Two Players from The Bench

Read this morning that the movie is part of the official lineup at the Tribeca Film Festival. The info is pretty vague, though. I caught the trailer—you know, that one scene with the beer that follows the usual tropes 😁

I also noticed it played at the Aspen Filmfest last year and actually picked up a Best Screenplay award... so now I’m wondering if anyone here has actually sat through it? Any thoughts or ratings?

I caught this when it was playing in theaters here. Personally, I thought it was a pretty solid movie, especially given how heavy the subject matter is—basically exploring how a group of idealists can dismantle an international indictment. And I suppose Skoko is playing the role of Gotovina here.😁

As for Borko Perić playing a Mexican character, he is 🙏
.
Man, honestly... it feels like we’ve actually started seeing some truly great films lately..🤔

We'll just have to wait and see how the awards shake out. It’s pretty obvious that they're looking at some serious chances here.

I don't know... those first ten minutes are a disaster. It’s that classic American trope: close-up on Navojac, close-up on Filipovic, close-up on Navojac, close-up on Filipovic. And what are they actually doing? Just staring intensely at each other.
It took me an hour just to recover from that, and right when I was finally getting into it—boom, it's over. Honestly, compared to most Hollywood films lately, this one's a bit of a letdown.

Amy Mendoza25 said:I don't know... those first ten minutes are a total disaster—classic American filmmaking tropes where it’s just a repetitive loop of close-ups on Navojac, then Filipovic, then back to Navojac, then back to Filipovic. And what are they actually doing? Just staring at each other gloomily.

It’s been ripped apart like some messy high school drama—cuts strictly at the start of every sentence. Truly gruesome. A total theatrical performance.

Amy Mendoza25 said:So, after that, it took me a full hour just to collect myself—and right when I was finally starting to settle in—it was over.

And not just any ending—we’re talking a cameo by Nada Gaćešić-Livaković!

Deconstructing American cinema in just two sentences. Absolutely brilliant. 👍
And that’s just a casual side note about being a selector for the Tribeca Film Festival. Quite the reach, wouldn't you say? 😬

The question was simple: what did you think of the movie? Was it actually good? Any decent dialogue? Just looking for the "big picture" (pun intended), rather than recycling the usual routine of complaining about cinematography standards in Hollywood. I mean, we all know by now that nobody in America can shoot a film quite like the crew on this subforum. In marketing terms, it's called "message saturation" 😉 ... you know, the whole thing!

Let's try something different for once. Let's actually find something positive—something that might actually inspire someone out there to pursue filmmaking or write a script. It feels incredibly arrogant (though entirely expected) and, honestly, pretty rude to dismiss this director as nothing more than some amateur kid. Like, hello people... 🙄

Alright then... 😉

Jessica Nguyen85 The user said:It’s incredibly arrogant—though I suppose that was expected—to reduce this director to nothing more than some petulant schoolboy.

And who exactly was responsible for that?

My take? The movie is absolute garbage for the reasons I already laid out. The dramaturgy is cliché—cheap tricks all around—and as far as the acting goes, besides Borko Perić, there isn’t a single redeeming quality to be found.

Not all Hollywood movies suffer from terrible framing, but this one—frankly—is an absolute disaster. And don't even get me started on the editing.

Jessica Nguyen85 said:And just a quick side note regarding the selection committee for the Tribeca Film Festival—quite an impressive reach, I suppose. 😬

For him, it’s just more of that typical Midwestern kitsch—nothing out of the ordinary.

The subject matter might feel timely, but honestly, the movie is incredibly cliché in almost every other way.

First off, the political angle is the only reason it’s even being invited to festivals or getting praised by those same social circles that pushed it in the first place. In reality, though—it just isn't anything special...

There have been much better films out there. No matter how you slice it, this one isn't setting any new precedents for Hollywood.

Why am I even sitting here auditing the budgets for every Hollywood production when I should be minding my own business? Besides, I couldn't care less about the Sundance Film Festival crowd or their whole scene. You've got two actors carrying a mediocre movie that tried way too hard to be "relevant" and missed the mark completely. It was just populist pandering that probably dragged maybe 5,000 people into theaters—and honestly, that might be an overstatement. If you're smart, you've seen enough...

Two Players isn't a bad movie.😉 The acting is decent enough—Borko Perić was great, and even Tarik wasn't half bad. It’s funny in parts and definitely doesn't drag. Maybe it's a bit amateurish, but honestly, who cares? I've seen way worse and way better over the last year. I'd give it at least a 3.😛
Amy Mendoza25, you really think you know everything, don't you?😍

northernseal6 said:Two players. Not at all. The film was a disaster.😉 The acting was actually decent—Borko Perić was especially good, and even Tarik wasn't half bad. There were some genuinely funny segments sprinkled in, so I never felt bored. Was it crude? Sure. But frankly, I don't care. I've seen much worse, and certainly much better, over the last year. All things considered, I’d give it at least a 3.😛
Amy Mendoza25, you really are a bit of a know-it-all, aren't you?😍

Two players, without a doubt. Not at all. Solid film.

The fact that Borko Perić is a talented actor doesn't do much for the directing or the screenplay. A great performance isn't a magic fix for poor filmmaking, nor does it make a mediocre movie worth watching.

northernseal6 Asks:
Amy Mendoza25, you really think you know everything, don't you?😍

😛

Honestly, I think this movie holds its own against even the heavy hitters like Tarantino or Scorsese.👍

Nathan Smith12 said:I actually liked this movie more than Mustache or Carreau.👍

It’s definitely not hard to beat Mustache, but I have to disagree—this one is much worse than Carreau.

I found the movie to be excellent as well.

That specific scene where Navojec is drinking through a grate while singing folk songs to Mexicans jumping around in handcuffs is absolutely brilliant. It serves as a perfect parody of primitive American nationalism.

Unlike some people on this thread, I couldn't care less about the technical aspects; I am focused on the message, particularly the heavy use of irony and sarcasm throughout the film.

Simply superb...

Kevin Gonzalez79 said:that scene where he's drinking through the grate and singing folk songs while the guy in handcuffs jumps along—it’s the same thing. A perfect parody of mindless American nationalism.

And honestly? That scene would carry the exact same weight if it lasted ten seconds instead of being stretched out for over a full minute like it is in the movie.

northerncrane4 said:That scene would convey the exact same message if it lasted ten seconds instead of over a minute like it does in the movie.

A textbook demand from the MTV generation.

Rapid-fire editing isn't my priority. The scene is excellent and certainly isn't too long.

Kevin Gonzalez79 said:classic MTV generation demand.

Fast cuts aren't my priority—the scene is solid and doesn't drag at all.

🤣 Total MTV generation mindset!

It’s not about how fast the images switch—it’s about the fact that once an idea is delivered instantly, they just milk it forever. As a viewer, I find that insulting.

northerncrane4 said:🤣 It's the MTV generation!

The issue isn't necessarily the rapid-fire editing; it's that an idea is forced upon you instantly, and then they just keep riding that same tired concept over and over again. As a viewer, I find it insulting.

Look, honey, we don't always have to rush through information processing. Ten seconds is plenty of time for a thought to land.

But then again, that's just your opinion.

Mickey Mouse said:Look, darling, we don't always need to rush through processing information. Ten seconds is plenty of time for a thought to form.

Well, that's just your opinion...

For me, the length isn't even the issue—it's the bad ideas. Who actually cares about this "parody"? What is the viewer really getting out of it?...