Completely stupid. The first thirty minutes with Bill Skarsgård has some of the worst editing of the year, they stagger back and forth between timelines way too much. And once Tom Holland shows up, the problem becomes that its split between one semi-interesting plot with all the compelling characters, and another which feels like the plot to a cable crime show. But by far the biggest problem is with how they handle violence. I don't necessarily agree with Haneke's idea that directors like Tarantino are desensitizing people to the weight violence has in the real world. At least Tarantino never expected you to take the gore in his work seriously at any point. Here, we basically have something horrific or gruesome every other scene, and Campos wants it to have the same impact each time. It's not like you need it to be extremely sparse, but with the tone of the music, and the fact that every major character does something heinous just makes it all so cheap. Contrast that with something like No Country For Old Men which goes out of its way to impress the importance of every single action, and really only has two characters who ever do anything severe. And the Coen Brothers comparisons don't end there. The narration is very sardonic, and also completely unnecessary considering how obvious a lot of the symbolism and theming here is. The music in some scenes actually reminds me of Miller's Crossing, which might've been ok if the music in general wasn't so all over the place. And there are a number of characters who feel like very cheap attempts at writing one of the memorable oddballs that show up in all their work. Its a mish mash, and I wouldn't call those similarities the most distracting parts of the movie, but I just couldn't help but think about how they would have been better handled in that context. If the movie has a saving grace (or graces), it is Holland and Pattinson. Holland is legitimately great, I didn't really know what to expect from him after only seeing him as Spider-Man, but he is carrying this whole thing on his shoulders, none of it would be worth it without him. Pattinson, on the other hand, is just chewing the scenery, and he is so fucking funny. He looks strikingly like Jeremy Irons in this, which I had never noticed before, and this turn reminds me of some of his hammier performances. Just the way he says "delusional" during that one sermon. Brilliant. Besides them, no one is really exceptional. I liked Eliza Scanlan, but her character isn't very complex. Harry Melling was alright I guess, that's another Coen Brothers connection, he is an orator here, just as in Buster Scruggs. Yet again, Jason Clarke has proved to be a fine actor without ever having been in anything good. Everyone else is forgettable. Trash.