Quote:

---

I'm thinking that you, SGG, are a city guy, or nearly so. So I'll ask: are you aware of the more reserved nature, maybe taciturn mode of these rural guys? All of them snickering at the Feeb, her desk ways, the FBI Bureaucratic methods, the lack of "Street sense" and her dogged determination to waste her efforts, instead of using their expertise to solve things? F&WS guy wants to help her, but he's not going to spoon-feed her, and she ignores his offers to help get her focused and straightened out.
If you have a chance to watch it again, see if you can tell the silent tug of war between their levels of conversation, action, authority, and acumen. He wants to help the fish out of water, but she's stubborn. This layering of interaction and exchange was really done well. Amazing. Reminds me of Fargo, as well.

I was thinking Olsen was Lead Actress.

Did the scoring feel familiar?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Brought over from the Wind River thread:

Quote:

---

I'm thinking that you, SGG, are a city guy, or nearly so. So I'll ask: are you aware of the more reserved nature, maybe taciturn mode of these rural guys? All of them snickering at the Feeb, her desk ways, the FBI Bureaucratic methods, the lack of "Street sense" and her dogged determination to waste her efforts, instead of using their expertise to solve things? F&WS guy wants to help her, but he's not going to spoon-feed her, and she ignores his offers to help get her focused and straightened out.
If you have a chance to watch it again, see if you can tell the silent tug of war between their levels of conversation, action, authority, and acumen. He wants to help the fish out of water, but she's stubborn. This layering of interaction and exchange was really done well. Amazing. Reminds me of Fargo, as well.

I was thinking Olsen was Lead Actress.

Did the scoring feel familiar?

---

Yes, I am a city guy, but I do get that "attitude" from certain folk who think because they make a little more than you that they know it all. Yes, we even get that in the city. But, to answer your question, I picked up on that right off. The screenwriter did a fantastic job of delivering on those subtle glances, looks and reactions throughout this film. It's not only from the Cops/Sheriffs v. Feds dynamic, but from the Cityslickers v. Countryboys.

If you didn't pick up on it, the sheriff (Ben - Graham Greene) even said as she pulled up to the house at the beginning "Here he is," expecting to see a male agent.
Subtle also was the "barb" they gave her regarding her winter attire. Fish-out-of-water? You bet.

Before I go further, I took an educated guess that Renner was lead for a couple of reasons: one, they started with him (after the set up of the girl running through the snow; brilliantly done BTW. It both set up the mystery and set the tone of the movie). Then comes "Cory" (Renner) and his set-up was: not a cop, but a local official with roots in the community and we are told (within the story mind you) that he's an excellent tracker - Fish, Game & Wildlife. He's definitely the country boy, but he's nobody's fool. We find out that he's patient (you almost have to be, to be a good tracker) because he takes his time in teaching his son; there's tension between him and the boy's mother; but he's a stand-up guy because he encourages his ex to find work where she can, and that he will pay child support. The tension is not typical lover's spat or mistreatment by either side...so what gives? I'm thinking what's the reason for them not being together; you know he loves his son. And that "looks like I'm in trouble" that "Cory" says as he walks in to pick up his son.

What does that tell us, the audience? This guy is a straight shooter (literally) a good father, a patient guy, strong-willed, a survivor. All this but we get more, little clues as to the type of guy "Cory" is. He later shows that patience with "Jane" and even proceeds to teach her about tracking. The more I write, the more I'm realizing that this was a helluva script.

I gotta stop for a while, my hands/fingers are getting tired.

SGG

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
I was largely struck by the interplay of verbal and nonverbal conversation.
F&WS guy is frustrated that when FBI babe is given info, she doesn't pay attention. The LEOs on the Res are not verbose, and I was impressed with the restraint exhibited by the scriptwriters.

I am not sure one can fully absorb the nonverbal conversation on something like a laptop screen.

I heard about some advice from one action actor to another, possibly Ahnold to Chuck Norris. Something like: Talk less. Movies are for the audience to see, not hear.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Yes, I liked how subtle the screenwriter quietly introduced the characters, their prejudices (both the country folk, the Fed, the local cops, the Native Americans, even the young and old Natives...and the women. I agree that there were a lot of glances, looks and behaviors that punctuated the dialogue.

I don't think that "Cory" was frustrated with "Jane," on the contrary, he was very patience throughout the film. Remember how "Cory" talked to his son both about the BB gun, and then the horse, very patient; then to "Martin" (the father of the dead girl). That man was never rattled. He was steady and determined. She (Jane) was kind of reckless and insistent, but she knew she was in over her head. Eventually, she asked "Cory" for help. He was teaching her like he was doing with his son. This guy is a cool customer.

I too was impressed with the screenwriting. He gave you just enough to keep your interest, but not so much that you could figure it out predictably. They had restraint alright. Breadcrumbs my friend, breadcrumbs!


SGG

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
I was largely struck by the interplay of verbal and nonverbal conversation.
F&WS guy is frustrated that when FBI babe is given info, she doesn't pay attention. The LEOs on the Res are not verbose, and I was impressed with the restraint exhibited by the scriptwriters.

I am not sure one can fully absorb the nonverbal conversation on something like a laptop screen.

I heard about some advice from one action actor to another, possibly Ahnold to Chuck Norris. Something like: Talk less. Movies are for the audience to see, not hear.

---

---

Quote:

---

I am glad that you picked up on those items. Really glad.
I hope that all viewers can pick up on that, if they are in a relaxed setting, but I'm not sure that all can.

How do you think the pacing, cadence, editing and transition compare to Arrival, Fargo? This will never be confused with a Tarentino film.

I saw Wind River in cinema before Bladerunner 2049 came out. Do you think that fact helped me enjoy BR more?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:

Quote:

---

I am glad that you picked up on those items. Really glad.
I hope that all viewers can pick up on that, if they are in a relaxed setting, but I'm not sure that all can.

How do you think the pacing, cadence, editing and transition compare to Arrival, Fargo? This will never be confused with a Tarentino film.

I saw Wind River in cinema before Bladerunner 2049 came out. Do you think that fact helped me enjoy BR more?

---

I actually got to see it twice (I had one of those 48 hour rentals) and I'm glad I saw it twice....missed some dialogue, but I was able to pick up on things that I saw but pushed to the back of my mind without a second thought. Second viewing was needed and I was able to piece some things together.

Funny you should mention Arrival, I had that in the back of my mind because of the score. There was very subtle whispering in the background, which I believe was the poem that "Cory's daughter" wrote. I felt the vastness of space, the brutal unforgiving cold and the desperation of survival throughout. I loved the pacing, tone and the cadence was deliberate - not slow by any means; subdued but somewhat dangerous, wild and raw. It also reminded me of The Revenant. And no, this could never be confused with a Tarantino film. Totally different vibe. The storytelling was precise and deliberate (there goes that word again) and, to me, there wasn't a frame wasted. Every scene built on the one before and prepared us for the next one.

As far as BR is concerned, the screenplay did not flow as easily as WR and, at times, was bogged by it's own weight. but I agree, it probably helped in viewing BR. Oh and yeah, you are biased about Elizabeth Olsen. like I said, I don't blame you - she's gorgeous (I love those eyes of hers) and she's a terrific actor.

SGG

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
OK, the scene I don't know.
After he finds the critters, wolves or coyotes. Then he sees something on the next slope, maybe needs his binocs to look.

What was it? What did it mean? It seems whatever it was, was crucial.

Got a clue?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
From what I remember, I believe it was the trail of the snowmobiles. I need to see it again to be sure, but that's what I remember.

SGG

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
OK, the scene I don't know.
After he finds the critters, wolves or coyotes. Then he sees something on the next slope, maybe needs his binocs to look.

What was it? What did it mean? It seems whatever it was, was crucial.

Got a clue?

---

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
I'm glad you saw it on 42" screen. Remember the scene where FBI, goes with the Sheriffs to visit the Energy guys? That scene was one key reason I recommended seeing on a large screen, and sitting where you can view the full width of the shot.

A most memorable dialogue for me was his description of how far she or anybody can run in the snow.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
From what I remember, I believe it was the trail of the snowmobiles. I need to see it again to be sure, but that's what I remember.

SGG

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
OK, the scene I don't know.
After he finds the critters, wolves or coyotes. Then he sees something on the next slope, maybe needs his binocs to look.

What was it? What did it mean? It seems whatever it was, was crucial.

Got a clue?

---

---

There was some big green boxy thing he saw, among the hillside trees. Or was it a mountain slope?

I also think some of the stuff about his daughter I didn't catch clearly.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
From what I remember, I believe it was the trail of the snowmobiles. I need to see it again to be sure, but that's what I remember.

SGG

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
OK, the scene I don't know.
After he finds the critters, wolves or coyotes. Then he sees something on the next slope, maybe needs his binocs to look.

What was it? What did it mean? It seems whatever it was, was crucial.

Got a clue?

---

---

There was some big green boxy thing he saw, among the hillside trees. Or was it a mountain slope?

I also think some of the stuff about his daughter I didn't catch clearly.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Brought over from the Wind River thread:

Quote:

---

I'm thinking that you, SGG, are a city guy, or nearly so. So I'll ask: are you aware of the more reserved nature, maybe taciturn mode of these rural guys? All of them snickering at the Feeb, her desk ways, the FBI Bureaucratic methods, the lack of "Street sense" and her dogged determination to waste her efforts, instead of using their expertise to solve things? F&WS guy wants to help her, but he's not going to spoon-feed her, and she ignores his offers to help get her focused and straightened out.
If you have a chance to watch it again, see if you can tell the silent tug of war between their levels of conversation, action, authority, and acumen. He wants to help the fish out of water, but she's stubborn. This layering of interaction and exchange was really done well. Amazing. Reminds me of Fargo, as well.

I was thinking Olsen was Lead Actress.

Did the scoring feel familiar?

---

Yes, I am a city guy, but I do get that "attitude" from certain folk who think because they make a little more than you that they know it all. Yes, we even get that in the city. But, to answer your question, I picked up on that right off. The screenwriter did a fantastic job of delivering on those subtle glances, looks and reactions throughout this film. It's not only from the Cops/Sheriffs v. Feds dynamic, but from the Cityslickers v. Countryboys.

If you didn't pick up on it, the sheriff (Ben - Graham Greene) even said as she pulled up to the house at the beginning "Here he is," expecting to see a male agent.
Subtle also was the "barb" they gave her regarding her winter attire. Fish-out-of-water? You bet.

Before I go further, I took an educated guess that Renner was lead for a couple of reasons: one, they started with him (after the set up of the girl running through the snow; brilliantly done BTW. It both set up the mystery and set the tone of the movie). Then comes "Cory" (Renner) and his set-up was: not a cop, but a local official with roots in the community and we are told (within the story mind you) that he's an excellent tracker - Fish, Game & Wildlife. He's definitely the country boy, but he's nobody's fool. We find out that he's patient (you almost have to be, to be a good tracker) because he takes his time in teaching his son; there's tension between him and the boy's mother; but he's a stand-up guy because he encourages his ex to find work where she can, and that he will pay child support. The tension is not typical lover's spat or mistreatment by either side...so what gives? I'm thinking what's the reason for them not being together; you know he loves his son. And that "looks like I'm in trouble" that "Cory" says as he walks in to pick up his son.

What does that tell us, the audience? This guy is a straight shooter (literally) a good father, a patient guy, strong-willed, a survivor. All this but we get more, little clues as to the type of guy "Cory" is. He later shows that patience with "Jane" and even proceeds to teach her about tracking. The more I write, the more I'm realizing that this was a helluva script.

I gotta stop for a while, my hands/fingers are getting tired.

SGG

---

Quote:

---

I forgot to reply before. I had thought the reason Cory was not with his wife was due to the rift from what happened to their daughter.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:

Quote:

---

I forgot to reply before. I had thought the reason Cory was not with his wife was due to the rift from what happened to their daughter.

---

Yes, but we don't know this until much later in the film. At the very beginning "we" get to know him, he's a father, he's not with his wife, but they are NOT arguing per se, they seem to get along and he even offers advice and support for his ex. So, in my mind, I'm thinking "there's something else here;" so I figured it would come later in the story.

I knew, once Cory discovered the body that he knew who this girl was. He's a local, it makes sense, but then we discover that it's much deeper than that. Like I said, a well-written script and probably worth an Oscar nod. It is subtle but key to the overall treatment of the story and the interaction between characters. Remember when he goes to the house of the girl's parents, he meets the father, Martin, at the door. Remember also how Martin treated Jane as she came to investigate and question the parents. Her people skills are lacking and she practically accuses the parents of not caring about their daughter. She sees the mother cutting herself in the bedroom, and she completely changes her tone.

This is what I mean about the writing in this film. So subtle, yet so damn good.
Now, back to Cory at the door with the father: One look and he starts crying and hugs his friend; the sheriff closes the door and stands in front of it, as those guarding a secret, ad Jane doesn't dare take a step outside. Inside you can hear the man sobbing. She gains respect for the family and Cory's influence and character all in one scene. And so do we. Fucking brilliant writing. My hat's off to Taylor Sheridan. The murder mystery and cinematography are but a backdrop to the interpersonal relationships that developed in front of our eyes. Fuck I'm jealous, but so admire Sheridan for his dead on writing ability. We get character development and story advancement all in one fell swoop and we're at the very beginning of the movie.

The more I write about it, the more I get the feeling that Oscar will, hopefully, recognize this film's brilliance....at least in the writing category. My vote would go toward Sheridan for screenplay. I learned a lot in presenting this review and in dissecting this screenplay.

Oh,, I almost forgot: I didn't realize, until my second viewing, that the two girls were friends. Then it made a lot more sense, not only the friendship between Cory and Martin, but the trust Martin had in Cory to the point that he fell into his arms and openly wept during that scene at the dead girl's parents house.

SGG

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:

Quote:

---

I forgot to reply before. I had thought the reason Cory was not with his wife was due to the rift from what happened to their daughter.

---

Yes, but we don't know this until much later in the film. At the very beginning "we" get to know him, he's a father, he's not with his wife, but they are NOT arguing per se, they seem to get along and he even offers advice and support for his ex. So, in my mind, I'm thinking "there's something else here;" so I figured it would come later in the story.

I knew, once Cory discovered the body that he knew who this girl was. He's a local, it makes sense, but then we discover that it's much deeper than that. Like I said, a well-written script and probably worth an Oscar nod. It is subtle but key to the overall treatment of the story and the interaction between characters. Remember when he goes to the house of the girl's parents, he meets the father, Martin, at the door. Remember also how Martin treated Jane as she came to investigate and question the parents. Her people skills are lacking and she practically accuses the parents of not caring about their daughter. She sees the mother cutting herself in the bedroom, and she completely changes her tone.

This is what I mean about the writing in this film. So subtle, yet so damn good.
Now, back to Cory at the door with the father: One look and he starts crying and hugs his friend; the sheriff closes the door and stands in front of it, as those guarding a secret, ad Jane doesn't dare take a step outside. Inside you can hear the man sobbing. She gains respect for the family and Cory's influence and character all in one scene. And so do we. Fucking brilliant writing. My hat's off to Taylor Sheridan. The murder mystery and cinematography are but a backdrop to the interpersonal relationships that developed in front of our eyes. Fuck I'm jealous, but so admire Sheridan for his dead on writing ability. We get character development and story advancement all in one fell swoop and we're at the very beginning of the movie.

The more I write about it, the more I get the feeling that Oscar will, hopefully, recognize this film's brilliance....at least in the writing category. My vote would go toward Sheridan for screenplay. I learned a lot in presenting this review and in dissecting this screenplay.

Oh,, I almost forgot: I didn't realize, until my second viewing, that the two girls were friends. Then it made a lot more sense, not only the friendship between Cory and Martin, but the trust Martin had in Cory to the point that he fell into his arms and openly wept during that scene at the dead girl's parents house.

SGG

---

They were two the same. Both fathers who had lost their daughters, failed to protect them until marriage.
And not a word spoken.
I thought Jane realizes there that she should be listening more, to both Cory and Sheriff.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Moose:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Brought over from the Wind River thread:

Quote:

---

I'm thinking that you, SGG, are a city guy, or nearly so. So I'll ask: are you aware of the more reserved nature, maybe taciturn mode of these rural guys? All of them snickering at the Feeb, her desk ways, the FBI Bureaucratic methods, the lack of "Street sense" and her dogged determination to waste her efforts, instead of using their expertise to solve things? F&WS guy wants to help her, but he's not going to spoon-feed her, and she ignores his offers to help get her focused and straightened out.
If you have a chance to watch it again, see if you can tell the silent tug of war between their levels of conversation, action, authority, and acumen. He wants to help the fish out of water, but she's stubborn. This layering of interaction and exchange was really done well. Amazing. Reminds me of Fargo, as well.

I was thinking Olsen was Lead Actress.

Did the scoring feel familiar?

---

Yes, I am a city guy, but I do get that "attitude" from certain folk who think because they make a little more than you that they know it all. Yes, we even get that in the city. But, to answer your question, I picked up on that right off. The screenwriter did a fantastic job of delivering on those subtle glances, looks and reactions throughout this film. It's not only from the Cops/Sheriffs v. Feds dynamic, but from the Cityslickers v. Countryboys.

If you didn't pick up on it, the sheriff (Ben - Graham Greene) even said as she pulled up to the house at the beginning "Here he is," expecting to see a male agent.
Subtle also was the "barb" they gave her regarding her winter attire. Fish-out-of-water? You bet.

Before I go further, I took an educated guess that Renner was lead for a couple of reasons: one, they started with him (after the set up of the girl running through the snow; brilliantly done BTW. It both set up the mystery and set the tone of the movie). Then comes "Cory" (Renner) and his set-up was: not a cop, but a local official with roots in the community and we are told (within the story mind you) that he's an excellent tracker - Fish, Game & Wildlife. He's definitely the country boy, but he's nobody's fool. We find out that he's patient (you almost have to be, to be a good tracker) because he takes his time in teaching his son; there's tension between him and the boy's mother; but he's a stand-up guy because he encourages his ex to find work where she can, and that he will pay child support. The tension is not typical lover's spat or mistreatment by either side...so what gives? I'm thinking what's the reason for them not being together; you know he loves his son. And that "looks like I'm in trouble" that "Cory" says as he walks in to pick up his son.

What does that tell us, the audience? This guy is a straight shooter (literally) a good father, a patient guy, strong-willed, a survivor. All this but we get more, little clues as to the type of guy "Cory" is. He later shows that patience with "Jane" and even proceeds to teach her about tracking. The more I write, the more I'm realizing that this was a helluva script.

I gotta stop for a while, my hands/fingers are getting tired.

SGG

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Those goons give me the creeps, I don't get them. The first time they seemed irrational enough, but watching again they are just evil.
Curtis is asked, nicely and repeatedly, to remove Pete from Matt's quarters and effectively cease his harassment of the girlfriend. After absolute disregard by Curtis and everybody else, Matt throwns Pete out and closes the sliding door.
Sure, they are drunk, but how does that get fun?
Then they beat up Matt? When he's out, they start raping the girl, with Matt still there? WTF?
None of them stops the event, and seem to line up for turns. When Matt comes to and starts giving Pete the beat down he richly deserves, what do they do? They gang up to kill Matt? I just don't get these clowns.
And then they're setting up FBI girl and the Sheriffs, flanking them, drawing on them, directing Pete to shoot the Agent, so they can all kill the entire group.

---