You didn't give me the right words, you gave him. What about me?
Night.
Poorly furnished apartment.
At the table are two: Black (Samuel L. Jackson and White (Tommy Lee Jones).
They are impersonal, but their names are not necessary.
Black prevented White’s suicide attempt on the subway and now they are talking about life, God and whether to exist.
An hour and a half of incessant dialogue — from beginning to end in the frame only two: Jackson and Jones. The Black Man has a night to try to heal the soul of the White Man with his spiritualized speeches, who still does not lose hope of escaping from unpleasant conversations on a divine topic and still bring it to the end.
This film-dialogue will not be amenable to everyone, because really an hour and a half you need to listen. This film you can not even watch - the characters do not leave the limits not only apartments, but one room in this apartment and sit at a table. They drink coffee, go to the window, eat, but stay in the same room.
And Sunset Limited Evening Express really can be listened to without even paying attention to the picture. You have to listen to him first. The measured conversation between the Black Man and the White Man is fascinating, offering an unquestionably difficult test for the viewer, but at the same time extremely interesting!
In the incessant dialogue between the heroes of Samuel L. Jackson and Tommy Lee Jones, very interesting thoughts flow through, which are subsequently curious to analyze and dive into their essence.
If you have not suffered, how do you recognize happiness? In comparison with what? - the formulation is interesting, because in fact it is: if I have not experienced pain and suffering in my life - can I claim that I was happy, because I really have nothing to compare any other of my state, because I can not be sure that I was unhappy at one time and happy at another!
“Faith comes when there is nothing to lose” and you can’t argue again, right? Does an unbeliever turn to the Faith when he does not need it much and how often does he turn to it when the usual methods have not led to a successful result? For example, when medicines cease to help in the fight against a serious illness, a person looks to the Faith, trying to find salvation in it!
Every journey ends in death. Everything leads to one finale, no matter how nihilistic. It sounds apathetic and pessimistic, but it is. It's a fact. It doesn’t matter what the path is (in this case). It doesn’t matter if you’re happy or unhappy along the way. It doesn’t matter what good things you have in your life. Everyone's journey ends in death. Everyone’s journey ends in a grave.
And in the context of the last sentence, the White Man-Professor's desire to end his journey as he sees fit no longer seems to be a shock. He makes his choice, probably a much more wealthy person than Black. He is ready to part with the benefits and leave this world, and not clinging like a Black man for life as a straw, in fact dragging on existence in a poor apartment, the door to which has to be locked for 5-6 locks, because behind the wall lives unknown who.
Yes, the black man is spiritually rich, while the white man is the opposite. And everyone has a choice. Each of them has the right choice.
Over time, it becomes clear that Black and White are a screaming opposition to each other, because the Black man appears from the position of almost an Angel (and certainly not by chance his clothes are lighter colors), while the White man is certainly not the Devil, but certainly a person whose soul has long reigned Darkness. And it also seems no coincidence that he is dressed in dark colors.
It is no coincidence that the characters drink coffee each of the mugs of its own color. White from black and Black from white. To emphasize the position of two people with this specific coloristics.
And the approach of each of them is different from the other.
“Sometimes you speak just for a red word,” says the White Professor, who, by virtue of his education, is used to operating with facts and speaking accurately and on the point, unlike the Black Preacher. White knows the value of words and gives his arguments, he carefully chooses words.
A black preacher, like a priest from a church, sprinkles loud statements and beautiful speech turns, climbing into the soul of the interlocutor (but not a suicidal white professor) through the ears. Do these words have a soul, or are they just words? Which confirms Black's objection to White's words:
You seem like a smart person, says White.
I'm a stupid village nigger from Louisiana, Black replies.
Black's last words perfectly complete the film. How many words were said from Jackson’s character ends with his own thought: “You didn’t give me the right words, you gave it to him.” What about me?
In summary:
The movie is great.
The acting is great. Both Tommy Lee Jones and Samel L. Jackson are incredibly believable in their images: one in the form of a desperate professor with a completely lost look and disillusioned eyes, the other in the form of a preacher who heard the voice of God after the faith “when there was nothing left to lose” appeared in him. . .
Tommy Lee Jones - as a director - is damn good. He got acquainted with his directorial work with the film “Three Graves”. After watching the Sunset Limited Evening Express, I regret that he shot so little.
But look at you. I do not impose my opinion on anyone.
One black man prevents another white man from throwing himself under the wheels of the evening train Sunset Limited and brings him to his poor home. So begins the maximum chamber production of Tommy Lee Jones, in which he plays one of the two available roles, and the other is given to Samuel L. Jackson. The film is based on the play by Cormac McCartney, who, in addition to being a good friend of Jones, is also one of the most prominent American prose writers of the second half of the XX century.
In this picture everything is very minimalistic, as if on the stage. In the middle of the barracks of the apartment there is a round table, on the table there is a newspaper and a shabby Bible, next to two chairs. The same minimalism is seen in the names of the actors. Tommy Lee Jones is White and Jackson is Black. The work of the composer Marco Beltrami is also subject to the general mood. Although this picture does not need any serious musical accompaniment, some strong monologues are successfully emphasized by the background ambient.
Soon it turns out that White is a professor, an educated and well-read person, an absolute atheist. Black is a former prisoner who did not live the most pious life, but turned to God over the years. Between them begins a dialogue about the meaning of life, faith and love for yourself and your neighbor, with which an hour and a half of screen time flies literally in the same breath, because both actors play just awesome. Samuel L. Jackson was to be expected to do something like this, humorously, in the spirit of an African-American priest, but Tommy Lee Jones in this film is just a concentrate of lack of meaning in life, a frightening black hole, calm beyond despair. The irony of the names of the characters of the film manifests itself in full when it becomes clear who is actually White and who is Black.
It is clear that the questions that people have been struggling with for several thousand years, there are no answers within the framework of one film, so Cormac McCartney does not strive for this. Each of the characters of his play ultimately remains in his opinion. But he asks the right questions, which can provoke reflections already in the minds of the audience, will become a kind of catalyst to the awareness of reality. Perhaps for someone this dish will be too concentrated, but someone else will feel a real high.
It's dialogue. Big, deep, at the end even emotional, but dialogue. The conversation between the two sides of the search is true. The truth here is Faith.
I confess I am not familiar with the original source. So the viewing became a revelation. Especially the extreme tirade of "White", Tommy Lee's hero - so familiar, close, as if off the tongue. You listen and you know the words in advance. What am I saying? His opponent's methods are also predicted ahead of time.
There's no need for two heroes. They represent different attitudes, views on what faith is. And confronting them is a very brave decision. Fortunately, both characters are shown as mature personalities, so there is no empty debate. It's the dialogue. With attention to the opponent's opinion, arguments, conclusions.
Interestingly, the weight of both sides is equal. The value of opinions is not diminished. Therefore, no one imposes on either side. Nevertheless, the strong and weak arguments of each are perfectly shown. You can clearly see the changes in the characters during the discussion, their adherence to dogmas: openness, perception of the environment, attitude to life events. And all this without any details! It is not told how the characters arrived at the current point in their lives. It's the characters! For it is not ‘white’ and ‘black’ who are the protagonists! The heroes here are the sides, the attitude to the eternal question. That is, the characters of Tommy Lee and Samuel are only projections of the main characters. How many heroes are there? Aren't you alone?
I want to note that the look of the character Samuel painfully familiar and known. Therefore, the character is read in the narrative ahead. But the opponent is not so simple. It's deeper, heavier. The depth of each can be seen in the final scene. The burden lies in the awareness of the responsibility for the “publication” of this side, the awareness of the truth of this side. Therefore, he tries to keep his distance to the last, not to open up. Otherwise there will be consequences. What can be seen from the reaction of Black?
As for the viewing. Throughout the film, there are no special effects, no testosterone - it's not an action movie. There is no background music as such! Almost. With rare exceptions, you can hear the abuse of neighbors, and loud music from the street. Only closer to the final there is a certain melody emphasizing the words "White". The whole discussion takes place within one room. The camera only occasionally focuses on the characters when it is necessary to emphasize their speech. However, almost Brown's character movement, the film comes to life. Elusive, but alive.
I wouldn’t mind taking part in such a conversation.
Atypically balanced film, without explicit propaganda. Extremely chamber. To stir up the gray matter, perhaps, to adjust your attitude to the topic touched on - will be perfect. To be in the mood!
Bible/Life Discussion Club Under the Wheels of Death
My KP bro often recommends movies and TV shows to me. It is worth visiting him in an online guest - so immediately the movie brother throws you with offers to see something, try, so to speak. This time I saw this movie (which I have seen many times). But was and was, as they say. So, if it weren't for the CP, we wouldn't be seeing you today. That's what he did.
Two people talk in this movie. They kind of have an argument. Dispute more often on the biblical themes, on the themes of life and death, on the theme of teaching: one teaches the other, rubs his life truth into him. My brother and I often have quiet arguments - I give ratings and write reviews, the KP in response to me recommends watching and reviewing movies and TV series - answer arguments, in short.
And in our film, in principle, the topic of the dispute itself is not so important, especially if you, having understood what is happening, have not chosen any of the sides of the conventional conflict, dispute, discussion. So you can just enjoy playing two remarkable actors.
The cover is black and white. Our heroes also have different skin colors. Their worlds, where they come from, can also be said to be opposites. The opposite. And it fuels controversy, sharpens the knives of the dispute. Okay, I'm going to have to stop here for a mobile game to do a task, otherwise the limited time for it to run out. . .
So, after much more important things, let’s continue. Cinema in confined spaces requires good preparation. There's a lot of dialogue, so rote is important. It is important that the viewer is chained to the heroes. You don't want to put anyone in the lead roles. You need a strong entourage, a core. Typical, North American, slightly killed, requiring more than one year of painting the walls of the apartment is suitable. It also requires a general contradiction: one wants to get out of the buried alive, the other will pull it back. One wants to die, the other pulls his ears back. In principle, you can conditionally divide all people.
I'm also beginning to realize that everything, every philosophy of the world, even the Bible, is boring me. They do not think of their lies at all. So tightly sits on my head the helmet of my salvation, Jesus Christ. That's it, bro. What are your arguments?
But if you step back and look at it more broadly, our film is an ironic parody of a man’s life, a short one where he is given only one quick choice between the eternity of life and the infinite death of a mortal.
It’s not often that Tommy Lee Jones sits in the director’s chair, but once he sits down, something outstanding will immediately turn out. So it came out with a modest budget and technical means chamber TV film "Sunset Limited", which has become a cult in the Russian cinematophile environment. I remember the time (the year of 2012) when it was only about him and they said: I heard about it from my students, but my hands came to see it only now, which, of course, I regret – there would be another reason to discuss with smart people in the distant 2012.
The play of Cormac McCarthy, a gloomy painter of the end of civilization, who flaunts his atheism, is filmed by Tommy Lee Jones with meticulousness and attention to detail: cinematography is not as simple as it seems, but the mise-en-scene scenes are extremely complex, although they fit into the space of one room. The angles, “eight”, imperceptible editing, the transition from close-ups to medium ones are submitted so that the viewer does not get distracted by them, watching the content. And the content here is wow! A little, much psychological duel between a black pastor and a desperate professor who miraculously managed to avoid suicide.
The director and screenwriter elegantly deceive audience expectations: usually a movie about metaphysics and the philosophy of suicide is designed to debunk them and give the public arguments in favor of life. Here the whole film the pastor crucifixes, sometimes flouts and fools, literally gushing with vitality, but all his arguments collapse when faced with the throbbing pain of human despair (if I were asked who played in this picture better – Jackson or Jones, I would not be able to answer: so colorful opposition of their characters). The final monologue of the hero Jones reveals the innermost thoughts of McCarthy – this philosopher of horror and hopelessness.
However, I think that the authors of the film do not hide their irony about Jackson’s character, they sympathize with his desire to help a desperate man, because Sunset Limited is a film about the clash of meaning and nonsense not only in the souls of individuals, but in relation to the fate of the entire civilization. Why live if, as Jones’ character puts it, “meaning has vanished in the trumpets of Dachau,” when the arguments for the existence of God and the love of Jesus are not only unconvincing, but seem ridiculous? If despair is so great and nothingness so attractive? The movie doesn't answer that. However, the significance of this modest TV movie is in another, in that, clashing the extreme points of view, it proves throughout the whole hour and a half that only conscious faith can save from suicide. Consistent atheism always ends in despair and suicide.
Hero Tommy Lee Jones took up the rescue of the pastor in large part because everyone else does not care about him. Yes, the pastor in the film does not appear in the most attractive form, and the desperate professor looks more sincere and alive. According to the writer and author of the play (I do not know as a director, but I think that Jones did not accidentally choose the role of professor), believers are clowns, and atheists suffer from world grief. So be it. However, because the desire to save a person was quite sincere in the pastor, he understood that only his words, arguments, arguments somehow restrain a potential suicide from a fatal step.
Sunset Limited is a very deep movie thanks in large part to McCarthy's play itself, but if the acting performance were less authentic, convincing and psychologically powerful, if the directing and fine visual details (such as the red, infernal aura of neon lights outside the pastor's apartment window) were not as accurate, complementing the text of the dialogue and Jackson and Jones' play, the film would hardly have succeeded. Of course, it is a pity that in its message Sunset Limited is antihuman, glorifies despair and non-existence, trying to disavow Christianity, but it is nevertheless important that even a fierce atheist like McCarthy admits and proves with his play (and Jones’s adaptation of it) that only faith in Christ keeps people (or rather some of them) from self-destruction. This conclusion cannot be denied by any Christian.
39: This is what education does to us. It makes the whole world purely personal. What I no longer believed, it is foolish to pretend that it is not!'
Tommy Lee Jones, being the director and performer of the leading role, noted in a truly serious picture, shot in the form of a dialogue between two elderly Americans, metaphorically depicting painful reflection or internal conflict ' rational intelligence' with ' a moral man' within one ' skull box' It is quite an eloquent picture depicting the schizophrenia of modern Western society, where, limited reason is as helpless as rational reason, which, due to cowardice or selfishness, or even "#39; great mind" #39, rushes to meet its sunset limited.
“Western civilization flew like smoke through the pipes at Dachau, and I was too carried away to notice, and now I see!” In putting these words into his character, Cormac McCarthy seemed to describe his own reflexive experience, full of resentment and burning resentment.
One can feel this heartfelt cry: “My world is a forced labor camp, from where innocent workers are drawn every day to be executed!” I don’t just see the world that way, I think it is! The Pulitzer Prize, after which he may have been forced to conform to the more stringent rules of “American exceptionalism,” cost him dearly. However, Grandpa was vengeful, twisted and found a way to expose the vaunted American rationalism – casually mentioning the trumpets at Dachau, of course, implying everything else that modern Western civilization “flew” through. Remember at least “Baby” with “Fat Man” in Hiroshima and Nagasaki or “Agent Orange” in Vietnam – everywhere around the mass murder, continuously, over the past 100 years at the initiative of the exceptional elite of one exceptional country with an exceptional democracy.
The film, without any doubt, is iconic and the author correctly did that Sunset Limited remained behind the scenes and gave the opportunity to wish the main character all the best.
What if you put two incredibly venerable actors in the kitchen and handed them a play by Cormac McCarthy? Sunset Limited is coming out.
This TV movie is a real dialogue theater, where all the attention of the viewer is focused on the actors. And if in the same Linklater trilogy about walks in European capitals, the actors talked about romantic things, then in Sunset Limited Tommy Lee Jones and Samuel L. Jackson spend an hour and a half discussing the topic of religion and the place of a person in it. Two completely different people view the divine and the worldly, understandably, from different points of view, and when was it not interesting to look at it?
Black and White, God and the Devil, Professor and Prisoner are dualistic principles in Sunset Limited. And the gun on the wall in a tense dialogue drama is a fatalistic attitude towards the life of one of the two heroes. This is a very strong and incredibly interesting conversation. Read - anti-standup. Mastucci.
After watching this work for the third time, I decided to describe my impressions of this picture. After the first viewing, this utopian play confidently entered my top of the best and most beloved films, in subsequent times this bar only strengthened.
Much in the world of cinema is evaluated purely subjectively and extremely individually, but still, even admitting it to me is extremely insulting that such work has bypassed all sorts of film awards, because everything that is in this tape is, for me, the standard of production.
The whole film is essentially a dialogue divided into several parts, and the location does not change, and there are only two actors, but the emotional intensity only grows with such unprecedented force that by the end you feel as broken and lost as the hero of Samuel El Jackson.
Two people, two life positions face each other with incredible force, capturing the viewer in their dispute about the meaning of life and its meaninglessness. This is a matter for the viewer to judge. I have not seen such a strong philosophical intensity in dialogue in any of the films I have seen. Here it should be added that these are not the impressions that fade after viewing, these impressions of the caste that will pop up in your head for a very, very long time, pushing for re-viewing after a while.
What’s so exciting about this film is that it’s just as exciting as the previous aspects, it’s Tomili Jones, who put this film and Samuel El Jackson, and I would even say without the slightest exaggeration that they’re not in this movie, they’re living these roles. And here I will make a small note that you need to watch this tape without fail, in the original dubbing.
Summing up all the above, I can say that this picture is an indicator that sometimes only one room and two actors will be enough to stage a brilliant film, and the rest is a matter of talent.
On a slush evening, you raise the collar of your coat higher, run in the subway. The mood is shitty, people around cause only disgust, and life shines you with nothing but the headlights of an approaching train. And so great is the temptation to cross the line, one step and nothing else will need to think. "Sunset Limited", in fact, about a man who almost crossed the desired line and the second trying to stop the first.
The film, staged on the play, does not involve an abundance of locations, or some vast and massive amount of visual means. Tommy Lee Jones, who also took the director's chair, deliberately stingy on decisions, reducing everything to minimalism of means, sounds, focusing all our attention on the distribution of forces in an hour and a half dialogue between a white man with a dark soul and a black man with light inside.
Is such a deliberate theatricality good? For the TV film format, it is quite possible for the viewer to focus on the text of the play. And this is not a simple one: we have here an eternal dispute about God, about choice, about freedom, about responsibility for one’s neighbor, about good and evil, if in essence. Questions are eternal, complex, and we can admit that they are insoluble. And on the basis of this understanding, the whole discussion, unwittingly witnessed by us, becomes a shade of obviously useless, unnecessary, as if someone is dragging a huge stone up a mountain, or trying to fix something that is long overdue to throw away.
But that doesn't detract from Jones and Jackson's excellent, albeit somewhat hyperbolic, play, and how beautifully their dialogue changes as they evolve. As in one, a spark of hope first appears, then fades away, and in another, a strong and confident fire begins to extinguish. Adding to the tension, of course, and unseen but well-known episode of suicide attempt, do we realize that if one lets the other go, it will be involved in his death, or not? Can you take the blame for this?
This film will not reveal anything new, rather it will unravel what they prefer not to stir, not to think, decide not to talk when they already understand that it does not make sense. So my review is neutral. It seems unbearable infantilism for two adult actors to play a play about God, the meaning of life, helping others, when all this is so subjective, so unsolvable. It seems that Jones got into it all just for the Mephistopheles creepy monologue of his character at the very end. And Jackson for the role of a good old nigger from the south, so that you can safely overplay, ridiculous tone and roll your eyes.
To live clinging to illusions or a truthful, oppressive existence without them? Everyone's choice. Just stay away from each other. You can't prove anything.
After all, the belief that one can change another with a great and powerful word is in essence also illusory.
For the taste of fatigue and irritation, but food for lazy reflection
6 out of 10
This film does not aim to show any perfect or whippy dialogue. In the dialogues that are in the film said no more, and no less than necessary. Yes, we can say that at the end of the verbal and intellectual battle, Black lost his arguments and arguments. We can say that White from the very first frame looks incredibly tired person. The characters in this film sometimes get lost, immersed in memories, jump with that. Just like real dialogue. A “perfect” dialogue would have turned this film into either a sermon or a semblance of Dostoevsky’s work.
Heroes are ambiguous. The character of White, although at risk of attracting the wrath of the viewer for his positions, but arouses interest. His skepticism, his fatigue and confidence in the correctness of the decision.
Black’s character is a savior, but it raises many questions for me. It is worth remembering his emotional story about the alterations in prison.
It is interesting to note the play of the terms “white” and “black”. White skin color is immersed in the blackest darkness. And Black tries to be enlightened, light.
Of course, the film makes you want to think. And, inadvertently, take someone's position. Many opinions have been expressed, but I want to offer my own, which is partly based on the logic of the film. Note that there is not a line of condemnation. No one condemns Black for his past, no one condemns White for his choice. Maybe this is the main message of the film? You can save, despair, fight for a man. But you should never judge him.
How and why does the most important thing in us, like greens in plants, go away – the thirst for life? And gradually, as if on tiptoes, imperceptibly, everyday, the “apocalypse of our days” creeps up, starting a long, gloomy morning in Auschwitz, stay in hell. One of the Russian philosophers said: Hell is not eternal life, even in suffering, but the torment of eternal death. Maybe Rosanov? He said: I may not have perfect truth in my actions, in my relations with people: but I may not have perfect truth in the holy of my soul. That would be terrible!
In short, the Tommy Lee Jones film and the Cormac McCarthy play it's based on are about that. Of eternal death, of hell within. O sick man, like a rotten tooth, longing for his own living soul, for life, the trusting thirst of which is truth.
The Lee Jones movie is about fictional hell. It is about hell, which is created by the intense efforts of the intellect by man around himself, as a protection from the light of life, from air. When it comes to life, it’s like torment. Except at night. On the way to my own scaffold. But – a step from the scaffold – to meet a person, just talk to him ... and suddenly find salvation.
Are there people who are not worth saving? This question is asked by the largest American writer, Pulitzer Prize winner and one of the obvious candidates for the Nobel Cormac McCarthy ("Old Men Don't Place Here", "Advisor", "The Road") in his play "The Evening Express Sunset Limited". McCarthy is attracted to a post-apocalyptic. In every sense of the word. In Tommy Lee Jones’s film, her taste is utterly hopeless, as in Coen’s “No Country for Old Men” and Scott’s “Advisor.” However, compared to them, the film is still bright. However, until the finale was heard, until the door opened, behind which either life or death (everyone, of course, decides for himself), you are like in the depths of the apocalypse of one person who, in general, probably already died (under a depression train 150 km per hour). But suddenly there was a rescuer.
To show the bowels of the soul of one who does not want to live, scrape out from there - through the clutches - a lump of resentment, complexes, childhood fears and adult disappointments ("Everything I loved turned out to be so weak, subtle ..." All that I believed in is no longer there.’’ But here is a man who made hopelessness his only god. He prays to her, makes love to her, twists to the point that he spreads it to everything and everyone. All the white lights. He puts it out. “Hope for nothingness. And I'm clinging to her,' White burns. Sounds like it, huh? The whirling brain of an intellectual, even in despair, will find something to show off. Words, words, words... There are so many of them, they are more serious than a heart attack, more addictive than karma, they are like stones thrown into the grave by unloving hands. With your own hands. To my own grave. Every day. Day by day... Suffering and fate are the same thing. Lovely! Where is my pencil, let me write it down.
“You’re an intricate devil, Professor,” Black White compliments (there are no other heroes in the film). After all, he managed to turn “a trifle like suicide” into a new Hamlet, King Lear and War and Peace combined. It's too complicated. There's too much meaning in nonsense. Too many words to add to the void. Too much brain. It's just a quirk. The “Adishche” of the spiritual leprosarium, over which the smoke of burned faith in oneself, the world, the light, people, humanity is swirling: “Nothing remains of the former world.” Western civilization has completely turned into smoke over the Nazi concentration camp. And I was so fascinated by high matter that I didn't even notice.
There are people who are not worth saving. Tommy Lee Jones' film is about the fact that there should always be a question mark after that phrase. This is probably the only pompous phrase in the film: “We are responsible for our neighbor.” There's light. And one day there will be a savior. Everyone is here to save someone.
P.S. All life is a catch of consonances. For this film caught this: "He was thin, exhausted, was on the verge of despair, and he was led on the path of "faith" ... just a conversation with an elderly Augustinian monk. - Why are you suffering, Martin? Well, our exploits are insignificant, sins are not redeemable: but the blood, the blood of the Savior, for one drop of it is enough to cleanse the worlds of sin. And Martin was resurrected: he rested on his forehead, or rather, like a swallow in a stuffy room, he broke out into the window of these well-spoken, but completely random words and flew into infinity. V. Rozanov. "An incident in the village."
Room. Two men. Between them is the Bible. One is black, the other is white. Black and White — that’s how they are spelled out in the credits. Black saved White from the Sunset Limited Express. Now they sit at a table and talk about the importance of human life.
How does this movie attract you? These are the conversations that last until dawn. They address issues that few people have thought about. But they all come down to one thing: God.
An atheist-believer dispute. What could be more interesting? Most of the film will go under the arguments and charisma of Black. But it won't be that way. The finale will terrify even the most hardened pessimists. If you look at The Sunset Limited, you will find more questions than answers. Such questions are called "eternal".
The idea of putting two actors in a confined space and making an hour and a half movie about it is very bold and risky. Nevertheless, the director and part-time one of the main actors - Tommy Lee Jones - coped with this brilliantly. Paired with Samuel L. Jackson, they created the impossible, chaining the viewer to the screen. Is it worth talking about their acting skills?
Cormac MacCarty ("The Road, "No Country for Old Men") is the man who created The Sunset Limited. Needless to say, without this writer there would be no film?
This film is called "atheistic." That's hard to disagree with. You may have different attitudes to religion, but you will agree on one thing – you will not find such a discussion-dramatic masterpiece.
This film is another project of Tommy Lee Jones, released on television in 2011. Already repeatedly awarded and nominated for various awards, being famous, Jones even before working on this tape managed to gain experience, shooting the films “Old, Good Guys” and “Three Graves”. In this case, he proposes to plunge headlong into the discussion about God.
How a former black prisoner managed to save a white man (Tommy Lee Jones), who decided to commit suicide by jumping from a platform directly under a train, only a failed suicide is perplexed. A dark-skinned character (Samuel L. Jackson) from the beginning of the film, being in his small apartment with the one he saved, forces, during a long conversation, the professor, as he came to call him, not to finish the job. The professor begins to wonder why death is exactly what everyone should strive for in order to end once and for all the pain and suffering that accompany people throughout their lives.
Elegant transitions from one topic to another, arguments about what it is worth living for and whether it is worth reading the Bible, who needs us and, in fact, what life is, all this enters the mind of the viewer with an endless stream of thoughts emanating from one hero or another. Sometimes, you just do not have time to realize what you just heard, because almost without pauses, quite bold theories and facts are put forward. Something can cause a violent reaction, something you agree with. Dialogue plays a key role in this film. Only with the help of a correctly stated thought, the former prisoner tries to pull the professor out of his predicament. And the one, either confused in himself, or because of a vast amount of knowledge and unconfirmed concepts, apparently decides that the solution to all these problems is to jump under the train “Sunset Limited”.
The shot involves the duo of Hollywood veterans Tommy Lee Jones and Samuel L. Jackson. We have little connection with the outside world. The operator hints at life bubbling under the windows of the apartment, only pointing at him. And the sounds coming from the street kind of say how violent it is out there. Attention is also focused on the loud cries of neighbors immersed in household chores. Our heroes conduct a clever dialogue on topics that affect the structure of our planet, culture, human torment, which may not be peculiar to this world, it is not clear why people need them and who actually benefits from them. Over time, there is a feeling that in the neighborhood with a black man live to the bone rotten, do not seek anything neighbors. A colony of moral leprosy, as the professor eventually called the people behind the walls. However, there are enough moments when you really want to go back to what has just been said and to understand in more detail the opinion proposed by one of the two “philosophers”.
8.6 out of 10
This film is for the celebration of real suicides. And not for those who to attract attention cuts his veins across or, having swallowed a lethal dose of pills, first calls an ambulance, but for real ones who deprive themselves of life quickly, decisively and without unnecessary noise.
The fact is that the winning professor, although he does not speak out loud, obviously holds the same idea as his opponent, a stupid and uneducated Negro, is to be where you are most missed. Only the Negro is in the "bad" area among the drunken drug addicts and criminals, and the professor is in the world of the living. Just like the Negro, the professor is fanatically confident in the correctness of his words about the lack of meaning in life and tries to convince other people of this as well. So he leaves the crying Negro in tears on the floor, even though he could not say anything. But, rather, the filmmakers convince the viewer of the correctness of the suicide preaching by putting the necessary victory speech into the mouth of the white professor.
I will not list my personal arguments against the winning worldview in the film. Let them speak to each of them. But the film will drag many more such stupid and uneducated people, like the Negro preacher from Sunset Limited Evening Express & #34, into death, into lack of will to live, and this will not serve as a consolation to me.
Telling us about two completely different fates, showing the story of one common evening held by people of completely different life and social positions, this film managed to perfectly convey the feeling of a certain doom, as if Damocles’ sword hanging over us alienation, that with each new word of the characters penetrates deeper into the soul of the viewer, forcing us to confess the truth of the unwanted truth.
The story revolves around just two people. One (Samuel L. Jackson) is an African-American who does not want to call himself that way, who believes in God and in the salvation of every human soul. The second (Tommy Lee Jones) is a white man, who is an intelligent and educated man, who is sobbed by this whole society with its gallant flaws, hypocrisy and general degradation, from which, moreover, no one wants to at least try to escape, so the situation only gets worse with time. Therefore, the first hero and saves the second from jumping under the train, and then brings to his home to discuss the problem and try to do something to help.
We should watch these two characters for an hour and a half: there are no more actors. But this movie is not necessary.
This film should be reviewed more than once or twice in order to go into all the details of the topics disclosed here. Literally, each phrase here hides a certain sacred meaning, which is a pillar of one of the sore topics of today’s society in general or human life in particular. And due to the excellent casuistics of the characters, we have to wring this monolith out of the text ourselves, which is not only difficult, but also great - this shows the viability of the film as a work of art.
By the way, it is worth thanking none other than Cormac McCarthy for such dialogue. One of his styles of storytelling, expressed in small chapters and an almost complete lack of description of locations, perfectly “lies” on the cinematic rails. An example we can find in his own "The Road", in the film adaptation of which we saw Charlize Theron and Viggo Mortensen.
But here and the play is different from the mentioned work of McCarthy as well as their adaptations. Yes, the style of the master is recognizable (take at least the unnamed characters in both works), but the information content is different. In Sunset Limited's Evening Express, I'm talking only about the film, only indirectly implying the play, we are given a much more extensive layer of information for analysis. It covers a lot: ordinary everyday situations inherent in us; nostalgia for the past; the inevitability of the collapse of humanity; over time, the annoyingly closed cycle of aimless existence and so on. Here we see two different people of absolutely different views, and on the example of their conversation understanding of the essence of the external nature of the world, viewed from different sides, which gives a huge prairie for their own reasoning.
Of course, a huge part of the film is occupied by twists and turns about the truth of God or his utter illusion and uselessness. Showing us a huge number of allusions to the Bible, which also require a huge amount of time and effort to understand, we see the problems of religion and faith itself from different sides, which gives rise to the creation of a personal view. In general, the whole film shows us the opposition of orthodoxy to the belief in the views of one hero and atheistic and misanthropic ideas, as well as the thoughts of another, which allows us to especially acutely realize certain ideas, at the same time dealing with them from immensely different sides.
I really liked the movie. I am firmly aware that I have not yet understood everything in it, which is why I realize that I will return to it more than once or twice. This work by Tommy Lee Jones is beautiful, not only as an actor, but also as a director. In general, to play in this kind of film, where all screen time is allocated only for two characters, is more than a difficult task. But such maestros of their business as Jackson and Jones coped perfectly, giving us not the same type of characters, but a living example of people who combine a completely one vision of the world, why watching their debates is not only interesting and to some extent informative, but even useful.
Yes, Sunset Limited is a difficult in its content, “heavy” in nature and perception, full of drama and not the most rosy thoughts. But this contains one of his main charms: he boldly talks about the sore, thereby “opening” the eyes and the viewer, making him think. No, it does not become a philosophical dogma, nor does it become a kind of immeasurably developed inference, a “discovery” of the public. Nope. He just boldly talks about what is in sight, but what we usually do not want to talk about, which attracts me personally.
Should you watch it or not? You decide. This is a film with an open ending, which leaves behind a unique “aftertaste” and inspires a lot of thoughts, reflection on which, at least, I was engaged for a long time. At the very least, this should be “tried.” The next step is yours.
P.S. Probably because I prefer self-examination more than dynamics, I like this. But it is a distraction. Thank you very much.
Black and white, light and darkness, yin and yang, faith and atheism, life and death. Sunset Limited Evening Express is an hour and a half dualistic duel in a shabby shack somewhere on the backstreet. Although sometimes it seems as if the twilight location of the film is something otherworldly, torn from reality, and the characters are stuck between worlds, between reality and naviya, and it depends on who wins, where they go next. The unity of time, place and action. Dialogues, dialogues... so that the viewer did not get bored, the master had to take on the adaptation of the play by Cormac McCarthy. Tommy Lee Jones took over, and Samuel L. Jackson took over as assistants.
A black-skinned, but bright-minded ex-con, who joined Christianity, saves a white Professor from being thrown under a train, whose soul has long been dominated by hopeless darkness. And the next 90 minutes are given to the owner of the apartment in order to settle in this darkness at least one ray of light, otherwise the next morning his guest will go to the same platform for the same purpose. Sunset has an amazing feature. If at first Jackson's character seems almost a know-it-all, a guardian angel with a bunch of tricks up his sleeve, ready to ironically smash the Professor's suicidal logic, the further into the forest, the more helpless his arguments look, and the deeper we delve into the terrifying philosophy of suicide.
Top plate. McCarthy’s work of the end of the zeros is generally permeated with decadent sentiments towards Western civilization, the erasure and inversion of local values. One of the leading overseas writers of our time seems to wonder: “And if all this collapses?” You could say Tommy Lee Jones' character alone encapsulates the narrative of The Road. In his inner world long ago there was a post-apocalypse. The American Dream Curve is not for the Professor. He is devoid of human attachments and disillusioned with star-striped values. Culture is the last branch that held over the abyss, and it broke down.
Plate down. Jackson, by the way, painfully resembles himself in "Pulp Fiction" - the same intonation and mannerisms. It’s like we see Jules Vinville 15 years later, the same ex-con who took the righteous path. But his knowledge and vocabulary are too small to eradicate the skepticism of suicide, although it sometimes seems that the Professor’s position is so fundamental that the Pope himself would not convince him. Braving famous truths like “love your neighbor”, the ex-prisoner only delays the time, but does not break the situation. But what about a guest with whom God never bothered to speak in person? As Blaise Pascal wrote, “God regulates man’s knowledge of Himself—He gives signs visible to those who seek Him and invisible to those who are indifferent to Him.” He gives enough light to those who want to see; He gives enough darkness to those who do not want to see. Maybe that's the point.
Atheism has many causes, but the Professor has roots, existential causes. “There is no God, and we are His prophets,” the road concluded. Such thoughts of the heroes of the novel were prompted by objective reality. A ruined world where it is not clear whether it is worth living, and if it is, for what, what is the point? Jones's hero has brought himself to this state. He states that if there is a God, the sound of human groans is his most joyful melody. And the only thing that keeps a person from suicide in this nightmare world is the fear of death, or rather, the fear of the next, even greater nightmare. But most likely, the whole afterlife is nothing more than an illusion and a lie. The Professor's worst nightmare would be her presence. He hates the idea of meeting all those with whom he has gladly said goodbye: his mother, etc. He just doesn’t need it, he wants something else – peace, absolute silence and peace.
In the end, however, it suddenly occurred to me that the position of a suicide and an atheist is also a kind of faith, not knowledge. No one can guarantee what awaits us on the other side. And to strive for this is therefore foolish, for at the end of the tunnel it can be even worse and all dreams of peace will be turned to dust. Is it not better to seek peace among the living while there is time?
7.5 out of 10
Remove the fear of death from people’s hearts and they will not live the day. Who would have lived in such a nightmare if not for the fear of the next? .
Life without illusions is unbearable. Kafka squared! The film can be disassembled by quotations. Very much. Reading the reviews, it is nice to know that many people appreciated the film. I will do my part.
The dispute between the scientist and the village atheist about the meaning of being goes beyond the eternal confrontation between religion and science. Tommy Lee Jones’s character is not an ordinary suicide. The objectivity of his worldview leaves no doubt that this is not a pessimistic view of the world - the world is. Morally, man has not changed since cave times, and perhaps the spiritual leprosarium The professor does not consider the specific place in which he was, but the whole society. And had I been in the place of his opponent, except to admire his mind, which conquered the fear of nothingness, I could not have done anything.
It seemed that despite the harshness of the dialogue, the Professor was quite loyal to his counterpart, trying all the time to get away from the annoying “savior”. A little more talk and the "savior" himself would run on the tracks ahead of the Professor.
However, it is no coincidence that the characters of the film are already old. If they were younger, the situation could be considered a farce of “losers” covering up cowardice with philosophical materials. Life, whatever it is, ends in death, but the tragedy is that few people are able to look at the world without “pink glasses” – if there were more such people, maybe something could be changed?
Show me a religion that prepares for death, for non-being, and I will join such a church.
A masterpiece.
Holy love for one’s neighbor and unbearable aversion to him face each other. A difficult dialogue begins, sometimes ironic, angry and honest.
Two strangers just see each other, talk and try to listen. No one can find direct answers to questions about God, meaninglessness, despair and emptiness. Human fears can be compared to the stars, which are visible only at night, you forget about them during the day, you do not feel them. But the hour comes and nothing else remains. As in the film itself, there is nothing superfluous.
It doesn’t matter who has the final say in an argument. The divine voice from heaven will not sound to anyone.
And after a long and intense night, we see the rays of the morning sun, the weeping face of an elderly man disappears and only light remains. There is still time before the Sunset Limited fast train runs at full speed. Even if it's very small.
There is one sin behind me: do not feed me bread, let me watch a movie in which the actors are once two and settled down and the whole plot is based solely on dialogue. If the film “Big Deal” is more diverse, albeit chamber, then “Sunset Limited” is exclusively of one direction. And this very orientation is indicated as the meaning of human life. Simple and simple.
The room does not claim to be a royal apartment, it is easier to say a hut and it has two men, one white, the other black. Both over 50. Two people battered by life. But it's not "Chinese Coffee" with Al Pacino, which also has a room and two people. In this picture of Tommy Lee Jones you can find a lot of interesting things. Of course, the questions and answers that the characters put before each other are known to many of us, but there are also those that we will hear for the first time.
The one who's white doesn't spoil a thing like life. He is frustrated, depressed and feels he has good reason to lower his curtain. The second, the one that is black, on the contrary, loves life and not just loves, but even in those moments when it is, to put it mildly, not sweet. And this divine messenger, with all his spiritual and intellectual powers, will try, as it is now fashionable to say, to revive this wanderer who has lost his way in the fetters of his own mind.
The film is deep and serious, not allowing you to relax for a minute. Even somewhere very serious and for an hour and a half it is very difficult to concentrate at times. But this is what cinema is good for, when you have the opportunity to work your brain and enlighten your soul at the same time. This is the beauty, so as not to fall into the beauty.
Did I like Tommy Lee Jones? But Samuel L. Jackson is incredibly charismatic and just living the life of his hero. He does not play, lives by those concepts and beliefs of his character as strongly as the belief in the God of the actor himself is obviously strong. That's it and that's it!
10 out of 10
On the one hand, the idea of the painting “Evening Express Sunset Limited” is not new and something remotely similar we could observe, for example, in the film “12 Angry Men”. Also a closed space, also several completely different people, due to circumstances, are forced to reason about the meaning of life. And on the other hand – in the film “12 Angry Men” the characters are still 12, in “Sunset” the whole film has, as they say, “drag” two characters, which is at least a huge challenge for actors. And it should be noted that from the actor’s point of view, I personally did not have any claims to the picture.
Sunset Limited evening express shows us a long dialogue between two completely diverse people. The saved and his savior. Or as indicated in the caption - "white" and "black"
As I have already noted from the side of the acting game, there is practically nothing to complain about in the picture. And Samuel L. Jackson and Tommy Lee Jones performed their roles perfectly. And that’s considering that for an hour and a half in the frame we see only two of them. If I singled out one person, I would still prefer Jackson, in my opinion, his character turned out brighter, which, most likely, was conceived by the creators of the picture. As for the dialogues themselves, in principle, they are not bad and there is a certain depth in them, but nevertheless, I believe that the film lacked some zest, which is indicated by the general assessment of the picture. In my opinion, if the creators had made a more powerful emphasis on the ending, the picture could claim the prefix “genius”. But already it turned out a good movie, with an excellent acting component, which is certainly recommended for viewing.
7 out of 10
As a child, my father instilled in me a taste for quality cinema, since then society has diligently spoiled this taste. In the words of my father: ' life is simple, there are no alien landings on earth every day, asteroids do not fly daily, giant mutants do not run on the ground and deadly viruses do not move'. Maybe that’s why it’s so hard to make and especially watch movies about ordinary life without action.
Evening Express Sunset Limited is a film without music and action, a film of one room, a film of one table, an interior. A film-dialogue of two people from ' different world' and differently related to the possibility of living. It’s a great movie where it’s hard not to sleep.
What does this movie look like? About faith in God and faith in the material world, about the eternal dispute of adherents of this or that faith, about the strength of their faith and their arguments?
Perhaps for some and yes, perhaps for the filmmakers themselves, and maybe not. In any case, for me, this film was primarily about weakness.
Weaknesses of two people before life, one on the edge of life and death rests on faith in God, and the other on the fast train. Weaknesses of characters, not allowing one to get up and leave, despite the locks of the flimsy door, and the other to get up and move to another house, to make the world around him more alive, justifying this by some higher state of mind. About the weakness of their reasoning of their faith, each of them is right not yet to speak to the other, and each can easily regain the rightness to himself already indefinitely, and this is the weakness of the film itself. It cannot go indefinitely, and therefore the creators decided to strip one of the interlocutors of words and this move turned out rather weak.
I didn’t look for and think about all these weaknesses, starting to watch this film, I expected to see a little different, but apparently being at that moment the most objective I saw what I saw, you may see that the other, in any case, will be interesting.
5 out of 10
Two single people, a table, two chairs. A dull room that saw the views of a sofa eaten by bedbugs, gas tiles, dirty rags hung around the corners of the room. The silence of the night is only sometimes disturbed by the piercing cries of the wretched who huddle in this place left by God, where there is no hope, no love, no happiness.
And yet, according to the dark-skinned hero of the film, each of us unconsciously strives for happiness, whether it is a burned whiskey alcoholic or a disillusioned old professor. Happiness? Can there be happiness in this forgotten place? And in general, what is happiness in a damned world where there is no way out, where everything that is dear to you turns into less than ashes? Confident in his fragile ideals, an elderly professor who lives in a world of fictitious and empty images and a bitter realization of the meaninglessness of existence cannot even imagine that happiness fits in the palm of his hand, that happiness sits a quiet butterfly on the hand of a stationary observer who peacefully contemplates the world, that happiness whispers a saving phrase in your ear when you open your eyes in a prison hospital, being between life and death, that happiness appears on the platform of Sunshine Limited station, although you have made ten times sure that there is no soul on the station. For others it is enough and small to feel this divine, cathartic feeling; for others there will not be enough riches of the whole world to fill the abyss of an empty soul.
Happiness? Surprisingly, it is the atheist professor who can so sensitively feel God, or rather his absence. So sensitive to feel and suffer every moment. To incinerate, to burn out your soul with a ghostly knowledge from which there is no use, and which has destroyed faith. In knowledge he sought consolation. He loved him and worshipped him like God. It destroyed his soul. Without ever thinking about God, the old professor, however, cannot bear the feeling of his absence. So great is this sorrowful feeling that everything loses meaning, even Knowledge, and there remains only one possible outcome, which now makes no sense to distant - death, in which at last there will be silence, tranquility, peace. Happiness? In death you will find your happiness. The desired happiness, which speaks of the hero of S. L. Jackson.
We have witnessed a drama unnoticed in a vast city, a drama of the human soul. Outside the window above the roof rises a golden disk of the sun, which shines equally to each of us. Once again there was a miracle of the birth of a new day. “You are all in the light, and you only see the shadow that you cast yourself” – wise words of the old convict, inspired by God, or simply the wisdom of a man who has lived a long and hard life. Alas, the words sound only an echo in the inflamed brain of a broken man who is unable to live, who has exchanged Truth for 4,000 books and called this exchange equivalent, and who has encroached on the very origins of creation, on his priceless, from any point of view, life. Pride overshadowed the bright mind and left darkness. A wanderer in darkness tragically ends his worldly path. The only possible outcome for him is his worst punishment. Because he wasn't supposed to be.
A story about the meaning of life and meanings in life, about good and evil, about the last feature as a point of new reference, about people, about God. The story of choice and how our beliefs shape our lives. Good movie.
The film raises questions about the essence of life, pouring into the divine being and the supremacy of religion, as well as the denial of this and this is communicated to us with the help of two characters: White and Black (no wonder the color of the skin is chosen in this way, this emphasizes that the interlocutors are different poles of one whole). The tape is designed for patient and inquisitive viewers and without a special love for philosophy can not do, as it is difficult to watch an hour and a half film, which takes place in one room, because the film adaptation of the novel by Cormac McCarthy on an amateur. However, if you pass the test of strength, then the conversation between the two opposing parties will be informative and fascinating, especially when the roles of the characters are played by artists such as Samuel L. Jackson and Tommy Lee Jones.
The problem of the meaning of life is one of the fundamental doctrines of philosophy. Some believe that they have solved this problem and are in false bliss, others, disappointed in even searches, vegetate meaninglessly in this black and white world. He who asks wants to know the truth, the doubter wants to know that it does not exist. But neither of them knows the truth. We can only assume, because it is not quite accurate to count.
In the end, everyone is killed by what they believe, not what they do not believe. And maybe such a selfish thought as the hope of nothingness and seems to be the act of the weak, but sometimes quite justified and reason. There are as many aspects as there are stereotypes. And it should not be forgotten that the dialectic of preaching always presupposes evil at the heart, since imposing someone else’s worldview is preaching in hell, and it should not be forgotten that in addition to your own shadow there is also light around it. In this case, allegorical looking down on other passengers is condemned. It is not by chance that the Sunset terminal station was chosen - now there is a choice: continue the path to being or stop being a part of the spiritual leper colony.
He is insane who has never thought of death. And as I often think about her, then accidentally stumbled upon this film, immediately began to watch.
Evening Express "Sunset Limited" is a play by Cormac McCarthy, all the action of the picture takes place in the same room with only two people - White and Black - and it is not about the race of the characters, but their role in what is happening.
Hero Samuel L. Jackson saves the hero Tommy Lee Jones from being thrown under a train. He brings him to his house, and a conversation begins between them, starting with a simple attempt to find out the cause of White’s action, and ending with finding out whether human life is important at all.
What better way to describe a film than a quote taken from it?
You can't be happy if you're in pain.
- Why not?
- It doesn't make sense.
The point is, Professor, if there is no pain in your life, how do you recognize happiness? In comparison to what?
The whole movie feels like you’re in the theater. Playing actors is fascinating, creating the impression of presence. You think with heroes, argue with them, get angry, laugh, sad.
This is the third work of Tommy Lee as a director, it is clear that the hand of the master is stuffed. There is nothing superfluous. Just two people who were connected by an accident for one night. Sometimes the director returns us to reality and reminds us that besides these two – Black and White – there is someone else in the world, with the help of a simple rain outside the window, the horn of a car or the cry of his wife at her husband coming from behind the wall.
But, in general, the situation does not change, and this allows you not to be distracted by external factors, but to immerse yourself in the dialogue of the characters, to penetrate them to the very depths of your soul. You can just close your eyes and imagine that you're the third person in the room, the third person in the room, the outside listener, and the picture benefits even more. Don't look, just listen, and the picture is still complete.
The film will certainly appeal to thinking people. Thinking about life, about death, about faith, about love, about hope.
I would like to conclude with the following lines:
My world is basically a forced labor camp, from where workers who are absolutely innocent are taken by lot, several a day, to be executed. I don’t just see him that way, I think he is. Are there other points of view? Yeah. Will any of them stand up to scrutiny? No.
Cormac McCarthy is always a reflection on life, a dialogue about the importance of Being and God, a clash of religiosity against education. That's what happens in this TV movie. Minimum budget, the most suitable actors, impeccable text and viewers. Remember when McCarthy wrote in The Road:
This picture assumes the presence of a spectator. From the very first minutes, we are being forced to engage in a dialogue that we cannot but join. A precise, concise, filtered stream of words combines into bizarre war battles between believers and atheists, intelligent and educated, desperate and hopeful.
We have two men, each of whom has crossed his half of the world. They exchange attitudes, get upset, angry and continue to talk.
The position of one is based on the belief that any one of us, even without reading the Bible, knows far more about Good and Evil than anyone can imagine. The second, takes the classic gloomy position of many of McCarthy's heroes, formulated by him in "The Road": "Nights are blacker than hell, each new day is a bit darker than the previous one." It is as if ruthless glaucoma is just beginning, and the world around it has already begun to dim.
In fact, the whole film is one long dialogue. There is no need to look for special intrigue, it is in the text, as well as in acting. A special digression needs to be made here. Despite the fact that we have a TV movie, I believe that the acting work in this film is one of the best in 2011 (the film was released in 2011, respectively, this year and should be indicated). Two famous actors who usually do not forget about commercial projects, and they do not position themselves as especially “lycedeic” – simply and modestly gathered and showed everyone what a real acting game is.
No offense to the many fans will be told, but the same Al Pacino in his two monologue films (Chinese Coffee, Local Stigmatic) of course showed his honed talent, but did not bring his heroes to archetypal heights. However, he (like De Niro) had similar acting successes at a much younger age.
I rarely recommend movies for review, but Sunset Limited is a philosophical parable, the viewing of which may be interesting to the widest audience. Minimalism in the visual component is compensated by maximalism in the content of the role and the disclosure of images.
You know, it's no coincidence that I'm talking about archetypes. In the credits, one character is called “Black”, and the other is called “White”, and if you think about races, then it’s not about them at all.
7 out of 10
An hour and a half conversation about the life and death of two elderly people, each of whom, not a creature trembling, but has the right. One has the right, because he has read several thousand books and a professor in general, and the second is friendly with God Himself, easily talks with Him and can easily introduce others to Him (and in prison he fully demonstrated his rights). In general, typical Americans – and God have the right, and almost everything else (well, except that the iron door has not yet got). The situation, however, is complicated by the fact that one of the characters has more rights than the other, since just before the film Black intercepted White in his jump to the next world. And on the basis of more rights (and the principle of democracy: the one who has more rights is right), for the most part of the film Black persistently so White instructs the right way. These instructions personally strained me, and White, as I understand it, they were also not to his liking, but as a person educated and accustomed to democracy (in addition, the door was locked) White listened to them patiently (and I, frankly, rewinded). But, in the end, White could not stand it, and very clearly explained to Black that the right to divide and that contrary to his “white” rights, all “black” rights are simply nothing. Yes, there are “black” rights, in the light of “white” rights – “everything is nothing” (this is not an oxymoron, these are White rights). And hearing about such “white” rights, Black was forced to open the door and let White out, and then began to blame God for the fact that He, they say, some of the wrong words in the script prescribed (whether the author or God was wrong in this film).
This film gave me a feeling of mild condescension: unhappy but naive Americans are trying to look around in the hell, which we have been in for almost a century and many things have already seen. At the same time, if the figure of White aroused sympathy in me, then the figure of Black caused almost irritation in me. I would call Black’s reasoning delusional, and the manner of his behavior a curvature, which, in my opinion, is completely inappropriate in the circumstances of this film. White’s thoughts and moods, in my opinion, seem more meaningful and more felt, which, however, did not make them any closer to me. And of all the hour and a half of conversations of this film, more or less worth it to me only thought White about the collapse of civilization and his personal “white” collapse. The scale of White’s internal collapse, I would estimate, as the maximum possible, but I note, fundamentally unattainable. But the very connection between the external and internal collapse of the White seemed to me very far-fetched, and the words with which the White tries to express his views seemed to me not quite adequate to his status - with the professor's declared readability (more than four thousand books!), he could quote someone clever, and not carry an unexpressive cutoff of the level of a semi-literate Negro.
Don't watch this movie - it's better to read some clever book, you can even the one that was on the table in the film.
P.S. Also, in this film, I was unpleasantly struck by the complete silence of the women’s issue – when discussing issues of life and death, mentioning the role of women in the process is, in my opinion, very appropriate. However, the "heroes" amicably bypass this moment in silence, which causes me vague suspicions that they are not white and black, but both of the same shade.
4 out of 10
1. Death anthem 2. Thousands of possibilities of God
In general, this movie is just creepy and scary, everything that is written below: it is an impression, thoughts born from watching, it is difficult to live with them, the film generates a conflict within the person himself.
1. For some, faith is hope for the best, it is help in difficult circumstances (and real as it seems to them, well, more precisely, to say: as they believe, so by faith and receive, I repeat: for them this is Reality).
For others, faith is the opium, the illusion, the rose-tinted glasses that hide the horror, the meaninglessness of existence.
The first convince: put on these glasses and life will immediately become easier, the second answer: on the contrary, remove and face the truth, free yourself from illusions that only fuel your existence.
To feel the joy of life, to receive pleasure from it - this is the very engine of life, it does not allow it to fade away, and it does not matter through what this joy is achieved, what is the drug & #39; it is used ... only it is better not to think that all this is meaningless - because of course, - will end in death. However, ' drugs ' taken by people and so block the awareness of death: dull the sense of its inevitability in some cases or promise that death will not be at all, but there will be another life behind the grave. . .
On the other hand, the professor rightly says that pain we miss in turn (the old is forgotten, the new comes and it in turn goes into oblivion), it does not accumulate, otherwise life would turn into unbearable suffering, total hell, and this is another illusion that helps us to live, not to go crazy, not to die of heartbreak, and not to commit suicide ... and thank God that we do not feel the pain of the whole world, other people’s pain is not felt and not experienced as acutely as our own, everything is forgotten and erased. . .
To feel the joy of life (not taking into account, covering one’s eyes to the meaninglessness and futility of this joy), not to feel the pain and suffering of this world ... this is so nasty and one can only exist in this world, no other way ... otherwise one must look at the train schedule and go to the nearest station ... to peace, silence. . .
Scary? It's no worse than living.
And is there in the world not an illusory, real justification of life?
2. God had a thousand possibilities at the dawn of the universe, and look what He made of it all.
The question is really 'philosophical' for those who argue about God as the Creator of this universe: could it be different?
On the one hand, if He is creatively free, it could have been better, and if He could not, then He is not free to choose from a thousand possibilities. . . .
If we say that everything was good initially at the creation of the universe, but this freedom destroyed people themselves and it was not the fault of the Creator Himself, then the question is: was it then the freedom of God not to make such a universe in which man himself by his freedom will destroy?
If there was, then why create a world that condemns itself to suffering?
If not, is God not free? But it can't be like that.
Maybe God doesn't. But then he is an illusion invented by people to live and overcome the horror and meaninglessness of his existence. 1
Essence. This film is actually a television performance, staged based on the play of the notorious Cormac McCartney ( "Old men do not belong here", "The Road"). Throughout screen time, we listen to the dialogue of two people who are completely different from each other, who in a normal situation probably would never have met. Gradually, the characters of the characters are revealed and the viewer is always interested in what the characters of the picture will talk about further.
Actors. In fact, it is a theater of two actors. Although it would be more correct to say two great actors.
Samuel L. Jackson once again demonstrates his acting talent, playing a completely different character from his previous screen images.
In the eyes of his hero, you can see a desperate attempt to awaken the lost interest in life in the hero Tommy Lee Jones, however, at the same time, there is a fear of hopelessness to do this.
Tommy Lee Jones was a great company for Jackson. A tired man who is skeptical of trying to convince him of the existence of God. The role was strong.
Placing. The action takes place in one room, the film is built on dialogue. Those who love the movie will not be disappointed. However,
In my opinion, the dialogue that makes up the film is filled with real dynamics, which you will not see in every action movie.
Result. A wonderful chamber movie, built on the dialogue of two characters with whom by the end of the film you want to communicate in real life. The final monologue of the hero Tommy Lee Jones and the overall amosphere of the picture together give us the perfect movie for those who like to think and draw some conclusions from what they saw.
Separately, I want to say that the film is not propaganda of religion, as it may seem from the back.
A huge thanks to everyone who had a hand in creating this picture.
The film is based on a play by Cormac McCarthy, winner of the 2008 Pulitzer Prize for The Road. According to Cormac McCarthy, two great films have already been made: “No Country for Old Men” by the Coen brothers and “The Road” by John Hillcout (based on the same award-winning novel). Perhaps Cormac McCarthy can be called one of the best writers of our time; in Russia, writers of this level no longer exist. And now for the adaptation of McCarthy took the outstanding actor Tommy Lee Jones.
There are only two characters in the film: a professor (played by Tommy Lee Jones) and a preacher (Samuel Jackson), a superb acting duo. The whole action of the film takes place in one room, and the action, in fact, is not, instead of it - only conversation. And these conversations are protracting. At first, you watch the film with interest, but in the last third of the film interest is replaced by admiration.
The plot is as follows: the professor tries to commit suicide by throwing himself under the train "Sunset Limited", but he is suddenly held by someone, some Negro. He brings the professor to his home, and a dialogue begins. The Negro turns out to be a former criminal, a murderer, who in prison believed in God and became a preacher (although his confessional affiliation is not mentioned, but, apparently, he is a Protestant).
The preacher loads the atheist professor with religious propaganda. He breaks several times to leave, but the preacher restrains him, realizing that the professor, having left, will again try to commit suicide. The preacher presses on the professor, trying to awaken a religious feeling in him and prevent him from committing suicide. Listening to him, the professor, it would seem, thinks about something and tries to understand those religious positions, which he hears from the interlocutor.
The very manner in which the preacher speaks of faith is typically American-Protestant – somewhat loose-headed and cheerful, assertive, as if he were not preaching Christ, but advertising some commercial product. I once attended a sermon of an American Baptist preacher, who was simultaneously translated into Russian, and then I saw something like this, some Christian marketing, looking at which, it becomes a little awkward for these sincerely believing American brothers in Christ, whose sincerity gives some falsehood, as if you drink “natural” fruit juice and feel a clear chemical taste, from which you want to spit.
After the streams of words poured over the head of the professor have subsided, the latter begins to speak and turns his soul before the preacher, and here it is as if poisonous black smoke fills the room. The professor carries in his soul such horror, such an endless nightmare that the preacher, having barely looked into the abyss slightly opened to him, embraces his head with his hands. All his Protestant vigor and self-confidence slid off him like acid washed away. He realizes that his sermon was powerless and useless; he chose key words to open the professor’s heart with them, but it is not just locked, but tightly brewed. Before the existential horror that swirls in the professor’s soul, all the words of the preacher turned out to be just husks, miserable childish babble, and the preacher understood this.
I must say that in the last third of the picture, when the professor presents his worldview, the atmosphere of the film changes dramatically, moves to another, deeper level, and what happens on the screen begins to clearly resemble the films of Ingmar Bergman. Only he could hear from the lips of the heroes such monologues, full of terrible and deep despair, mixed with some universal horror; and now we hear it in a teleplay by Cormac McCarthy. An unprecedented case in the history of cinema is for the hero of an American film to speak the language of Bergman’s despair.
In general, the preaching did not achieve its goal, the preacher realized that he could not keep the person who carries hell in his soul from taking the last step leading to the final hell. The professor asks to be let out of the apartment, and the preacher no longer holds him, but inevitably opens a series of locks on the door. There is a feeling that the door opens, leading not to the corridor on the floor, but to the afterlife. The professor is leaving.
The preacher is desperate. When he is alone, he says to God, I don’t understand why you sent me here. If you wanted me to help him, why didn’t you give me the words? You gave it to him. What about me? His preaching mission has failed, and he doesn’t understand why. He thought that turning the lost on the right path was his vocation, to which he was quite fit, but now he realized that there were cracks that he could not jump over, and fences that could not climb over. The inner darkness of a man may have a concentration which the pitiful bulb of his dim faith will not enlighten. He thought his faith shone like a powerful spotlight. But the illusion dissipated, touching the true reality in all its deep horror.
(I recommend watching this great film translated by Yuri Serbin.)