Yawn. Poorly Filmed Snooze Fest.

Yo, there's no way for me to review this film without saying, take your *insert ethnicity + "ass" here* to see this film,like now. You have to see it in order to know what you're really messing with.

This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

I'm not kidding. This was THE WORST movie I've ever seen in my entire life. That's hours of my life I'll never get back. Avoid this awful waste of time at all costs. I think it might have taken years off of my life.First of all, I think this movie was more about making a political statement rather than entertainment. I am willing to look past that. I've come across some good movies that were pure propaganda. However, everything about this movie was terrible. The beginning was terrible. The plot was terrible. The climax was....non existent. The ending was absolutely ridiculous. Please, for the love of God, avoid this movie.

One of the most overlooked masterpieces of the last decade … nothing against "No Country For Old Men", but I'd rather trade 'Art' for the unforgettable journey to which Tommy Lee Jones invites us in this modern Neo-Western film "The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada".First, what a title! It could mislead by making you believe it's some kind of symbolism, but from the first minutes of the film, you understand that Melquiades is the name of the unfortunate odyssey's hero, and that he's dead. There's no way to resurrect him, but there will be three ways to bury him, understand: to prepare his soul for the last voyage. Burials in human civilizations have always carried a powerful meaning; it's a sign of respect, a way to honor those who are not with us anymore. And Death is not a barrier, when it's a matter of respect and honor.The pacing of the first act is quite slow, conveying with efficiency an atmosphere of boredom and meaninglessness. The movie is set in a small town in the Tex-Mex border whose natural geography offers perfect opportunities for emigrants, to enter illegally. So the town is regulated by the eternal cycle of Mexicans trying to penetrate the frontier and border patrol trying to catch them. This is the town's routine outside while inside, people try to fill their time, by sunbathing, watching insipid soap operas, and banging the restaurant owner's wife, Rachel, Melissa Leo, sexy as ever. There's a feeling of a ghost town where the only living people are actually the cowboys, the only ones who domesticate the wildness and hostility of the place as they do for bulls and horses. They are the present, incarnating both a remaining connection with the past and a light of hope for the future. And this universe is Pete and Mel's routine, two friends, a veteran cow-boy with a stone face and a heart of gold, and a young 'vachero' who wants to work in what he does the best. The friendship between Pete and Mel is crucial as it will cement Pete's feeling of duty, when Mel will be accidentally killed. It's not a revenge story, this is no film for clichés, it's always about respect. It's a man's film that would have made proud the late Sam Peckinpah.And it's interesting to note, how like some old westerns, the movie almost associates the idea of virility with the cowboy world, while the other men seem to lack this quality. The town is governed by boredom, by a sort of emasculating nothingness. The restaurant owner is the most notorious cuckold in town, but the lovers are not the fastest guns in town either ... or they are. It's ironic that in a comic relief scene, the chief police, Belmont, the one who's got the power, has sexual troubles, the kind that affects his self-confidence. But it's a good premonition of the Police's impotence in Melquiades' case, convincing Pete to do the vigilante … and we sure trust him that he'll handle the case better than Belmont, as he proved to handle Rachel quite better. Let the men tackle this. Still, Melquiades is pictured as a timid man with girls. His apparent sweetness makes his death even sadder, especially because the border patrol guy who killed him, Mike Norton, is a totally opposite character.Mike Norton is a selfish insecure scumbag who visibly hates his life. Indeed, there's something bitter in his whole attitude, and it's hard to believe he was popular once. Barry Pepper plays perfectly the man who constantly vents his anger on the others, not hesitating to punch in the face a Mexican girl who was running away, not the likeliest character to inspire our sympathy. And it's not his sordid sex scene with Lou Ann, his wife played by January Jones, that would contradict this feeling. Pepper as Norton was outstanding and I can't go without mentioning when after cutting his nail toes, he did what I expected him to do. Gross, but authentic. His lack of virile satisfaction fills his life with a boredom he can only satisfy it with the help of a Hustler magazine. Pathetic but also tragic as this will lead to the accidental killing.I took my time to get to the point, but so did the film that needed a long prologue before the odyssey started. Like "The Godfather", it had the time to present the characters, and like "The Godfather", it's about an evolution, not a corruption this time, but a redemption. The story starts when the flash-backs end, and when taking Norton as a hostage, Pete will order him to dig up Mel's corpse in order to bury him in Mexico, in his hometown. Two men and a corpse guiding them, the corpse is still present as if Mel was alive, as if his soul wasn't in peace yet, and this is the whole point: saving souls. Pete has a duty as friend, Mel had to be respected, and Mike was offered an opportunity to redeem himself. In their route, they'll meet a blind man asking them to kill him, he doesn't want to commit suicide, not to offend God, but neither does Pete. They'll meet the Mexican girl who'll show Norton the other side of the mirror, and teach him one thing or two about respect.And at the end, there's Norton, the soul of this film who, through a nightmarish journey, will repent of his acts asking Mel's soul to forgive him in one of the most emotional breakdowns ever, that decided Pete to finally release his prisoner as his initiation was over. One of the greatest masterpieces of the 2000's, sublimated by a dazzling cinematography, "The Three Burials" is a true gem that should have earned many Oscar nominations … including one for Barry Pepper, who proved through Norton that it's never too late to change, for the better

Several times while watching this awful movie I thought of Bugs Bunny. After the movie was over I realized why I had these thoughts: Bugs would occasionally 'reach' into his body and pull out something he needed to further the story. It could be a blowtorch, fully operative, or a bowling ball or a weapon. So too with Three Burials. When the story advances to the road aspect of the movie, we get 'surprise' devices like .... finding a blind man listening to a radio in the boonies somewhere in Mexico .....how this living-alone, elderly impoverished sightless man was able to find the fuel to run the .....presumed..... generator since his cancer-ridden son hadn't visited in six months is a different story problem...... The sub-professional screenwriter .....of this movie....., Arriaga, then reaches for the blow torch again when the Barry Pepper character 'escapes' from captivity and enters a cave to hide only to be bitten by a rattlesnake! .....how this beaten-up man, dispirited, exhausted, malnourished, riding without a hat in the daytime Mexican sun then slung over a horse and riding for unknown hours, over rough terrain, could survive a rattlesnake bite is another story whopper too...... There were other fanciful inventions like the ones mentioned but on to other problems with this movie. Repeated flashbacks can be acceptable in telling a story but only when the question is answered, "Would the story work better being told in a more linear fashion"? During the early parts of Three Burials I was confused several times when characters I was just beginning to learn about were time shifted backwards. For this viewer, the confusion this caused wasn't worth the effort itself and the story would have been clearer had they told it straight forward. .....Plus, later on, this creaky device is just dropped from the movie altogether!..... Something else now: Is Arriaga making a political statement by showing virtually all of the white Americans as defectives in one way or another while all the Latino's are benign, generous and overall, good guys? More: The character played by Jones is certifiably insane. Really weird guy. Next: In brief but numerous flashbacks they show the relationship between Pete and Melquiades as a deep one of mutual trust and affection. How then to deal with the duplicity of Melquiades in telling Pete about his non-existent family in Jimenez? Is this something you would do to a good friend when talking about your death and how you would want your family notified? It's pathological and calls into question M.'s character. Finally: Three burials take place. The final one, after all the tedious agony Pete's gone through to have it occur, is a half-ass job with the body not even deeply/fully buried. The local animals would have his remains eaten and spread all over the place, assuming of course, that there would be anything edible after all the amateur embalming that has taken place. PS: Why the need to show the corpse over and over again?

Here's the kind of movie that appears every once in a great while that actually makes you think, and more so, reflect on such intrinsic human traits as loyalty, friendship, integrity, and alienation. Coming out as recently as four years ago, it's a film I had never even heard of until it made the rounds on Encore Westerns recently, and even then, it's title didn't interest me enough to tune in at the time. However with the luxury of a few days free time on my hands, I managed to pick it up at my local library. To say that the movie is mesmerizing would be somewhat of an understatement. It's morbid and fascinating at the same time, a slow motion train wreck that begins with the Tarantino-esqe convention of a non-linear story line, then descends into a nightmare reality for it's principal players as the viewer simply can't imagine how it will all turn out.The movie was oddly reminiscent for me of two other films, one from four decades ago, and another quite recent. The picture's early treatment of alienation among it's characters, (Lou Ann and Mike, Rachel and Bob) was as powerful here as it was in 1971's "The Last Picture Show", both taking place in the stark heat and dust of the American Southwest. With a small town population one could virtually count on just a few hands, both films dwell on the notion that "It's always the same, always the same" - with the perverse realization that whatever you do doesn't remain a secret very long. So the indiscretions of a waitress are known to everyone, and stepping outside of the town's comfort zone is a concern for one and all.The other picture that comes to mind is another Tommy Lee Jones vehicle, the recent "No Country For Old Men". Both stories lend themselves to a randomness of events that at any moment threaten to spiral out of control. Gunshot wounds and rattlesnake bites are unseen and unintended consequences of moving in the wrong direction, while even well thought out plans never foresee potential obstacles along the way. With both pictures, you're left with the uncomfortable sense that the Tommy Lee Jones character remains joyless and without direction, even with closure. Both finales are as powerful as they come.It's been a few days now since I've watched 'Three Burials' and I'm still thinking about it. That's in no small measure to those ghastly and grotesque sequences when Pete (Tommy Lee) battles the ants and applies the antifreeze embalming. Is it weird to suppress an involuntary chuckle while at the same time you're going 'WTF'? But there's also the relationship Pete forges and forces with Mike (Barry Pepper) while on the trail to complete his mission. It's a surreal crossroads both men arrive at when Mike asks Pete if he's going to be OK, but no stranger than asking the same question of the man he killed.