The Four Word Film Review Fourum

All Forums

Film Related

Films

American Gangster - inevitable spoilers

Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!

Screensize:

UserName:

Password:

Format Mode:

Format:

Message:

Smilies

[quote][i]Originally posted by BaftaBaby[/i]
[br][url="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0765429/"]American Gangster[/url]

I'm doing one of my tie-in pieces to this for the M* but just wanted to share a few thoughts about it here, too.

From the first few shots of a super-confident Denzel Washington, we think we know whom we're dealing with. A guy's covered in something flammable, crying and begging for his life as Denz lights a cigar, then flips the fire. Then, and with only a slight tightening of his jaw, Denz pumps unnecessary bullets into the human torch.

This cat ain't afraid. He breakfasts on nails, preferably rusty ones, and he doesn't take chances. But something, too, makes him want to put out of its agony, someone who's suffering. It could be a cheap shot, but Denz makes it creditable.

Sometimes film pedigrees pay off, and I'm happy to report that in the capable hands of Ridley Scott, based on a screenplay by Steve Zallian, teaming with the wit and timing of editor Pietro Scalia and cine-crispness of cinematographer Harris Savides - not to mention a cast who collectively serve the film rather than their egos -- the project conspires to engage both viscerally and intellectually.

It's a true story - often told in the cine-style of the gangster era it evokes, i.e. the 1930s -- in some of those scenes if you faded out the color you might be watching something by Howard Hawks or Michael Curtiz. But as well as revealing what went on in the takeover of the drugs trade by Frank Lucas from the Italian syndicates who controlled NYC's biggest illegal moneyspinners, the film also explores how the situation got so out of control and why so little was officially done about it.

At one point, good cop Richard Roberts [Russell Crowe] wonders whether the powers that be actually want to end the thriving drugs trade since it would put a hundred thousand people out of a job.

There are several almost throw-away observations like that strewn through what is an engaging, if slightly tangled plot. It really puts the current international epidemic into perspective. I'll leave it to you to connect your own dots.

Only one strand seems ill thought out and it's easy to see why it's there at all. Because Lucas is humanized by his range of scenes, we needed some balance with Roberts. So we get tasters of an ambition to become a lawyer - working all day doing cop stuff and then off to night school - a relationship falling apart with divorce procedings looming, yada yada. Only it's either not enough to really care or too much not to feel diverted. So, with a final cut at 2 hours, there's no room to make the film into even more of a novel.

One of the things Scott and company manage to do - as well as tell the complex story with much humanity - is to make us see that in a NYC world of suppurating corruption set against the backdrop of a corrupt war in a faraway country - what pissed off both the cops and the Mafia was that a black man had dared not only to emulate their methods but to improve on them.

Scott's film never excuses or justifies that Frank Lucas became as powerful as he did before being brought down by a hen's-teeth rare team of honest investigators. [And if you think I'm exaggerating, by the time the saga winds up, over two-thirds of the NYPD narc squad were arrested and jailed for corruptioni.]

But -- and there's a scene of potent modesty between Washington and Crowe on either side of a prison interview room table which exemplifies what I'm talking about - we are constantly reminded of the social context that makes this a tale worth telling.

Let's just mention the acting again. Both Washington and Crowe are superb - really it's some of the best work of each of them, and it seems to matter to each of them, as well.

But there's a stand-out supporting performance that would win let alone be nominated for every award going if I ruled the world ... that of the great Ruby Dee. A giantess in the body of a tiny old woman. Dee has always commanded every moment from her first forays on stage with husband Ossie Davis. She doesn't have that much screen time here, but just watch her set up your expectations of her character, then in very tiny ways completely subvert them. I'll bet on the page Mama Lucas is a bit of a cipher - but Dee could read off the phonebook and make those numbers come alive.

[/quote]

- HTML is OFF | Forum Code is ON

Check here to include your profile signature.

T O P I C R E V I E W
BaftaBaby	Posted - 11/16/2007 : 17:10:36 American Gangster I'm doing one of my tie-in pieces to this for the M* but just wanted to share a few thoughts about it here, too. From the first few shots of a super-confident Denzel Washington, we think we know whom we're dealing with. A guy's covered in something flammable, crying and begging for his life as Denz lights a cigar, then flips the fire. Then, and with only a slight tightening of his jaw, Denz pumps unnecessary bullets into the human torch. This cat ain't afraid. He breakfasts on nails, preferably rusty ones, and he doesn't take chances. But something, too, makes him want to put out of its agony, someone who's suffering. It could be a cheap shot, but Denz makes it creditable. Sometimes film pedigrees pay off, and I'm happy to report that in the capable hands of Ridley Scott, based on a screenplay by Steve Zallian, teaming with the wit and timing of editor Pietro Scalia and cine-crispness of cinematographer Harris Savides - not to mention a cast who collectively serve the film rather than their egos -- the project conspires to engage both viscerally and intellectually. It's a true story - often told in the cine-style of the gangster era it evokes, i.e. the 1930s -- in some of those scenes if you faded out the color you might be watching something by Howard Hawks or Michael Curtiz. But as well as revealing what went on in the takeover of the drugs trade by Frank Lucas from the Italian syndicates who controlled NYC's biggest illegal moneyspinners, the film also explores how the situation got so out of control and why so little was officially done about it. At one point, good cop Richard Roberts [Russell Crowe] wonders whether the powers that be actually want to end the thriving drugs trade since it would put a hundred thousand people out of a job. There are several almost throw-away observations like that strewn through what is an engaging, if slightly tangled plot. It really puts the current international epidemic into perspective. I'll leave it to you to connect your own dots. Only one strand seems ill thought out and it's easy to see why it's there at all. Because Lucas is humanized by his range of scenes, we needed some balance with Roberts. So we get tasters of an ambition to become a lawyer - working all day doing cop stuff and then off to night school - a relationship falling apart with divorce procedings looming, yada yada. Only it's either not enough to really care or too much not to feel diverted. So, with a final cut at 2 hours, there's no room to make the film into even more of a novel. One of the things Scott and company manage to do - as well as tell the complex story with much humanity - is to make us see that in a NYC world of suppurating corruption set against the backdrop of a corrupt war in a faraway country - what pissed off both the cops and the Mafia was that a black man had dared not only to emulate their methods but to improve on them. Scott's film never excuses or justifies that Frank Lucas became as powerful as he did before being brought down by a hen's-teeth rare team of honest investigators. [And if you think I'm exaggerating, by the time the saga winds up, over two-thirds of the NYPD narc squad were arrested and jailed for corruptioni.] But -- and there's a scene of potent modesty between Washington and Crowe on either side of a prison interview room table which exemplifies what I'm talking about - we are constantly reminded of the social context that makes this a tale worth telling. Let's just mention the acting again. Both Washington and Crowe are superb - really it's some of the best work of each of them, and it seems to matter to each of them, as well. But there's a stand-out supporting performance that would win let alone be nominated for every award going if I ruled the world ... that of the great Ruby Dee. A giantess in the body of a tiny old woman. Dee has always commanded every moment from her first forays on stage with husband Ossie Davis. She doesn't have that much screen time here, but just watch her set up your expectations of her character, then in very tiny ways completely subvert them. I'll bet on the page Mama Lucas is a bit of a cipher - but Dee could read off the phonebook and make those numbers come alive.
9 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First)
MisterBadIdea	Posted - 11/26/2007 : 16:28:45 quote: The other thing is Heat is actually viscerally exciting throughout I don't have much to argue about the rest of your post, which I think is pretty insightful. But I'm going to have to disagree on this point at least -- "Heat" is a self-important and joyless film about miserable people. "American Gangster" is short on the actual drama, I agree, but I still prefer it and I like this particular approach -- it gives the idea of real life unfolding. Even without the traditional narrative motion, I find the interplay between Denzel and Crowe far more interesting simply because the good guys are good guys and the bad guys are bad guys. "American Gangster" isn't exciting, no -- but it's very interesting.
demonic	Posted - 11/24/2007 : 01:26:06 quote: Originally posted by MisterBadIdea One thing I really liked about this movie is that, like Heat, both men look at each other as equals because that's exactly what they are. But in Heat, they're equals because they're both beaten-down and weary and in American Gangster, they're equals because they're both damn good at what they do. Honestly, I think Heat is pretty overrated, and American Gangster does a lot of the things that people say Heat does. Interesting comments from all. Finally it didn't engage me in the way I wanted it to, can't really explain why that is, but something MBI wrote above made me think about it. Scott, or the script, tried just a little too hard to make the stereotypical role-reversal obvious: the criminal is the suit-wearing gentleman, concerned with honesty and justice, and the cop is the slouching chancer prepared to bend the rules with a disasterous private life to boot, which was a bit too (forgive the pun) black and white for me. In Heat the men were practically the same man, with strong good and bad traits - they just happened to be on different sides. The other thing is Heat is actually viscerally exciting throughout, whereas AG only really kept me following for two hours and excited for the last 30 minutes. It took forever for there to be a decent moment of actual drama - I think when Crowe has to confront the Special Investigations unit for his marked bills. I can watch Heat repeatedly, but although the quality of the acting was good, I don't think I'd really care too much about giving American Gangster many more viewings down the track. Oh, and I should say, how off the mark are the reviews that draw comparison to The Godfather. How ridiculous. If anything it brought to mind the very film it name checks - the French Connection, but didn't set the pulse racing like that film either.
damalc	Posted - 11/20/2007 : 17:52:43 i mentioned this before in a round of fycth, but since AG has its own thread now, i'll say it again. i thought it was one of the best acted movies, considering the whole cast, that i've seen in a while. brilliant performances from Washington, Crowe, Dee, Williams III, Ejiofor, Brolin. even RZA, or The Abbot, Bobby Digital, Prince Delight or whatever the hell he's going by these days, was nice. i think they have a good shot at the SAG award for cast performance.
BaftaBaby	Posted - 11/20/2007 : 14:23:27 quote: Originally posted by Salopian Nice Morning Star piece, B.B., which made me think about the title of the film. I normally dislike all these American --- titles (as I'm sure you've noticed, no other nationality does this), but perhaps it is intentionally making a point this time. Thanks, Sal ... I'm sure you're right about the title
Demisemicenturian	Posted - 11/20/2007 : 14:15:14 Nice Morning Star piece, B.B., which made me think about the title of the film. I normally dislike all these American --- titles (as I'm sure you've noticed, no other nationality does this), but perhaps it is intentionally making a point this time.
MisterBadIdea	Posted - 11/19/2007 : 21:27:54 One thing I really liked about this movie is that, like Heat, both men look at each other as equals because that's exactly what they are. But in Heat, they're equals because they're both beaten-down and weary and in American Gangster, they're equals because they're both damn good at what they do. Honestly, I think Heat is pretty overrated, and American Gangster does a lot of the things that people say Heat does.
RockGolf	Posted - 11/19/2007 : 17:10:16 While I suspect any of 50 actors could have played Crowe's role, I can't imagine anyone playing Lucas better than Denzel. There is such an intensity to the man. Look at one scene he has in front of a fireplace. You can read about 15 things going on inside his head, even though he doesn't say a word or move a muscle. I agree about Ruby Dee. What a class act she is. Anyone know why Clarence Williams III (Linc Hayes from TV's "The Mod Squad"), who appears in a short but critical role as "Bumpy" Johnson at the beginning of the film is not credited? He doesn't even get an "uncredited" credit on IMDB.com.
BaftaBaby	Posted - 11/18/2007 : 10:10:36 quote: Originally posted by Salopian quote: Originally posted by BaftaBabe Frank Lewis It's Lucas. oops! Fixed now - thanks, Sal!
Demisemicenturian	Posted - 11/18/2007 : 02:24:28 quote: Originally posted by BaftaBabe Frank Lewis It's Lucas. The film's good but not great: the I.M.D.B. score is strangely high at 8.4. It's currently got a low 5/5 from me and may slip to 4/5.

The Four Word Film Review Fourum

Snitz Forums 2000