Watch The Counselor For Free

Wonderful Movie

Simply A Masterpiece

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

1 star in memory of each hour I'll never get back. Poor plot, no script, no story. A film full of verbal statements, Cameron Diaz with bad make up and Michael Fassbenders tears and nose dribbles.

Movie Review: "The Counselor" (2013)Shooting its principal photography between July and October 2012, followed by an extraordinary long post-production period of a year, when director Ridley Scott had been struggling due to his brother Tony Scott's suicide on August 19th 2012 in Los Angeles County with a further dealing relentlessly brutalized screenplay on the criminal condition when a drug-trafficking Texan business man, here given face to out-for-mischief playing actor Brad Pitt, overthrows himself with a perfectly-organized Mexican cartel deal originally-conceived by first-to-be novelist then turning screenwriter Cormac McCarthy, known for writing the thriller-novelty "No Country For Old Men" in 2005, which had been adapted to the screen in Academy-Award-winning efforts by The Coen Brothers in 2007.Title-given leading character, performed by Michael Fassbender, who shares one extraordinary scene in the final third of a 110-Minute-Editorial initiated by R. Scott's long-time collaborating as entrusted editor Pietro Scalia in a simple cross-cut of The Counselor sitting in a car under breeding summer conditions and Mexican cartel "Jefe", portrayed with single-handed efforts by actor Rubén Blades of owning the picture in itself a calmly-received rock of the aftermath due to a monologue of futile revelations, where a just-reacting Michael Fassbender in face of his character's life annihilated must accept the situation of losing properties and control, which director Ridley Scott so masterfully prepared to hit the any matured audience's nerve.Nevertheless this strict thriller only works in a few single scene, especially with actresses innocently-then-spoiled playing Penelope Cruz to ultra-hardshipping character of saving-her-own-skin Malkina, in show-stealing beat performances by Cameron Diaz versus Javier Bardem to lose as character Reiner, when my only wish had been that this potentially full-throttle piece of cinema had been become the suspense-gripping picture; brought to controversial flourishment of pain-stakingl honesty on human behaviors in-debt in greed with its seemingly disturbing subject matter of ending the world as we know it.© 2018 Felix Alexander Dausend (Cinemajesty Entertainments LLC)

This is not a synopsis, it is a reflection of my experience watching The Counsellor.I've just watched The Counsellor for the 3rd time, and for the 1st time decided that I like it.So if I didn't like it the 1st 2 times, why did I watch it for a 3rd time?Well, have you looked at the credits? I should probably start by saying that IMHO, P. Cruz is endlessly watchable, and Brad, Javier and Cameron run her pretty close. This is also a film from the guys who brought you Alien, Blade Runner, No Country for Old Men and The Road. There's a Fassbender involved.But... good movie making is notoriously ephemeral, just one moment can lose an audience irretrievably, and on first watch, this movie lost me. More than once.And yet... just a couple of great scenes can elevate a film, and this film has many brain- searing moments. Those sort of things stay with you, which is probably why I watched it the 2nd time. Maybe that time it became a little clearer, I could let the words worm their way in, and the images and cinematography wash over me without the anxiety that I was missing something. Wow, don't cheetahs loping out of a car and over a dead Bardem look cool? How brutal and breath catchingly denial-denying is that soliloquy from the cartel boss? How Shakespearean the story arc? But I still couldn't like it, because despite all of this, the story was still distant, the details unclear, scenes strewn like spare jigsaw pieces.Maybe this film's reputation will grow in the online future, where gaming shows the way, and the participant is consulting the online guide as they enjoy the experience. As soon as this film started to lose me on the 3rd watching, I consulted the Wikipedia Plot details, and yes, it's all there in the film. It's actually a fairly straightforward, dark, hard story, although I have to say, I think the editing decisions did not serve it well. Hitchcock used to talk about the need to engage an audience and play with their expectations, and I feel this is what is missing from this film. I would have preferred scenes that made it clearer that there was a connection between Diaz's character and the on-road shenanigans, and even on which side the male protagonists were when it came to the road warriors. The road scenes are fantastic as it happens, but they seem almost adrift from the main protagonists' plans. As impressively flexible as Cameron is, and as funny as Bardem's conversation with Pitt is, rather than the car humping and the confession scenes, find a way to expose Cameron's character while engaging with the story, whether that be to advance it or throw a curve ball. Another example, having Cameron allude to the importance of possessing 'the computer' is not sufficient to ratchet the tension that the build up to Pitt's demise deserved. We are still wondering what happened to the drugs, there is already a price on Pitt's head and we don't realise that Cameron is after his case. I suspect that there was a desire to have Cameron's involvement appear as a reveal of sorts, but there appears to be so much going on that by the end of the film, it is not even clear that it is a denouement, unless you've seen it before.To the filmmakers involved, the final cut probably seemed un-needing of further exposition. In that case, what harm could come from including a few of their favourite scenes? It seems to me that this film suffers from too many good scenes, and not enough empathy for an audience's moment by moment engagement. These are structural faults, which could have been addressed in the script or film edits. TBH, as much as I love Ridley Scott's films, this is a weakness which is not a complete surprise. It is just a shame that this flaw afflicted what could have been a D grade diamond of a film (I learnt from this film that D is a good grade for a diamond). It still shines, it's just a bit too much flash over structure. It feels like a film on the brink of greatness. After the 3rd watch.

Often considered a dud in regards to the works of director Ridley Scott. I would instead argue that this is a film that while heavily criticized on its release is full of such charismatic and bizarre performances from a fine ensemble cast that you'll never be bored and you'll often be surprised. The story never stops keeping your attention with it's twisting plot and gruesome stylized violence. There are things in this movie that you won't see anywhere else...I promise.