Oscar for film editing? ? I think not.

Rating: 7/10 (4 March 2005)

It's worth stating from the outset that I tend to notice things that others don't, and as such, I'm often "taken out of a movie", in other words, while I'm there to suspend disbelief, if some gross continuity error or obvious implausibility strikes me, and they often do, it takes me out of the experience just long enough to remind me that I'm just watching a movie, which tends to lessen the experience for me.
That said, what follows are a couple of brief and early-occurring spoilers which have nothing to do with the plot and will soon be forgotten if you should happen to see this flick, i.e. you can read the following comments without it affecting your appreciation of this movie.
There are a couple of scenes early on that appear in night clubs where the singers and/or musicians are not in sync with the soundtrack and dancers are not in step with the beat of the music. This is always a problem for me, but even more than usual when I have unrealistic expectations of Scorcese's work. Isn't making these things right part of film editing? And didn't this film just get an Acadamy Award for film editing? What's wrong with this picture? And, if that weren't' enough, in one of the aforementioned scenes, we are led to believe that two people will order dinner and eat in a ballroom which seems to be in a perpetual confetti snowstorm. Yum! ??? !! Soup with extra schmutz!
The glaring faux pas notwithstanding, there is much to recommend this film. The performances are at times great, the effects occasionally spectacular, the cinematography above average, the dialog often crackling and the overall experience well worth the effort of watching. It gets better and better, (and tighter), as it goes along.
You will enjoy this movie. Just don't expect it to be flawless.
8