Read Negative User Reviews for Sicario

3

ColbertSep 5, 2016

Overrated movie. Decent acting from everybody but Emily Blunt spends most of the movie smoking cigarettes while looking confused and worried at the same time. Her character would never have been chosen for the mission if anybody had checkedOverrated movie. Decent acting from everybody but Emily Blunt spends most of the movie smoking cigarettes while looking confused and worried at the same time. Her character would never have been chosen for the mission if anybody had checked her psych profile. Why her buddy tags along doesn't make sense.
This is not a movie about drug trafficking. Its a government sanctioned revenge story which flippantly looks through the window at a major problem but uses it only as a backdrop for Blunts dilemma.… Expand

3 of 6 users found this helpful33

All this user's reviews

3

DreamcastUserOct 9, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I didn't like it at all. Emily Blunt's character was mostly useless to the overall plot. All she basically did was stand in the background and whine. When she tried to do something important she was stopped EASILY. Alejandro was an interesting character and was in my opinion the true protagonist of this movie as he actually contributed to its plot. The end parts felt like they had some switched out scenes that didn't make any sense after being retaped. The Night Vision filters were extremely unnecessary. The acting wasn't that good for some of the minor characters either. Some of them were supposed to be going through a hard time like (SPOILER) a kid's father died at the hands of Alejandro, and they didn't sell any emotion at all. I feel like this is building up to a much better sequel but this 1st movie was nothing to write home about. The ending was very unsatisfying and proves to me this one was only a set up for a sequel. 1 more note: I felt the plot was very hard to follow and wasn't very interesting.… Expand

7 of 16 users found this helpful79

All this user's reviews

1

litigator426Dec 22, 2015

Right from the beginning this movie is extremely unrealistic. Emily Blunt plays the lone (and maybe only) FBI Swat team member. She miraculously survives a shotgun blast from three feet away despite being surprised by a gunman waiting forRight from the beginning this movie is extremely unrealistic. Emily Blunt plays the lone (and maybe only) FBI Swat team member. She miraculously survives a shotgun blast from three feet away despite being surprised by a gunman waiting for her. The shotgun blast exposes a whole in the wall of a house which reveals it is filled with scores of dead bodies that have been decomposing but which no one (including apparently a K9 unit dog) ever sniffed out. Despite the home's proximity to a barren desert the killers have apparently decided to stack the bodies in the middle of a suburban subdivision...only it only becomes more unrealistic from this point on..… Expand

5 of 12 users found this helpful57

All this user's reviews

3

kotyonokOct 15, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This is Heart of Darkness without much heart or darkness. It's the kind of movie that tries to shock you into feeling something by dangling statistics in front of your nose and proudly announcing "Hey, you hear that gunfire? Those aren't firecrackers! Aren't you scared now?"

It's anchored around Brolin's smug but ultimately uninteresting mystery man, Blunt's "experienced" FBI agent (who spends most of the movie with the same frightened-Bambi look on her face, occasionally adding a few tears), and Del Toro doing his best to add intensity to his cookie-cutter killer character (oh, of course you weren't supposed to guess who he was working for, even though someone told you in the first half-hour of the movie! oh, of course he has a token dead family thrown in when we're explaining his motives- how else could he feel sorry for our sobby FBI agent? etc.).

It's humorless. charmless, and banal. The people behind this movie don't even manage to capture the horrifying thrill you might get out of the fact that, for the people who live and work around these cartels, this violence is normal- they undercut that by having the male characters swagger, monologue, and lecture us about these terrible things like little boys trying to gross out their sisters. There is absolutely nothing of interest to be had in these two hours, and I don't know why so many people are giving it positive reviews.… Expand

7 of 17 users found this helpful710

All this user's reviews

2

jhepNov 10, 2015

Sicario…..ultimately falls between two stools ….and succumbs Big Time to the lure of a certain cinematic grandstanding in which off-the-charts “machismo” - the film is marinated in it- totally wins the day and we enter a magical 007/CharlesSicario…..ultimately falls between two stools ….and succumbs Big Time to the lure of a certain cinematic grandstanding in which off-the-charts “machismo” - the film is marinated in it- totally wins the day and we enter a magical 007/Charles Bronson/Spaghetti Western Universe (think Clint Eastwood‘s The-Man-With-No-Name) where Adult Supervision has been left far behind (poor Emily Blunt gets saddled with the Adult Supervision stuff)……In a sense all this is really too bad because director Denis Villeneuve is an amazingly gifted film maker who can build suspense out of almost nothing and from having someone sneeze or make a cup of coffee using the wrong spoon....his use of music is truly phenomenal…..But sadly what held so much promise rapidly moves from art to something like Goofy Hyper-caffeinated Journalism……..We enter A MAN’S WORLD here folks where poor, bumbling Emily Blunt will be given no quarter because quite frankly, and there’s no nice way of saying this, she’s just a Dumb Girl ….

The final .007 half hour of the film disintegrates into something out of a “Twilight Zone” episode mixed with flashes from old “Zorro” movies, with Benicio del Toro shooting Bad Guys like they props in some extremely violent (some would say nifty) video game and even shooting the luckless Emily Blunt character at one point (“Don’t ever point a gun at me” he rebukes her caddishly after firing a couple of bullets into her)..…Do you get the picture ?….….clearly both script writer Taylor Sheridan and director Denis Villeneuve have opted to throw caution to the winds by this point....and the disquieting result is that the Benicio del Toro character is suddenly channeling for- that's right - good old Charles Bronson (and I`m talking The Real Deal Charles here: the Bronson of “Death Wish”, “Death Wish 2” and “Death Wish 3” …none of your candy-assed, squeamish liberal stuff !) …..and in the very next scene, by way of a Macho Man encore, del Toro threatens to blow silly `do-gooder` Emily Blunt`s brains out if she doesn’t put her John Hancock to that paper saying that all these carrying-on have been done strictly ``by the book”; "You’d be committing voluntary suicide” del Toro assures Blunt as he presses his revolver more firmly into her neck…..Emily weeps momentarily but happily opts to sign (getting shot once in a movie is enough for even your most hardened Do-Gooder ; there's no point pressing your luck !!...….Sadly the silliness of all this seems to have been lost on many of the critics who - like director Villeneuve- apparently still hanker for old-fashioned, hokey, macho man action yarns about REAL MEN living in a REAL MAN‘S WORLD…..Sorry kids...time to put your comic books away and grow up.… Expand

5 of 14 users found this helpful59

All this user's reviews

2

GreatMartinOct 9, 2015

“A thriller set in the world of drug trafficking evokes the high stakes and high risks of the drug trade”--a synopsis of the new movie “Sicario”? Actually this is the first line of the 2000 movie “Traffic” but describes both movies.

I had“A thriller set in the world of drug trafficking evokes the high stakes and high risks of the drug trade”--a synopsis of the new movie “Sicario”? Actually this is the first line of the 2000 movie “Traffic” but describes both movies.

I had heard good word of mouth about “Sicario” and with 7 new movies opening today I put a question as which one to see on the film buffs facebook page and the vote was overwhelmingly for this movie. All I have to ask is, “why?” Yes, Benicio Del Toro gives a mesmerizing performance, as a former Columbian who was a prosecutor and has good reason to hate drug dealers. It is explained that sicario is slang for a hitman and he defines the term. One of the many things I didn’t like about the movie is that you will know the reason why before it is spelled out. Josh Brolin, a favorite of mine, as head of a task force but for who unknown, gives a solid performance. I have heard much about Emily Blunt’s performance but I found her to be way out of her depth as an equal FBI agent in the playing field of macho acting men.

Anyone who has even seen a movie about drug cartels know it is a rough, tough no holds barred, world of killing and “Sicario” shows that from the opening with a house invasion exposing dozens of rotting bodies in plastic, followed by naked bodies hanging upside down in the Mexican streets. Shortly after there is a scene of the ‘good’ guys slaughtering 8-10 guys in a traffic tie-up at the border. Later there is torturing with water, beatings, forcibly poking of a finger in someone’s ear and, yes, the scene of a lone man shooting, killing 7 men. While the point of violence is necessary to show there are quite a few gratuitous scenes.

There is a strong supporting cast from Jon Bernthal as a pickup in a bar to Bernardo Saracino as a major cartel boss and Julio Cesar Cedillo as a minor one along with Daniel Kaluuya, as Blunt’s partner, who requires a suspension of belief to accept his character and Victor Garber as one of the many bosses of the American team along with others.

While direction by Denis Villkeneuve is very professional neither he nor the screenwriter Taylor Sheridan bring anything new to the drug trafficking movie including that it is violent and bad guys on both sides of the fence. The opening music was, to me, a blasting wall of sound and at times during the film very intrusive while at times thye camera work of Roger Deakins was really first rate.

Now I need to know what the film buffs who recommended the film saw in “Sicario” that I didn’t.… Expand

5 of 15 users found this helpful510

All this user's reviews

3

ScraperJun 25, 2016

The major problem with Sicario, aside from the boardroom bureaucrat banter, is that the main character is completely ineffective from every angle. She doesn't cooperate and falls into easy trap after easy trap for being such aThe major problem with Sicario, aside from the boardroom bureaucrat banter, is that the main character is completely ineffective from every angle. She doesn't cooperate and falls into easy trap after easy trap for being such a best-of-the-best outsider. The second problem that drags this one down to the ground is the dialogue. Conversations are mere snippets of sentences trying to relay the point that the operation is a secret...along with everything else. The speaking parts just aren't very unique. It's kinda like something a video game developer would whip up to get to the heart of a bloody video game about, oh, lets say Mexican drug cartels. By the time it reaches action, it hardly feels justified. It barely touches the variety and vision of Traffic for being so often compared to it.… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

3

shemp2004Jan 8, 2016

This review had me laughing because I agree with everything you are saying. This movie was just bad. There was no depth to the characters. They have a great cast but all the characters are weak. The story was weak. Emily Blunt had noThis review had me laughing because I agree with everything you are saying. This movie was just bad. There was no depth to the characters. They have a great cast but all the characters are weak. The story was weak. Emily Blunt had no point in the story if they were to delete her character the movie would immediately be better. All she did was complain and make trouble and delay the main story arc. Josh Brolin had no depth either he plays the typical "I'm cool as **** CIA operative. The action in the movie was boring because we really didn't care about. The 3 points I give it were for a couple cool scenes and Benecio del Toro thats it.… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

0

Strong_K3isanAug 30, 2019

Absolute Garbage and Repulsive , Foolish Movie Have Ever Been Made in The History of World.

1 of 6 users found this helpful15

All this user's reviews

0

dave741Oct 17, 2015

I didn't liked this movie at all. Why ? Because , for me it was too much slow paced and i had a bit of difficulty to follow the scenario sometimes. I feel like the principal actress didn't have enough charisma. I was very bored at theI didn't liked this movie at all. Why ? Because , for me it was too much slow paced and i had a bit of difficulty to follow the scenario sometimes. I feel like the principal actress didn't have enough charisma. I was very bored at the theater and that's why it's a 0. Bad actors + Bad scenario + Slow Paced and boring.… Expand

7 of 56 users found this helpful749

All this user's reviews

2

tupungatoJan 17, 2016

Lazy writing and brilliantFBI agent Kate (Emily Blunt) is talked into assisting with CIA operation against Cartel led by Matt (Josh Brolin) in cooperation with foreign consultant (Benicio Del Toro).

After promising opening scene "Sicario"Lazy writing and brilliantFBI agent Kate (Emily Blunt) is talked into assisting with CIA operation against Cartel led by Matt (Josh Brolin) in cooperation with foreign consultant (Benicio Del Toro).

After promising opening scene "Sicario" becomes a dull moral ambiguity story with very good performance by Del Toro and marvelous cinematography by Roger Deakins who never fails to amaze me.

I was expecting a "brilliant action thriller" and I agree there are some thrilling action sequences (SUV escort, operation in the tunnel), but unfortunately, the story is far from brilliant. The main plot device is "it's better not to ask questions" and "you'll understand it later". Kate asks some questions, but usually they go unanswered without sensible reasons. The CIA specialist Matt jeopardizes his own operations by not providing ANY background on what the team is about to do, whether there will be firefights, what are the risks and what are the objectives.

Despite brilliant camerawork and good cast, film's lazy writing and unreasonably slow pace outside action scenes makes watching "Sicario" tedious.

Direction: 4/10, Screenplay: 2/10, Cinematography: 10/10, Acting: 7/10, Music: 6/10

Overall: 3/10camerawork in war on drugs… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

3

YorkManJan 11, 2016

I didn't like this film. I understood what the director/screenplay was attempting to achieve, the acting was good all round, the cinematography was brilliant and the score was incredibly fear-inducing at all the right points.
However,I didn't like this film. I understood what the director/screenplay was attempting to achieve, the acting was good all round, the cinematography was brilliant and the score was incredibly fear-inducing at all the right points.
However, knowing what was being attempted, does not hide the fact that said screenplay and said direction was (in my opinion) very sub-par.
The story starts off well, introducing the (strangely/weirdly) attractive Emily Blunt as a fast rising member/leader of a DEA task force. Discovering a stash of bodies in a building targeted as a likely location for Mexican cartel hostages, she then loses two agents to an improvised explosive device.
She's then asked to join up with a dedicated anti-cartel group, which she is told is attached to the DEA and operating within the boundaries of National and International law.
The head of the group is played by Josh Brolin (in a scene stealing performance), whilst there is a South American man in the group whose motives and tasks aren't revealed until near the end of the film.

Ultimately there is a decided conflict of interests, as the DEA agent cannot reconcile the (incredibly illegal and violent/shoot to kill) methods used by the anti-cartel group. Resulting in an ending which doesn't really make any sense.

The film lacks an emotional core, the only view of the 'other side' we get is that of a Mexican police officer who (like the rest of the local police, the film would have you believe) is working for the cartel(s), using his patrol car to move drugs around. We get to see his wife, and his son, who serve to show he's merely a family man doing what he needs to, in order to provide for his family.
The problem is that it feels so forced. Like at some point the screenwriter saw there was a policeman in the script in the build up to the finale, and just decided (in post-production) to film a few extra 'family' scenes to try and offer some balance. But it fails....

The whole movie feels like a campaign trailer a far right-wing politician (from Texas, or Arizona) would come up with to justify additional spending on drug enforcement, and as a rationale if it were needed for the actions of those on the front line. It's so pro-America that you almost expect every scene where there are some US soldiers (and there are many!) to end with them all hollering 'U-S-A! U-S-A!' at the end.

Perhaps that is a reason why the film doesn't carry as much resonance. As an Englishman I probably view movies like this with the same kind of 'outsider' mentality an American does when they watch a gritty London-based 'Mockney' crime drama. I view such things as more of a fantasy exploration of a romanticised idea of what actually happens.
It would be nice to think Americans watching this understand it's only a story, and not based on actual events, and not a well written story at that! As I said, it would be nice!

But judging by a lot of the '10 out of 10' reviews, there does seem to be a concensus this movie is a masterpiece of modern cinema, which it just isn't!… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

0

Alex2011Mar 20, 2021

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Awful soulless movie. I didn't care about the caracters at all. Everybody does super mysterious but many aspects of the movie are just plain stupid for the sake of drama. E.g. Why did the mexicans hide the bodies in the wall of the houses instead of hiding them in a hole in the sand?
Everything is either black and white. Movie tries to be super realistic but if you ever went to Mexico you will see that the world this movie shows has nothing todo with reality. I think such movies just spread more hate and don't do any good.
Cheers!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews