The Fall (Season 1 & 2)

Allan Cubitt, 2013 & 2014

IMDB

4/5

There is certainly a variety of serial killer related dramas across the Television landscape. A lot of them are quite good: Dexter (until the awful final season), Hannibal, first season of True Detective, first season of Fargo. But there are of course some duds - like The Following.

The Fall, created by Alan Cubitt, is an offering set in Belfast Ireland. The film focuses on both sides of the spectrum. Gillian Anderson (widely known for her role in the iconic X Files) plays Stella Gibson, the reserved but dedicated investigator leading the hunt. Jamie Dornan plays Paul Spector, the man they are after. Paul is a family man who moonlights as a serial killer. He seeks out a particular type of woman and plans a meticulous strategy to sneak into their home and kill them. He is a man living two lives. During the day he is employed as a grief counseler. He gets his two kids ready in the morning and sends them off to school. He kisses his wife goodbye. It's not until his family is in bed that his nocturnal murderous side comes out. He has his wife convinced that he is working a suicide hotline when he is out filling his savage needs.

One interesting feature right off the bat with The Fall is the fact that you are introduced to Paul quite quickly. Once you are introduced, Paul and Stella get equal screen time. You learn quite quickly that Stella fits into the workaholic investigator trope that we've seen so many times. Strong-willed female. Sleeps at her desk, never really taking any time off, married to her job. Completely wrapped up in whatever case she's on. She's that person that can get into the mind of the serial killer. She knows how he thinks. She can predict his behavior. This concept is nothing new, we've seen it many many times.

This is where the series gets conflicting for me. You have two central characters, neither of which are very likeable figures. Stella is a very cold woman; she doesn't offer much in terms of vulnerability and openness. Paul is equally cold, and the lack of history provided just has you spending time with a distant man with no real sympathy for his evil compulsions. So it becomes a situation where you can tolerate Stella because she is dedicated to hunting down a guy that you just don't like because he continues to kill beautiful women for whatever reason. This decision to not reveal much of Paul's backstory may have been a deliberate decision by the show's creators, but that doesn't mean it was the right choice.

We discover more about Paul's past in Season 2 which does shine some light onto his dark proclivity. But this could have been done in the first. They could have even had some flashback sequences to provide more of a complete illustration of Paul. The lack of these elemnents were something that constantly troubled me watching the first season, but the series clearly was doing something right because I couldn't resist watching more even with those frustrations noted. The series without a doubt is better in the second season. Most notably the extended-length season 2 finale. That is without a doubt the best episode of the series thus far. Multiple story threads come together so remarkably and the balance of tension and delivery is outstanding.

Narcos (Season 1 & 2)

Carlo Bernard, Chris Brancato, Doug Miro, 2015-2016

IMDB

5/5

When I think about really detailed gritty crime dramas, I think of Jean-Francois Richet's Mesrine: Killer Instinct films. Split into two films, it's a biopic of "Public Enemy 1" Jacques Mesrine. Mesrine was a French gangster responsible for several bank robberies and kidnappings in France and Canada. He managed to elude the law and even escaped from prison. Jacques Mesrine and Pablo Escobar have a lot in common. They are both solitary figures both considered to be highly dangerous & sought after to their respective countries. They were both incredibly elusive and constantly in hiding. They both managed to escape from prison. They were both considered to be "Robin Hood" figures to the common people.

But Wagner Moura's Pablo Escobar will have more of a lasting impact on the cinematic landscape than Cassel's Mesrine. This is probably because through a television series, he's really able to cultivate the Pablo character and let it build rather than try to let it build through 4-6 hours of two movies. But the similarties between the two don't stop at the leading performances. They both have an elaborate backdrop. Mesrine in urban France. Narcos in urban Colombia. Through fly over shots of Colombia, tracking shots through the streets, it creates an detail rich world that pulls you in. As dangerous as the city may be there is still something that draws you back to it.

As each episode continues in Narcos, the stakes continue to elevate as does Escobar's wealth and influence. As his empire grows, his moral concessions do as well. Almost like Breaking Bad, he's a figure in slow deteriortion. Someone that has concrete morals at the beginning turns into a comprimised villain with blurred vision. Escobar is undoubtedly an interesting figure. Someone who has unimaginable wealth and power. Yet there is a hunger for more. More of what? Well, that's what the series is all about. Legacy, respect, family. These are all important things to Pablo. In a sense the money is just secondary. It really becomes a disposable thing. We are constantly seeing stacks and stacks of money thrown around like napkins through the series. Buried underground, thrown in bags, throwns in boxes. There's so much of it they don't even know what to do with it all.

I gave Mesrine 5 stars back when I reviewed the two films. I feel the same for Narcos. It's hard to find any noticeable flaws with this series. It's just so well filmed, so well acted, so well put together. Everything from the production design to the intricate sound design - it's all top notch. It's all just top notch. Call me a sucker for gritty crime dramas, I deserve it. Cutting my teeth with Scorcese's great body of work has set a certain standard. Narcos meets and exceeds these standards.

Season 2 manages to keep raising the stakes, the only difference being that we finally get to see some pieces of Escobar's empire finally breaking down. But the mystique around him builds. There are times that, even if you are aware of the historical facts, it feels like he's never going to be caught. One of the constant thoughts I have while watching Narcos is what if Pablo had never run for that political office early on? By doing that he put the spotlight on him, a spotlight that never went away. It seems possible that if continued to lurk in the shadows of Colombian society rather than trying to become such a mainstream figure that he could have gone on growing his empire and wouldn't have to spend his life on the run.

A Most Violent Year

JC Chandor, 2014

IMDB

2/5

Chandors follow-up to 2013’s great / under-rated All is Lost is a New York Crime drama starring Oscar Isaac and Jessica Chastain. The two of them are enough to get any cinephile on board. Isaac stars as Abel Morales, a successful business owner that runs a lucrative fuel-oil delivery business but has fallen victim to a lot hijackings of his vehicles. While the pressure builds for him to make changes to reduce the risk of his delivery-men in the field, he is focusing all of his energy into pooling together the funds to close on a neighboring property that would allow him to expand his operation.

The film could be considered a mild character study in the sense that you find yourself trying to get a read on Abel throughout the film. His actions are perplexing at times. He is very ego-driven, not so consumed with the money so much because he has enough of that. He seems to be another character completely focused on power, making that step to the next level. He is not very willing to let anything get in the way, even if it involves putting his employees and family at risk. His stubbornness becomes very frustrating in the story. You can feel the pressure mounting through the story while he stands back in his brown trench-coat staring at the walls thinking.

For a film to be called “A Most Violent Year” and have it be based on the most crime-filled year in the Big Apple, you would actually expect the film to be more violent. A more fitting name for the film would probably be a “A Most Non-Violent Movie”. Not that you NEED violence to fuel a film, but the rather unhurried rhythm of the film never really picks up and maintains that pace throughout the entire 125 minute running time. There isn’t a lot of chemistry between Isaac and Chastain. At times the script even feels quite weak. To the film’s credit it tries to explore some different avenues in the New York crime category by focusing on an entrepreneur rather than a group of gangsters, but it is ultimately too fruitless. Unfortunately Chandor’s followup to the great All is Lost is A Most Unmemorable film.

Blood Ties

Guillame Canet, 2014

IMDB

2/5

The first thing you notice with Blood Ties is the loaded cast. Clive Owen, Zoe Saldana, Mila Kunis, Noah Emmerich, Marion Cottilard, James Caan. It almost feels as if someone owed someone a favor. How could it go wrong? Probably because Guillame Canet is at the helm. He wants to make his version of a 1970’s Period Piece like American Hustle. He knows the music. He knows the attire. He knows the cars. But it just feels lacking. That and the film has some problems with it. First off, Clive Owen is one of the best actors working today. But he is miscast here. He just doesn't fit the role as the dirt-bag criminal brother. His character just feels unauthentic. The neck and arm tattoos feel painted on. The accent, while not British, is not exact. Owen was actually replacing Mark Wahlberg for the role, who had to drop out due to scheduling conflicts. But Wahlberg probably wouldn't have been really good either. You really need someone in the role who has more street grit, someone more erratic. Someone with more deep-seated New York ties. Maybe someone like Michael Imperioli. Not an English actor pretending to be a New Yorker. Another miscast is Mila Kunis who really brings nothing to her role other than her good looks. She is the typical cliched girl who can't resist the bad boys. That being said, praise is due to the casting choice of Billy Crudup who really nails his Frank role. Crudup is one of the more underrated actors working today.

There are problems with the film. Instead of being in the presence of complex characters you sit in the presence of caricatures. A good example is James Caan’s father character who really feels one-dimensional. Comes off as sort of an aged Sonny Corleone if he had lived to his later years. But without the depth that Coppola was able to add to that character. This character is just a slow moving, bitter Italian who spends most of his time angry at his late wife that he had left decades ago. His purpose in the film is really to only to force continuous confrontations between Frank and Chris, reminding them of their (here it comes!) Blood Ties. There is some poor editing in the film. Chris and Frank get into physical altercation with each other in Frank’s apartment. Frank kicks him out and tells him he never wants to see him again. He goes into work the next day only to be told by his commanding officers that they can’t have him working if Chris is living there. You would assume the response would be: “funny you say that! he just moved out last night. He won’t be coming around again. You have my undivided attention when it comes to me doing my job as an officer of the law”. But no. Instead he comes off as insulted, offended. Storms out. Did he completely forget about the previous nights events?

Blood Ties could be considered a bad movie with a good ending. The last half hour or so of the film is actually quite decent. A great car chase scene filled with all of the period automobiles which feels like it took a lot of effort to choreograph. A call back to a childhood event that really lands. Good final scene. That’s great, except for the fact that you have to bear the unsubstantial first 2/3’s of the movie to get to the good parts.

Heat

Michael Mann, 1995

Can I Stream It?

4/5

A group of elusive professional robbers have met their match when there is a unexpected slip-up on a job and they find themselves suddenly in the sights of hot-headed homicide detective Lt. Vincent Hanna (Al Pacino).

Michael Mann's action thriller pits DeNiro vs. Pacino (one of three films that the two co-starred in together) to satisfy any movie-lovers dream. Set in the backdrop of the concrete jungle of 1990's Los Angeles, much of the film consists of night shots littered with thousands of squared lit windows as one of the many police helicopters present in the city drift through the sky. When present in the day hours, you are probably looking at a contemporary structure that seems to be holding on to the side of a southern California cliff. If you aren't there, you're in a bank or close to money which at that point you are probably muffling your ears from the sounds of automatic rifle fire. Much of the film is the robbing crew on the move, with Vincent's men hot on their tail. The best of the best. Not many bank robbers are pulling architectural plans before a job, and not many detectives are meeting criminals at a club at 2AM for a ambiguous tip that may or may not even pay off. Dedication on all fronts. It's that cat and mouse concept that keeps the film compelling, although there are so many layers to this great picture to follow. Heat is home to one of the great bank robbery scenes of all time, and if you haven't seen this film you've probably heard about it. It's a lengthly action drama that's not without some over-dramatization, some over-acting by the wavering Pacino (although he provides some of the most memorable quotes on film that are forever in your brain), and some questionable plot-holes here and there. But you're willing to let the imperfections go. Even if you've seen this film a few times and you revisit it years later, you are bound to find something new.

Casino

(REWATCHED)

Martin Scorcese, 1995

Can I Stream It?

4/5

This mob drama follows a pair of friends Sam Rothstein (Robert De Niro) and Nicky Santoro (Joe Pesci) as they attempt to build their wealth through different avenues on the 1970's Vegas Strip. Sam works on a more calculated career backed by the mob managing the Tangiers casino while Nicky recklessly uses his mafia ties to strong-arm his way to the top.

Scorcese packs his bags and heads out west to the old Vegas. A Vegas more focused on loyalty and class than pure corporate commercialism. And while much of the film has a lot of Scorcese's familiar elements (dolly shots, Rolling Stones, violence, male dominance, domestic violence, drug use) it's a behemoth of a film as vast as a Casino floor that never makes you feel like you are watching Goodfellas Part II. The camera pans through the elegantly-lit Tangiers with its hypnotic carpeting and lingering cigarette-smoke. At times you're flying over the barren Nevada desert as Pesci chillingly hints at how many problems are solved out there. Pesci's Nicky Santoro is as heedless and unpredictable as Tommy Devito (Goodfellas). But he somehow makes it different. De Niro's Sam Rothstein shows the clear rise and fall of a man very much like Jake La Motta (Raging Bull). Sam puffs his cigarettes as his hair grays and he burns another five minutes off his life. A guy who stays in the game too long. But once again, he somehow makes it different. Sharon Stone giving it her all as the hot-mess-alpha female-in which she was nominated for an Oscar and won a Golden Globe. All playing with the backdrop of the cocaine-fueled, golden-framed 1970's, with so many layers. The deception between two life long friends. The ignored warning signs of a toxic relationship and it's inevitable demise. The naivety of love. Greed. Uncertainty. Political leverage. In the end, it's just another story reminding us of the very finite nature to it all. With everyone having a hand in the money-grab, it can only last for so long before it all falls apart.

There's certainly a poetic quality to the picture. De Niro's narration romanticizes about a better Vegas, back when people knew what kind of drink you wanted when you walked into the casino. Very much like the old Times Square in mid-town Manhattan before it was Disney-fied. Romanticizing about how the good-old-days almost has an ironic comedic quality to it with the mental image of a giant tank of a casino like the Tangiers with a lot of holes on the outside, with gangsters waiting outside trying to fill up their buckets. Scorcese avoids any subtlety as you see the classic Casinos being demolished as next-gen obese tourists ascend on the homogenized MGM Grand, stylistically similar to that great final shot of Gangs of New York as the Brooklyn graveyard gives way to a skyline shot of the Twin Towers.

American Hustle

David O. Russell, 2013

Netflix

3/5

Russell's latest work is actually a difficult film to explain to someone when they ask you to describe the plot. "Okay.. so there's this con-man and his lover who cheat desperate people out of black market loans who then get caught and have to assist the FBI in taking down some politicians while also at the same time try to handcuff the investigation to the mob by promising Middle Eastern financial backing in rebuilding the Atlantic City casinos. You got all of that right?"

Scorcese gave his keys to Russell and told him to bring it back in one piece. He did, and he took it for a nice long spin in this con-artist crime drama/gangster story/quirky comedy/period piece. The nod to Scorcese is blatant: the narrative, the tracking shots, MOS sequences set to music, the gangster motif, the Big Apple backdrop. The casting office even called for a couple of Boardwalk Empire's guys. But it's also very David O. Russell. At times the film solicits laughter reminiscent of his comedic style in Flirting with Disaster. Russell puts on his Sounds of the 70's compilation and plays with one of his signature elements of taking that classic song you've heard a million times and putting a visual component in there that makes it seem like you're hearing it differently. 

Christian Bale morphs into his role as chubby con-artist (hair piece included) Irving Rosenfeld and continues to prove that he's one of the best actors working today. If his character didn't possess the nuance that Bale was able to bring to the role, it just wouldn't work. Jennifer Lawrence takes her already great performance in Silver Linings Playbook and goes off her meds, taking it to another level as a vindictive hot mess. Her distorted reality from being confined at home. The manipulative tendencies. Seething jealousy. Bradley Cooper's character is similar to his character in The Place Beyond the Pines in the sense that he's a government worker trying to make his mark. He's always been overlooked. He can almost smell success, it's so close. He wants it so badly. Amy Adams plays the classy Sydney Prosser, who wants nice things and is willing to trade her morals for companionship. Renner's performance as Camden Mayor Carmine Polito is more subtle but it has a certain plangency to it. You know whats going to happen to him. And it should bother you even after the film is over. Some surprising faces even turn up - one of which is un-credited.

Enough can't be said about the performances in the film. The cast deserves much praise, as well as Russell for being able to collaborate with such a pool of talent. It's especially impressive to discover that 20% of the film was improvised which again speaks well for the Russell's confidence. But outside of the great performances, the film feels too elaborate. While Russell's The Fighter and The Silver Linings Playbook had a more youthful feel -  American Hustle seems to be a film made for the older crowd. Probably the crowd who grew up the 1970's. It's surely a subjective movie (aren't they all), likely to be lauded by many and not so much by others. But either way you're bound to feel satisfaction on some level because the acting gives you your money's worth an hour into the picture. 

Boardwalk Empire (Season 4)

Terence Winter, 2013

Netflix

5/5

Any fan of the Boardwalk series by now has come to expect a certain level of consistency. In the first three seasons, you learn a great deal about what happens. Authentic set pieces, comprehensive character structure, period music, short life expectancy. Terence Winter clearly has no problem developing a character and ending his or her life suddenly. It's one of the more gripping parts of the series. Swift bloodshed. Because of the historical element to the show, you are already aware of the fate of some. Some of the legendary names we've heard echo through American culture since we were children. But for others that's not the case. Other characters are more shrouded, but with large stories. Along with the consistency that the series provides, there's a real sense of accuracy. You are literally standing in the time period. There are so many ongoing story-lines, all equally alluring. It's difficult to find a flaw in Boardwalk. Perhaps there isn't one. The twelve episodes are constructed so perfectly. The season finale delivers and makes an impact. This series sits high on the shelf. It's hard to compare it to some of the better series to come out in the past ten years, probably because it's really carved out a nice niche. And it doesn't seem to be losing any steam either. And perhaps the only flaw of this amazing series is the wait time until the next season.

And so the series progresses on to the fourth season. Nucky continues to build his empire, and this season decides to expand to the Florida for assistance in efficiently importing his product. Al Capone is feeling like he is growing up and feeling like a big fish in a small pond faster than his boss Johnny Torrio would like him to, and begins to grow resentful. Van Alden is continuing to make new friends in surprising places, and in season four he finds himself getting the attention of the Capone's. Margaret is attempting to move on with her life, outside of the criminal world and in a more legitimate setting. Chaulky White is now running Nucky's old nightclub, an acquisition he made after his huge favor to Nucky last season. Gillian, struggling with her heroin addiction, finds new love that appears to be promising. We are introduced to new characters. The federal agents, led by young director J. Edgar Hoover, appear suddenly and are hungry to uncover the prospect of possible organized crime family. Dr. Narcisse is a new face to New Jersey, bringing with him a ominous energy that doesn't appeal to some, including Chaulky. The finale is heartwrenching and satisfying. It will stick with you. Or at least it should. 

Confessions of a Dangerous Mind

George Clooney, 2002


3/5

Ambitious television producer Chuck Barris (Sam Rockwell) who created The Gong Show and The Dating Game also moonlights as a CIA operative assassin in this film directed by George Clooney and a screenplay written by Charlie Kaufman. Based on a memoir written by Barris.

Sam Rockwell is a good choice for Chuck Barris. Barris is sort of an unassuming figure. At one point in the film Jim Byrd (Clooney) says to Chuck: "You're a fairly bright guy. You'll figure it out". And that sort of sums up a lot about Chuck. He has the drive, there's no doubt about that. But his youth was full of rejection, and that never really subsided. And life isn't necessarily timed perfectly. When he finally meets the girl who is sincerely attracted to him, Chuck has a lot of fires burning. He wasn't exactly thrilled to take on the job working for the CIA, but does anyway without much defiance. And that's why Jim chose him anyway. He fit the profile. What was the profile? Probably a softy loner who wasn't going to stand out. Someone who nobody really looks at twice. Someone who is quite forgettable. Not one to solicit a second glance. Someone perfect for Sam Rockwell, who is no stranger to playing the "also-ran" type of character.

The film at times offers a taste of classic film noir. At other times its more of a character study. And other times it feels like a black comedy mixed with a crime drama. Clooney is quite capable in the director's chair, there's no doubt about that. The scene where the camera pans while introducing the various contestants really gives the feeling its all one continuous shot. The cinematography by Newton Thomas Sigel plays with a lot of color, at times an absence of it. There's a certain stylistic quality to the film that at times feels almost Sin City-like. You get a sense that the entire film has a lot of skillful people behind the camera, and it's realized quite early on that everyone in front of the camera is more than capable. It's not going to be a film for everyone, and it's certainly not Kaufman's best screenplay, but it's a film that should certainly be appreciated for the production-value.

The Bling Ring

Sofia Coppola, 2013


3/5

Based on a true story that was profiled in a Vanity Fair article, a group of L.A. teens decide to burglarize the homes of the celebrities they are obsessed with in an effort to live the lavish lifestyles that they lead.

Coppola has always been held to a high standard given the impact that her father has had on the world of cinema. But she's clearly carved out a niche, and separated herself from the long dramatic pieces that Francis has created. Her films tend to be more stylistic and poppy, distinct and energetic. Bling Ring certainly fits into her typical style. Coppola, clearly fascinated by the Vanity Fair piece, wanted to paint the picture of the TMZ-culture and the shallow kids looking for thrills. The kids themselves appear quite numb in the film. When they have the valuable jewelry in their hands or the scarves around their necks, there is still a very obvious sense of emptiness. Without a doubt there is a void they are all trying to fill. It's not a story of the haves and have nots, but more of the haves and have enoughs. These kids are not destitute, as shown early on with Chloe (Claire Julien) driving up the Pacific Coast highway in her Lexus SUV. There is a sense of entitlement that they have. But there is also a sense of delusion. They scroll the pages of TMZ and Perez Hilton and see a mirror image of themselves. They want to live the life without putting in the work. It doesn't help that the parents are not present, and even if they are, they are filling their heads with Hollywood pseudo-spirituality that preaches positive thinking but doesn't lay out the framework for actually putting in an honest days work. Emma Watson delivers the stand-out performance as Nicki. Nicki gets what she wants not when she fills her pockets but when the cameras are in front of her. Almost as if she's laid out the entire thing (which you realize is impossible coming from her), she wants that fifteen minutes of fame where the paparazzi is in front her with the cameras snapping away.

The film gets running immediately with the punchy Noise-Pop and the showcase of material objects that would later become evidence. The lack of work ethic that the teens have combined with the sense of entitlement is reminiscent to the girls in Spring Breakers. But the film ultimately lacks depth. Perhaps it's the subject matter that doesn't give Coppola enough to work with? Could she have gotten into their minds a bit more? Maybe she squeezed everything she could have out of them. In the end, it's not going to be a Oscar-piece, but she was able to get a great performance out of very talented Emma Watson and examine the obsession of celebrity culture by today's youth.

Spring Breakers

Harmony Korine, 2013


2/5

Harmony Korine (Trash Humpers, Gummo, Mister Lonely) directs this raunchy crime drama about a group of girls (Selena Gomez, Vanessa Hudgens, Ashley Benson, Rachel Korine) who take desperate measures to travel to Florida to celebrate their spring break from college. When they arrive, similar measures continue when they encounter local drug thug Alien (James Franco).

Korine is no stranger to filming provocative subject matter, and he certainly provides some disturbing imagery here. The opening segment of the film is an array of drunken frat boys, bare boobs and beer bongs. The opening sequence, shot in slow motion, is an obvious examination of the crude behavior of America's youth. This examination is very much similar to the analysis of the deplorable behavior of teens in Kids (written by Korine). The obvious difference is that in Breakers Korine doesn't bother to observe much more than their hard-partying and drunken impulses. They are obnoxious, another villain in the film.

The actual story begins when following the group of girls trying to scrounge up the money to make the trip down to Florida. They look at this trip as if its going to be some kind of defining journey, one that will change their lives. Their innocence is evident, but overshadowed by their disgusting obsession with American materialism and pop culture. This obsession would continue to be examined for the remainder of the film.

James Franco delivers a noteworthy performance, probably the most chameleonic of his career as Alien. Alien is Korine's fictional Joe Francis, an impulse-driven manipulator preying on young women like a corn-rowed Vulture. He seeks them out when they are vulnerable, and goes in for the kill. His limited rants make him seem like Samuel L. Jackson's character Jules Winnfield in Pulp Fiction if he had dropped out of high school his freshman year. He takes pride in his material possessions, which are an obvious byproduct of the drug sales. His "Look at my sheeeit" rant is still echoing in my mind along with him whispering "Spring Breaaakkk" sort of like the "If you build it they will come" cornfield whisper in Field of Dreams. He has his wall of weapons, his Scarface on repeat.

Franco's character is certainly the highlight of the film. The other highlight of the film is Korine's use of color and sound. It's a very nice looking film, with a very applicable soundtrack. The duality of Dubstep to the slow-motion drunk-fest certainly makes an impact. Definitely style over substance, but the lack of depth in the story department certainly leaves much to be desired. While Franco's performance is very memorable, it isn't enough to carry it all. I personally saw Kids around the time it was released. I was young, probably 14 or 15. There are elements in that film, some imagery that still haunts me to this day. That was one of the first dark films I saw at a young age. It's probably why I gravitated to the more disturbing films later on in life - because of that profound impact that they can have, whether good or bad. Harmony Korine clearly had a lot to say back then. With Spring Breakers, he obviously has a lot to SHOW - I just wish he had more to say.

Goodfellas

(REWATCHED)

Martin Scorcese, 1990


5/5

Scorcese's adaptation of the non-fiction book "Wiseguy" by Nicholas Pileggi. The story follows the rise of Henry Hill, from kid to adult, working for the Lucchese crime family.

Finding someone who has not seen Goodfellas would creative feelings of jealousy. I would want to immediately sit them down and play it for them. I would likely become hypnotized, like I usually am, and watch the entire film again. It's Scorcese's true masterpiece. His mafia symphony. His flawless gritty gangster epic. The single take scene with the camera panning through the restaurant. Ray Liotta breaking down the fourth wall. The resonating soundtrack that spans time, from The Moonglows to The Rolling Stones. The elevating strings of cigarette smoke, the bubbling meat gravy, the puffy lines of cocaine. After watching it for the tenth time, you still find little gems here and there that previously went unnoticed. Not only that, the surprise moments in the film that you've become to expect are still magnetic. Ray Liotta has never been better. Liotta, like James Gandolfini in his role as Tony Soprano, - provides such an impeccable performance that he is permanently type cast. The progression and deterioration of Henry Hill is so well detailed. The 146 minutes move so fast, you forget that you had to flip the DVD over to side B. I used to have dreams about this film. The number one rule for making a mob film is you have to create anti-heroes that have some kind of endearing quality that makes you invest in their character. Scorcese creates these characters that embed themselves into the fabric of your mind. The actors are so good in this film that they are cherry picked for future mob roles. The film currently sits at #15 on IMDb's Top 250 and is preserved in the National Film Registry in the Library of Congress.