MovieChat Forums > Brimstone (2017) Discussion > An engrossing watch but with some major ...

An engrossing watch but with some major flaws (spoilers)


Ok, I may be in a minority, but I enjoyed this film. It was dark, gritty, violent and shocking. Yes it portrayed the abuse and subjugation of women and children, wives and daughters, but as it was a product of that time, that genre and obviously it was the whole point of the story, then that’s the creative hotpot we got. Guy Pearce is always watchable as a creepy b@#&£@d and it is interesting to see other actors in different things (the GOT alumni particularly in this case).
However, I found a few flaws that don’t sit right with me and spoilt the piece overall.
1) Fanning’s acting capabilities....where are they? She has little to no range. Sure, she can look frightened and have those big, wide eyes, but, seeing as how her character cannot speak or seemingly make any kind of noise, she needed to show everything on her face....and yet, she doesn’t. Her lack of range of emotion is very disappointing. I think the film could have been much better with a different actress in this pivotal role. Maybe they didn’t want to be too harrowing though, because I can imagine with more emotion in the role it would have been a different film entirely.
2) Just because you cut your own tongue off doesn’t mean you can’t make any sounds!! I mean, compared to this, I was impressed that when the boy was fatally gunned down, he made a sound at every impact; unusual but realistic.
3) There’s no way you could cut your own tongue off without fainting or giving up, or stopping because you’re choking to death on your own bile and blood....the Doctor/Dentist must have finished it off for her. It was such an extreme thing to do and really she could have avoided doing it.
4) There’s no way you could be fatally stabbed and gutted, with said guts being pulled out of your body and wrapped around your throat and remain alive, conscious and seemingly indifferent (I know he asked them to shoot him, but he didn’t seem in too much distress to me; Acting choices again?)
Other little niggles are just niggles and scoffs, like Harington’s ‘interesting’ accent, the clarity of the burning of the real Liz and even when you have been set on fire your character is channeling the Terminator so much you can withstand it and continue to have a conversation.

reply

Obviously it would pretty much eliminate the movie but we always do "she/he should haves" so here's mine. After the real Liz died, she should have taken the letter and explained to Eli everything that had happened. I'm sure he'd still want to marry her and she'd still have a tongue.

reply

Thank you and agree with the fact that viewer’s do make ‘she or he would have/should haves’, which makes for interesting discussion....so thanks for sharing yours.....although I don’t think my points are quite that (as in I wasn’t suggesting alternative story arcs based on the character’s choices or behaviours as such, but making observations about biology and possibilities of self-surgery and potentially underwhelming/poor acting).

I too think that she could have come clean about it all and kept her tongue and that she could have had a different (but similar), contented life with her husband and son.....until her father turned up!
I guess they could have still had the same story arc of his possession/revenge pursuit and maybe she would stay silent in terms of the abuse and her own revenge need.....but the whole mute aspect of it does give the film that bit of an edge.

reply

It did venture into dark fairytale sometimes. (I enjoyed it too)

reply

1) I thought she did a great job. The lack of over the top emotional responses played to the inner strength combined with the tough life experiences her character had. If the director had wanted more emotions or something different, undoubtedly she could have delivered that as well. Emilia Jones even delivered an earlier version of her that showed great continuity. It was easy to believe they were the same person as their traits and mannerisms were similar.

2) correct. It doesn't mean you can't make sounds. But what would those sounds add to the story? Silence speaks more eloquently. A person who makes sounds but cannot speak would not appear intelligent. Liz needed to appear intelligent

3) with a very sharp instrument and a bold strike, it is likely possible to cut your own tongue nearly off. Regardless , I wouldn't get hung up on it. Not a deal breaker.

4) probably true, but tearing guts out does not end life immediately and he could merely be in shock. The son shooting him added emotional gravity so there was purpose for it playing that way.

Preacher talking while on fire was because he was a ghost who had been to hell, and was likely returning. He wasn't human.

reply

1) I thought she did a great job. The lack of over the top emotional responses played to the inner strength combined with the tough life experiences her character had. If the director had wanted more emotions or something different, undoubtedly she could have delivered that as well. Emilia Jones even delivered an earlier version of her that showed great continuity. It was easy to believe they were the same person as their traits and mannerisms were similar.

2) correct. It doesn't mean you can't make sounds. But what would those sounds add to the story? Silence speaks more eloquently. A person who makes sounds but cannot speak would not appear intelligent. Liz needed to appear intelligent

3) with a very sharp instrument and a bold strike, it is likely possible to cut your own tongue nearly off. Regardless , I wouldn't get hung up on it. Not a deal breaker.

4) probably true, but tearing guts out does not end life immediately and he could merely be in shock. The son shooting him added emotional gravity so there was purpose for it playing that way.

Preacher talking while on fire was because he was a ghost who had been to hell, and was likely returning. He wasn't human.

reply