Only God Forgives (2013) User Reviews

An atmospheric tale of revenge, and not the sequel for Drive

[toinou328 · 7/10 · 24 May 2013]

Critics have gone way too hard on this movie. Lots of violent, strange et slow films have been presented at the Cannes film festival since its creation but yet every time a film pushes the boundaries of violence while keeping its own style, most critics go mad and sometimes shout at the screening, even leaving the theater before the end and calling it "outrageous". This film, along with "Anti-Christ" is a perfect example of the type of scandals that go on at Cannes for quite stupid reasons.

First of all, forget about Drive. If you know Nicolas Winding Refn's style and like it then you'll enjoy this movie but if you've only seen Drive and believe this is going to be in the same style (because of the same actor, similar cinematography, same musical style...) believe me you'll be disappointed. The trailer might give this impression, but this film is very different. The director had already made other movies just like this, but they did not encounter a really large audience. His works were mostly known by cinephiles, artsy people and intellectuals interested in film analysis (in a general way of course). Drive was his first really big success and also his first film taking place in America, starring a worldwide known star (Gosling) and going deep into its message while keeping a more specific style than his other films.

Here Refn feels a lot more philosophical, and comes back to his original style in directing films such as Valhalla Rising : great visuals, slow-pasted action, scenes that seem a bit detached from one-another, deep character development, little dialogue, extreme violence mixed with soft and/or trance-electro music... all of which are here to deal with philosophical, deep, hard subjects like revenge, good and bad, mother/son relationship etc...

When it comes to the acting Gosling does not disappoints however this time Refn wanted to do the opposite that he did in Drive : showing the weakness of his character. Also, even though he does pull-off a very convincing performance, Kristin Scott Thomas is surprisingly captivating and gives her character a much more "real" dimension than it could have been (like it is most of the time, when a woman is supposed to play a drug-lord badass). But saving the best for the end, Vithaya Pansringarm, an actor totally unknown to me until know, plays wonderfully his role as the mystical bad guy, and really did surprise me by the quality of his acting. He completely understood the movie's atmosphere and makes his character feel mysterious and fascinating.

To sum-up this is a very atmospheric, deep movie with great actors/actresses and dealing with difficult and serious themes, with some philosophical analysis possible, but definitely not in the same style as Drive, even though it has some similarities with it.

Slow, so slow

[Havgar · 5/10 · 24 May 2013]

If you've seen Drive, then you should know that this movie is nothing like it, except perhaps in the fact that they are both beautifully shot. Drive had a pretty brisk pace, good dialogue, a plot that went somewhere, and a likable character.

Only God Forgives had none of that. This is a movie which moves along at a snail's pace, and even at a runtime of 90 minutes, it feels like many hours go by before even a single thing happens. Even the characters move and turn slowly.

The plot, such as it is, you would probably find worth watching, but Nicolas Winding Refn peppers it with pseudo-dream sequences and many pointless scenes that drag on for ever, so that the plot becomes hard to stay interested in.

Now, some things you might care about.

The acting. Ryan Gosling, of whom I was a fan in his earlier days, plays the same character from Drive, except that here he is indeed even more emotionless. He speaks about 5 lines during the whole movie, and has fewer different facial expressions. Kristin Scott Thomas is very good, although she feels underused. She is definitely the strong point of this movie. Vithaya Pansringarm, who plays a prominent role in the movie, is as expressionless as Gosling, although he is somewhat better, in my opinion.

Action scenes do exist, and they do resemble those from Drive, in that they are very matter-of-factly and visceral. Here, Winding Refn has really indulged in a lot of gratuitous gore, although overall, I found the action scenes quite entertaining. One particular one showcases Byron Gibson's acting talents, and it is particularly (and hilariously) cringe-worthy.

All the characters in this movie are unlikable. It is extremely difficult to get yourself to care for any of them, including Gosling's, who is arguably the protagonist here.

Aside from Scott Thomas' acting, the only other redeeming quality of this film is the excellent way in which most scenes are set up and shot. The sets, the camera movement, the placement of the actors, all of these make up for some truly gorgeous shots.

Overall, sad as I am to say it, I cannot recommend seeing Only God Forgives.

Artistic Revenge

[Agent10 · 7/10 · 2 February 2021]

I don't understand the general dislike for this film. Yeah, I heard all the reviews and admittedly, the reviews turned me away from the initial release. It didn't help it was only in my town for a week. Either way.... I low key love this film.

I love the color palate. I love the pace. I love how it creates a world completely alien to the one I live in. While the story is very basic, it is visceral. You understand how Kristin Scott Thomas commands so much fear. You understand how Julian does not want to be like her. You understand how Chang prefers to work outside the confines of law and order with his own brand of justified punishment. The motives are clear, and while the older brother Billy is way too cartoony evil, we had to quickly establish the central conflict.

The thing about such a film is this...where does art end and pretentiousness begin? I think a lot of people interpreted this more for the latter than the former, wanting a dull Tarantino style revenge epic with tons of swearing and pretentious pop culture dialogue. What they got was a neon bathed slow burn, and it worked so much better. In the end, we see why it would happen that way. Chang is brutal and even caustic, but he is fair in the dog eat dog world of the drug dealing underclass. And boy, did that ending seem satisfying.

Those who have not seen a lot of film from multiple eras and styles of film making might not get this type of feature, but that is okay. For those who know high concept, low plot type film making, this one is for you.

A clinical study on perversion

[FrostyChud · 24 May 2013]

Either Nicholas Winding Refn is a Freudian scholar who has made a didactic film illustrating the nuances of the Oedipus complex, or psychic reality really does have an Oedipal structure. I vote for the latter.

We have Julian, played by Ryan Gosling, who is even emptier than the character he portrayed in Drive. He barely speaks, has no center, and cannot be a man with the woman he loves. In an early scene, we see him sliding his hand up her skirt in a nightclub. He is not just copping a happy feel; trembling, he is approaching the altar of Woman. We then see him walking down a scary hallway. He extends his hand to open a dark door when...SLICE...Chang cuts his arm off. It doesn't take a psychoanalyst to deduce the symbolism of the arm that must be severed when it reaches out. In the next scene, Gosling opens the door in reality and finds...his mother waiting for him on the bed. So, putting the pieces together, when Julian approaches a woman he imagines a door (and is not Woman always a door for Man?). Behind this door in his unconscious hides his castrating, phallic mother. But before he can open this door, a man with a knife appears and castrates him. Why? Castration sucks...but it is not as bad as what is behind that door in Julian's unconscious (psychosis).

Now, it happens that for perverse subjects like Julian (and, I am guessing, the director), the unconscious representation at the heart of their suffering is that of the phallic mother. Kristin Scott Thomas plays an excellent phallic mother here: obscene, castrating, oversexual...one who goes as far as to belittle Julian's manhood in front of his girlfriend.

Notice too that we never find out if Julian's girlfriend is a woman or a ladyboy. This confusion is alluded to in the opening scenes with Billy at the brothel and is further confirmed by the way in which Refn films Mai slowly lifting her skirt to show a breathless Julian whatever it is he/she has under there. Like all perverse subjects, Julian is haunted by the fantasy of the maternal phallus. Hence the popularity of ladyboy prostitutes in Thailand: they bring to life, in a non-threatening form, a powerful and archaic unconscious fantasy. What else but the hidden maternal phallus could Julian be looking for when he cuts open the stomach of his dead mother and reaches in? What Julian lacks is an unconscious representation of the womb, one that he tries here to generate. For the perverse subject, femininity is intolerable because in his unconscious, women are nothing but castrated men. He cannot understand that the essence of femininity is infinite interiority. Notice too how Refn's dojo is a surreal labyrinth: Julian has no representation for the labyrinth of femininity because he is stuck INSIDE the labyrinth of his mother's body.

The clinic shows us that nothing destroys a son's sexuality like a phallic, castrating mother. For Julian to save some shred of masculinity, he needs a father strong enough to castrate his mother. Enter Chang, who must be considered a pure fantasy. Here is a man strong enough, phallic enough, silent enough (he doesn't even speak English) finally to defeat the Gorgon and extract the phallus from her dead body. Once amputated, the hidden maternal phallus becomes the visible paternal phallus (=Chang's knife), one that is not attached to the body but can be symbolically passed from father to son. This is how the Oedipus complex "normally" operates. The perverse subject, however, has not accomplished this step. He has no phallus, no symbolic masculinity. He is still stuck in his mother's body, and as such he does not have the right to any sort of accomplished manhood. Hence the importance of cutting, of severing, of dismemberment for the perverse subject: he dreams of the paternal knife that would finally separate him from Mother and allow him to exist as his own man. Notice too that Julian's "final castration" takes place outside, in an empty field: through this paternal intervention, he is extracted from mother's body.

Of course, the super-phallic, super-castrating father that the perverse subject needs to accomplish this amputation is a formidable figure in his own right, one who is hardly better than the phallic mother in a certain sense. However, his violence is essentially just and limited by the Law, whereas the violence of the maternal superego knows no limits.

Julian's fight with Chang, in which he gets beaten up terribly, is an illustration of the logic of masochism: submit to the father in order that the father might finally castrate the phallic mother.

"Only God Forgives" is the depressing story of a perverse subject's difficult (impossible?) struggle to detach himself from an obscene, oppressive maternal superego. He doesn't really succeed. At the end, the disappearance of Julian's mother his simply led to the masochistic fetishization of Chang. The movie's last scene is ambiguous. Does it show us that Julian cannot see Chang as a man he might one day equal, a man whose phallus he might one day possess, but as an omnipotent God on stage? Or does it show us Julian's deep love and gratitude towards the lawman powerful enough to liberate him?

The slow pacing and static shots seem gratuitous at first, but as the movie picks up steam, we begin to understand their raison d'etre: Julian lives in a dead world in which nothing can move or change because everything is paralyzed by his mother. I almost walked out after twenty minutes, but I'm glad I stayed - there are some powerful archetypal figures here. The radical otherness of Chang illustrates well the secret of paternity: in our unconscious, our fathers are all Changs. The movie is worth seeing for this character alone.

Ambitious one...

[renatofernandesz1 · 7/10 · 28 July 2013]

After Drive, i was very curious to see what he was doing next.

This movie was fairly ambitious in its own ways, visually is a stunning mix of colors and beautiful composed shots, which elevates the whole mood of the movie. The story itself is a fairly simple one, however it is told in a way in which depended heavily on the actors performance, and this is were the movie fails. the way some of the actors fail to act the parts almost like shadows of themselves, sometimes overacting and being too much aware of the camera detracts from Nicolas intentions. Gosling is good here, so is Kristin Scott Thomas, the rest of the cast is hit or miss in some scenes. The overall surreal way of telling this story could've worked a lot better if they had solved those issues. I liked the subtext behind the whole relationship between Chang (who in is own ways has a twisted God complex) and Julian's character.

In the end it makes me a little sad, i think with a little more time put into working with the actors, it could've elevated the movie to another level, also without spoiling anything, i think the out of the box scenes could've been pushed a little more!! 7 out of 10!!

People will find meaning anything

[AlexWinterr · 3/10 · 16 May 2020]

I typically like Refn, but this was just disappointing. The plot line is fundamentally a banal revenge tale, cinematography as always is amazing but thats just not enough to save this. To respond to the positive reviews i'm seeing: How? Symbology? Where? Nothing happens in this. You get presented with basic characters that have a potentially interesting dynamic, which is explored with... long surreal scenes in which the characters just stare at each other? Its sad how people won't call out a movie just because they believe that lauding a film that the "simple plebs" have rated negatively will make them seem like a connoisseur or ahead of the flock. To end this: it feels like Refn tried to avoid making a mindless flick by leaving blanks for the viewer to fill in. Problem is, when 90% of the movie is a blank for the audience to fill in, the result it something that just feels plain lazy more than anything else.

Amazing work on a ridiculously bad story,,,

[TheNeel · 6/10 · 8 December 2014]

Nicolas Winding Refn's works are different, so you either like them or hate them. Personally I love them. However this film is quite disappointing.

The direction, art, music, editing and cast is awesome as always..

But the story kills the movie.. Sometimes its too dragged out even for a Refn movie.. pointlessly slow The characters have depth, and the suspense is engaging.. But overall theme is quite ordinary and the script is just bad..

So if you can ignore a super slow paced story for almost 90 mins and appreciate everything else in the film you will find this to be a masterpiece.

I gave it a 6 because as an overall 'movie' its quite mediocre.

Quite possibly the most tedious revenge movie ever made.

[BA_Harrison · 1/10 · 1 June 2014]

Drive, the previous movie from director Nicholas Winding Refn and actor Ryan Gosling, utilised a deliberate and rather stilted style that not only resulted in a unique air of cool but which also had the effect of making the movie's explosive scenes of violence more impactful. In Only God Forgives, Refn and Gosling repeat this sparing, slow-burn technique, but take it to the nth degree; this time around the effect is to completely bore the crap out of the viewer.

Quite simply, Only God forgives has got to be one of the most excruciating exercises in cinema it has ever been my misfortune to witness. Every pan, track or zoom is agonisingly drawn out, the camera movement often being almost imperceptible. A good percentage of scenes comprise of corridors, or people not moving, or people moving very slowly, or karaoke performances (slow songs, of course). Virtually every scene is lit in either red or blue, which gets extremely irritating. Gosling's brooding expression remains the same throughout the entire film. Conversations take an age to unfold. Minutes seem like hours. Hours seem like days. Time eventually loses all meaning.

Even the film's few scenes of brutal violence are shot in such a way as to render them totally boring.

Art-house types will love the film (or at least pretend to), finding hidden meaning and symbolism in its languorous plot and mind-bogglingly dull execution, but most right-minded people will quite rightly dismiss this for the utter garbage that it is.

unique

[SnoopyStyle · 8/10 · 19 August 2013]

I was expecting something more shocking. Don't get me wrong. This is violent and misogyny at it worst. But we've seen it all before. Especially the worldly movie reviewers that are so eager to give it a zero. If anything, it's the minimalist acting that's unique here. And not just the limited dialog but it's the movement. They don't even move that much.

The minimalist acting, the over saturation of color red, the grotesque violence, the misogyny, all of it adds to a unique feel unlike anything I've seen before. Even with all its oddness, it was compelling and mesmerizing. This is like nothing I've ever seen before and that's worth something to me.

A Beautiful, Brutal, Bizarre Picture

[williejk · 7/10 · 16 July 2016]

Only God Forgives is an unusual film to review. On the one hand, I feel obligated to recommend it for its beautiful cinematography and Refn's undeniable mastery of his craft. Yet, I am simultaneously repulsed by many of the scenes framed and presented, however well shot they may be. Indeed, Refn has reverted back to his more independent style of film making, his pre-Drive era if you will, and as such if you expect Only God Forgives to be as accessible as his 2011 effort, you will probably find yourself disappointed. This is an extremely brutal look into the psyche of a criminal as he grows ashamed of the actions and choices he has made, and as such wishes to repent for his questionable life.

Ryan Gosling plays the criminal in question; a drug smuggler named Julian who is but a pawn in his sadistic Mother's operation, played by Kristin Scott Thomas. After the murder of Julian's older brother at the hands of the police officer Chang, portrayed by Vithaya Pansringarm, his mother tasks him with bringing Chang to 'justice'. Most of the narrative that follows is told in typical Refn style, with sparse and infrequent dialogue, and mostly through the use of visual story telling. The cinematography is exquisite and must be praised, using brilliant use of lighting and shadow to convey emotion and mood. The acting, for the most part, is also good. Vithaya Pansringarm is very apt at portraying the steely-cold Chang who dispatches sinners with uncompromising efficiency, and Scott Thomas really did convince as the truly psychopathic, almost incestuous matriarch of the criminal family. However Gosling, unusually, didn't quite make the cut. He is once again stoic and unflinching as he was in Drive, but in parts in Only God Forgives it seems that he is almost sleep-walking his way through. The narrative is in part told through dream sequences so perhaps this was the desired effect, but he nevertheless appears gormless.

Indeed, where the film does falter is in its more existential moments. Sometimes they do work, such as with Chang's seemingly angelic nature, as he makes swords appear out of nowhere as he dispatches justice (indeed, he is the metaphor for God to which the title refers), but in other scenes it falls flat. The most peculiar of which is the recurring karaoke scenes where Chang sings in front of the characters of film as they watch from tables in an exotic nightclub. The film is also horrifically brutal in places. Refn's films are notorious for their unflinching violence, and I must say, he can go overboard. Such is the case in one particular scene as Chang tortures a criminal in order to get information. The scene is far too long, and just when you think it cannot get more sickening, it does. The shot length is extremely long as we are witness to close ups of eye-slitting and chest stabbing. It is far too brutal, and it does spoil the film.

However, Only God Forgives is still a good film and I do recommend it. While the existential scenes can be a little too random, and while some of the violence is too graphic, it is nevertheless visually stunning, with a brilliantly atmospheric soundtrack to complement it. I must also praise a director who is willing to push the boundaries and continue to make independent films that challenge audiences. Some hate his work, others may love it, but in the end, for a man to make art so divisive is extraordinary to behold. Only God Forgives is not a bad as some may say, but it nevertheless isn't Refn's greatest film.

Great style, crap everything else

[evan_harvey · 1/10 · 18 July 2013]

1 out of 10? Yep, it was "awful".

The story is okay, if thin. It seems to be trying to be arty and stylish, but despite looking superb, there is zero substance. There are no real questions being asked, no real characters being developed, and a threadbare story. All that means is this is a film of art for art's sake, which was always the refuge of the uninspired.

Ryan Gosling sucked. He just stands around, saying virtually nothing, no expression, no emotion, nothing. It was bizarre. Maybe that's how it was supposed to be, but all that means is that you have a dull, lifeless movie.

Kristin Scott Thomas sucked. Zero acting effort.

The script is s**t too. Very little dialogue, which would be fine except that the end result is weird conversations with zero emotion, zero acting, and bizarre pauses where no one talks.

And then there's some reasonably serious swearing, which when added to the s**t dialogue just sounds weird and odd.

The best parts were the Bangkok night scenery. The lighting is great (lots of red light, purple etc), but it is simply a s**t film. This film deserves nothing but contempt for wasting my money and time. If it had been free, it still wouldn't be worth it, but at least I'd only have my wasted time to complain about.

People are missing the point

[sephev · 9/10 · 26 July 2013]

It's a shame that people seem to be missing the point behind this film. However, on one's first sitting, it's easily done - Refn's style and pace may fool you into thinking this is a dull, slow film. The long, seemingly unending shots of actors staring into the distance may make you question Mat Newman's (the editor) talent. But what you really need to do is to look deeper into the film, because behind the extreme violence, the beautiful cinematography & production design and questionable reality, there is an interesting message. That message really depends on how you interpret the film, and differentiates from person to person.

For instance, Vithaya Pansringarm's character can be perceived in a variety of ways - a silent angel out to balance the injustices of his city, a delusional man who thinks of himself as God, or a vengeful cop who is simply out to do his job. Ryan Gosling's Julian can be seen as a confused soul who is out to avenge someone he clearly despised, someone who is bullied into action by his persuasive mother. Kristen Scott Thomas's excellent portrayal of Crystal, Julian's thoroughly unpleasant mother, acts as a wedge between the two of them. And the motives of each of these characters are questionable throughout.

It's certain that Refn's ninth feature film is not a simple crime drama as you might have expected. Its twists and turns will almost certainly surprise you, and it will linger on your mind long after the credits roll. It makes you question what was real and what was not in a way I've never seen in cinema before. And it really is a shame that a lot of people seem to completely miss the brilliance and genius behind it.

This film is pure style

[rubenm · 7/10 · 3 June 2013]

Basically, there are two kinds of films. Firstly, there are genre-pictures, using established cinematographic conventions, trying to please the audience. They may be good or bad, but are never shocking, disturbing or ground-breaking. Secondly, there are films ignoring conventions, and deliberately keeping distance from mainstream movie-making. Their aim is not necessarily to entertain, but rather to provoke, to shock or to disturb. They may be good or bad, but they don't leave the audience indifferent.

Clearly, 'Only God Forgives' belongs to the latter group. The quality of this film is not about the plot twists, the character developments or the witty dialogue. There aren't any. This film is pure style. The only thing that matters is cinematography and atmosphere. And there's a lot of that.

The film is set in Bangkok, which is shown as a dimly lit cityscape full of violent characters without any moral feeling. There's almost no daylight in the film, and neither any emotion. A senseless killing sets in motion a series of extremely violent acts. These are shown in settings full of contrasts - the most memorable and most violent scene takes place in a karaoke bar full of young women, watching the bloody proceedings in a state of pure indifference.

The film sometimes is very slow. But this, and the very effective soundtrack, adds to the sinister atmosphere. One great scene shows a sort of garden, with a man and a young boy sitting in a corner. Very slowly, the camera moves towards them, while the music indicates something creepy is about to happen. You keep looking out for the danger that is supposed to be hiding in a corner, but then the film cuts and the camera angle reverses 180 degrees, so that the audience sees what the man and the boy see: an army of corrupt cops, with the most sadistic one in the front row.

In this film, the acting is not about showing emotions, but rather about hiding them. An easy job for Ryan Gosling, who only has to show a poker face and act cool. It's Kristin Scott-Thomas who's stealing the show in this film. Her role is miles away from the British stiff-upper-lipped parts or the French character roles she is most famous for. She plays a super vulgar woman without any conscience, and she does it so well that I doubt if I would have recognized her if I wouldn't have known she was in the cast.

The thing that struck me most about this film is how Asian it seems to be. Not only the emotionless acting and the stylish cinematography, but also the extreme, almost sadistic violence is something you wouldn't expect from a Danish director. He himself seems indeed to emphasize this, by using Thai characters for the opening and end credits.

Pretentious

[melisakurtay · 1/10 · 8 July 2013]

I went to the film mainly for Kristin Scott Thomas, as in the trailer I got excited by seeing her transforming into a villain.

She was still great in OGF. She might be the only good thing.

My first opinion about the film is that, it is so obsessed about aesthetic that they didn't care there was no meaningful script. Pretentious written all over it.

It is as if Ryan Gosling just came from his home with the same outfits, same hairstyle he has in his everyday life and giving the same looks over and over again in nearly most of his films. Its like a staring contest with Ryan Gosling. He is not mysterious. He is not meaningful. Its not that he expresses so many emotions with his eyes. And what can he express with such a rootless character.

No dialogue written. Thats OK. Thats a choice. Not every film needs to be filled with non-stop smart lines. But what counts is what is written as dialogue. Here it fails big time. I read in some reviews that they say film is slow. I'm OK with a film being slow but if a man walks half his speed just to look cool or moves half his speed just to look mysterious it looks silly and boring. Police singing, doing karaoke in the bar, the prostitute just being there looking pretty and in pain, all the wallpapers etc. they all irritated me as its so "look at me i'm so cool and enigmatic wow". Its hard to pull that off. Takashi Miike, David Lynch they can pull that off.

As a fan of Asian films, this seemed a like a 4 year old little boy who wants to be like his 25 year old cool uncle. A long way to go. Its just sad that so many films that are actually similar to this "wannabe film"'s story exist. But they don't have big names like Ryan Gosling in it. So no one is even aware of those.

Being a good director should mean combining aesthetics and good story.

Kristin Scott Thomas is great to watch and if you like gore there are some scenes you would enjoy but other than that...

What a waste.

Annoying and Pretentious

[bettyblogger71 · 24 May 2013]

There isn't a lot of dialog because there isn't much of a plot. What there is, is at best, clumsy and predictable. I am not sure that it was even that believable.

There is however lots of silence, dark brooding nothingness, Thai Karaoke, lots of blood and questionable sexual relations of one sort or another. Perhaps these elements were supposed to fill the void. However it was not enough.

Great performances from all the cast but even they couldn't save it. At times Ryan Gosling just looked lost and bewildered and I don't think he was acting. I found it annoying and pretentious.

Worth watching

[tr91 · 7/10 · 31 July 2013]

This film is worth watching, it is very gripping and suspenseful. There isn't much dialouge at all, it is mostly just atmospheric. The plot is relatively simple, a chain of people killing others who are then linked to someone else. The ending is left open to your imagination too. There are some really gruesome scenes in this movie but this sort of thing was needed to keep the viewer gripped on the way the story was unfolding. Ryan Gosling was a very mysterious character again (as in Drive) and he portrayed this very well. The supporting cast were also good.

Overall I found this film to be quite good, was a relatively short film but I didn't feel it was 'dragging' like some said. I preferred 'Drive' but this one is still worth a watch.

7/10

Don't actually spend money on this. Please.

[DumondBatman · 1/10 · 5 June 2013]

I realize that not all movies can have fast-paced action sequences, or a perfectly linear/understandable plot, or what you would consider to be "normal" characters and/or character interaction.

But this particular movie manages single-handedly to avoid all of the above.

And add in some heavily awkward/nonsensical scenes where an Asian police officer does Karaoke, while the entire bar sits in complete and utter silence (literally no movement in the room as this person sings, and these scenes draw onwards for at least 5 to 10 minutes. In the middle of the movie).

I...can't describe how bad this movie is. It's not "art", it's not even particularly striking or disturbing like a David Lynch movie.

It's just nonsense for the sake of nonsense, featuring Ryan Gosling uttering all of five syllables and NOT CHANGING HIS EXPRESSION for the entire film.

Spoiler alert: the final scene, insane and nonsensical as it may be, is cut off by (you guessed it) yet another scene of a cop singing at a karaoke bar.

At that point the entire movie theater I was at got on its feet and left.

Laughing.

The plot is not really there

[OnZa · 6/10 · 16 June 2013]

"Only God Forgives" is a dark, serious and ultra-violent movie. It weighs in on Asian symbolism, spiritualism and response to revenge or own hand rights. It flows more like a music video than actual movie (even though it does not have fast cuts). That description also fits "Drive" but whereas that movie gained critical acclaim, this one has had way more split response and it's easy to see why.

Considering that even with star Ryan Gosling, "Only God Forgives" is to be considered a sub-genre movie and indie release, I can predict many people go to see it because of the previous (director & lead star) collaboration "Drive". I, like many others marching into movie theater to see it, had high hopes after Drive. I jokingly said that this is "Drive II". Well, it's not.

Director Nicolas Winding Refn has leaned towards heavy symbolism here, and unfortunately at the cost of plot where one considers how movies should have even a some kind of structure and character development. I had the impression after the movie that tackling the symbolism the writer/director probably thought he had invested more to his characters than he actually has. Gosling is the less spoken man like in the predecessor Drive, but without any likability. The "heroism" of the Drive main character could have been argued on but in this case there are no heroes or good guys in the movie. Just a self made perception of each religious or other view.

Some reviews said that the movie is style of substance but again (sorry) I need to reference to Drive and question even the style. It had couple of really nice shots and scenes with unique atmoshpere but I found it lacked the coolness. Also the stylisticity (is it a word?) of some the gore scenes only show of a bad taste. In my opinion you're either full on splatter or you're on the other end of the scale, not something in between.

This type of story would have been more powerful with some kind of invested emotion. I did not feel about anything when watching this movie. That is what separates if from it's predecessor and also other great movies. Now it's barely good.

I am afraid Nicolas Winding Refn have taken a step back here, although I am also pretty sure he does not entertain a thought of mainstream acclaim -that much we've seen from the previous movies. I hope he takes a sidestep for his next movie, and tries something different because he really is talented and an INDIVIDUAL director.

A missed opportunity.

[Troy_Campbell · 4/10 · 19 July 2013]

Danish auteur Nicolas Winding Refn's first Hollywood picture Drive is one of the best films of the millennium, hands down. His Thailand-set revenge saga feels like a natural extension of that masterpiece, albeit a very boring and pretentious one. Where Drive was slow-burning and enrapturing, OGF is slow and uninteresting; where Ryan Gosling's Driver was charismatic and compelling, his drug-dealing enigma here is dull and vacuous; Drive's violence was impactful and meaningful, the brutality in this is nasty and pointless. There are, however, two shining lights that save this from being completely unwatchable. The neon-lit cinematography is simply stunning and quite often disguises the senselessness of what is actually going on, whilst the ballsy performance from Kristen Scott Thomas as Gosling's reprehensible white-trash mother is a terrific display of her versatility and deserving of a much better movie. A missed opportunity that suggests Refn is a hit and miss prospect.

Lynchian Bangkok

[toonunit · 8/10 · 20 July 2013]

Those giving this movie 1/10 are saying far more about their own absolute ignorance of film and extreme immaturity than they are about this movie. I don't expect everyone to like this film - it is certainly not for fans of Hollywood blockbusters and those who start their reviews with statements similar to 'I went to see this movie because I like Ryan Gosling/Kristin Scott Thomas' render all further comments null and void - their opinions are simply worthless and cannot be taken seriously.

The cinematography is excellent and the acting superb. Those complaining of Gosling's lack of animation are completely missing the point that his character is empty and completely subjugated beneath the force of his mother. This movie is full of symbolism, psychology and philosophy and every shot and sequence masterfully executes the portrayal and exploration of these themes. Distinct allusions to David Lynch are apparent but these do not come off as derivative but rather as homage.

If you like Hollywood blockbusters or Rom-Coms stay away from this movie and don't bother deriding this movie due to your own lack of mature and critical thinking. On the other hand, if you appreciate excellent cinematography and exploring deeper themes of the unconscious, however dark they may be, do not be put off by the extremism of those giving this movie 1/10 and go and decide for yourself.

Refn refuses to rehash himself.

[Abyss47 · 7/10 · 21 July 2013]

Already appearing to be one of the most polarizing films of the year, Only God Forgives will likely trigger debate for a long period of time. Nicolas Winding Refn brought a lot more attention to himself as a director after making Drive, one of 2011's most memorable films. People who otherwise wouldn't have given a damn about him started to take notice and anticipate whatever project he became attached to next. Only God Forgives triggered excitement early after some photo stills from on set found their way onto the internet. Ryan Gosling reuniting with Refn after Drive only added to the anticipation.

The film has a plot, but it's not as important as the style and execution, which I automatically became attached to from the first frame to the last. You see, it's with this film where Refn seemed to be trolling his fans who fell in love with Drive. Instead of the straightforward approach that made Drive easy to follow, Only God Forgives gives a big "F YOU" to conventional ways of telling a story. I've heard some people describe the film's atmosphere as "nightmarish". Well, none of my nightmares have ever looked this good. "Hellish" is the term I would use to describe it, and even that isn't entirely doing justice to what Refn and cinematographer Larry Smith have accomplished here. The film's mood isn't entirely unlike that of another unusual film released this year - Spring Breakers - as they're both permeated by a quiet intensity that could make even the most fearless viewer squirm in their seats. The film has the look and feel of a frightening horror picture where evil lurks around the next corner and happiness is practically nonexistent.

Using a variety of colors, from dark red (the primary color) to light blue to gold and yellow, as well as an effective use of shadows, which contrast well with said colors, the film looks utterly fantastic, delivering a visual experience that is reason enough to watch the film more than once. Refn's choice of shots is smart and sophisticated as well, going so far as to remind me of Kubrick, as extended shots of characters looking into the distance and at each other can be found throughout, but without taking away from the details of the scenery. Refn fully realizes the effect of quietness and how to maintain a consistent atmosphere that keeps the viewer in a paralyzed effect. I can just imagine what it must be like to see one of his films in a darkened theater; that anticipation of violence erupting at any moment can be felt with assuring affirmation.

Ryan Gosling and the rest of the cast hold it all together like glue, with Gosling essentially playing a more mysterious version of his character in Drive, a drug smuggler by the name of Julian. Julian doesn't even react to the news of his brother's death, which draws attention from his mother Crystal (played splendidly by Kristin Scott Thomas) in one table scene that showcases Refn's eye for contrasting colors and flair for making the most out of an otherwise simple scene. Mai (Ratha Phongam), a prostitute involved with Julian, is merely a pawn in a nasty, cruel game of sadistic players looking to avenge the death of an immoral rapist/murderer. Chang (Thai police lieutenant), is a man that sees himself as immortal and without flaws. This God complex instills in him a level of confidence that helps fuel his inner rage. He's also the type of guy nobody would want to f-ck with, and Julian soon realizes this after he's beaten to a pulp in a one-on-one boxing match with Chang that damn near ends his life. It's almost as if Julian's mother has to convince Julian to continue his quest for vengeance since he's so emotionless and that fight seemed to take a lot out of him. Of course, him being told by his mother that Chang is out to get her after finding out that she ordered a hit on him also may have helped.

This makes one singular moment at the end all the more unusual, as Julian commits an act of redemption that displays his humanity before giving up what I can imagine would be very important to any human being. Like with Tony Montana, the thought of killing a kid proves too much for him, and in the process of killing his ally Charlie and seeing the dead body of his mother, killed by Chang, comes to terms with the guilt of his lifestyle, and in a sequence that may or may not be real, surrenders his hands to Chang. The ending is a real piece of gold, as Chang returns to his harmless hobby of singing karaoke after committing such cruel, violent acts, and in the process, all seems to dwindle down in peace, as our anti-hero is nowhere to be found.

Cliff Martinez's score further illuminates the despair and constant death that surrounds the environment the film takes place in. And it's kind of funny when you consider just how beautiful the whole thing looks. Dialogue isn't necessary in a film like this which has such a calculated and developed style. The feeling the style gave me is that of love, hate, confusion, warmth, coldness, fondness, intensity, and much, much more. When a film triggers so many different emotions in you over the course of less than two hours, you know it's done something right.

Many people will hate this film and toss it to the side as something pointless and boring, but understanding that there's so many different ways in utilizing the language of film, and that not everything needs to be straightforward or accessible, this is a film that I easily took a liking to. It helps that I didn't expect Drive 2.0 and it also helps that I got exactly what I was looking for, a film driven purely by great, sophisticated, and refined style.

pointless, boring and just plain bad.

[shoutatthesky · 1/10 · 20 July 2013]

If you like movies that have a very weak plot, many pointless scenes, the addition of dream sequences that add nothing to the plot and only confuse, characters that are not explained and which it is therefore very hard to care about, and many shots of the characters looking into the distance with little emotion on their face and seemingly little on their mind then this is the film for you. I don't mind films that are unique and don't fit the usual Hollywood format but there are things that are essential to a good film such as interesting characters, a plot of some sort and some clue as to what is going on being given but those things are missing from this film. I was so confused and mainly just bored throughout this film. I expected better things from Gosling. And I have enjoyed Refn's other films so I am not just a mainstream film lover only but this effort was just bad film making.

Depending on what you look for in a film you could either consider to be an artwork or a let down

[dme3-624-956960 · 8/10 · 24 May 2013]

I went into the movie theater looking forward to this film. Expecting something along the likes of Drive, which was a great cinematic experience in my opinion, I got to see something which had similarities in execution and style but turned out to be a very different movie from the latter.

Without saying too much I will say that this will be one of the weirdest movie experiences you will ever get. It has the same type of artwork that made Drive such a great accomplishment but it takes it a little further. This is done to a point where you can either choose to relate to its ruthlessness and brutality ( it is an extremely violent film) or discard it for it. The setting and scenes are played out beautifully but the pacing feels off as it builds up really slow and never gains pace throughout the showing. At times you feel like you are witnessing scenes from a wonderfully shot masterpiece, yet the next moment it can be as if these scenes add up to nothing substantial. To me it feels as if the director has been overly ambitious and at particular moments he managed to make it work but overall it doesn't hit home. It tries so hard to be memorable and refreshing that at times it turns into a parody of itself.

This being said I still enjoyed it for what it was and though the brutality and violence won't be for anyone to be appreciated ( it gets very raunchy)it's an experience I'm glad I did not miss out on. Some other people in the theater where less forgiving ( no pun intended) and left it running for the exit. It's not as accessible as you would want it to be, and it's not as great as it feels it could have been but if you want to watch a film you won't be able to wrap your head around entirely for the next few days I'd say: give it a shot. You might find it worth your while. I certainly found it to be so. A decent piece of artwork or a let down? Depending on what you look for in a film you can only consider it to be one or the other.

Visually Stunnnig,but it lacks something of major importance.

[redxction · 7/10 · 14 March 2017]

ONLY GOD FORGIVES is a film that is visually stunning with it's use of colours, location etc. But it lacks something of major importance, CAHRACTERS; Julian, a metaphor, Chang, a metaphor, Crystal, a metaphor. If Nicolas Winding Refn actually invested more of his time to developing these characters and not just have the characters as cardboard cut-outs waiting to be distinguished and worked out by the above-average film viewer.

On the other hand though the films profound and personal meaning mixed with the unforgettable, talented visuals outweigh the bad side of the film which I'm sure the art-house fan will look over the bad side considering that artistic films nowadays e.g. Under the Skin rarely have developed characters that feel and care for unlike the past art-house films in the 50, 60s, 70 were in it's prime e.g. like Wild Strawberries, Blow-Up, Peeping Tom, Eraserhead and 8 1/2

Absolute rubbish

[Quazoosl · 1/10 · 26 June 2013]

I think that either you will love this film, or absolutely hate it. I am in the latter category and here's why.

Because of the focus on scenery and the lingering shots the pace is dreadfully slow. There are shots where there is no movement at all I was sometimes wondering if I was looking at a picture or a film. The characters show little to no emotion and I couldn't identify myself with one single character. Sometimes it looks like all they do is stare. In my opinion the plot is simple, but unrealistic because of the strange choices the characters make. Halfway through I nearly got up and left.

Being honest I have to compliment though on the beautiful scenery and use of colours and light.