Quick, spoil the movie for yourself now so that by Oct you'll have forgot what the plot is.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Sicario: Day of the Soldado Rottenwatch
- Thread starter RastaMentality
- Start date
LOL This is how I shot in Time Crisis 3.
Maybe it's to make it look like it wasn't done by an expert?
I read an interview with Taylor Sheridan recently wherein he clearly expressed how pissed off he was at both the renaming of Comancheria into Hell or High Water, and for Soldado now being Sicario 2: Day of the Soldado, or just Sicario 2 in some territories. I feel quite bad for him. He wrote this movie to be its own thing and marketing is what has officially tied it into being "The Next Chapter In The Sicario Saga". That creates an expectation from folks that movie just wasn't originally envisioned with.
From the feature:
If anyone's interested in reading the piece:
https://www.esquire.com/entertainme...ay-of-the-soldado-yellowstone-interview-2018/
From the feature:
If anyone's interested in reading the piece:
https://www.esquire.com/entertainme...ay-of-the-soldado-yellowstone-interview-2018/
Some of those actual reviews are more in line with what I expected unfortunately. It was already lacking the look and uncomfortable feel from the previous movie just by the trailers, but some of the story hints given was the kind of Direction I was hoping they weren't going to take it. Interesting to see his upset at the marketing and Executives though, I didn't realize he envisioned it as its own separate thing.
As an aside plug, please watch Wind River by the same writer, Sheridan. It's really good.
As an aside plug, please watch Wind River by the same writer, Sheridan. It's really good.
It really is bullshit. Like a name change is one thing, a name change that makes people think it's a direct sequel when the movie is deliberately not trying to be a sequel is really messed up for creator and audience alike
Yeah, and that's what makes it doubly unfortunate when you start seeing reviews saying things like, "Not a perfect sequel". Because... it was NEVER meant to be.
From that interview
Yeah, that's how I imagine a title goes from "Soldado" to "Sicario: Day of the Soldado, next chapter in the Sicario saga"
Yeah, that's how I imagine a title goes from "Soldado" to "Sicario: Day of the Soldado, next chapter in the Sicario saga"
Caught a screening of this last night. It was good, the fear that it's all ooh-rah action is unfounded. While it lost some of the "innocence" of Emily Blunt's character, it replaced it with the relationship between Del Toro and the girl. The last trailer has pretty much all the action in the movie, it's still solidly a drama instead of an action flick. The action scenes were quick and efficient instead of long shootouts and gymnastics, your mileage may vary on whether that's a good thing.
Sounds terrific. I'm expecting balls to the walls action with minimal plot and I'm perfectly fine with that.
Sounds EVEN BETTER. Gang gang!
Last edited:
Does Sheridan mean they were supposed to be different characters or just the overall tone and plot was stand-alone?
Just watched Sicario the first time over the weekend, and I'm eager to see this. I'm just hoping it doesn't suffer from the shit sequel syndrome.
I mean, a sequel to Sicario is totally unnecessary. But this was never meant to be that. As the article with Sheridan I linked to on this page makes clear, this was never Sicario 2. This was "Soldado" and then marketing fucked it.
Same characters, but a separate story to Sicario. He was never interested in writing a sequel to Sicario, but there were further stories he wanted to tell with certain characters in that world. By calling it Sicario 2, it's created a wholly unnecessary expectation now.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. I'm still gonna see Sicario 2 though.
I just re-read my post and saw that it was a backhanded compliment :P
I liked Alien and Aliens both, a lot, and for different reasons.
I went into Sicario as a massive Villeneuve fan, but I don't know Sollima so I'm hopeful, but cautious.
Pretty much what I expected. It's another 2049 situation (people were fearing that would be a big action movie because the trailers focused so much on the action)
Only concern I have is if they tried to make Del Toro's character more relatable.
Sollima is good. He directed several Gomorrah episodes and the Suburra movie so he knows how to handle a blunt gritty unsympathetic crime thriller
It didn't strike me as a movie that needed a sequel, and I thought that maybe this one wouldn't turn out well because it'd be a moneygrab. Reviews seem decent however.
I watched the first one and thought it was fine. It's pretty good, but I feel it's overrated. It's not a masterpiece, but it's also far from bad. I had borrowed the DVD from the library and fell asleep watching it late at night, then forced myself to start from the beginning and rewatch it.
I watched the first one and thought it was fine. It's pretty good, but I feel it's overrated. It's not a masterpiece, but it's also far from bad. I had borrowed the DVD from the library and fell asleep watching it late at night, then forced myself to start from the beginning and rewatch it.
It was named differently. It was just "Soldado". Some marketing exec fucked up; the same thing happened to his other movie Hell or High Water. Marketing changed it from Sheridan's desired name of Comancheria.
This is worse though because it creates unintended expectations for the movie, expectations that the movie and writer were deliberately trying to avoid.
I'd say it was always a sequel, a film that features two of the most important characters of another film in the main roles is still kind of a sequel. It might not be a continuation of the story of the first one, but it's still a sequel of sorts.
It's just impossible for me to ignore the will of the people behind this movie, in particular Sheridan, when it comes to what this film was envisioned and developed as, versus what the marketing guys decided to call it. The very fact it's had three name changes now from Soldada, to Sicario: Soldada, and now Sicario 2: Day of the Soldado is very telling. This all came after the movie was shot. This isn't even an Alien to Aliens situation where both films are obviously different in their ways, but Aliens is clearly a sequel predicated on the events of Alien. Sheridan wrote Soldado to be a different beast with obvious connective tissue to the first film, but it's not a follow on from that movie, and he was the very first person to say this wasn't Sicario 2 and the idea of a "Sicario 2" simply didn't interest him. Just certain characters did.
Hope not. Her character was one of the weaker aspects of the first film.
Unless they plan on putting actual effort in her portrayal.
The marketing for Sicario 2 has been cringey since day 1. They clearly don't know how to market this movie.
What I was getting at was that it's no shock that the production company decided to change the title to Sicario 2, because despite what Sheridan said, even if it was just called Soldado, everybody would still consider it a sequel to Sicario. The main characters in Soldado are two of the main characters from Sicario, literally the only one missing is Emily Blunt. It's not like this is some big unprecedented thing in movies. Look at for instance the Mad Max films, the only connective tissue between any of them is the fact that there's a guy called Max Rockatansky in the lead role, but everybody still considers The Road Warrior to be a sequel to Mad Max, Beyond Thunderdome a sequel to The Road Warrior and Fury Road the fourth film in the franchise.
Now if Soldado's original script didn't feature Brolin and Del Toro's characters and that it was the studio's decision to change the film into a sequel to Sicario (which has happened in the past with for instance 10 Cloverfield Lane and Die Hard With a Vengeance), then I would be 100% with you that the studio fucked this by tacking on the Sicario name. However, that was not the case and from the studio's perspective I fully understand the decision to give it the Sicario name, since everybody would've seen it as a Sicario sequel anyway, so why not try to cash in?
Well that's not something I've read about Kate's character & Blunt's portrayal of her before.
I'll put it down to 'Hot takes in Era movie threads'.
It's called an opinion.
It amuses me how people jump on trends mindlessly, like the use of the term "hot take" lately when presented with a differing opinion.
heh
Yes, and I'm allowed to dismiss it as an opinion I find to be ill-founded.
I agree, first watch Blunt's character didn't bother me, seemed like a good vector for the audience's opinion. 2nd time was grating, she's there to react to the amorality and not much more.
Yes, and he's allowed to say your post was low effort and not worth taking seriously.
If you can't be assed to take your own posts beyond both the most tired and played out and lowest of hanging fruits on era then no one is going to take your posts seriously. Nor should they, really.
Title matters, because it creates expectations. Calling it Sicario 2 "the next chapter in the Sicario saga" creates the expectation that the movie is continuing the themes and style of Sicario and is a direct continuation of that movie.
As a title, Soldado is a clean break from Sicario, and implies a thematic connection rather than a direct one, much like how the sequel to Alien isn't Alien 2. It's Aliens, and it's understood that it's a movie with a different director and different tone and style to Alien
Benicio's "Mexican" accent is fucking atrocious and it was originally going to be called Soldada? If so, then who was the woman that was going to star in this film? I don't get the whole Santa Muerte wannabe dual flag poster.
Caught this tonight, thought it was a bit of a miss compared to the first. Visually it was a downgrade and it wasn't as nearly as tense either.
Exactly. Also, again, I'm absolutely fine going with the will of the creators and their vision for what this always was, versus what marketing people decided to call it. The plan is to get bums in seats at the end of the day and sell tickets, so of course calling it "Sicario 2" makes sense to remove any doubt about what the movie is related to. But that betrays the author's intent in this case, and we also clearly know how the author feels about this, and how they constructed it to begin with. I'll align myself with that more than what would be easier to sell tickets, because the latter option creates very different expectations. Get Him To The Greek is not a sequel to Forgetting Sarah Marshall, The LEGO Batman Movie is not a sequel to The LEGO Movie, and so on... key characters in familiar iconography, but different intent and expectations.
That "hollywood ending" part of the review is concerning. Part of the first movie's charm is that it didn't exactly end happily for most of the characters.
I saw this last night. Not sure I'd call the ending "happy" for anyone, though it had the opportunity to end on a more bleak note than it did.
I enjoyed it overall for what it was, though preferred the first film. This one just kind of ended up not going anywhere in particular IMO.
