Seen it. Liked it. Spoilers ahead:

The movie also ends with him about to go and possibly kill some guy based on nothing more than his own belief that the guy has done something bad, with it being repeatedly established that this guy is an impulsive drunken idiot whose better judgement is not entirely trustworthy.

Gorgeous, Aussie, 20 years younger than her husband and quoted Oscar Wilde. Yeah, that’s a real small-town Missouri cop’s wife all right.

A case which he fails to solve; and then he joins Mildred’s Murder Adventure. How are people finding redemption in this?

The other thing i didnt like is that the Sherrifs wife was way too goodlooking and austrailian. There are no good looking austrailians in rural bumfuck. Her glow took away from the rest of the film imho

That’s the reason I liked it so much. The people were realistic and complex.

I liked that McDonagh left it ambiguous, so we’ll never know whether they carried through with their plan. (I’m guessing they didn’t.)

I read it as two people who realized they were behaving abominably due to the loss of loved ones deciding to go on a car ride together, maybe to do something bad that neither one of them feels that strongly about doing.

Whoo boy, here we go.

So many people seem to have this tendency when analyzing stories (be they films, books, whatever) of only thinking in absolutes. Just cause Sam Rockwell’s character shows that he’s not a complete monster, does that have to automatically mean the storyteller is absolving him of his flaws?…

I didn’t like that either and didn’t expect much from Three Billboards. To my amazement it is excellent.

{Spoilers} I didn’t like the flashback where the daughter says something like, “Fine, don’t give me a ride—I’ll walk and get raped,” and then her mom says, “Fine, get raped,” and then that’s what happened, because a) who talks like that, besides fake-edgy characters, and b) how contrived can you get?

Yeah, I feel that whatever redemption arc there is for Rockwell’s character is firmly subverted by the conclusion of the film. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that subverting and playing with audience expectation and sympathy is pretty much the film’s MO.

Yeah, I pretty much thought that the story was a full-on subversion of a redemption arc and over-turning of audience expectation, if anything.

I didn’t see it as an arc, after a bunch of spoilery stuff he realizes that he maybe has to change so he tries. I mean at the end they’re heading off to (maybe) do something not nice so not much of a redemption.

I’m not sure if Rockwell’s character is even as racist as people claim; he lashes out at basically everyone he meets in the movie (unless they are a cop or his mother), but then he takes offense at McDormand’s repeated use of the N-word.  He’s just a regular every day racist (read: average whitey), as opposed to a…

There’s an even better version of this movie with Dixon’s victim included, although I appreciated the parallels drawn between the casualness with which the bar man at the end and Dixon spake their evil acts.

Again, the racist cop gets fired for his violence (by the new police chief, who is black) and then gets half his face burnt off. If someone wants to see a racist cop suffer then it’s all there.

“It’s either black or white. How dare you use gray?”

If you make a movie that anticipates a major social movement I don’t really find anything wrong with patting yourself on the back for it, even if you couldn’t have guessed exactly what was going to happen. It’s not like “predatory men get away with it because of societal inertia” is a new concept.

So we just have to bitch about everything now, huh? That’s fun.