CrankyÕs Flickershow Reviews
Neil Richter
Marty vs. The Man With No Name
Many
are speculating that this will be the year that Martin Scorsese finally gets
his much-deserved Oscar. His The Departed proved both a critical and a popular triumph, MartyÕs biggest
box-office success ever. Thematically, it was a thrilling return to form. His
last two films, the mammoth historical epic Gangs of New York and the Howard Hughes biopic The Aviator, received a certain degree of derision from critics
who felt that he was ÔOscar-baitingÕ. That is, desperate for the statuette, he
decided to go for the most epic project he could find in an effort to wow the
academy. Both were nominated for multiple Oscars, including best director, but
in typical academy fashion Scorsese was snubbed. When watching The Departed however, it is clear that Scorsese made this film for
himself and himself alone. There is no sense that he is Ôputting on airsÕ of
any sort. This is a down and dirty gangster film, densely plotted and dazzlingly
edited (thanks to ace work from his longtime collaborator and editor Thelma
Schoonmaker). Personally, I feel that Scorsese has never had a better chance at
nabbing his long-overdue Oscar.
Despite
all this though, a major obstacle lurks. Academy favorite Clint Eastwood is in
the running, and as he has proved in the past, he is a formidable opponent. The
man is a living icon with an undeniable pull when it comes to Academy voters. With
his Letters From Iwo Jima just now
getting a wide release, only time will tell how the public will respond to his
retelling of the titular World War II battle. What we do know is that it has
proven itself one of the major critical successes of the year. Whats more,
EastwoodÕs film is the kind of picture that makes Academy members drool. For
one itÕs billed as a war picture with a conscience, which means it secures
three criteria right away: itÕs a downer, it has a central ÔmessageÕ about us
as human beings, and its epic. The Departed doesnÕt quite live up to these standards. For one,
despite its gruesome subject matter, it remains a startlingly glib film, often
spitting out jokes and bloodied bodies in tandem, something thatÕs bound to
ruffle more than a few feathers. Even moreso, it never aspires to be anything
other than a truly magnificent piece of pulp. Needless to say it succeeds
brilliantly in its modest aims. Despite all this, EastwoodÕs film has the grave
laboriousness of a ÔseriousÕ film, something ScorseseÕs funhouse ride of a
movie lacks. Still, we arenÕt talking about best picture here, though both
films are nominated in that category. WeÕre talking about directing. All of
this would be speculative if Eastwood didnÕt have such a triumphant track
record when it comes to Academy voters. Case in point is his performance at the
last two academy awards. Mystic River
and Million Dollar Baby dominated
the nominations, with Mystic River netting him a best director nomination, and Million
Dollar Baby getting him the statuette
for both best director and picture. What was even more surprising was the
fawning that took place whenever one of EastwoodÕs films came up for scrutiny. Nobody
had a bad word to say about Mr. Eastwood. As I said before, heÕs a living
legend, both to his colleagues and the public in general. Scorsese, on the
other hand, has always been an outsider. His films are too profane, too
violent, too much. TheyÕre
practically hyperactive when compared to the EastwoodÕs straightforward style
as a director. Evidence of this can be found when one looks at budgeting. Scorsese
is not a cheap filmmaker. His Gangs of New York went epically over-budget and The Departed cost an
estimated 90 million dollars to bring to the screen. Eastwood is a polar
opposite. One of the reasons that film studios like him is his supremely frugal
reputation. When making a film, he has been known to pay special attention to
budget constraints, making sure that no extraneous spending takes place. For
example, Mystic River and Million
Dollar Baby both cost an estimated 30
million dollars apiece. ThatÕs only two thirds of what it took to finish The
Departed. This frugality, though not
necessarily an artistic asset, is something that continues to endear Eastwood
to the big decision-makers in Hollywood.
Truth
be told, it is too early to tell who will win this yearÕs Oscar race for best
director. Perhaps a dark horse will come into the running and surprise us all. From
my humble perspective however, it is between these two titans. In my mind,
Scorsese is the deserving winner. The Academy owes him a whole truckload of
Oscars for snubbing his magnificent work on Taxi Driver in favor of Rocky way back in 1976. Nonetheless,
Eastwood seems to have the upper hand. Still, we can always hope. After all,
isnÕt this the industry that makes dreams come true?
02/15/07