie was not enough to direct a criminal plot in the spirit of the already mentioned hits, he, along with producer and screenwriter Luc Besson, decided to densely manure his brainchild completely crazy-looking cacophony from various philosophical teachings, spiritual practices, and quotes of famous personalities of the distant past. In short, for some reason I decided to make a “smart” movie “not for everyone”, but did not take into account the main thing.
And the main problem, because of which the "Revolver" after the "Gone" was sent to criticism in scrap and universally failed at the box office (except that the "Golden Raspberry" it was not nominated) is the exorbitant artificiality and torture of what is happening, where the main artistic components do not want to harmonize with each other, forming a pretentious, tense, and generally falling into insanity cinematic likeness of some newfangled book on the non-existent science of "Motivational Psychology", or an early analogue of "contactivating." If it was an attempt to play David Lynch, then it is commendable as an attempt, but any work had artistic logic and formed into a single picture, despite the abundance of mysteries and mysteries, a bizarre interweaving of the real and the unreal. Guy Ritchie, however, wherever he gets, shoves “smart quotes” one by one, crumbled in one salad, and repeating them many times, without even thinking about what place Banking theory has to do with Machiaveli, chess, and other things. Esoteric? And in general - to what is happening, submitted in the format of a teenage edge-movie, where Jason Statham plays the main role? To explain his character's mental illness? In general, the very presence of long hair on the head of this actor in itself looks strange.
As a plus, it can be noted that the film is visually very pleasant. “Tasty” picture, made in a juicy color solution, from the first frames attracts and pleases the eye. And here just works the infamous effect of greater significance, when beautiful and pathos you simply "breed", and the king, in the end, is negligent. Having promised to say something important with a sophisticated look, the naive-looking author himself gets confused in these aphorisms, theories, and teachings, stuttering and completely losing the thread of the conversation, but maintaining the full seriousness of the expression. As a set of cheat sheets for the disciplines of "Societal Studies" and "Philosophy" in the first courses of the Institute, "Revolver" can and will be useful to someone. As a work of the most important of the arts – alas, does not pull to the declared level of importance due to its sucking from the finger.
- Why is the movie called "Revolver"? It just sounds cool. (c) Guy Ritchie
- I really liked this movie. I think he's very brave, macho. (c) Madonna
A schizophrenic film to the music of Vivaldi... Don’t look, if you understand something, you can’t explain it. "Gmar Tikun" is not reached... Guy Ritchie was fascinated by Kabbalistics from his wife, fortunately, he escaped in time... Conclusion - all the best created before marrying Madonna, now slowly moving away from all this, again creates... That's how I started. . . British Tarantino... And in this movie, and David Fincher from Guy no... . Why? Because he's Guy Ritchie and nobody else!
This film evokes mixed feelings. Complex and mysterious, it offers non-standard ideas and turns the usual ideas about the criminal drama.
In the center of the plot is Jake Green, played by Jason Statham, a street player who after serving in prison realizes that he does not yet know anything about the real game in life. He enters a deadly game with two sinister card dealers to avenge the humiliation and losses he has suffered.
One of the main themes of the film is the power of psychology, overcoming your fears and destroying your ego. The director uses many symbols and metaphors to convey these ideas. Some scenes may seem confusing and incomprehensible, but this only increases the mystery and intrigue of the film.
The acting in Revolver is commendable. Jason Statham perfectly copes with the role of Jake Green, completely immersed in the image and conveying his emotions. Also noticeable is the excellent work of actors Ray Liott and Andrea Riseborough.
The design of the film deserves special attention. Dark and cold shades, high-quality shooting and an atmosphere of unpredictability create impressions of the film that will be remembered for a long time.
However, the film also has some drawbacks. The plot is sometimes confusing and difficult to understand. Some viewers may lose the thread of history and be left disappointed. Also, some dialogues sound abrupt and do not always clearly convey the meaning.
In general, Revolver is a film that is interpreted individually by each viewer. This is a non-standard and at the same time attractive idea, mixed with a complex plot and excellent acting work. If you are ready for an unusual cinematic experience, then this film is worth watching.
Perhaps in the work of many directors there comes a moment when you want to try yourself in an unusual cinematic genre or shoot something atypical for your work. Guy Ritchie was no exception, who decided to move away from his criminal comedy dramas about bandits. Ritchie's first attempt at Ritchie in the face of romantic melodrama ' Gone ' to put it mildly, failed. What was Ritchie’s unexpected omaj towards David Lynch? Let's figure it out.
The plot of this film revolves around Jake Green, who gets into an unpleasant situation. Green decides to take part in a card game with the criminal boss Mac and wins a large sum. Mako decides to take revenge on Jake for insulting him. But it turns out to be only a small fraction of the trouble that falls on Jake's shoulders. After all, he has already caught the attention of the mysterious and powerful Mr. Gold.
It is worth admitting that Guy Ritchie wrote a very complex and at the same time exciting script, which fortunately did not spoil Luc Besson, who joined as a co-author at the last stage of production. As if in contrast to his previous works, the stories of which developed too literally and as if head-on. Which perfectly played on the criminal setting of stories and the hooligan nature of the story. In this case, Ritchie managed to tell an extremely complex, intricate and deep story, the main essence of which is held exactly ' between the lines ' But even at the same time, it is very difficult to see the main meaning of this story. Like the first moves in a chess game. When you do not yet realize what consequences your next move will lead to and clearly reflecting this already in the fact that chess has a very important role in the development of this story.
The heart of the whole story is certainly the main character of the tape Jake Green and the mysterious Mr. Gold, around the connection and identification of which the main semantic layer of this tape about the struggle of good and evil, angels and demons, black and white, which develops in each of us every moment of our lives. By willingly manifesting ourselves in our actions, decisions, and even those we did not dare to commit. At the same time, along with the realization of the main character of this tape 'truth', you involuntarily begin to think about who I really am and who lives inside me.
Guy Ritchie’s second experiment in an unexpected genre and format can certainly be called successful. Richie managed to create a very complex, heavy and confusing, but at the same time very exciting and almost fascinating film. The unaided eye can see the influence of the early works of Joe Carnahan and David Lynch. But to accuse Richie of plagiarism, and the picture itself in secondary is impossible. Especially considering that many of the directorial elements of this tape will later be used by him in "Rockroller" & #39; and "Gentlemen" & #39; Together, creating the impression of an extremely bizarre symbiosis of the crime drama genre familiar to Richie and an almost art-house noir thriller.
Jason Statham has long been held hostage to one image he plays in most of his paintings. However, in this tape, Statham managed to get out of his comfort zone and abstract as much as possible from his usual image. Definitely playing one of the best and strongest roles in his career. Damn good and Ray Liotta, who created another memorable and characteristic negative image. But only strengthening the impression of his game with a certain theatricality, which made the image brighter and more interesting. Also giving the audience one of the best works of the actor. And it is worth admitting that each member of the acting team proved himself more than worthy. Including not being a “good actor” Andre Benjamin.
9 out of 10
The revolver is Guy Ritchie’s second experiment in mastering an unusual genre and format, which took place as one of the best and strongest works in his work. Richie showed himself in this tape not only from an unusual side, but also did it very strongly. Having created on the screen a very heavy, heavy, confusing and complex, but at the same time a very exciting and fascinating film, to break away from which it is simply impossible and in the events of which you plunge from head to toe.
Dedicated to the bright memory of Ray Liott, whose life suddenly ended today. Ray was a talented actor and possessor of powerful charisma, which allowed to always admire his characters with special interest and delight. Rest in peace with Ray and thank you so much for your work, which will remain with us forever. Including the amazing voice acting of Grand Theft Auto: Vice City, playing which grew up a generation.
All sorts of personal growth trainings, self-teachers on sofa psychology, mindfulness practices and other life hacks of successful success can be replaced with a revolver. Guy Ritchie's "revolver." No, seriously, is there anything in this world that gives such an exhaustive answer to the question "What's wrong with my life?" in such a pretentiously graceful form? I unironically consider this the best work of Richie and one of the most brilliant films of our century.
I understand why the film failed at the box office at the time, and why many people did not understand it. “Revolver” at the first view is really very hard to fit into my head, in the middle I just paused and went out to get some fresh air. I don't think I could have stayed in the movie theater. But damn it, it's worth it! The film does not pamper the viewer with a convenient narrative, but stuns the crack of his own patterns, captures attention with vivid images, and then unceremoniously, even somehow everyday, injects him with the main idea directly into his mind. Oh, it's an awkward feeling when you feel like you've been brain-raped and you like it. The philosophy of this film does not need to “understand”, it just needs to be experienced.
"Revolver" is a good ground for film essayists of all stripes, for those who want to dig deep into the depths, and find the secret author's plans. You can talk for a long time about color theory, about the interweaving with the Bible, about references to chess games, about how well-known quotes fell into the epigraphs of parts of the film and other artistic experiments of Guy Ritchie, but should you? After all, we have a simple but grand thought: My main enemy is myself. And to solve external problems, you must first overcome your inner demons.
Yes, there is an amazing artwork done, the more I review the film, the more I am convinced that there is nothing superfluous here. Every word and every frame contributes, and completes this picture, making it exactly what it is. But, as I said, not all of this is for the general public. The general public needs an idea and a statement of it. The idea here is brilliant, and the presentation is perfect. Even without finding deeper meanings. No, of course, there is plenty of good food for thought for those who want to understand, for example, the intricacies of Mr. Gold’s image, or whether Zach and Avi exist in reality or only in Green’s mind. But for the casual viewer, so to speak, the main idea is freely available. Including this "Revolver" and beautiful.
This film will not divide your life into before and after, nor will it make you better. But it will break down your inner psychological barriers a little bit and sow a seed inside of it from which you can one day grow a new and improved version of your personality. Be sure to watch everyone!
P.S. And here is the good old Ritchev humor about the misadventures of hapless criminal authorities.
This movie is an atypical Guy Ritchie. So kind to our brother plot multiplayer, the unwinding of which is so pleasant to watch from the sofa, pecking a beer, turns out not to be jokingly involved in philosophy, closely bordering on psychology and psychiatry. As a result, instead of the expected relaxation from an elegant denouement, the viewer is suddenly put in the face of a mirror and asked to think. So while watching, I recommend drinking tea to keep your brain in good shape. Because the crying Ray Liotta in one of the trunks with the bagpipe in his hand is already a strong sight in itself.
Psychological, religious and Buddhist interpretation of the film
The literal meaning. The first rule of business is to protect your investment.
Jake Green, after serving in solitary confinement for 7 years, is released, where he and his brother Billy begin gambling. Thanks to the experience of wiring and strategic thinking skills acquired while serving his sentence, he is always lucky and quickly wins a fortune. Now Jake is faced with the task of taking revenge on his main enemy Dorothy Mac – the owner of the casino and the leader of the criminal gang, because of which he was imprisoned. As a result of an unexpected turn of events, Jake is forced to start a collaboration with hard-core scammers Avi and Zach. Further developments are dynamic and psychological. The abundance of vicissitudes, non-standard moves and semantic subtexts makes watching this film very exciting.
Psychological meaning. “The greatest enemy will hide where you least seek him.”
The revolver is aimed at exterminating the inner enemy of each ego – the prejudices incorporated into it. Such prejudices are accepted uncritically and make their behavior stereotypical and predictable. This is well demonstrated in several scenes of the film, for example, when Billy repeats word for word after informant, without critically rethinking the knowledge gained. Also, stereotyped thinking is demonstrated in parallel mounted footage of the reaction of criminal leaders Maki and Lord John to a failed deal. And of course, another confirmation is the famous monologue of the protagonist that we are all drug addicts sitting on the needle of approval, forcing us to act against our own interests and in favor of society. As rightly noted in the film, these prejudices become so ingrained in the human psyche that he begins to identify them with his inner self. Thus, the psychological trajectory of the revolver consists in the development of self-awareness, disidentification with false identities, getting rid of unproductive and alien prejudices, gaining independence and integrity.
Religious meaning. “War cannot be avoided, it can be postponed to the advantage of your opponent.”
All commentators have noticed that the three main characters bear the names of the biblical patriarchs: Avi (short for Abraham), Zach (short for Isaac) and Jake (short for Jacob). By the way, Jake’s surname – Green implies inexperience, immaturity and the principle of growth. But you should also pay attention to the leader of the mafia group Sam Gold. So Sam goes back to the Hebrew name Samuel, which translates as “the name of God.” Gold obviously means gold. This means that the name of God is gold. From this, it becomes clear that Sam Gold is the personification of idolatrous service to wealth, greed and delusion. This abstract principle dominates the structure of all the characters in the film, except the patriarchs, who, after years of ascetic practice in secluded cells, managed to gain spiritual freedom. Thus, the religious meaning of the Revolver becomes the path of spiritual purification of the main character. Jake goes through various ascetic practices: learns humility, mercy, resists the voice of the devil, part with secondary material wealth and joins the true spiritual wealth - faith and freedom.
Buddhist meaning. “The only way to get smarter is to play against stronger opponents.”
You can look at the Revolver and from the Eastern exercises. In this case, the world of the Revolver can be seen as a metaphor for the human world as a whole. Gambling, money and drugs are all attributes of Desire. A revolver is a death-bearing weapon that symbolizes suffering. The rotating drum of a revolver means the wheel of Samsara. The whole world of the revolver is an illusion, Maya. The characters of the film are mired in self-interest, cruelty, pride and other delusions. When Jake accepts the rules given to him in the form of a written canon during his retreat in prison, he embarks on an ascetic path of deliverance from suffering. His formula for success is the first commandments on the noble path, getting rid of suffering, and “breeding” is a trick in the fight against illusion. In this case, Zak and Avi are Bodhisattvas, enlightened beings who, through their infinite mercy, have decided to stay in this world and help others to gain enlightenment. It is very characteristic that Zack repeatedly calls Jake to mindfulness: “Wake up, Mr. Green!”, while Avi, playing chess with him, teaches the path, and with his wise advice and errands opens his eyes to the illusion. When bodhisattvas collect debts from debtors, they teach them responsibility and help to get rid of desires, promoting their spiritual growth. Obviously, the head of the mafia group Sam Gold in this case is Mara – a demon tempting ordinary people, leading to spiritual suicide.
Thus, Revolver, despite its external simplicity, turns out to be a deep multi-layered film that carries a whole layer of important meanings.
In principle, the film went well, but the ending, and in general the whole other half is delusional and absurd. Later Gentlemen and RocknRoller are much smarter, more beautiful and more posh.
What happens when you mix John Wick and Mulholland Drive? Well, probably Revolver. Of course, these are all conventions. Criminal "... Wick" so generally came out later "Revolver" and about any crossing and speech could not be at the time of the release of the tape Guy Ritchie.
In fact, I just remembered those two movies when I saw Revolver. If we take this film as a mere entertainment, we can see the story of a former player getting out of prison after a seven-year sentence and wanting revenge. It tells about everything that was in numerous flashbacks. And everything goes so chaotic that it becomes difficult at first, and then impossible to trace what was going on. But then it all loses all meaning. For the tape ceases to be standard.
When the hero at the same time hit by a car and not hit – I smelled “wrong”. Revolver stops being John Wick and becomes the originator of something completely different. It becomes full of metaphors. Like that arthouse. And everything went on such a track that I broke my head until it went round. In the end, after watching the movie, I had to admit that I understood 35 percent of it. But it didn't even bother me. There are always clues. He's the Internet. For example, Lynch's "Mulholland Drive" I didn't understand the last forty minutes at all. So the reception of the heart of the "Revolver" was more welcoming.
It’s all about knowing yourself. About the way and thorns and wolfs, through which we pass in this big and hostile world. Quotes, actions, characters, figures and silhouettes – everything here expresses something. A game with a color scheme fills the picture with additional meaning. The whole story seems to pass through the viewer. As if we were Mr. Green. A Avi and Zack our motivators to action
But of course, everything is not focused on Green. Ego of the same Maki plays with his "guinea" another joke ...
So it turned out that we are not just a genre of crime, but rather a psychological thriller. Symbolism is everywhere. And it seems to me that even if we did not understand something with reason, then we understood something with our soul without unnecessary explanation. The same numbers that express something biblical, let’s say. And chess is completely intertwined with the name (but this is what I learned from blogger reviews).
Jason Staetham in the lead role. Zac and Avi are Vincent Pastor and Andre Benjamin, respectively. Maca is Ray Liotta. But also Mark Strong in the role Utilizer can not go unnoticed, his hero also goes through the ordeals of purification (probably).
Who should I recommend this film to? "Highly" connoisseurs of "thinking" cinema. I appreciated the painting and recognized its importance. But there are definitely other tapes about this, which are superior to "Revolver by an order of magnitude." But... about them another time...
The more power you have in Gold's world, the less power you have in the real world. You're still in prison, you haven't really come out of it.
I sincerely wonder how one can admire “Maps...” or “Kush...” when there is “Revolver” among Guy Ritchie’s creations. 2005 is still the best year.
A time of marriage to Madonna (a truly equal couple) and learning the Cabal. I am not familiar with the teaching, especially it is closed. But, as you know, the truth is one, and it is beyond the limits of teachings, especially since the “Revolver” clearly reads echoes of Zen Buddhism.
The whole film is a koan (a philosophical puzzle designed to fool our mind, paralyze it to look beyond its chatter), just at the moment on the roof with the healthy Dimonds letters, when Avi “discovers” the state of affairs, and our mind tries to understand the grandeur of the game, we have the opportunity to hear our spirit (I will not use special terms).
The path to awakening ("Wake up, Mr. Green") is through fear and stopping the inner dialogue. In the elevator, we see the death of the ego. And after a peaceful, conscious Jake, 10 minutes to the end of the film.
All right, just the details.
Revolver is a man's film to the bone. The women here are assistants, whores and Rachel's girl. The other heroes are all men. Of these, only Jake is a bit human: he has family, past, feelings, reasoning, motive, compassion; the rest are doing business.
Weapons, modified phallus, in the modern world replaced by money, who has more, that thicker and longer. Money adds muscle, status, women and confidence. Where the action takes place is unknown, let us consider it the city of the vice of Western civilization. This world is ruled by Mr. Gold, whom no one sees, but he sees everyone.
At the very beginning, Jake is released from prison and the next plot is devoted to his spiritual liberation. The path that goes through fear:
Untreatable disease - fear of death
Give money - fear of losing money
The fear of losing control
For the next two minutes I will have to sweat and shake like the last whore at the sight of a dose.
Green, as we all know, means green. We have green nature (life) and envy. The color of dollars and the color of the fourth chakra, which is responsible for self-control, compassion, renewal, spiritual growth. And the purple, which Jake Green so likes - the seventh chakra - the door to bliss and knowledge.
Jake’s inner voice is also a character in the film. It sounds especially loud when the hero is hit by a car, a moment of reasoning that we are all sitting on the needle of approval and recognition.
What's Jake's real inner voice? What does it mean to say, “We are you... We didn’t take you with us because we loved you... You weren’t ready.” And the inner dialogue in the elevator: “I am you, but you are not me.” Subpersonalities. Some push up, others slow down development. I am not sure that it is worth disclosing this topic in an essay, if anyone is interested, he can read.
Maca is an interesting character, his nature is fully revealed. How demonic (visually) he is in the solarium scene. How his demonicity is played animatedly in a moment of anger. Vanity is his mortal sin. Cowardice is his dark side. How he is crushed under the pressure of calm Jake (a person who has moved to another level).
Several times the characters mention the snake: Avi compares Jake's play tactics to the behavior of a snake; Lord John says that greed is the only snake that cannot be tamed; there is a statue (or pillar) in Mack's chambers: Eve, wrapped in a serpent, embracing the Tree of Knowledge; tattoo on the body of a man Lord John: a samurai fights a snake.
Money – greed, power – vanity – all that is so important to our world, ruled by Gold, only interferes with the true Path of spiritual ascent. The path lies through fear, ridicule, misunderstanding, loneliness.
Revolver is a spiritual message from Guy Ritchie. If you are lucky, then you will determine the place where you least want to go and take a step towards fear. It's a man's way.
Sometimes the real problem is not so easy to understand.
Guy Ritchie has repeatedly proved to his fans, detractors and critics that despite his attraction to adventurous crime, he is actually a versatile and confident director, ready to experiment and surprise the audience with unexpected artistic solutions. Having managed to achieve universal fame and respect thanks to the unexpectedly shot exactly at the goal of the film “Cards, Money, Two Guns”, Richie felt special attention to his person, which almost immediately resulted in the trust of influential producers who gave him all the necessary funds and opportunities for the filming of his next project, known as “Big jackpot”. And this time, in addition to good old friends Jason Statham and Vinnie Jones, such world celebrities as Brad Pitt, Benicio del Toro and Dennis Farina also joined the talented Briton. And although Big Score was similar in many ways to his previous film, Ritchie showed completely new facets of his talent, laughing us with really funny jokes and twisting the story in a way that it was simply impossible to break away from it until the very end. Having said, as it seemed to him, everything possible on the topic of English crime, Ritchie decided not to dwell on the achieved values and in cooperation with his then wife Madonna, as well as the Italian production side, shot a frankly unexpected melodrama “Gone With”, which was strikingly different from everything that the director did before. And even though critics tore the picture to dust, Richie himself tried to create something fresh and unexpected, demonstrating that he is ready to develop, take risks and possibly make mistakes, but at the same time move forward and grow as a director. And to somewhat correct the slightly shaky situation, his next project Richie made “Revolver”, written with the participation of screenwriter and producer Luke Besson. Many fans of the director rightly reasoned that this work was supposed to bring Ritchie back to the days of "Card, Money, Two Guns" and "Big Score", but they probably never were so wrong. Of course, Guy Ritchie knows a lot about crime, but again, he tries not to sit still and makes every effort to make each of his films different something special, and “Revolver” certainly stands out against everything that was shot by the director in the past.
Directly the plot of the film introduces us to a passionate player and just a risky guy Jake Green (Statham), who tries to avoid unnecessary trouble and not to mess with people who are not trustworthy. However, Greene’s reputation in the gambling business is quite high, and therefore it is not so easy for him to ignore the attention that he is given by influential crime bosses. One of them is the eccentric, unpredictable and explosive Mac (Ray Liotta), who is not accepted to refuse. Having lost his leading player on the eve of the prestigious tournament, the mafia decides by all possible means to enlist Green’s support and sit him at the card table. And since there are no options for refusing the hero, he still has to accept Maki’s offer and do what is required of him. And it seems that the game goes as it should and you can breathe out with relief, as the unpredictable happens. Not only did a shootout ensue in the room, but after some time, the police came out on Jake, learning that he was involved in a risky illegal venture. Refusing to cooperate with the investigation, Green goes straight to prison, as he realizes that a locked mouth is, in fact, the only guarantee that he and his loved ones will be safe and sound. And just in prison begins a completely new stage in the life of the hero who decided to finally take his fate in hand and no longer depend on anyone. Having learned about a promising formula that allows you to win in virtually any gambling game, Jake decides to apply it in practice without much thought. And it seems that the knowledge gained works as it should. Now it is important to deal with excessively arrogant Maka, who felt all-powerful and often crosses all permissible boundaries. But even though Jake has become more self-confident and knows the formula for success, he shouldn’t relax, because life is too volatile. Today you can be the master of the world, and tomorrow you can fall into the nearest ditch with a lifeless corpse. And when the so-called guardian angels Avi (Andre Benjamin) and Zach (Vincent Pastor), everything becomes so confused that it becomes extremely difficult, if at all possible, to get out of this tangle.
It seems that all the details of the successful box office film from Guy Ritchie are fully available here, and the basis of the plot for the most part refers to the first two films of the director, but in fact the situation is absolutely unpredictable. Yes, we again get together with the hero Jason Statham in a criminal alteration, where bullets fly hail, and authoritative bosses brag about their power, but “Revolver” is more like not a criminal thriller with elements of comedy, but a philosophical parable, which is full of reasoning, artistic allusions and metaphors, the meaning of which is so easy to catch. Of all Guy Ritchie's films, Revolver is the most twisted and dramatic, and most viewers will have to revisit it repeatedly to get the point. And the fact that all the hidden and obvious meanings after this will become fully understandable. In addition, not everyone will want to re-swim the story of Jake Green, because the film can not be called an easy attraction. In some places, he can even cause irritation due to the fact that the truth constantly escapes from view and it is generally unclear what Ritchie was thinking when he sketched a script resembling an existential drama for an overly demanding viewer, often content with a complex festival program. But at the same time, it is impossible not to admit that the film has its own special style, it is original and makes us wait with interest what Richie will come up with next, what advice he will receive from Besson and what will ultimately end the story of the main character, who was perhaps the most amazing appearance of Jason Statham on the screen.
Not to say that the actor shines with any special emotional palette when playing Jake Green, but we go with him a long, penetrating and even frightening way to deal not only with Maka, but also with the psychology of the player himself. Greene may be trying to look immaculate and firm, but there’s a tough fight going on inside him. He wants a lot, but he is not omnipotent. He tends to make mistakes, and guaranteed success can jump out of hand at any time. And what Green will finally understand will be the main message of this film.
6 out of 10
Guy Ritchie ' European Tarantino' though Tarantino can only be one person. Tarantino himself. His films are fun and fun. Nice characters. Phrases can be divided into quotations. In general, entertainment, anywhere. Although most often they parody Tarantino and if you take 'Cards, money, two barrels', 'Big Kush', Rock and Roller', then in general they are similar. The boss of the mafia breeds the main characters like suckers, losers try to find money and even find, in the end, the boss dies for various reasons. Although there is a difference between these films, the theme is the same. The other films are also fun and dynamic. But the artistic part of the entertainment. The screenwriter, by the way, was Luc Besson, who is also known for films with similar dynamism. Speaking of the revolver, the film struck me.
This film teaches us that there are feelings that prevent us from living and developing. Because of them, the main character gets into bad situations and gradually thanks to his friends Jake becomes serene, and such a person is difficult to defeat, and even morally impossible.
If you look at the antagonist, this is an example of a comparison between him and the main character. Seeing the weaknesses of the G-d, the antagonist was confident in himself and his own power. However, seeing the serenity of his threats and crossing the path of Mr. Gold, the antagonist begins to lose ground and falls. The last scene just shows us what roughly can happen to us, namely depression and powerlessness, if we get into the same situation.
About this film is similar to the picture of Akira Kurasawa ' The Genius of Judo' where, according to Japanese religious tradition, to reach a state of serenity and thereby defeats enemies. The difference between the two films is that 'Revolver' shows the problem from the standpoint of psychology, a'The Genius of Judo' from the standpoint of religion.
From the actors I want to highlight Jason Statham. In my opinion, this is one of his best roles. Mark Strong was happy. Liotta didn't pump either. In general, in acting, I have no one to blame.
Thus, the film is the best work of Guy Ritchie and Luke Besson and teaches us that vanity, greed, fear of loss, ambition, fears and phobias can motivate us to grow, but can kill us.
9 out of 10
For me, the film came out quite complex and ambiguous. You probably have to revisit it to get a better understanding of what is happening, but a number of things immediately catch your eye. First of all, it's an abundance of detail. A lot of clues, thanks to which an attentive viewer can stretch his gyrus and, in the end, guess what is happening in a particular episode. At least one I managed to solve. In short, there are no special claims to the plot, but about this a little below. I didn't even know it was Guy Ritchie, but in the script itself, something elusively resembled a familiar and beloved handwriting. As a result, it turned out, as usual, beautiful, spectacular, dynamic and twisted. But there is one ' but' The subject of psychology and psychiatry was touched upon here, and this is not the specialty of this director. Often for the sake of creating intrigue on the screen, things are absolutely illogical from the point of view of what turns out next in the plot, but I prefer not to spoil what exactly is the matter.
Characters. All came out bright, colorful, as it should be. It's probably Ritchie's crown number. The relevance of certain images is a separate issue, but to see how all this works, without a doubt, it is interesting that for any story is the most important thing, and I highly appreciate it.
And yet the excessive fascination with psychology and psychiatry led to a number of far-fetched, as well as frankly impossible plot moments, in particular, the suddenly awakened conscience of a top hired killer, cool as eggs. we all love spectacular turns, but this is a bit too much. This is just one example of this strangeness. And yet, some of these psychological games also succeeded. When the character pricks a tanned mobster, his reaction is priceless, although the ending is somewhat stretched. All the other, more traditional components, including acting, work perfectly like clockwork. The dish was successful, and do not blame the chef for this small experiment.
7 chess combinations with a match in the mouth of 10
When I saw this film for the first time, it was in high school, the meaning of the film I did not really understand. I like to watch something more complicated. But the revolver turned out to be a tough nut, which even had to revise it after years to at least understand a little. This film is not for everyone, but rather it is only for connoisseurs tied to a tangle of films that need to untie and over which you need to sit and think. An indicator of the fact that there were not many connoisseurs of the film, are the assessments and reviews of film critics, who like that the meaning of the film is not hidden from them, but served on a platter with a blue rim. No one wants to look stupid and admit that he does not know or misunderstand something, and trying to understand the plot and its interweavings is long and tedious. It is much easier to say that there was simply no special meaning, and the one that was, was empty and stupid. This film is a kind of spit in the face of critics.
So, what's this movie about? It is about everything, everything that a person can face. At the time of his education and fight against false attitudes. The revolver has several semantic levels. The first level is the most visible, it’s “the plot”, that is, at the first viewing a person immediately clings to the plot itself, does not understand it, and says that the film is bad. The second level, which is deeper, is psychological. Namely, the struggle with your ego, with the help of your unconscious, and reconciliation with your emotions and fears, by getting rid of what the “hero” considers values. The third level is the level of Kabbalah. Purification by Kabbalah. The whole film is made in the style of this teaching. This can be found in more detail in the sources with the analysis of the film and the philosophical course of this religion. And the most profound is the fourth, theosophical. Seeing God in Himself as the absolute ego. This idea should be discussed in more detail, but not here, it is still a brief overview, not philosophical writings. There may be other layers in the film, but I found only these, and I confess with the help of other sources. The film teaches one very important lesson. Someone you used to think of as an adversary is not. The only enemy you really have is within yourself.
The film itself is simply saturated with various allusions and references. In the whole film, there are many symbols, many of which remain unsolved, they may not mean anything, but having an idea of the importance of the details in this film, it is difficult to believe. No less attention is focused on dialogues, which can be distributed into quotes and printed out in a frame. As Avi once said, “There are no problems, Mr. Greene, there are only situations.” It opens up a space for reflection.
The performance of the actors in this film is at a very decent level. Great attention is paid to facial expressions and gestures, which very well reveal the plot, if you look at it, and not just look. And, of course, the highlight of the whole film - props and scenery. It is breathtaking when you learn why Green always appears in gray-green shades, and the color of Mackey is often blue. I would highly recommend watching the review. There are a lot of interesting things to learn, for example, why the elevator stopped on the 13th floor, what the diamonds on Zack and Avi’s clothes mean at the end of the film, why the Liquidator missed, and who Mr. Gold really is. This is only a small part of the details in the film from one great ocean of meaning.
The film is great, but you will not recommend it, no one will want to dig into it and watch it over and over again.
8.5 out of 10
We watch a lot of movies in our lives. Some more, some less. One way or another, everyone singles out one or more films that they consider the best.
Revolver - the cinema of the genius Guy Ritchie and we all know his chic style in many films: original dialogues, a wild labyrinth of the plot, cool characters and so on. Almost all viewers turn on the movie, expecting just that. But alas... Guy Ritchie cheated everyone!
It's not another crime comedy, oh no! Before you a real philosophical film, so subtle in its understanding that one viewing is sometimes not enough.
"with Em GOLD sees all of us."
Philosophy is difficult, but very relevant for each of us. And no matter how ironic it may sound, but the main character is played by the “chief philosopher of the Internet” – Jason Statham. This is one of the main tricks of Guy, because the eternal hero of the militants can not play someone else! Especially in a purely philosophical film, and he played... And I did it just fine. This is a real revelation of Jason, he showed the absolute opposite of all his images. It is also worth praising the other actors - wonderful and colorful heroes.
There is philosophy, its subtle presentation, good actors and wonderful images - enough for a beautiful movie, but Guy Ritchie did not limit himself to this.
Revolver is a beautiful picture visually. Every frame is good, all these thirds, the blurred backgrounds, the right angles and the play of colors drive crazy.
All of the above is accompanied by a wonderful sound. Sometimes it seems that Guy was shooting a film based on music, and not on the plot.
You can praise endlessly, but it is worth saying that the movie is really difficult and for this reason many people may not like it. Also, do not forget that this is not another “state fighter”
Whether or not I am a fool, then / nbsp; or you, Father, have overthinked
I consider myself not stupid and pragmatic, with a broad view of the world and some taste. I watch different movies. Some films are light and interesting, some are complex and put pressure on the psyche. Some films need to grow, because experience will allow you to better understand the essence.
As for the "Revolver", then in the course of the whole action, very unhurried, by the way, I had only one question:" What are you talking about?
The thing is, when you watch this movie, you don't know what they're saying. And as soon as I guess, it turns out not. But it's filed wrong.
The plot of “Revolver” is not presented as a thriller, where you need to think and understand, it is more for fans to look for deep meaning. So if you think about it, you can find any symbol of anything anywhere. If you try, you can find philosophical meaning in the advertising of candy. But that doesn’t make it a good movie with an interesting story.
To the work of the director as that: the construction of the frame, the choice of the plan, the shooting chips and style - there are no complaints. Richie can. He always could, he was very talented.
Acting is good, too. It is especially pleasant to watch them after modern films, in which the actor is difficult to distinguish from the scenery, so they are emotional.
As a result: an ambiguous picture, in which there are many pleasant things and interesting finds, but from the southern part you did not understand anything. Maybe I'm not smart enough for this picture, or maybe just in an effort to confuse the plot, confused themselves. In any case, it is worth a look.
The greatest enemy will hide where you least seek him.
This movie is likely not to appeal to those who liked other Guy Ritchie films and decided to watch something similar. .
This film, definitely will not like those who do not like all philosophy, self-exploration, etc.
This film could be missed by those who do not expect that under the harsh, cruel sauce you can serve a deep philosophical and religious meaning and even true kindness. .
This film is obligatory to watch for those who are interested in Eastern philosophy, spiritual practices, lovers of Pelevin, etc. In addition, watch at least 2 times, the first time not cover everything.
Main idea:
“The greatest enemy will hide where you least seek him.” – Julius Caesar, 75 B.C.
The ordinary man is completely identified with his mind and believes that it is. In reality, the ego and the concomitant thought process are the chief enemy of everyone, and this enemy lives in every man, and everyone thinks of him as himself. From this fallacy spring all the troubles of the world, and this is the key to our fears and pains: “His best wiring was that he made you believe he was you.”
To say more is to spoil, at every step a riddle, a hint, a reason for reflection.
A unique and one-of-a-kind film, perfect in its incarnation, but for a specific audience.
This film, in my opinion, was not deserved ' doused with dirt '. There were many words about Guy Ricci, they say, the meaning is pulled by the ears, just a mixture of various pseudo-smart phrases, etc.
But nevertheless, many found answers in this film that asked new questions.
So let's look at everything in order. We see at the beginning of the film as a table of contents, phrases that mark one or another part. As it were, we are shown all the stages (more precisely they say), the map on which the main character (and us along with him) will have to pass. That sounds like a book, doesn’t it?
I will not go into the plot, so as not to spoil for those who have not seen this work.
Let me just say that the essence of this film is not in the picture, it is much deeper. The picture on the screen only confirms what is happening behind the scenes.
Here you can divide the entire film into three layers, as the viewer perceives the information.
After watching it for the first time, I had a confused feeling that there was something else behind the action on the screen. After reviewing the second time, you already see the jungles of character psychology. And personally, I only saw the whole philosophical picture for the third time, but unlike the "Dead" & #39; Kant, Nietzsche, and other undeniably wise people, this philosophical and psychological concept is applicable to our daily reality.
To sum up, I want to say the film of the very type that will not be popular with large masses of people, but it is worth watching. And only if after viewing there is a desire to understand, you begin to look for meaning.
By the way, it should also be understood that, at that time, Guy Ricci was the husband of Madonna, and she, in turn, deals with ' Kabbalah' so there are many references to the occult symbols of antiquity, but they all carry a very specific meaning in the general plot.
Another important point to understand is the color, or rather their semantic meaning. Pay attention to the colors of objects and backgrounds, not just the characters themselves.
P.S. Also very impressive is the abundance of small details, which only enhance the sense of thoughtfulness of each frame. Like a $12 bill. I noticed this detail first, and then I wondered why make a fictional bill, was it easier to take a banquet of $ 10. But as it turns out, there's nothing accidental.
“The only way to get smart is to play with a smarter opponent.” What is this beautiful and quoted phrase about? That the rival is already with us. Every moment. Always. So we can grow up and get smarter.
I watched this movie a long time ago and didn’t really understand it (I think I’m not alone in this).
You need a key to see. And recently one person (our friend with Guy Ricci) said the following: "Revolver" is a course of Kabbalah -1 in artistic form. That's where we get the key. What is it about? What kind of rival is Stetham's hero talking about? What is this destructive force within us? Be familiar, opponent! The voice that tempts you to get angry, scream, fall into despair, whispers about our worthlessness, encourages you to hurt another, etc., etc., to think about yourself, yourself, yourself, creating chaos in your life in particular and on the planet Earth in general.
But whyy, oh God, why? In short, the opponent is given, because long ago, a little before the big bang, we wanted to deserve light and grace, because otherwise you do not appreciate, otherwise it makes no sense. Here's the game. At the macro level, the opponent is our greatest friend who helps us grow and earn the light by spiritual work. At the micro level, an implacable cunning enemy who knows all our weaknesses and must be destroyed every day. (Normally the opposite) Wake up, Neo. It's interesting to watch the movie "Revolver" with this information, everything falls into place. This information is so interesting.
The more sophisticated the game itself, the more sophisticated the opponent.
The film is not one whose plot can be summarized in a few words. The content is layered. There is no single dominant thought here. It is impossible to identify objectively which of the topics is dominant. Whether it’s an internal enemy sitting in each of us in the form of fears and delusions, whether it’s the perception of life as a game that divides players into opponents and victims, whether it’s the need for recognition, the main motive of human actions. Guy Ritchie and Luc Besson provide the viewer with a whole philosophy, providing it with a coordinate system and a number of principles.
The form of the work is beyond praise. High-tension dynamics of the plot unfolds in chic interiors. Operator and installation work abound in a number of techniques and finds that spur the excitement of the viewer to absorb the created visual holiday. In this regard, "Revolver" is undoubtedly a stylish movie. Despite the almost 2-hour duration, the film looks in one breath, causing a desire to review the picture again and again, finding new faces in it.
9 out of 10
Guy Ritchie is without a doubt the best English director. Beginning as the creator of a brilliant Map, money, two barrels and an equally good movie Big Score, Guy Ritchie rose so much that he was lucky to work with Robert Downey Jr., Jude Law and Jared Hares.
The revolver, in my opinion, is the most underrated film of this director. Unlike the previous films of the English director, Revolver is a deeper and more complex picture in which problems concerning the institution of statehood and psychology are raised. This is a film about how the state manipulates us and how it hides it. The film also tells us why it is so difficult for us to overcome our vices and become a different person.
The film works perfectly visual storytelling technique. Lighting will allow you to better understand what is happening.
What about the acting and cast? Jason Statham, Vincent Partoret, Andre Benjamin played their character well, but, in my opinion, Ray Liotta played the best in this film.
9 out of 10
Why 9 instead of 10? Because it's Richie's first and last film in the genre, the atmosphere is sagging in some places.
It's a very personal movie for me. I have watched this movie more than 26 times. I think that says it all.
The film is very, very not stupid. It is deep and has meaning, the depth of which must be understood. It is beautifully shot, it is beautifully and very expressively spoken, there is good music, good actors. The first time I saw it, it was a revelation. I was probably 15 years old, and it was in this film that I suddenly realized that cinema can be more than just entertainment, it can bring more than just positive emotions. I would even add that the movie “Revolver” changed my life and the way I think, then it showed me that “thinking” is cool. If it were not for the idea of the revolver, who knows who I would be now.
Every phrase can and should be written down and remembered. For example:
The wise man speaks in the world there is only one question. And the more often we hear this question, the stronger we will become. Do you know what that question is, Mr. Greene? “What does that give me?”
Listen to what the characters in the film say. Just imbue with the idea of the film, try to see beyond the outer shell.
The next film by Guy Ritchie unfortunately does not make such a strong impression as his previous work, but it is a pity.
Mr. Greene, a successful gambler, who got out of the dirt into the princes using his talent, gets into a big one: he owes one of the casino owners. The same in turn is trying to pull off a deal with Mr. Gold.
To be honest, history is not catchy at all. This time the course was taken on a more serious and grim narrative. And this format did not succeed – yet the director is much better at getting pun and ridiculously furnished situations, when all plot twists are solved by themselves. The characters are gray and pale against the background of beautifully created images from the previous films of the director. And some, as it seemed to me, borrowing and playing around the theme of reproduction of personality perfectly fit into the canvas of Fincher’s Fight Club, but here this is not the tail of the mare.
But not everything is so hopeless - there is a pleasant visual component, a good editing of some scenes, good music, and action where necessary.
As the situation with the film “Revolver” shows, it is not always possible to shoot accurately in the heart of the viewer, even talented and accurate shooters from birth make mistakes.
5 out of 10
Yes, 'Cards, money, two barrels' and 'Big Kush' good, whatever you say. But the Revolver is more than that, my friend. It lies in a completely different plane. It’s like comparing 2D to 3D.
'Contacting with specialists, I realized one thing: these experts don't fucking chop.'
The film is simple and at the same time incomprehensible, like all genius. That is why he was so criticized. In general, it is about our lives. Life is one big game in which each of us makes choices and decisions based on our inner beliefs, which are mostly false.
'Wake up, Mr. Green'
We are mostly Mr. Greens who sleep on the move and can’t see beyond their own nose. We make a decision by listening to our ego, then the other half of us tells us otherwise and we rush from side to side in panic, doubting everything, even the simplest and seemingly obvious choice.
'If you try to destroy it to save people, they will destroy you to save it'
That's what happened to the Revolver. After all, this movie is a kind of game of psychoanalysis with the viewer. As you might expect, most of us have failed. Most people are always wrong, that's a fact.
'And finally, when the victim begins to doubt that the opponent is equal to her, in fact, she doubts her own intellectual abilities, but no one admits this, not even to herself'
Of course, it is difficult for a person to even realize that he was wrong, let alone admit his wrongness publicly.
In fact, Revolver tells us that most people are stupid and ignorant, which is why the film has such an assessment, which in turn speaks about success rather than failure.
10 out of 10
About ten years ago, having been impressed with “Big Cash” and “Maps, Money, Two Guns” (I don’t know whether to bow or not), I sat down to watch “Revolver”.
I didn't understand anything.
Shaggy Statham, peep-puff, stylish angles - OK. There is little that these Englishmen are weird, there are few unsuccessful films. I didn't even get upset.
Ten years after that “ok,” I was glad that I was watching the “Revolver” sitting down, otherwise I would have gone down somewhere, scattering toast.
It's a GE-NI-AL-NY movie.
It is incomprehensible how the mainstream Guy Ritchie in the distant two thousand-fifth managed to collect a puzzle of the level of Tarkovsky and Balabanov - in his entourage, with his chips, but the puzzle is so swirling that the head goes around. Here recently I was told that “Master and Margarita” is a mirror maze, so “Revolver” is a mirror room in which you will certainly get lost without prompts.
Speaking of clues. Those that give the director, I was not enough. If a respected writer had not corrected my angle of view, I would (probably) understand very little now. Therefore, recommending a movie, I will give you a hint:
Pay close attention to the thoughts of the main character. You have a pencil in your hand.
This film puts before each viewer and brilliantly resolves one of the most important questions for us:
“Where is our main enemy hiding?”
The next question – who is my main enemy? – everyone will answer in their own way. Maybe it's wrong, maybe it's not. But half the job is done, and if you think about what’s going on on screen, your life will never be the same again. (It sounds terrible, but it means a positive effect.)
P. S. And yes, it is one of the most Christian films.
The film is full of meaning, emotions and intellectuality. It's hard to tell what the movie is about.
It's a ghost movie. What happens if you mix the theory of numbers with the prisoner's dilemma, sprinkle Sun Tzu with quotes, spice up Jason Statham and add Guy Ritchie to your taste? That's right, it's a revolver movie.
Interestingly, there are no credits at the end of the film, just a black rectangle. Everyone is free to express their own opinion, you can spit on the screen, or you can go into yourself, immersed in thought.
There are directors who always make the same movie. Guy Ritchie is definitely one of them.
Don't get me wrong, it's not always a bad thing. When you come to see a Richie movie, you know what to expect. The only intrigue is whether the new creation will surpass the “Maps” and “Kush”.
So it was with the Revolver. It all begins famously: an expensive casino, hairy Statham, big bets, huge ponts. Right. But the further you go, the clearer you feel that something is wrong. There is no need to go far for the answer, it is enough to study the poster more carefully. Writer and producer: Luc Besson.
The revolver appears as a weapon in the film a couple of times. Here it is a little different: “to revolve” is both “to spin” and “to think.” Phrases, dialogues, quotes - like bullets in a drum, they rotate in a circle, several times in a movie hitting the barrel. But no one is in a hurry to pull the trigger. From this comes a slight disappointment and a feeling of drag.
Games of fortune or as Marx, Freud and Chuck Palahniuk “Revolver” watched
“Revolver” is one of the rarest cases of synthesis of meta-intellectual cinema like “Last year in Marienbad” with purely entertaining, entertainment-oriented cinema. Naturally, such an unusual neighborhood caused both viewers and critics a natural rejection. The first got lost in the labyrinth of narrative construction, and the second, apparently, could not accept the fact that someone dared to encroach on the holy of holies of “pure cinema” and ventured to create a clever video clip. But after a catastrophic death at the box office, crucified by audiences and critics, Revolver miraculously resurrected thanks to multiple interpretations. Here we will touch only part of them, the one that is most reliable and common.
The front side of the plot is a cunning, but quite typical criminal story, saturated to the limit with cards, money and smoking trunks. In fact, this is a real philosophical study in which various discourses intersect and intertwine. What they are can be understood from the following story.
Chuck Palahniuk, Sigmund Freud and Karl Marx met and decided to watch some good movies. After much debate, the choice fell on the Revolver. As soon as the last shot died out on the screen, and instead of the credits, the questioning darkness was exposed, the company developed a heated discussion about whose influence in the tape is most obvious.
I think each of us understands that the Revolver is the epigon of my Fight Club. Instead of scams, fights, instead of greed, violence, replace Sam Gold with Tyler Durden, and you will see that it was my work that laid the foundation for the whole picture. And isn't the hero's final battle with himself an absolute replica, right down to a shot in the head from my movie? What about the character's direct speech to the viewer? What about the free-style serving with a whole series of distracted inserts that break down the fourth wall? And cool plot twists, aggressive, drive and informal style, criticism of the consumer society, and, of course, the main theme - the struggle of the hero with his alter-ego? Even the fates of the films are similar - failure at the box office, cold acceptance of critics and the subsequent cult reputation. In general, I would argue that Revolver is nothing more than a distant echo of the Fight Club, which was suddenly heard in Europe with the assistance of Luc Besson and Guy Ritchie.
Freud: But Mr. Palanyuk, please express your disagreement. First of all, if we delve into the exploitation of other people’s ideas, my name was also missing from the credits of your film. Secondly, as far as I can see, your idea of a man’s struggle with his alter ego in Revolver is only a small part of the complex system of interaction between characters that fully expresses my theory of personality structure. I note that the story itself is nothing more than an abstract metaphor, and that abstract space with twelve-dollar bills and cars without numbers, in which it unfolds - an allusion to the "inner empire" of our psyche, where all the characters only represent one or another psychic authority. Let’s start with the mafia authorities – Lord John and Mr. Mac. It is obvious that these are the viceroys of the ITO – bubbling with rage, chaotic in their actions and desires, always thirsting for power and money. Zach and Avi symbolize the Superego - reasonable limitation, prudence, good manners, calmness and confidence. The protagonist himself is, of course, the Ego itself, torn by the contradictions between passion and reason, desire and duty, external and internal, material and spiritual. One of the movie’s slogans is “The only way to get smarter is to play with a smarter opponent.” In this case, he is the hero himself, who overcomes himself and his vices with proven (still the founders of ancient religions) therapeutic methods: he gives away all his wealth to get rid of self-interest, humiliates himself and kisses the feet of the enemy to stop pride, creates dangerous situations to overcome fears - fear of closed spaces, his alter-ego and the main fear - death. Special attention should be paid to the mysterious figure of a non-existent ghost man, a gentleman who, despite his immateriality, single-handedly rules over the entire surrounding world - Sam Gold. The film deliberately fails to answer whether he is really the hero's alter ego or whether it is just a beautiful comparison. Gold is an absolutely self-sufficient substance, a blind spot, an irrational remnant that we will never know. It lives in every person, for it is a mystery that we cannot solve; in other words, Gold is the “other” that is talked about so much because they cannot understand.
"Herr Freud, let me interrupt you, for Sam Gold is more of my ideology than yours." His name speaks for itself. Without going into the role of gold in the economy, the picture is really based on macropolitics, not existential research. The film itself illustrates the functioning of capitalist society. His most accurate metaphor is play, dangerous, deadly and damn cruel. What if the weak, feeble individual, this thinking reed, decided to play a game with the master of the universe, capital? Does he have a chance? As Machiavelli said, “War cannot be avoided, it can only be postponed to the advantage of your opponent,” and the protagonist understands this well. The main opponent of the hero is Sam Gold, sitting in it, in fact it is the capital itself! Remember that wonderful scene where we were shown how the hero created his wealth – simply transferring capital investments from one mafia boss to another, thus acquiring a certain percentage or “navar”. This is the basic principle of banking. A simple formula of playing on greed, self-interest and desire, bringing superprofits. So, unnoticed to himself, the hero turned into an absolute capitalist, the god of the shadow economy Sam Gold. And, as my friend Engels says, it is not easy to grasp the moral wretchedness of capitalist existence by being rich. “The enemy is always where you least seek him.” Capital is not in the safes but in the heads! Interestingly, like Mr. Palanyuk’s “man without a name,” the hero destroys the very principle of capitalism from within, i.e., not by establishing a proletarian dictatorship (although this method is more correct), but by realizing himself as an economic unit, a “desire machine,” with the subsequent spiritual transformation and overthrow of the transcendental power of capital. So, comrades..."
Here the front door opened and on the threshold there was a figure of a man in a long coat and British shoes polished to shine.
Ritchie: Gentlemen, you are all right and you are all wrong. I’ll tell you one thing: I don’t know how I got this movie, but I hope you liked it. "
The door slammed shut. Marx proposed to conclude the discussion and revise the “Big jackpot”. Everyone gladly agreed and unanimously admitted that he was much better than the Revolver, because everything brilliant should be simple.
If you want to spend the evening under an uncomplicated thriller, this film is not for you. Don't even turn it on. This movie is not for fun at all. This film is a philosophical reflection in the form of a movie, and the main thing in it is precisely the ideas of the author, and not the plot, shootouts and action. Although the events of the film are also important and interesting, but it is only a means to convey basic thoughts. If you think about the director’s message and take out something useful for yourself and your life – great. That’s why you have to make these movies.
After serving a long time in prison, Jake Green was so impressed by two chess geniuses who were serving time in the neighborhood that, apparently, after leaving places not so distant, continues to communicate with them as imaginary friends. He imagines that they help him, and also suggest serious thoughts.
“Nothing brings such pain as humiliation and loss of money.”
Take Jake's money, humiliate him, and not just him, but any hero in this story, and that's it, you fill their lives with unimaginable pain, you paralyze them, you destroy them. We all get attached to things. Take away from us what we value most, don’t give us what we crave – and that’s it, we’re crushed, we’re writhing in agony. Our attachments are the levers we can control.
“We are drug addicts sitting on the needle of someone else’s approval and recognition.”
We can't get off her. But you just have to try to jump off this needle, and someone else's disapproval will not ruin your day. We look everywhere for recognition, forgetting about ourselves, just to look good. But we forget that today there is recognition, and tomorrow there may not be. Even the same person today can approve of you for something, and tomorrow no longer. And then we break down, and we run again for recognition. You just have to stop... And learn to feel happy, even in the absence of approval, simply because there are other things worth living for. There is approval - well, no it - it should not break us or somehow reflect on self-esteem.
“The greatest enemy will hide where you least seek him.”
You know what the beauty of the game is, Jake? We don't know where the enemy is. Is there one? He's in everyone's head and they believe him. That's his second self.
The main character Jake Green fights against Mac. Mac is fighting Greene. But who is really the enemy? Is this the man we think is the enemy? And yes and no. People may be competitors, but the greatest enemy is invisible. So could the enemy be the mysterious and powerful boss, Mr. Gold, whom everyone fears and serves? It's closer. Mr. Gold represents a thirst for greed, profit and money. And all the heroes were so submissive to these desires that now only puppets are captive to their own insatiable greed. They are governed by their own desires. They cannot live without satisfying their desires. It is symbolic that no one has seen the boss, but everyone is sure that he exists. Indeed, greed is invisible, but its existence is certain.
The enemy is in the head, it is our beliefs, habits and especially our addictions. The enemy is all that makes us weaker, prevents us from living. It prevents you from building happiness, spreading your wings and becoming free. The enemy is our social fears, our laziness, our unwillingness to work on ourselves.
Give the man what he wants and he is in your power. Take away from him what he desires and he will break. This is how our desires govern us. If there is someone who can manipulate your desires, they can manipulate you. You think that you are controlled by a person, but in fact you are controlled by your own desires. And this man is just skillfully manipulating them. You are a hostage to your own addictions and weaknesses, and they are your true enemy. Not the people who take advantage of your weaknesses.
By changing the situation with someone who controls you, you can change it by controlling it yourself.
We can become stronger and happier by not letting our weaknesses, fears and attachments control us. They don't have to decide anything for us. It is possible to live, enjoy many good things in life, without falling into depression or self-deprecation, if you are temporarily or not getting what you want. You can learn to endure pain and suffering calmly as an inevitable part of life. You can overcome your fear. You can work and overcome your weaknesses. A man can do a lot if he wants to.
This picture is not intended for those who are waiting for an empty action movie with fun scenes and epic shootouts. It's not for those who want to relax and have a beer with popcorn. Here you will have to face things that are sometimes very difficult to understand and even harder to accept.
The film consists of complex conceptual things: shows the struggle and interaction of ego states within the framework of the personality, the transcendence of the “I” beyond the usual roles in Jake, and vice versa, the decline and absorption of the chaotic unconscious personality of Maki. And all this is wrapped in a juicy crime drama.
After watching the film, it leads to existential reflections, makes you feel the formlessness of your “I” and its components, which are induced by social influence. You think about who you really are and who is this “phantom of society” that makes you do sometimes nasty things.
The film is intended for periodic re-viewing and reflection, in order to discover new and new facets of this film.
10 out of 10