We won't go through considerations on the artistic quality of Paul Schrader's work (which we also find here) and on the depth of the arguments in which he is usually involved (as an author, himself or as a director). There is no controversy there, and we are talking about one of the biggest names in cinema in recent decades. That's it.
The problem is that, in addition of having an aesthetically beautiful film before our eyes, shot at the right pace, with good performances by good actors, we are served a script that I would come to consider chaotic and even a little lazy, which takes away the credibility of the film as a whole.
Without giving spoilers, it seems that the themes discussed here were picketd up from a list of the (eventually) most controversial and appetizing for a 21st century film, which are then approached randomly, following logical and causal connections without much support.
This film's script clearly has the ambition to be relevant and leave its mark for the story it serves, but ends up, in my view, revealing its own obvous ineffectiveness.
The problem is that, in addition of having an aesthetically beautiful film before our eyes, shot at the right pace, with good performances by good actors, we are served a script that I would come to consider chaotic and even a little lazy, which takes away the credibility of the film as a whole.
Without giving spoilers, it seems that the themes discussed here were picketd up from a list of the (eventually) most controversial and appetizing for a 21st century film, which are then approached randomly, following logical and causal connections without much support.
This film's script clearly has the ambition to be relevant and leave its mark for the story it serves, but ends up, in my view, revealing its own obvous ineffectiveness.