Sicario 3

:eek:

Superhero
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
9,498
Reaction score
1,993
Points
103
 
Hopefully it gets made and they find a good director to continue this.
 
First one was great, second one not at all. Hopefully they figure out a good reason besides the search for more 'content' with a recognizable brand name.
 
I'm so game.

Denis had mentioned that he would've returned for Sicario 2, if he wasn't directing Blade Runner 2049. I'm praying he finds an interest in coming back.

I believe Denis is the primary reason that the original film was so damn good -- not just in terms of direction, but on the page too. If you read Sheridan's original script, it's a far-cry from the final film. It's much closer to Sicario 2, which came off as Fox News fear-mongering propaganda. In addition to his subdued direction, I theorize that Denis rewrote the original's script (in consultation with his cast) to downplay Taylor Sheridan's more distasteful sensibilities (for example, there's a tacky, unnecessary rape scene involving the protagonist in Sheridan's script). But they didn't change enough to warrant a screenwriting credit. If you take a look at interviews, Emily Blunt mentions that the final scene was "workshopped" for an entire day. It was initially much more unnecessarily violent and vulgar.

Here's the link:


Anyway, I do like Sicario 2. There are great individual scenes (the shocking ending, as well as the scene with the deaf man). But they really need someone who is both a subdued director AND writer. They can't rely too heavily on Sheridan's ideas.
 
I think I remember reading that it was always the plan to have different directors in each Sicario entry but I can't find that quote now. In any case, Villeneuve himself has currently at least four projects in development so I doubt he would prioritise this over some others that have been announced many years ago. And I wouldn't want him either. Honestly I thought Sollima did a great job taking over as a director, as did Hildur Guonadottir who replaced Johan Johansson in the score. Any problems I may have had with the sequel were strictly script based.
 
I'm so game.

Denis had mentioned that he would've returned for Sicario 2, if he wasn't directing Blade Runner 2049. I'm praying he finds an interest in coming back.

I believe Denis is the primary reason that the original film was so damn good -- not just in terms of direction, but on the page too. If you read Sheridan's original script, it's a far-cry from the final film. It's much closer to Sicario 2, which came off as Fox News fear-mongering propaganda. In addition to his subdued direction, I theorize that Denis rewrote the original's script (in consultation with his cast) to downplay Taylor Sheridan's more distasteful sensibilities (for example, there's a tacky, unnecessary rape scene involving the protagonist in Sheridan's script). But they didn't change enough to warrant a screenwriting credit. If you take a look at interviews, Emily Blunt mentions that the final scene was "workshopped" for an entire day. It was initially much more unnecessarily violent and vulgar.

Here's the link:


Anyway, I do like Sicario 2. There are great individual scenes (the shocking ending, as well as the scene with the deaf man). But they really need someone who is both a subdued director AND writer. They can't rely too heavily on Sheridan's ideas.

Man is looking to make at least one more Dune. I'm not sure if he has the time. But yeah, I agree. Sicario feels far morel like Denis then Sheridan's racist ass.
 

2016:


2018:


 
Last edited:
McQuarrie in Sicario would be beyond awesome! Please make it happen. :pray:
 
The original was lightening in a bottle and those cannot be recreated so easily, even with the same director and actors, especially with so much time passing since its release.
 
Day of the Soldado wasn't as good as the first one and it certainly had its issues but it was still quite good.
 
LOVED the first film, but never got around to watching the second. is it worth watching?
 
The second is not nearly as strong or subtle as the first film. But it's worth the watch -- there are a few incredible scenes/sequences even if the story is a pure right wing wet dream.
 
The second one was pretty awful and after reading Sheridan's original script for the first, it's clear Denis was the reason that movie worked so well (and probably BDT and Blunt too, considering they apparently had a lot of input in their characters) The original ending was gross. What we got was so much better. Because of all this, without Denis involved, I can't see myself watching Part 3.
 
The first movie had a lot of nuance that the second one didn't.
 
The second one was pretty awful and after reading Sheridan's original script for the first, it's clear Denis was the reason that movie worked so well (and probably BDT and Blunt too, considering they apparently had a lot of input in their characters) The original ending was gross. What we got was so much better. Because of all this, without Denis involved, I can't see myself watching Part 3.
What was the original ending?
 
The second one was pretty awful and after reading Sheridan's original script for the first, it's clear Denis was the reason that movie worked so well (and probably BDT and Blunt too, considering they apparently had a lot of input in their characters) The original ending was gross. What we got was so much better. Because of all this, without Denis involved, I can't see myself watching Part 3.
Agreed. The original film's screenplay was absolute trash (particularly the ending). Denis is such a visionary that he was able to craft something subtle, nuanced and tasteful out of that script. They must have workshopped the hell out of that script on set.
 
What was the original ending?
It's a very on-the-nose ending with overwritten, overlong dialogue explicitly communicating the film's themes. Alejandro also exposes Kate's breasts for no reason. The original script has a lot of brash, pointless nudity (there's another scene where the protagonist gets raped, entirely naked from the waist down before an officer comes to save her. That would later change to the more tasteful scene where Kate discovers that the man she's hooking up with is a hitman). The violence has no real emotional weight to it too.

In the final film, everything is much more subdued, dialogue is pared down significantly and the violence has meaning. Emily Blunt's passivity as a protagonist has greater weight to it too.

It was written like an average episode of Yellowstone essentially :o
 
Last edited:
It's a very on-the-nose ending with overwritten, overlong dialogue explicitly communicating the film's themes. Alejandro also exposes Kate's breasts for no reason. The original script has a lot of brash, pointless nudity (there's another scene where the protagonist gets raped, entirely naked from the waist down before an officer comes to save her. That would later change to the more tasteful scene where Kate discovers that the man she's hooking up with is a hitman). The violence has no real emotional weight to it too.

In the final film, everything is much more subdued, dialogue is pared down significantly and the violence has meaning. Emily Blunt's passivity as a protagonist has greater weight to it too.

It was written like an average episode of Yellowstone essentially :o
I recently re-read the original script too since it's such an easy google search away, and I still cannot get over how much better the ending we got was.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"