by Allan Fish
(USA 2006 152m) DVD1/2
Heavy lies the crown
p Jennifer Aniston, Brad Grey, Graham King, Brad Pitt, Martin Scorsese d Martin Scorsese w William Monahan ph Michael Ballhaus ed Thelma Schoonmaker m Howard Shore art Kristi Zea
Leonardo DiCaprio (William Costigan Jr), Matt Damon (Colin Sullivan), Jack Nicholson (Frankie Costello), Mark Wahlberg (Dignam), Martin Sheen (Queenan), Ray Winstone (French), Vera Farmiga (Madolyn), Anthony Anderson (Brown), Alec Baldwin (Ellerby),
Is it really nearly twenty years since Quentin Tarantino took an average Hong Kong thriller, City on Fire, and turned it into cinematic magic as Reservoir Dogs? I must be getting old. How ironic, then, that Tarantino’s predecessor, Scorsese, takes a leaf out of the apprentice’s book and takes another Hong Kong flick, the satisfactory Infernal Affairs, and turns this into cinematic magic. At first glance, it might seem like a return to familiar ground for Scorsese, and yet really it isn’t. His underworld is the Italian-American variety which has since almost become a cliché, while this film is set in another place entirely, the dark side of the Irish-Americans, and indeed of the police set to catch them. Look not here for double-cross, or even triple-cross, we’re beyond that. One is reminded mid way through the film of a line from Michael Caine in the TV drama Jack the Ripper, in which he castigates the formation of the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee by saying that if he was the murderer, he’d join this committee and go out looking for himself. Such is the opportunity granted Matt Damon’s two-faced mob informant, Colin Sullivan.
Sullivan has been groomed since childhood for stardom through the Boston police ranks by local Irish kingpin Frank Costello. On the other hand, the blood kin of a definitely criminal Irish American family, the Costigans, wants to become a cop to redeem the family name. The cops, however, want him to go undercover, and soon it becomes a battle between whether the police mole or the mob mole gets the upper hand.
Scorsese certainly plays for grandstanding effect, the use of Donizetti – and the deeper symbolic meaning behind the use of his piece from ‘Lucia de Lammermoor’ – and even a split-second clip from John Ford’s The Informer are not there by chance. Like all Scorsese crime films, it’s a film littered with quotable lines, many of them provided by the Mephistophelean Costello, my own favourite being “you can’t trust a guy who acts like he’s got nothing to lose.” Here’s a director who doesn’t merely ask your attention, he demands it and – as if he hadn’t done so already a dozen times over – earns it. The cross-cutting between scenes played out at different times will perhaps irritate those wanting simple entertainment, but those watching simple entertainment can watch the Hong Kong original, which is merely a background sketch for the rich, multi-layered fresco that Scorsese feats our eyes on.
Such a film could not work without the cast, however, and one cannot help but be impressed. But a few years ago DiCaprio seemed like a fish out of water in Gangs of New York opposite Daniel Day-Lewis, but following the success of The Aviator, he’s the real deal. Damon doesn’t quite command his acting chops, but such an exercise in duplicity doesn’t require the same visceral electricity, and he’s fine, while Wahlberg is sensational in support. Topping all, though, is Jack, in some ways merely being Jack, but as with Day-Lewis before, Scorsese just reins him back a tad to stop him overbalancing the piece. It’s a mesmerising performance, one worth a dozen of his autopilot work for James L.Brooks. Even the way Scorsese introduces him is sublime, playing on his being in the shadows, both figuratively and, of course, so as not to show the wrinkles. He drips evil from every sinew, and haunts the film even in the scenes in which he is not present. You can spot references to all forms of art, from Shakespeare to Hawthorne, but Marty has to get his cinematic homages in and the last one even makes one forgive the unnecessary touch of the rat on the balcony; by magnificently aping the final shot of The Third Man. Few directors would dare, Marty dared and delivered…in every way.
Click on names for archives
Writers/Founders
Wonders in the Dark 
Now, this is a film that I don’t mid here at all. Although it has its fair share of detractors and despite the fact that it is perhaps the least characteristic of all Scorsese, I love the film. Magnificently directed, acted, shot, cut and scored.
Agreed. This will undoubtedly be much higher on my own list. And as usual, wonderful review.
Well, this is one I can get behind fully and seems perfectly placed here in the 90’s. I think a lot of the discussion over it being a weak Scorsese is due to the Oscar backlash. Whatever. It’s a fun film with some outstanding performances (as Allan deftly mentions), plenty of action, and goofy Baw-stin accents all-around. Scorsese even gets some fun overacting from Alec Baldwin and Martin Sheen in just for kicks (with Baldwin essentially playing a parody of his GLENGARRY character for the 20th time).
Baldwin and Wahlberg get plenty of fantastic lines to throw around here that’s for sure Troy. Actually the humor those two show is one of the main reasons I’ve returned to this film the few times I have.
I quite like The Departed. It’s one of Scorsese’s better films, along with King of Comedy and Casino. I think it’s Di Caprio’s best performance too. Wahlberg and Baldwin also great.
However, The Departed isn’t a patch on Infernal Affairs.
A masterful under-cover cop procedural. Scorsese breaths his own spin into this tired genre with the help of a lightening fast Thelma Schoonmaker at the editing desk, his classic rock collectionn a smart script and a youthful cast any fledgling film-maker would ejaculate in his pants for. Hovering over it all is the wise-owl performance of Jack Nicholson (really the greatest actor the lasy 40 years has produced) showing these whipper-snappers what its all about. The opening montage that chronicles Costello’s crime teachings, cut to The Rolling Stones GIMME SHELTER is Scorsese montage running white hot. Is THE DEPARTED Marty’s best film of this decade? I would reserve that slot for GANGS OF NEW YORK. However, where this type of film is commonplace year after year, its great to see a master director showing everyone out there how’s its REALLY done.
The Departed is meatier than Infernal Affairs and shows the characters struggling more overtly with the torture of undercover work.
Infernal Affairs is barer, cooler, more sophisticated and more streamlined. There is greater tension in the proceedings and the line between the two moles is thinner. The unspoken bond between them is stronger and invests the film with greater poetry.
Infernal Affairs is more successful as procedural, more succinct and less interested in irrelevance. It doesn’t dwell on the hell of these people’s lives but it is made implicit by the subdued and slickly claustrophobic style.
Tony Leung is a far greater and subtler actor than Leonardo Di Caprio.
The mob boss is incredibly stupid in the Departed, not realising who the mole is when it’s obvious. ‘You used to be a cop huh? But you’re not anymore. Well, that’s OK then’. In Infernal Affairs the mob boss doesn’t have that information.
Agreed. Christopher Doyle’s cinematography (correction: apparently he wasn’t DP, but “visual consultant” to the film, whatever that tends to mean) in the film is also sort of marvelous, doing a great job of imparting much of the seedy and posh Hong Kong atmospheres without ever losing a strict realistic edge. The characters are also, by and large, a lot more human and sympathetic, whereas in Scorsese’s everyone is simply more or less pitted in dog-eat-dog overacting performances. “The Departed” is still a fun movie, a worthy regional remake, and maybe even the best-directed movie of its year, but it doesn’t hold a candle to “Infernal Affairs”.
The highest compliment that I can give the film is that it’s pretty much the same as “The Magnificent Seven” is to “Seven Samurai”. Is it good? You bet it is. Great, even? Sure, go for it. As good as the original, though? Not on your life.
As I’m sure everyone knows just by the name of my blog, Scorsese is royalty to me, so it’s interesting how I continually go back and forth on The Departed. At times, I think that it is among Scorsese’s best work, at others I think it’s just a pretty good cops-and-robbers story. I’m now to the point where I definitely enjoy it and think it’s an above average Marty film… although I certainly rank The Aviator ahead of it and think that I would prefer Shutter Island as well if we’re including the start of this new decade. I agree with everyone that the performances are all around outstanding, which is no surprise because I personally think that Leo is (and has been for a while) a hell of an actor. Wahlberg and Baldwin are fun, Damon is also very good, and I also think that Ray Winstone turns in a very nice supporting performance. Nicholson’s character is all over the map, which I suppose is the point, but I find myself liking his performance better in spots than overall.
The craft of Scorsese is evident throughout, which is always a treat to watch. My only complaint with the overall film is how condensed everything feels, which I would guess is a result of having to squeeze a trilogy into a single film. No matter how tense or explosive it plays, the ending is just too rushed for me. So I definitely like this one, but have some issues with it (although not major ones). It’s one that I will likely re-watch before I post my own Top 25, because it hovers near the cutoff point for me and could potentially be in my list – which it clicks with me, I absolutely love it.
Ironically, just yesterday I ordered the Infernal Affairs Trilogy… funny timing that the next day Allan posts this wonderful piece.
Terrific contribution here Dave, and I know well your great affinity for Scorsese, a position that just about everybody shares including myself. At this point I’d rate SHUTTER ISLAND ahead of both THE AVIATOR and THE DEPARTED, though it’s possible GANGS could narrowly be the top dog here.
Two things that have bothered me about THE DEPARTED since I saw it the first time. Firstly, the under-appreciated turn that Matt Damon gives. His worm-like arrogance combined with his sweating guilt is ABSOLUTELY right. The scene where he breaks down and crys in the warehouse elevator, know the gigs up, is a moment of telling cowardice a lesser actor would convey. I think, personally, after Nicholson, he gives the best performance in the film. Secondly: the fianle. Sorry, but with all the gritty realism going on in this film and the bad, truthful fortune that pervades the story, I just don’t buy the conclusion. Its too neat to have Walhberg come in and kill Damon. Considering everything up to that moment, the rat would have, albeit through ironic luck, gotten away with everything.
Great piece Allan.
Unlike a lot of people who favour the original, I too felt Departed outscored Infernal Affairs from the final cinematic effect. Where the HK flick was smoother & a tad more lyrical, this one is raw, testosterone-driven & downright fun. The performances, as you mentioned, are excellent throughout, with Jack Nicholson delivering yet another thunderous piece of acting. And that score – that was just superb!!!
I’m with you Shubhajit. And once again you’ve rendered a superb economical assessment here!
Personally, I’m not a huge fan of this film. I found it messy, with the editing jarring (although I’m sure it is referenced, the random ellipses didn’t work for me). Maybe I feel this way for the reason Dave pointed out – it feels very condensed. And Nicholson to me was just be a big ham. DiCaprio on the other hand should have been nominated for this performance instead of Blood Diamond that year at the Academy Awards.
Not to be a stickler, but I found it hard to look past that damn CGI rat at the end. It was a bit of overkill.
David, great to have you here, and you present your case beautifully.
Ok, but I prefer Picture Perfect.
Hmmm, a bit too dry perhaps. (See the listing of the film’s “auteurs” above…)
I too think Infernal Affairs was a tighter, stronger film. I’d probably watch Departed first just because of all the American ganster film tropes, the great use of the Boston setting, and Nicholson’s over-the-top performance but I certainly think the original was more dramatically powerful. The surprise violence near the end here had no real emotional impact on me and seemed more like an ironic development than something that happened to a character we cared about. Though not without its own irony (the music is perhaps self-consciously maudlin and the opening and closing door has almost a slapstick effect) Infernal Affairs wrings far more pathos from the demise – and as Stephen notes, its ending rings much truer.
The few minor quibbles I have aside… I think the reason that THE DEPARTED raises itself higher than any of the other films of this kind in the past two decades is obvious. Scorsese, ever the realist, embues the film with no easy outs. Like his RAGING BULL, TAXI DRIVER and GOODFELLA’S there are no white picket fences or happy endings. Innocent people, good people, innocent bystanders-like those in real life are all playing in the lottery of the hand of fate. Its precisely this, the unflinching, head on truths that set this film apart from looking like just another episode of 24, CSI and LAW & ORDER. The moment the bullet goes whizzing through Leonardo DiCaprio’s head, splaying his brain on the elevator wall told me we’d be OK. Scorsese’s gritty, real sensibilities would not betray us. The more I think about this film, the more I like it.
I have such a strange position The Departed. I’ve never been anything but honest about my love for Scorsese, but I find this pretty hollow, and he clearly lost control of at least some of his actors (*cough* Nicholson *cough*). The film is pretty sloppy and it seems like something a big Scorsese fan who took only the style and not the substance from Mean Streets, GoodFellas, etc. At the same time, it may be the most innately enjoyable of Marty’s flicks, which is saying something because he never bores me. So, The Departed lies near the bottom of my ranking of his films, yet it’s one of my go-to films for a lazy day Scorsese marathon.
This is a fascinating comment thread, and I fully expected that for a host of reasons there would be more than a fair share of negative responses. What can I really say here that hasn’t at least been broached. This is an exceedingly entertaining film, that for me is an improvement over INFERNAL AFFAIRS, but yes Nicholson plays Nicholson, and there are some tidy resolutions. There is still visceral filmmaking in the mix, and on balance I’d rate it over THE AVIATOR and approximately equal to GANGS OF NEW YORK. I think we’ve seen both sides of the coin here on this amazing thread.
Maurizio-Youre dead on with your assumption that Scorsese Oscared in BEST PICTURE and DIRECTOR because of past Academy flubbs. 1976 is the biggest offender: he was not only denied the nomination for Best Director for TAXI DRIVER but the film (nominated) was clearly the best of the 5 films nominated. 1980 was a strange year. Marty received his best notices for RAGING BULL. The film nominated in just about every category, but the voters were reluctant to give it to a director with a long, promising career ahead of him. The Academy also had a hard time coming to grips with RAGING BULL. They didn’t know what to make of it and, frankly, ORDINARY PEOPLE (while terrific) was closer to the wholesome “safe” fare they felt safe giving the big prize. The wins for DEPARTED were major payback.
On par with AVIATOR? Maybe. But, I have to vehemently disagree with Sam that this film is on the same level with GANGS OF NEW YORK. The stunning recreation of the period, the flash editing not usually associated with historical dramas, the mix of new age rock and sounds of the time. GANGS is a breath-taker for almost 90% of it running time. And, let’s not forget the acting. Cameron Diaz FINALLY gave a good performance as the hooker. Jim Broadbent is perfectly slimy as the fat and greedy Boss Tweed. John C. Reilly is perfectly menacing and affably stupid as the cop. But, cutting through the film like the dorsal fin of a predatory shark cutting the water-line is the titanic DANIEL DAY LEWIS. His turn as the dictatorial and violently homicidal Bill Cutting is one for the time capsules. Scorsese’s direction it tight and the few narrative flaws barely register with all that’s going on. Its Marty’s answer to Kubricks CLOCKWORK ORANGE. As perverse and almost as striking. GANGS is Scorsese’s masterwork of the decade.
Just got back from holiday and what a lively discussion.
I’ve found this one to be a middling film by this director’s standards. Diverting and entertaining enough, which comes erractically and electrifying to life when it replicates and emulates the situation found in ‘No Way Out’/’The Big Clock’ – with the hero chasing his own shadow.
Marty’s flaw is a complete lack of empathy for his characters, so he can puting the plumbing together, but rarely get anything to run through the taps foe his audiences to latch onto (except for an element film buffery, whose criteria is all intellectualising over images and themes). Of his three masterpieces, for me, ‘Taxi Driver’, ‘Goodfellas’ and ‘Raging Bull’ – the first two achieve emotional frission through proximity to the central characters through the duration of the movie, the last gets by through sheer cinematically intoxicating craft with no emotional engagement, even as LaMotta smashes his head to a pulp….no emotion.
This one is a good policer, low-brow elements given a directorial sheen, and rewarded with a charity Oscar. At least he can’t go home sulking that he’s not part of the ‘in crowd’, of the establishment that denied both Hitch and Welles.
He has everything but soul. Though I expect great things from his next project, a documentry celebration of British cinema. Though I hope it’s balanced and not just Powell and ‘The Red Shoes’.
PS: As for ‘Taxi Driver’, a masterpiece for the ages but, even in 1976, it had ‘All the President’s Men’ and ‘Network’ of equal worth.
Bobby: You have been sorely missed at the site. I do hope you had a wonderful holiday.
Bobbyj, ATPM and Network were exceptional films, Taxi Driver was a great film, easily Scorsese’s best.
His documentary on British cinema will be good, he wanted to do it for the BFI for the Century of Cinema strand, ditto Italian, but he had to settle for the US one. He’s already done Italian, so it was understandable he’s do British, though let’s hope, as you say, he goes beyond Hitchcock, P&P, Lean and Reed to Ealing and the kitchen sink brigade, so much more out there.
I’ve read ‘Travis Bickle’ comes from Anderson’s ‘O Lucky Man’ character Mick Travis. Scorsese was that much of a fan. So I’d assume he’ll be touching on stuff like that.
BOBBY-I don’t think ythis film WAS SUPPOSED to be anything other than just “a good policer.” Taking that into account, I thank the director for taking on the project and perfecting what so often looks like evening network television trash. Basically, I think Marty is saying, like Stanley was saying about horror with THE SHINING, “look guys, you see this, THIS IS HOW ITS DONE!” I also think, that as a master film-maker, who’s more concerned about his art, that while having an Oscar is nice, he could care less about them. Yes, his British film project raises my interest and I can’t wait ti see what he gonna do with THE RISE OF THEODORE ROOSEVELT. I have my fingers crossed that he shelves the Sinatra biopic.
I’m a bit resistant Maurizio to including BRINGING OUT THE DEAD with those others, but it’s a position a number of people have enthusiastically posed.
BOBBY J.-No doubt that ALL THE PRESIDENTS MEN is a good solid film. But, to put it in the same leque with TAXI DRIVER is ludicrous. One is a by-the-numbers investigative political thriller, the other is, well, IS. NETWORK is tremendous and I think today its messages are even more spot on. Its PROBABLY Lumet’s greatest film and easily his funniest. But, again, the comparison is like apples and oranges. Two of the three are terrific memorable films. One of the three is an out and out classic and a masterpiece of artistic cinema to boot. Also take into consideration that only one of the three is cited as one of the ten best of that decade everytime the big brains get together whereas the other two don’t even come close. Sam throughs the words STAGGERING MASTERPIECE around a little too much for my taste (he needs a pacifier). However, TAXI DRIVER is that rare one that rightfully deserves those two big words.
There’s a tremendous brave audacity in Lumet’s ‘Network’ and in Pukula’s ‘All the President’s Men’ that pretty much matchs ‘Taxi Driver’. The one thing they lack is Herrmann. But, Dennis, I’m pretty much against putting one film above others. I think we should be thankful that we had three adult masterworks in one year. ‘Taxi Driver’ is one of those films that, if I catch it on a channel…I’m compelled to watch the whole movie. I’d rank it next to ‘Network’ and ‘The Godfather Pt 2’ and ‘The Red Shoes’….it’s sheer joy.
NETWORK, THE GODFATHER PT II and THE RED SHOES for sheer joy? I can think of a few words that can describe these three films… But, JOY? Jesus, THE GODFATHER PT II is a lot of things; bold, brilliant, fatalistic, disturbing and hard. I sense no joyous moments in this film to label it a joy. A masterpiece, yes. A joy? No way. NETWORK is hilarious, profane, telling, prophetic and insane. Joyous? Nah….. THE RED SHOES? You’re getting warmer. Here’s a few JOYOUS films that exude JOY: SINGIN IN THE RAIN, TOY STORY, THE WIZARD OF OZ, MARY POPPINS, E.T. THE EXTRA TERRESTRIAL, THE MUSIC MAN, ITS A MAD MAD MAD MAD WORLD, THE SOUND OF MUSIC, ON THE TOWN, THE QUIET MAN…. If those three bring joy, I’d seriously tell your shrink to switch your medications…. LOL!
Well maybe when one watches or sees brilliant, bold, contemplative art one feels joy. I know this is how I generally feel.
lol…..dennis, we don’t have shrinks in my neighbourhood!
Jamie is spot on and gets it.
I haven’t seen the film in ages, but am going to see the original since it’s on TV later this week.
I’d put both Taxi Driver and Network in my all-time top 20, and haven’t seen Rocky, so can’t comment on Marty losing that one.
dennis, did you just list The Quiet Man as a joyous film? It would push one to suicide….
The Quiet Man is about as joyous as having your spleen removed by being sucked through a straw while watching a beloved pet being thrown in front of a combine harvester. It’s understandably only sold with sick bags attached in Ireland. Only How Green Was My Valley is more unwatchable in Ford’s filmography.
I agree wholeheartedly with the first sentence.
HERRMANN’s score is one key element the other two films don’t have on there side. Try, as well, superlative editing by Marty and Marcia Lucas, Paul Schraders blistering screenplay, the grittily realistic to almost nightmarish cinematography by Micheal Chapman, Marty’s use of slow and elegant tracking shots that lead our eyes into places they would never, brilliantly go. Pile on a superlative supporting cast that includes the ever affable Albert Brooks, the sinuously sexy Cybill Shepard and the hilarious and wise Peter Boyle. Out of the stratosphere would be Jodie Foster’s 13 year old hooker and, in the performance that makes his bones, Robert DeNiro giving one for the history books. The Oscars got it all wrong that year. TAXI DRIVER should have taken Picture, Director, Screenplay, Actor, Supporting Actress, Editing and Music. And everyone knows it.
Nice Dennis, you seem to have a lot of “joy” and rapture for ‘Taxi Driver’. I’ll keep my joy for all three, though. But you have inspired me to carve a statue for Marty in the back garden. Though I think I’ll need two extra blocks of marbal for his eye-brows!
I just watched Infernal Affairs, and it’s superior to this in just about every regard. Shame on those who think otherwise.
I’m a bit resistant Maurizio to including BRINGING OUT THE DEAD with those others, but it’s a position a number of people have enthusiastically posed.