"Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri"

Fuck YEAH!

She must have had a blast playing that part.

Could she get nominated?

I love the last scene in the trailer.

An average score of 8.9 (9.1 from Top Critics) on RottenTomatoes and a score of 87 on Metacritic. Raves for McDormand's portrayal of righteous fury.

The title really turned me off at first but the trailer is awesome and I can't resist a critical darling.

It will sweep the Oscars guaranteed. Best Picture and Best Actress for sure. By awarding it Oscars, it will allow people in Hollywood to say hey look we really care about rape even though we ignore it in our own industry.

Caught this at the Chicago Film Festival. Very retraining. Laugh out loud-worthy but also thought-provoking. Francis is incredible.

*entertaining - damn autocorrect

Looks amazing 😉

R7 While you're correcting, it's FRANCES. Francis is a man's name.

Frances McDormand has to be the MOST joy-less woman on the face of the earth. But I loved seeing her smiling on the red carpet last year.

She and Sam Rockwell are amazing

She deserves the Oscar for that last line in trailer alone.

Cute gayling and Oscar nominee Lucas Hedges plays her son.

I second R12 and also for the cunt punt!

I can't believe the raves this is getting. A knockoff Coen brothers film with a total cunt of a lead character who we are supposed to be rooting for. The bizarre Catholic priest tangent was jarringly bigoted and irrelevant. Probably because the Irish director has zero connection to Missouri or America in general.

I just saw it and I'm not sure what I think about it. Coen Brothers-esque, a mix of dark humor and strong violence.

Almost all the characters do something wrong or immoral but no one is held accountable, which left me with no one to really root for or identify with.

The performances are good across the board but the plot's a bit ramshackle...

[quote]A knockoff Coen brothers film

When I saw the ad on TV, my first thought was, "Annual Coen Bros. Oscar bait crap..."

Well, the Coens sure ain't gonna get a best screenplay Oscar for "Suburbicon"!

Reading the summary for the movie, there is no kind of resolution or satisfying ending. They don't find her daughter's killer. I hate movies that do this.

I think it has a few screenplay problems (that people will ignore because they think a script means just ‘funny lines,’ which it does have in spades), but I loved McDormand, Rockwell and Harrelson in it, probably Harrelson most of all.

The ambiguous ending didn’t bother me, and I liked it better than some pat resolution where they get justice because it was messy and complicated. It feels like Rockwell gets redemption but McDormand is completely lost, even though they join together for a common cause.

Didn't she already play this role in "Olive Kitteridge"?

I thought it was an HBO movie

It wasn't well received by some critics, a few weeks back.

R23 it seems like there's been a bandwagon effect. Now at 94 on RT, but lower on Metacritic.

I was listening to a movie podcast last week (Who Shot Ya?) and the two female critics really clashed with the two male critics over this movie. The rape as a narrative device, Frances' character going totally nuts by the end, thus siding with the people around her saying she should just get over her daughter's rape already (after seven months), the weird racism aspect that's never fully addressed... The script was supposedly written six (eight?) years ago and they claim it's showing its age.

It kinda bombed at the Spirit Award nominations as well.

I have no plans to see it. The scene where she kicks someone in the crotch -- very hard -- is not my cup of tea.

[quote]I was listening to a movie podcast last week (Who Shot Ya?) and the two female critics really clashed with the two male critics over this movie. The rape as a narrative device, Frances' character going totally nuts by the end, thus siding with the people around her saying she should just get over her daughter's rape already (after seven months), the weird racism aspect that's never fully addressed... The script was supposedly written six (eight?) years ago and they claim it's showing its age.

I listened to the pertinent parts of the podcast and I disagree with the women. Like one of the male host says, the town is telling Frances' character to get over it not the film itself. And they're not all saying it because they want to sweep the murder under the rug but because of what it is costing her and costing her son emotionally. I liked the idea that it is a movie filled with human characters and not clear cut good people or bad people. That's life. The one thing that bothered me is that I didn't think some characters suffered the full consequences of their actions before they got their redemption but, again, that's life.

R27 I can kinda understand why some women would be just done with rape and hysteria narratives, though.

What do you think of that one critic's point that these (wildly) different interpretations stem from the fact that the movie gives off mixed vibes because it can't decide on what genre it actually wants to be?

I liked it when I saw it a couple of days ago, but the more I’ve thought about it the last couple of days, the more it bothers me. I think Martin McDonagh had a good kernel of an idea, but a second eye, either a co-writer or a different director, might have fleshed it out better.

The violence that goes without consequence is really troubling and baffling. Attempted murder, arson, assault. The tone wants to be both serious and flippant and doesn’t end up working.

And there are details that don’t make sense. We’re supposed to believe that three billboards in the middle of nowhere go for $5,000 a month? That’s ridiculous. It’s like McDonagh just pulled a random number out of his ass.

But McDormand and Harrelson are really good.

FRANCES MCDORMAND IS WAY, TOO OLD TO PLAY THIS PART.

She did a good job, but the filmmakers expect us to believe a 60-year-old woman is the mother of teenage kids. As if she started birthing them when she was 45 years old.

GROSS!

This movie and "Get Out" are the ones to beat for Best Picture.

r30: Women in their 40s can still have kids. It's not as common but it happens all the time. That's certainly not the problem with this movie--which I saw. I think with the arson incident, the tone of the film goes completely off track and the plot is filled with holes. It's not a terrible movie, but it could have been much better. The acting IS the strong point.

Twat movie for twats.

R30 I'm 63 and still have a teen at home,. I saw this the other day, and I really liked the whole movie. The story was well-told, and the performances great.

I think with the severe beating of the advertising guy going completely unpunished and uninvestigated, throws the story off-track.

And then no investigation of the arson strains credibility

No, r32.

The writing is a strong point, too. The arson reinforces the theme that misplaced aggression and undue convictions are wrong.

Yes, it's not very sympathetic of McDormand's character. But it's the type of shit angry people do all the time -- the wrong thing for the right reasons.

You need to be able to appreciate the literary point of well-crafted, unsympathetic characters. If you need McDormand to come across as perfect, you're handicapped by political correctness and knee-jerk reactions. These characters' nasty behaviors were not developed amorally or unrealistically.

Is r35 just testing for posters who are chiming in without having seen the film?

Because the arson WAS punished. **SPOILER ALERT*** Sam Rockwell was fired. And his new, black police captain DID conduct an investigation -- the movie includes the scene where he interrogates McDormand and Tyrion Lannister about the arson.

But like the rape, there was not enough evidence to convict and that's the point of the movie. You don't convict without conclusive proof and you just have to accept the outcome.

** MORE SPOILERS

Pardon, you must mean you expected Frances McDormand to be punished for the arson.

Well, she was punished with a guilty conscience for having accidentally maimed Sam Rockwell, which she didn't intend. She was also punished with having to date a dwarf against her druthers. She was also punished by giving the dwarf blackmailable information against her, which he used against her at the restaurant by blurting out her guilt in front of the whole crowd.

You need to get the point that retaliating against the wrong people is wrong. The movie is just demonstrating that.

Ooh, Martin McDonagh has a new movie? We love him. Thanks, DL.

SPOILERS:

The cop Dixon should have been arrested and charged with assaulting the two ad workers, in addition to being fired.

Mildred commits arson leading to a serious injury, and assaults two high school kids, hard, in the crotch.

Mildred's husband goes unpunished for his billboard arson.

The army guy vandalized the gift shop and threatens Mildred. No repercussions.

The army guy beats the hell out of the ex-cop, perhaps in self-defense, and just drives away.

Mildred's ex husband commits domestic violence, including his hand around her throat, and walks away.

A guilty conscience (Mildred) or a change of heart (Dixon) hardly seems like enough comeuppance for their actions.

But maybe I shouldn't take this movie too literally -- is it a comedy or a parable or an allegory representing some deeper, hidden meaning...?

It was okay but just that. McDonagh does this lazy, skewed approximation of what people talk like in present day small town Missouri and it's just plain weird. Lots of yelling about "retards" and "niggers" and "cunts" but more for shock value and easy entertainment than nuanced characterization. Still there were some unexpected twists and turns and it's a unique little movie so that adds some points. Better than "Seven Psychopaths" but not as good as "In Bruges" (what is?) . Will be nominated for stuff but ultimately too unpleasant to win much.

I was also taken aback by the pointlessly harsh language at times

I can't remember the last time I was so excited for the awards season to arrive already. I won't be satisfied with anything less than a bloodbath. This one and The Shape of Water seem to be somewhat fizzling out already.

R42 Were you now, cunt?

Dear r40,

LIFE ISN'T FAIR. Justice is not always served. Donald Trump and Mullah Omar live in power "without repercussions" and Joseph Stalin never "got his comeuppance."

THAT'S LIFE. Why can't you handle the truth? Why don't you value and appreciate the lesson the movie is trying to impart about justice and wrongful convictions?

P.S. How do you walk out of the door every day? Nobody is guaranteed "comeuppance."

It would be critic-worthy if the wrongdoers were glorified in this movie -- but they're clearly not. They are shamed.

What is the lesson?

[quote]She did a good job, but the filmmakers expect us to believe a 60-year-old woman is the mother of teenage kids. As if she started birthing them when she was 45 years old.

Lady Bird did the same thing, 62 year old Laurie Metcalfe playing the mother of a teenager.

You cannot be serious........!

I adored this movie. So interestingly dark and cynical. People are misreading it talking about redemption. The truth is the two characters had to realize both Rockwell and Frances's character are equally flawed people but just in different ways. They both think they can do whatever they want, and they both bond to go after possibly killing this dude without justification. They are both lost.

Also it surprises me so many people are upset about the cop getting away with assaulting someone without facing punishment. Have you been paying attention? When do cops ever face real repercussions?

I didn’t like it. It’s so exaggerated and over the top. The characters are like something out of a sitcom.

I really enjoyed it... probably loved it... saw it last night. Yeah the script and story were kinda uneven but it told a hell of a story.... I hate Woody Harrelson... he drives me nuts... don't know why... I almost didn't see it because he was in it... but he deserves a nomination for best supporting actor. He was great. So was Frances. Don't know if they win best picture with it because of its flaws but it was a terrific movie.

The movie also seems to revel in violence and gore, which is a major turn-off

Woody Harrelson was great. His wife was so terribly miscast it took me out of the movie.

Bad acting, foreign accent that didnt belong in a tiny midwestern town. Too young for the character.

[quote]The movie also seems to revel in violence and gore, which is a major turn-off.

Martin McDonagh always writes scenes with violence and gore but they're also frequently hilarious in a black humor way. I've seen all his plays but have had to look away for a minute or so in most of them.

Looking forward to seeing his latest play "Hangmen" on Broadway next year.

Sorry ..... the ending is not satisfying at all. Great performances, lousy wrap up. Also the lighting is atrocious!

Why was Sheriff's wife Australian? Also, no one else found the anti Catholic rant extreme and out of place?

[quote]Why was Sheriff's wife Australian?

Terrible decision that felt very out of place.

[quote]Also, no one else found the anti Catholic rant extreme and out of place?

I was fine with the rant but it comes out of nowhere, no build up. Just this priest is at her house for a scene, and is never before before or afterwards.

That scene was weird, whether you agree with its sentiments or not...

Just saw this — greatly enjoyed it!

Agreed that the casting of Aussie Abbie Cornish as Woody Harrelson’s wife was distracting and an odd choice.

Frances McDormand excellent, Sam Rockwell OUTSTANDING!

Abbie Cornish was cast because everyone would be complaining about a deplorable knowing about Oscar Wilde otherwise. Of course, the supposed solution of making someone do an English-adjacent accent is even worse because why the fuck would any learned (and gorgeous!) foreigner marry a deplorable sheriff in Upper Shitholia, Missouri? Ridiculous.

Apart from that, I [italic]loved[/italic] this movie. Even though it does nothing to address the racial or any other social issues it brings up, regardless of some people insisting that it does. And the script does show that it was written nearly a decade ago because those homo jokes are all meant to be laughed at. Was waiting for them to address that by having Rockwell be gay, but nope.

McDormand is transcendent but Rockwell's performance is both transcendent and transformative. I was so fucking attracted to him throughout. He deserves to get every award he's nominated for.

I am sick of violence, swearing and "unsympathetic characters" - that is all we get now. And it is all that is around us at work, and everywhere in real life.

Head on over to the Hallmark Channel, R62! There are likely several holiday-themed gems for you to enjoy!

In the end I felt strangely angry that an English writer would go out of his way to portray Americans as so dumb. I mean, Rockwell's character was almost borderline mentally challenged. How would he even get a job as a cop if he was that slow?

And Cornish keeping her Aussie accent had to be deliberate, because she showed in “W.E.” (yes, I’m embarrassed to admit I saw it) that she can pull off a believable American accent.

Still, it was only a minor flaw, and certainly didn’t detract from McDormand’s and (especially) Rockwell’s terrific work.

From the film, "Walk Away Renee" - The Left Banke. Great song from the '60s.

Rockwell's character was repulsive but his performance was riveting

For all of those people who are saying that the film wasn't realistic because there wasn't realistic punishment or justice, well...

No shit. That's the fucking point of the film.

If this movie had been all sing-song at the end with a prosecution of someone for something and vindication for someone else, that would have ruined the whole fucking idea. The key premise here is that bad shit begets bad shit from all angles. It boils down to that.

I thought that parts of the movie were maybe a bit slow or disjointed, but that overall it was a pretty good flick. And I don't think that Frances McDormond was too old for this role -- she did a fantastic job.

R63, Because there can ONLY be TWO possible movies in the world? Disgusting pigs in Hollywood making trite nihilism and violence with ugly characters or trite sentimental fluff?

Out-of-touch filmmakers show most glaringly how out-of-touch they are when they make a film about "ordinary people" or working-class people. Always condescending, gets a whole lot wrong, and insulting.

I love it when she kicks the kids in the balls and the cunt! Best movie scene EVAH!!!!!

It is a really good movie, I give it 4 stars because the script is great and the acting is great and the Ozarks are kind of beautiful.

I told you Sam Rickwell would win. He was perfect.

bad movie

You did not see the film, r74. It was a great film.

good movie.

I liked the film a lot. And I think that both Sam and Fran are great in the film. The whole story hinges on the believability of their characters which are rather extreme. But their acting makes them human.

So happy for both, and the director/writer.

I LURVE sam rockwell

Silly how old Harrison needed to have a “hot’ wife.

Mama Dixon was hilarious. That was The Four Tops version of Walk Away Renee

actually R75 I did as a Sag screener.

I'm on the committee.

And this guy saw it too.

"Three Billboards assumes the aspect of world-weary malcontent but is really just a patronizing scold. It shouts nasty shit in a crowd, draws a reaction, and then brings it down with a but seriously, what is it with those beaners? It knows enough to be able to act awful, yet not enough to obscure that it's genuinely awful. It chases its own MacGuffin. It makes the point that there's no salvation but offers salvation; these people who have injured others are forgiven not because there's a moral reset button, but because the movie's almost over and movies that are actually down about our species (like mother!, or The Killing of a Sacred Deer) don't tend to win awards and gather support. McDonagh uses Dinklage as a metaphor even when he has him proclaim his humanity; he says that people can be saved even when there 's no mechanism for salvation nor evidence that these shticky characters desire it or have earned it; he writes violent smut and hopes you'll believe he's merely commenting on it. All of Billy Wilder's films were assholes, too, but they were populated by people who deserved to hold their aspirations. When you have someone talk to a deer and then burst into tears, you're either Douglas Sirk and a genius, or you're the dick who uses drop-needle opera cues to show how afraid you are that someone is going to figure out the difference. Three Billboards is a nasty bit of work, more telling by the fact of its existence than by its execution. People will connect to it. That makes me feel pretty lonesome and afraid out there among the English."

I haven't seen anything thoughtful detailing why it's so great, mostly just attacking the intelligence of anyone who dares to critique it. Everything that this movie tried to do has been done much better elsewhere, without pointless stunts like the dentist drill and cliched rants against organized religion. It's like 2 hours of a bad SVU episode.

Why does her character wear a garage jumpsuit all the time if she works in a gift shop?

LOVE YOU R82.

There are smart folks who walk among us still.

(HA! R83)

Rich characters and great performances. That's the greatest strength of this movie.

The story is about great anger flowing from great pain. It examines where that anger can take you and, also, where it cannot. In that regard, it reminded me a lot of the 80's and 90's and ACT UP. Enormous heartbreak from loss and the injustice of it all, bubbling up into a rage that could not be stopped. It was useful. It got shit done. We did some billboards, too. It gave us a voice and a direction and vented some of the pain. But on its own, it was not enough. We had to grow further to make peace with our loss.

Mildred had loss and grief and pain in quantities she could not endure. I get that. But by the end of the film, she had grown.

"I have to go to the Little Boys' room." The funniest thing I've heard in a movie in a long, long time.

okay R85, i hear you

I couldn’t believe the scene where the ex husband had her by the throat and 30 seconds later they were holding hands. It really strained credibility. The son had a knife at his father’s throat. Maybe if it we’re better directed....

When she kicked the kids and no on arrested her...you might believe it if if weee set in Ireland somewhere but not in the Deep South.

I'd love to see Sam Rockwell get an Oscar. He's just adorable and one of my favorite actors.

Abbie Cornish was cast because she is 35 and Frances is 60.

Hated this movie. Mildred and her husband tenderly holding hands moments after he had her by the throat was awful. McDormand is only playing an extension of herself and Olive Kittredge. I’ll vote for Woody Harrelson for the SAG Award, though. He’s by far the best thing in this piece of shit.

It seems like the Three Billboards detractors’ main beef with the film is that characters are allowed to get away with doing bad things and that the lack of accountability strains credulity. The whole point of the film, in a way, is that someone has gotten away with murder and the lack of someone being held accountable for their actions has driven Mildred Hayes to a dangerous brink. This entire town is, like, against her and wants to move on from the murder and basically pretend like it never happened. Mildred’s unwillingness to let it go herself leads to her committing steadily escalating felonies and misdemeanors. In a way, I felt like she was daring the police to arrest her. The fact that there are no charges filed almost reinforces her main complaint about the force - that they’re ineffective and even dangerous to the citizens of the town.

The complaints never focus on any of the technical aspects of the film (which are essentially unimpeachable) or the acting which is very strong so it’s “Why doesn’t so-and-so PAY?” A question that, as a writer of complicated people in fiction, typically us writers don’t really care about all the time, to be honest. It’s cheap and frau-ish.

This sort of movie/netflix show is the new cheap and frau-ish. This is all we get now. It is not innovative, it is not daring and it is not true.

I liked it a lot. I liked that the characters were not what we expected, were deepermwhen yoj scratched the surface. It could sooo have been about a courageous mother against corrupted policemen. But she was far from perfect and the sheriff was doing his best. It didn't go at all where I thought it would.

Is it possible that the American public is annoyed because of the discrepency between how America is and how it is presented by a non-American ? I can see how some scenes are indeed not you. The abrasive anti-Catholic rant. In the theater I was in, there was a collective gasp and after, laughs. But we used to be a very Catholic nation, clerically dominated. Not an American issue per say.

I loved the ending was ambiguous but that the 2 angry characters had started a reflection.

I would love for Harrelson to get a nom. And of course, Frances McD. And why not Sam.

It sounds so off, like he was trying to write something about smalltown Ireland and all the issues around it, and he just put it in the US, thinking it would be the same thing.

R94, I agree about your observation, but it didn't bother me. Maybe because I'm not American ?

It happens most often than not when an author/director produces a story/movie about another culture. They love that other culture and have noticed many things about it they want to reproduce and yet, it looks a bit off to people from that culture. They notice everything that is not exact, which is normal. But when they are used to it, they develop a tolerance and see it was not done out of spite.

Do you remember the movie Chocolat ? I think it was an American movie made by a Swedish director from a British novel about a French village. They cared enough about French culture to mention poet Rimbaud,but good grief how off and odd it was when they showed Frenchmen not daring to enjoy their food !!! That's just very wrong. Yes, there are very no fun traditonnalist, right wing people too in that country. But NEVER would it be expressed by not wanting a chocolate shop in their town.

Just an example out of many, many, many.

Anyways, 3BBOEM is still good !

Poster up thread claims Stalin never got what was coming to him? He sure did! He was having a heart attack and everyone just left the room. They did absolutely nothing, leaving him to die in extreme pain and knowing how much they hated him. No, it wasn't the death he deserved, but it was enough for me to know they left him to die like a rabid dog in the gutter.

It was not my cup of tea (too hokey) but isn’t the movie a metaphor about Hillary losing and people feeling raped? There is no conclusion because you can’t revenge an unsolved crime. One thumb down

It makes absolutely no sense that the new chief, who by the way is black, simply fired Dixon after witnessing him throwing a guy out of a window and then continuing to beat him on the ground. Dixon not being arrested on the spot is beyond ludicrous.

Is the mother in the film transitioning? She looka like a man

Enjoyed this much more than expected... though, it's odd to me that Frances (who was very good) and Rockwell (who was great) are getting more awards traction than Woody, who I thought was absolutely phenomenal.

His voiceover letter(s) are unbelievably powerful and very much the heart of the film. And, it's all conveyed by just his voice. Unforgettable stuff, really.

After having been snubbed for PEOPLE VS. LARRY FLINT lo so many years ago, this may be his shot at the gold... but, maybe not.

I guess there is his LBJ movie next year, though, too.

Woody deserves so much more respect than he gets, but I guess the HUNGER GAMES checks off-set the awards snubs. Ca-ching, ca-ching.

I was surprised by just how good Woody was in this. He is definitely the moral heart of the film.

I really hope he ends up getting an Oscar nomination and wins.

If both Woody and Sam get nominated it will split the votes and allow the true and rightful winner Willem DaFoe to claim his Oscar.

R91, you’re wrong. The people of Ebbing, MO were all for finding Angela Hayes’ killer, they were against Mildred Hayes taking aim at Sheriff Willoughby because they all knew he had cancer. You’re expectation that after 7 months Mildred would be able to just “let go” of her daughter and the horrible end she met is as wrong-headed as McDonagh’s understanding of the grief, pain and sheer powerlessness a parent feels in this circumstance. But McDonagh isn’t overly interested in empathising with Mildred - he just wants to use her grief as an excuse for all of her foul-mouthed, bad behaviour he thinks is so funny including “the fat dentist” and “the town midget.”

Also Mildred doesn’t get charged for her crimes of assault and arson because people and the police feel bad - GUILTY - about what happened to her daughter and that they haven’t been able to fix it. Not because the police don’t know how to do their job. McDonagh doesn’t follow through with these consequences because it doesn’t suit his plotting, not because the police don’t know their job - they bring her in for assault but let her go, they arrest her co-worker. The problem is McDonagh doesn’t earn his moments which creates a distancing effect, an inability to engage with his story which neither works in a universe we might all recognise as moral or in the universe he’s created, where cheap, lazy writer’s tricks are obvious and transparent no matter how good the acting is. Three Billboards is a potentially good idea for a film that is executed with a largely mediocre script; that potential will be enough for some people to still get excited about it while others can see its obvious flaws that promote distance and a lack of engagement. We don’t all have time for films about warm and fuzzy wife beaters who abuse they’re ex-wives in front of their children, make fun of the child who just held a knife to their throat and still rush to the door to see. The writing just lacks any credible human behaviour.

R100, Woody’s LBJ film was finished in 2016 and was already released in November 2017 and was a complete misfire both critically and commercially. It’s eligible for this year’s Oscars, not next year, but is not going to garner any nominations.

I completely related to Mildred's character. A few years ago, my brother was killed in a pileup. The DA declined to file charges and the guy had no insurance so a civil suit was pointless. He just walked away. Frances PERFECTLY inhabited that helpless, all encompassing rage when someone is stolen from you and nothing is done about it.

The one thing I wish they hadn't done is include the flashback with the daughter, especially with the super-cliche fight where she wishes her dead gets killed and then she does.

I want to see this film when does it come out on DVD?

Another casting error besides Abbie Cornish-he’s a wonderful actor but Zeljko Ivanek is not very convincing as a small town Missouri cop.

I thought he was going to have a secret, too, but no. I wonder why he took on that role that didn't go anywhere.

It’s not one of Frances McDormand’s best films. Those would be Almost Famous, Fargo, Wonder Boys, and the unfairly maligned Mississippi Burning.

R100 woody wasn’t snubbed for Larry Flynt he was Oscar nominated. Also for the Messenger a film I don’t remember.

[quote]I was surprised by just how good Woody was in this.

Yeah he didn't have a lot to do but he really lit up the screen whenever he was there.

R104, you're wrong. Pretty much everything you wrote is just wrong.

There is more than just one kind of script and one kind of movie. You seem to be disappointed that in THREE BILLBOARDS you did not get Sally Field in a melodrama, tear jerking and ultimately uplifting. McDonagh didn't write or direct that movie. This one is not for you? That's perfectly fine. But you're analysis of the film and your grasp of what it is about and what it seeks to convey is entirely empty and way off the mark.

Read R106's post until you get some glimmer of understanding of what it is to be driven mad by the despicably unjust things that can happen to us in life.

R113, there’s “despicably unjust” and then there’s “ludicrously unrealiatic.” Dixon not being immediately arrested for tossing Welby out of a window and then beating him further on the ground falls into the latter category. It’s beyond stupid and the film is being justifiably criticized for it. McDonagh has zero defence for this.

Oops, “unrealistic.”

[QUOTE]You’re expectation that after 7 months Mildred would be able to just “let go” of her daughter and the horrible end she met is as wrong-headed as McDonagh’s understanding of the grief, pain and sheer powerlessness a parent feels in this circumstance.

You must be a complete idiot, R104, because nowhere in my post did I state this.

Nothing in the movie is realistic. If you go looking for realism, and demand to find it, you will wrongly conclude the movie is an epic failure. Every scene, every character, every plot twist is heightened. This McDonagh's way to tell his story and make his points.

Realism is not ever a requirement.

r113 so the film is supposed to be realistic on the one hand, which is why none of the gaping plot holes are sewn up, but also don't you dare criticize its lack of realism on the other. got it.

R118, why don't you stick to something like The Post.

So in other words this is like when you do something and say ‘ I meant to do that ‘.

You do something stupid. I meant.

R117, you’re a moron.

Do you remember Stepford Wives starring Nicole Kidman? It was clearly 2 different movies edited as one. Whenever it was criticized some would say it’s just a comedy. I’m not saying Billboards is as bad as Wives but we are getting the same excuse. When we talk about the freestyle screenplay without logic we are told it just a black comedy and the writer meant to do that.

Absurdist pieces don’t ask the audience to care about the characters, they just tell us to enjoy the ride. Three Billboards is ultimately an absurdist piece and it has no business asking us to care about its characters.

This really nails it for me:

Exactly what about that article nails it for you R124? I'm not in America and cant access that page.

If you liked this film, there are many, many, things about it to like. If you didn't like this film, there are many, many things for you not to like. More than with most films, one's own experiences are going to influence the reaction to it.

Emotionally, it's extremely truthful, at least from Mildred's perspective. The injustice is as unjust as it is shown in the film. The offenses committed by the priest, the dentist, the racist cop, really are that extreme, from her perspective. And her responses are the only ones possible. If you don't open yourself emotionally to what she is experiencing, than you won't understand the film. There are lots of good reasons not to want to experience that level of pain, loss and outrage, even empathetically, but keeping that distance will not bring you into this film.

McDonagh is kind of an infuriating filmmaker. His writing is beautiful, but he knows it, and the showiness of his scenes and dialogue overtake any effort to build an authentic story. And it is the worst kind of bigotry to just wing it on middle American culture - I could see the headlines in the UK press if an American set a film there that exposed the UK's deepest awfulness (and it is deep) without attention to detail. "In Bruges" was equally maddening - you loved the poetry of it but the prose was ridiculous.

However, I'll watch anything McDonagh makes because it's fun and smarter than the average hack, but I would love to see some more work on keeping it real. Even David Lynch made "The Straight Story".

R126, it has nothing to do with the weakness of the viewer but of the writer to write REAL as so beautifully put by R127.

Bravo R127!

Nothing about weakness is mentioned at R126. Difference in experience is what is discussed.

The 'offense' committed by the priest was being Catholic -- or caring that Mildred's kids were being bullied and alienated at school. She didn't care and went on a bigoted rant.

The offense committed by the priest was that he came to mansplain to Mildred, on behalf of the cops,how to grieve acceptably and mourn while not inconveniencing the police chief.

" If you don't open yourself emotionally to what she is experiencing, than you won't understand the film. There are lots of good reasons not to want to experience that level of pain. "

No R129-it is condescending and implies weakness on the part of the viewer to not "open oneself up to that level of pain";

weakness and "keeping at a distance."

So I again have issue with your implying such weakness upon those of us more than willing to not stay at a distance and experience what's real .

And this writing aint it!

I didnt buy her pain for a second. I saw heavy handed fake writing

Ditto, R132. Her pain becomes transmuted into something incredibly self-involved and ultimately unsympathetic. That cuss out of the priest was no better than the endless self righteous sermons Julia Sugarbaker doled out towards the end of pretty much every episode of Designing Women. I wanted to kick Mildred in the cunt.

no one who uses a word like 'mansplain' is worth listening to.

Oh right R113, because at the age of 52 I have no idea how despicable and unjust circumstances in life can be. Thanks for that.

R91, re-read your own post. You interpret Mildred’s emotional state as being “unwilling to let go of it,” “it” being the horrible rape, murder and desecration of her daughter’s body. That’s how you interpret it. And thanks for calling me an idiot - I think we’re starting to understand why you like this movie so much.

The distance is created by the film through its middling script that strains credibility even within the universe it creates; that could also be identified as the “style” of the film. A film that strains credibility is not the failure of the discerning viewer.

Given the well known subject matter of the film it seems silly to think that viewers would refuse to engage with Mildred’s pain and reject the film on that basis. If I wasn’t willing to empathise with Mildred’s pain, I wouldn’t have bought a ticket.

THANK YOU R137 AND R133--the movie was a sledgehammer

I loved it!

Figurine Guy did it, right?

This movie and Laurie Metcalf not winning has ruined award season for me.

Thank God it won’t win Best Picture now.

R137, the expression is “strains credulity.”

Really R142? You sure you want to play this game?

“Although you will commonly see it said of some far-fetched story either that “it strains credulity” or that “it strains credibility,” the latter is more traditional. Something that strains credulity would be beyond the powers of even a very gullible person to believe. This form of the saying isn’t very effective because a credulous person isn’t straining to believe things anyway. Such a person believes easily without thinking. It makes more sense to say that something too weird or wild to be credible “strains credibility.”

I thought it was perfect in every aspect.

[quote]I thought it was perfect in every aspect.

...I find that hard to believe.

I thought it was one of the dumbest movies I've ever seen. Not one character seems like a real person; not one event seems like anything that would ever happen in real life; the black characters are there only as props to allow the movie to have some sort of anti-racist message; Frances McD. whom I love, and Woody Harrelson do the best they can with their ridiculous roles, but it's hard to imagine what possessed them to do this movie; cute little Lucas Hedges is wasted and Sam Rockwell is awful; and I could complain about a million other aspects but don't want to get too spoilery.

Everything has to be grounded in realism? What a limited, and limiting, point of view.

That none of them were "real" is one of the strengths of the film. There is an element of reality in each of the characters, then McDonagh pushes them to extremes. That tension is what gives this film its energy.

R147 gets it. The previous poster (“characters must be real!”) is a moron.

If you are taken out of the movie what the fuck

I meant if you are thinking about the plot not making any sense while watching movie the screenwriter hasn’t done a good job.

It will only win for the acting. No way will it win anything else.

No need to call others morons.

By the way, I TOTALLY agree with R146.

One fake ass movie.

[quote] Everything has to be grounded in realism?

No, it doesn't need to be grounded in realism, but the unless the characters are, say, cute, animated woodland creatures, their words and actions should be recognizably human.

One problem is that the billboards themselves have more depth of character than the actual cast.

R152, I disagree, I think it is essential to sometime call out the morons who post ignorant shit on here.

I don’t understand putting this much energy into writing and posting about how much you hated a movie. Like, move the fuck on and go watch Dunkirk again. These people (or is it just an army of one) are deranged and their criticisms morph/escalate from one post to another.

Move on dot org, hon.

R156, do you also use the term “hashtag” in everyday sentences? Something tells me you do.

I saw it. It wasn't "fantastic." It was hard to watch. A word I would use to describe it is "grotesque." The characters, the situations...all were pretty gross and hard to stomach.

I found the character of Mildred totally and completely unsympathetic. She's a CRIMINAL; she commits crimes against people and property with impunity and the police "let her" get away with it because they feel SORRY for her? In what universe would that happen? And that's just one of the implausible things about this movie; there are many.

Some people think this thing is some kind of commentary on America. And what might that be? That America is fucked up? Well, who doesn't know that?

This movie isn't nearly what it's cracked up to me. If you don't see it, it's no loss.

The detractors here should probably stay away from the oeuvre of Flannery O’Connor.

TBOEM is no Flannery O'Connor.

LOL It only got 4/6 in Norway's biggest newspaper.

I cannot stand Woody Harrelson. I loved his work in this film. Still can't quite believe it.

[QUOTE]I cannot stand Woody Harrelson. I loved his work in this film. Still can't quite believe it.

He gave the best performance in the film and it's never quite the same once he makes his exit. That look on his face after he spits blood in Mildred's face is just unforgettable. I wish HE were the one getting all the awards accolades instead of Sam Rockwell.

shitty homophobic film. perfect for the academy

how do you mean R164?

I watched it tonight. Expected not to like it, but was curious.

I loved it. Really great writing. And the acting was perfect -- by everyone.

I loved that the "heroine" was a bad-ass criminal cunt.

I'm glad to hear that, R166.

[quote]And the acting was perfect -- by everyone.

Thank you so much!! Finally SOMEone who got what I was going for!!

Just watched it on HBO - it's too ridiculous for words. Don't watch this when you're high, the Hollywood-ness will make you physically cringe. I'm really hating American "serious" movies these days. They're so phony. Now I feel like Holden Caulfirld describing his brother's job.)

I hated this movie. I get it was a black comedy but it was so stylised. The acting was over the top and the writing wasn't great . Frances McDornand is a very mannered actress. I didn't feel her performance was oscar worthy. She does the same wide eyed anguished look in every scene.

I wanted it to be at least as good as Fargo.

Not even close. Bad script, not a single character to root for and no resolution.

I can't believe F.M. beat L.M. Laurie was robbed.

Old news.

Frances McDornand is an overrated actress

Great movie.

Laurie lost to Allison Janney, not F.M. r171.

oops.

This movie deserved the best picture award, raw and unexpected. The moment I finished watching The Shape of Water I couldn't shake the feeling that it was the type of movie Nickelodeon should be producing. I'm mexican and I wouldn't defend neither three of our acclaimed directors, maybe Cuarón but he didn't deserve a second Oscar, it was Lanthimos chance to win.

So whatever happened to Inclusion Rider? Is she in jail with Reality Winner?

Caleb Landry Jones was the best part of the film.

This movie was a piece of shit.

Thanks for the necro to express that overblown critique. It was overhyped for sure but an interesting picture all the same.