An OK film but overblown, lacking characters and subtlety and with OTT performances to match

Rating: Null/10 (24 May 2004)

In 1980 the US opened its borders to Cuba to allow those with relatives in the USA to come over and join them. However Castro also takes the opportunity to clear out his jail and over 25000 people with criminal records come over. Among them are Antonio Montana and his friend Manolo, who do a killing for crime boss Frank Lopez in exchange for their green cards. When they carry out another job for Lopez, they are welcomed into the fold and they start to rise up the organisation. However Montana is ambitious and greedy and will not be content until he reaches the very top of the tree.
This film seems to have been raised up over time to the point where it is mentioned in the same breath as such superb films as The Godfather and Goodfellas but I must admit, having just seen it for the third time, that I simply cannot see why people seem to hold this in such high regard. It is a good film let me say, but it is not anything more than that. The story charts the rise and fall of drug lord Tony Montana and it is a sweeping tale that always has something going on and thus avoids being dull  however it is far from being without flaws. Comparing this tale to the Godfather is a joke. Montana is not a complex character  he is a grubby little fellow who gets inflated on his own greed and is as violent as he needs to be. As a result the story is rather simple and totally relies on actions rather than characters  making the film overblown for the most part and totally lacking any sort of subtlety or patience. Like Tony himself, the film is all about excess and it gets a bit tiring as a result. The story is ambitious and quite enjoyable but it is no more than that. The film was criticised for being excessively violent when it was released but now it just looks about par for the course; however you can see that it is being deliberately overly violent at times just to make an impact and, sadly, it rarely carries an emotional punch  only a visceral one. This is not too much of a criticism because gore and violence is still impacting on it's own but I always prefer to be emotionally involved rather than just watching it for its own sake and, for all it's memorable lines, the finale is just a hoot  OTT and silly!
The film may not have been written with any detail or interesting undercurrents but it does have plenty of memorable lines  which may be a big part of the reason that the film has been remembered for so long. Certainly it will not be remembered for it's well written characters! Montana is the main character and he is simply just a little coke head who is greedy  to compare him to Michael Corleone is a laugh, Montana has no complexity and no character and should not even be compared. Likewise in the supporting characters, there are no complex or even 3-D characters, they are all very simplistic and match the film's overblown nature. It is mostly for this reason that I consider the performances to be mostly poor. For some reason people hold this up as one of Pacino's best performances and I really wish I could understand where they are coming from. Because he has no character to work with Pacino has no choice but to just chew up the scenery. If you look up the word 'ham' in a dictionary you will not only find the description of 'meat from a pig' but you will find a reference to Pacino's performance in this film. He overacts without shame and is memorable for that reason, but to rank this as one of his best performances is just an insult to a great actor such as he  it doesn't compare to Godfather I & II or Dog Day Afternoon and, to me, it ranks as one of his most embarrassing moments of excess. The rest of the cast are just a collection of average 'cooooo-ban' performances albeit from quite a few well known names and faces  Loggia, Abraham, Shenar and Belzer all make appearances. Bauer is quite good but he has little to really work with. Pfeiffer has even less to do and is pretty wasted (literally!) in a minor role. Mastrantonio is a good actress but you wouldn't know it from this film  just like Pacino she is overblown and silly.
Overall this is an OK film that is ambitious but ultimately is not worthy of being mentioned in the same sentence as things like the Godfathers of Goodfellas. It lacks any sort of complexity or subtlety and is just energetic and noisy rather than being well written. De Palma directs in the same style  every scene is overblown and sweeping, a characteristic that the performances copy to cause a talented bunch of actors to be presented with no characters to speak of and just resort to overacting and scenery chewing  something that Pacino is particularly guilty of.