Is it really that bad?

I think people hated it for a few reasons. The main one being the poetic and Shakespeare-like dialogue, which only seemed bad because Diaz and Bardem sucked saying it and made it seem like a poor quality TV movie. Another reason may be that it wasn't typical Hollywood and was too dark and bleak for most people. The story wasn't structured in a way that most people were used to. But despite all that I really liked it, simply because it was so unique and original that I found it interesting. And Pitt's and Fassbender's performances made the movie.

The last 20 minutes of The Counselor are, in my opinion, as good as any 20 minutes from any film noir movie ever made. It's that good.

What people are turned off by is the movie's horrific depiction of human nature. It basically presents us with the image of cheetahs killing their way to the top of a pyramid of rabbits. The cheetahs are amoral humans with high business acumen and a taste for murder, and the rabbits are ordinary decent (albeit naive) human beings who are just food for the "cheetahs". And the movie's prediction of the future is a lot of dead rabbits and a few contented cheetahs basking in the glory of it all. This movie turns off people who are sheltered rabbits. They think all of this was made up by the screenwriter to scare them.

The thing is, all the worst parts of this movie -- the parts that people complain were unrealistic -- are actually true. Cameron Diaz's character is a lot like Cormac McCarthy's ex-wife, for example. Javier Bardem's character was based on a famous Hollywood producer ("you would be surprised who is in this business" his character says). Ridley Scott's brother, Tony, hung out with real bounty hunters... for some reason. Maybe if you are uber-rich, the social world is very small. The cartels know the Hollywood studios, producers sleep with murderesses (did you see that headline about the NASCAR racer and his assassin girlfriend?), etc.

People think this stuff is far-fetched, that the artists are sickos for making it up, and idiots for thinking we would believe it. Truth is, a lot of this stuff is completely within the realm of human behavior. And it's a damned fine film.

I'll go against the grain, here-I liked it

Maybe you should just watch the damn thing and decide for yourself. I think it's severely underrated, and was mostly derided because of misguided marketing.

You don't market an art film to the same people who flock to the theaters for the new Fast & Furious movie, but that's what they did. It's not an action movie. It's not even really a noir or mystery or suspense. It's more of a play than anything, a dialogue-heavy reflection on violence, greed, misogyny, and the ways the USA fuels the drug wars in Mexico. But because it was marketed as an action/suspense, it advertised the wrong message, drew the wrong crowd, and generated the wrong kind of word-of-mouth.

It was always going to be a divisive film, but it was never even given a chance.

No, actually it's quite an interesting movie. If u can get past all the metophoric dialogue, it's actually good. I think most of the actors may have been challenged by the intense unrealistic dialogue, but they made it through turning out a little gem of a movie. We've watched it now several times and always find something new and interesting about. Consider it a tale of greed.

Brad Pitt and Michael Fassbender made the movie. They couldn't save it though. I feel like a Fan Edit of the film would/could make it MUCH better. There were a lot of scenes in the movie that just felt forced and didnt move the plot forward or the characters.

It's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything.

i wanted to like it. i really did. but it just sucked.


--------------
Life is not a problem to be solved, it's a mystery to be lived.

[deleted]