Waiting for the Barbarians (2019) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
187 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
Coetzee eye-view on the blurring of morality
joebloggscity19 December 2020
JM Coetzee is the author of the original book, and is rightly lauded for his story telling ability as much as his literary ability. However, his works haven't easily transferred to screen, which is not uncommon for high-end literary works. This one to me is borderline.

What we have is a tale set in the 19th century of a humble wise magistrate of a garrision on the frontiers of an unnamed European Empire (seems like an area bordering around the former Soviet Union states). His stoic nature though is confronted by the entry of a colonel and his forces, who seem hell-bent to start battle with locals who are NOT looking for aggression. The Colonel is everything our magistrate is not, and the whole matter is complicated by the magistrates falling in love with a local lady he helps to return to her people.

Surprisingly this film hasn't been warmly received by the critics which is surprising, as it is actually very good. The main hold is the sublime performance by Mark Rylance in the lead, who can't have been any better than what he has done with the role. You empathise with him, and see his destruction at the hands of his colleagues (which clearly shows that the true Barbarians are at his side and not beyond the walls).

Johnny Depp was fine but seemed out of place, whilst Robert Pattison gets better with every film he stars in. The setting is perfect and beautiful, and the film has a fine slow pace. Admittedly it could have helped to flesh out some other characters more than just the magistrate to give them more weight, especially the mysterious colonel.

I don't get what it is that the critics were downgrading here? It's a fine existential story, and one that some will enjoy revisiting. Fair enough, the subject matter and a number of scenes are uncomfortable to watch, but that's the point! It's not about a rose-tinted look at the colonial past. It's also not 'Zulu' (which admittedly I very much love).

It's a tough watch at times, but very worth a viewing. Mark Rylance will little do better anywhere else ever again. He at least is a major reason to watch this one.
51 out of 57 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Pain is truth
ferguson-66 August 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Greetings again from the darkness. Nobel Prize winning author J.M. Coetzee's revered novel was first published in 1980, and renowned composer Philip Glass later adapted the South African writer's work into a 2005 opera. It's a fascinating piece of literature that, on the surface, doesn't lend itself easily to the silver screen. Perhaps it works because Mr. Coetzee wrote the screenplay himself, and rising star director Cirro Guerra brings it to life. Mr. Guerra's two most recent films were both excellent: BIRDS OF PASSAGE (2018) and EMBRACE OF THE SERPENT (2015).

Mark Rylance (Oscar winner for BRIDGE OF SPIES, 2015) stars as The Magistrate of a desert outpost on the fringes of territory controlled by 'The Empire'. The Magistrate is mild-mannered and non-confrontational. He's a fair administrator, and Rylance's outstanding performance ensures he's a sympathetic figure, yet not a perfect man. The Magistrate's approach is to maintain a peaceful co-existence with the local nomads, who are described as 'barbarians' by others in The Empire.

Things change quickly and severely when Colonel Joll (Johnny Depp) arrives at the settlement. We see his approach thanks to cinematographer Chris Menges' beautiful wide shot of Joll's horse-drawn carriage surrounded by desert and mountains. Depp plays Colonel Joll as a stoic man committed to a mission he never fully states. Instead he sermonizes about his interrogation process with such gems as "patience and pressure" are the key, and "truth has a certain tone". It's not long before we learn, right along with The Magistrate, that Joll's definition of 'pressure' would be termed torture and brutality by any reasonable person. His ruthless 'interrogations' lead to the result he was sent to obtain: the local barbarians are planning an uprising.

Director Guerra provides sub-chapters for the various seasons through which the story progresses. The Colonel arrived in "Summer" sporting sunglasses, and proclaiming "Pain is truth. All else is subject to doubt." It's a mantra that plays out in various ways. "Winter" brings 'the girl", a native with two broken ankles and other signs of torture. The Magistrate and the girl (Gana Bayarsaikhan, EX MACHINA) have an unconventional relationship, one that doesn't go over well with Joll's police force or the other locals, including Mai (Greta Scacchi), one of the loyal outpost staff members.

"Spring" is subtitled 'The Return', and it includes The Magistrate returning the girl to her people, and his subsequent return to the outpost where Joll's second-in-command, Officer Mandel (Robert Pattinson), has him arrested and tortured for consorting with the enemy. Pattinson plays his role in wild-eyed contrast to Depp's stoicism. When "Autumn" rolls around, it becomes clear that the real question is, "Who is the enemy?" or, perhaps, "Who are the real Barbarians?" The Magistrate is viewed as a traitor and laughingly referred to as "one just man".

It's frustrating at times to think about the modern day application of this story. What is an empire? The violence, narcissism, and lust for power lead to a loss of humanity that is painful to observe. Filmed in Morocco and Italy, the oppressive nature of the frontier makes this quite a downer, and one that requires effort and time to connect as a viewer. It also allows Menges and his camera to capture the details of the office and apartment, along with the sparseness of the jail ... both in contrast to the vast frontier. This is a either a tale of morality or a cautionary warning shot that solidifies Joll's adage. Perhaps pain is indeed required for truth.
65 out of 91 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Strong performances save "Waiting for the Barbarians"
lukebohn8 August 2020
Waiting for the Barbarians is a film directed by Ciro Guerra, and stars Mark Rylance, Johnny Depp, and Robert Pattinson. This is a historical drama where Mark Rylance plays the magistrate for this fortress on the frontier of the "Empire". There is no date or location given, and not even a name for the so-called "empire". This is because the main theme deals heavily with imperialism, and the mistreatment that has gone on in almost every example of it. Johnny Depp and Robert Pattinson are the "bad" guys checking up on the frontier, and trying to handle the barbarians. Now that we have simple routine out of the way, let me describe how I personally thought this movie was. This film has very important themes, and strong performances, but struggles to really keep your attention. The movie starts off pretty strong, with this rivalry between Johnny Depp (who is brilliant in this by the way), and Mark Rylance. It was highly entertaining to see their ideology duel and it looked like it was going somewhere. However, then we get to the long second act where it basically takes too long at everything. Also, there is no Johnny Depp, or any interesting characters or plot really. Mark Rylance is good, but his character is just wimpy, and not charismatic. He is just utterly weak in almost every sense. He is also kinda creepy with his weird foot fetish scenes (you will know when you see them). It finally picks up in the third half which is carried by Robert Pattinson and Johnny Depp. This isn't because Mark Rylance is bad, but his character on his own is just extremely boring. Everytime Robert or Johnny was on screen, it was very entertaining. I just feel they made Mark's character way more interesting. Besides seldom clunky moments, the acting is pretty good. The actual story is kinda interesting, but I feel we have seen it done in a more entertaining fashion. Don't get me wrong, i'm not saying I wanted more action in this movie, I just felt like more conflict was needed especially in the second act. The themes are very important, and it does a good job of showing it (imperialism is bad). The cinematography was okay, it just didn't have a lot of "wow" moments. The soundtrack also didn't strike me much, but was okay. Honestly, if this film didn't have Johnny or Robert, I don't think I would have liked it nearly as much. In the end it is an okay film, but ultimately suffers from being kinda boring the whole second act. I will say that the Johnny Depp and Robert Pattinson performances are worth it in the end. I would recommend renting this movie despite its shortcomings.
69 out of 101 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Who are the barbarians?
Gordon-118 August 2020
This film makes the viewers question who are the real barbarians. I find it engaging and introspective. It's beautifully shot too.
124 out of 152 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Slow paced but with excellent acting.
deloudelouvain28 November 2020
Although the cinematography and the acting are almost excellent the slow pace of the story makes Waiting For The Barbarians just a movie that is worth watching once but not more. It just lacks some oomph, maybe some battle scenes to make it better. There is some cruelty and torturing though, physical and mental torture, so the story is still captivating and the excellent acting of Mark Rylance is the best thing of the movie. Johnny Depp and Robert Pattinson are for once the bad people, and they did a very good job playing characters that everybody normal will dislike. All in all it isn't a bad movie but it clearly misses something to make it exceptional.
18 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Beautiful
j_slovak24 April 2022
It's a slow burn, but if you're ok with that, you're rewarded with strong performances, incredible cinematography and beautiful landscapes and a compelling lead character to root for.
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Really really good, slow burn
butskhrikidze8 August 2020
For start waiting for barbarians opens in a best way possible, it doesn't rush anything, makes you intresting from the very beggining, while maintaining the pace. As the story goes on it gets more and more dramatic. Visualy the movie is very well shot, it looks beautiful and has purpose, which unfortunately is rear nowadays, overall cinematography is amazing, score is really good too, acting, for start Robert Pattinson and Johnny Depp have supporting roles but they performed them very well, leading actor, Mark Rylance has lots of acting to do, he is the main source of emotions and in this movie Rylance is just great. There's another character played by Gana Bayarsaikhan who also needs to be very emotional, that is the performance that really stole the show. Overall directing, including working with the actors, storytelling and so on, is 10/10, fantastic.
53 out of 80 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Worth watching during a Sunday night.
emilliann12 August 2020
This is one of the movies that you have to see it first and then read the reviews to make your own impression. It is a amazing movie and a story that shows the history and oppressions that we humans, have done to each other. The story unfolds slowly, with two characters who show a lot of psychological problems, two different characters who show emphaty and inhumanity. At the end of watching this movie, you will be left with a lot of mixed emotions. Anyway, this is not your regular movie or story where you get only fighting and action, give it time and you will love the story.
22 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A message but not a story
lingonkakan_9210 August 2020
Watched this movie with no expectations more than a slight interest in late 19th century colonial history. Past mid-point I started to ask myself when it would truly begin, for the story never felt intriguing to me, neither did the characters (although there were one or two scenes with Johnny Deep that were enjoyable). By the end of it I had to search for an explanation of the movie, on the internet, since I was convinced that I had missed some key elements somewhere; but no, to my big surprise I seemingly managed to stay focused enough to catch it all. So what is there to this movie?

In my opinion, it's very focused on delivering a message, so much that it takes away from what could have been at least somewhat of an interesting story; the message itself is clear not long after the beginning of the movie and once you get it, you've had it all.

And what about my interest in history? Well, the movie takes place in "the Empire" and the soldiers came from "the capital", more than that I don't know. Some more action could've helped a little, but no, there's barely any action either to save it. You are in for a slow-paced movie, with a weak story and decent acting, trying to deliver a message.
51 out of 82 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Mostly effective, could use a little work, though.
foxypoo8 April 2021
Firstly, the cast couldn't have don't a better job. Mostly everyone did great. From a technical aspect this movie is pretty great. There are a couple shots that are genuinely breathtaking, the music is good, and as expected the direction is really great. However, the issues with this film lie within the script.

Overall, I was fairly engaged with the story, but I just wish there was more of it, you know? I feel like I had a pretty good appetizer and the waiter just forgot about my entree. And I guess there's an argument to be made that that's kind of the point, but still I felt like there could've been more to bite into. I honestly feel like an extra 20 minutes would've been well justified.

Anyway, despite a couple pacing issues, and some issues I have with the way the story was presented, I was mostly satisfied with this film. So check this one out if it sounds like something you'd like. I'm going to give this a 6/10 for now, but I could see it changing to a 7/10 with time.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Loved it
eviekse7 August 2020
I can see why it might not be everyone's cup of tea, but personally I loved the film. It's very different from many other action films I've watched, but I liked its uniqueness
50 out of 84 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
An uncomfortable dissection of human nature
siderite7 October 2020
This film is about how nasty we can be while hiding behind things like authority, law and other euphemisms for power. A slow burn movie, it stars Mark Rylance - in a yet another great role - as a decent man who has no power to control things, but has to observe others. I will have to say that both Johnny Depp and Robert Pattinson did a great job, but their characters barely covered ten minutes of screen taken together. The film is well done, beautifully shot, introspective.

Bottom line: a gem in the mud, a film that was bound to gather low ratings because it is uncomfortable to bear witness to human cruelty, pride and greed. It's a must watch, but be warned that it is not easy to do so.
147 out of 156 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Good Movie
zorro127 February 2021
Although overall not stunning, the parable in this movie is sound. Great acting.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Builds slowly and then... slowly continues :/
thehullsmt4 August 2021
I *almost* agree with the reviewers who said this movie is a "slow burn." It's definitely slow, but it doesn't really burn. It kind of smolders, leaving you wishing that the film would at some point actually ignite and draw you in. It never did that for me.

On the positive side, the cinematography was very good and Mark Rylance's portrayal of the Magistrate was fantastic. He's a very talented actor. But I feel that his effort was wasted by poor development of literally every other character in the film, including the so-called "barbarians" for whom we are supposed to feel a great deal of empathy. I found myself disliking Johnny Depp as the Colonel, but not loathing him as I should have.

In short, I kept waiting for the film to quit messing around and just "go there" - I'm not even sure where "there" actually was, or what I would have discovered when I arrived. But it sort of felt like walking in place for 2 hours. Oh well. Barbarians, I hardly knew ye.
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
decent
Kirpianuscus7 September 2020
I expected the film with...fear. Because each adaptation of a great novel remains a try . Because the characters and the atmosphere are more posessions of reader than work of the writer . But the film is decent . Grace to cinematography , reasonable solutions for inner monologue of Magister and, no doubts, for the admirable work of Mark Rylance and Greta Scacchi. And, sure, for not bad Colonel Joll proposed by Johnny Depp. Moments of novel are fresh, the intro is just beautiful and it works, maybe better than as adaptation, like a colonial story. And the barbarians as Mongols remains an inspired solution. In my case, only two surprises - the absence of generous belly of Magister and his so large office. But , obvious, it is a reasonable adaptation. So, just decent.
23 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
"Pain is truth. All else is subject to doubt."
classicsoncall26 October 2020
Warning: Spoilers
The film has all the look and feel of an indictment on British colonialism, even if the subject location is unknown and the reigning authority is unidentified. The story quickly gets to the point that the barbarians one is waiting for are the colonial soldiers dispatched to quell a supposedly nomadic uprising by an indigenous people with no means to fight a war. Johnny Depp turns in another off kilter performance, not as flamboyant say as a Jack Sparrow, but bizarre enough to qualify as one of his numerous oddball characterizations. Mark Rylance portrays the magistrate of a desert outpost who wisely rules as a humanist in a live and let live manner, recognizing that leaving well enough alone is the only sane way to conduct affairs when the potential opposition can become deadly upon a moments' notice. It takes a while to get to that point, and in the meantime, the magistrate evokes the imagery of a humble Jesus washing the feet and tending to the depradations of a nomad woman savagely beaten by her captors. He maintains a stoic and dignified manner, even while being charged with treasonously consorting with the desert barbarians. My favorite scene was where the magistrate made up the story to go with the slips of carved ancient writing, only to invite further wrath from a nominal superior. Because the story was fictional, it left me with an empty feeling at the end. There was also the dubious continuity of the seasons during which the story took place, as it proceeded in order from summer to winter, and then from spring to autumn. Better if that were not even mentioned, as the look of the desert locale didn't change at all.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Coetzee captured on film for those who dislike to read books
JuguAbraham4 September 2020
If the film is to be appreciated it is for the work of the author and scriptwriter Nobel laureate J M Coetzee, not the director Ciro Guerra. Colombian director Guerra was notable as the director of "Embrace of the Serpent" also dealing with colonial actions in Amazonian South America; here he is less spectacular. He might not have been familiar with English language but scriptwriter Coetzee was there. But as a director??? At best, actor Mark Rylance is notable. The Italian director Valerio Zurlini's film "The Desert of the Tartars" (based on Dino Buzatti's novel) made in 1976 has a somewhat similar tale but is way superior as a film to this one.

The desert storm scene is not as spectacular as in Peter Brook's 1979 film "Meetings with Remarkable Men."
7 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Below decent
PainTensei8 August 2020
There was potential for a good story, but it was not here. The movie is quite boring to watch. It looks fantastic and the music really suits the theme but overall I would skip this one based on the bland story.
52 out of 110 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Not too bad.
rox73122 April 2022
I have not read the novel, so I had no expectations. It seemed to go slow for me. Once I got myself into the story I rather enjoyed it. Anything with this amazing actor in it I will watch.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Waiting for the Story....and waited...and waited
jackkern-862-99369910 August 2020
Great Acting by All, Excellent cinematography. Direction of scenes very well done!

The Writing was a Travesty! Far too many Holes in the story line, the pace was like a Flat-line on a heart monitor, no ups or downs, just one long period of sufferance. I would think a Reasonably Large Budget went into the acting talent and cinematography, such a Waste over poor writing and direction.
48 out of 102 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Good, but need scissors.
davidvpcol30 April 2021
It's just the director, very famed in my country, but he takes scenes to obscene lengths that the movie loses pace, interest, and one forget the story.

The plot is self-apparent, but pretty sure with nice cut and edits, and music can improve.

I loved the theme, I recommend it only if you are patient and can endure long pointless scenes.

Also, the acting is beyond solid.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Are you kidding me, really?!
jengiscan200012 August 2020
Looked good on paper. Three well known 'good' actors , well filmed and so on but really? I always want to like a film when I watch it. It's bloody awful, Mark Rylance wimping about, always on the verge of tears. Weird foot fetish. Not an interesting man at all. It's set in a non existent colonial outpost somewhere in 'Marocstanlia' Pattinson is just picking up the cheque, very little presence. Mr Depp allowed free reign to be 'quirky' (those glasses!) Why will no director ever say "Don't do that Johnny, it's crap" He is a good actor but seems to get away with nonsense on a regular basis. Maybe he is too nice to say no to ? Too long , a lot of shots of not much happening. I understand it examines 'colonialism' but in my opinion it does not do it well. Have not read the book and after this I won't be. Make your own mind up.
42 out of 89 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
A great movie, great storyline, but not for everyone
mustafaghaleiw17 December 2020
I'm a movie goer, I like very much watching great movies, the ones that touch our hearts with their great storyline, and every now and then one comes a long that leaves me think about what I've just watched and reflect its story on my personal life and the world we live in and what's going in it.

I don't think it was about any specific events in the human history, but it captures very well the cruelty of human beings against each other, but at the same time in the midst of this savagery, there is still someone who still have a very good heart, still human, still have the courage to stand up against those savages, even when his own life is put at risk. I believe it shows extremely well how those who speak the truth and warns us of our evil deeds and the unfairness we do daily how they are being badly treated, mocked and ridiculed in our organizations and our societies. This movie is really great.
62 out of 70 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Pretty good movie, with some good acting
catrachotyson-5241119 June 2021
.....just wish there had been some historical context to it. I mean, the hats say French empire, but where and when? The "barbarians' are Asian and in the desert, so Mongolia? Were the French ever in Mongolia? Anyway, watch it for the drama, it's a pretty good little film.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
meandering, meaningless waste of time
chriswjoiner15 August 2020
A monster and a weak, foolish old man with a foot fetish, these are the two central characters of this pointless waste of time. It has no plot, it has no action, it makes no sense. There is some absolutely beautiful scenery, and the cinematography is competently executed, but these are the only redeeming features of this film.
28 out of 61 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed