More of the same - good, but the same

Rating: 6/10 (9 October 2006)

Don't get me wrong, I am a big Marty Scorcese fan, but I want to point out a few things about his latest film that you may not have noticed because he has become so crafty over the years. These are some of the "tricks" or "Devices" which were cool in "Casino" when first used, but now that it is ten years later, they seem a bit tired and overused.
1. The use of Early Rolling Stones music under a scene. Can't you afford to hire a real composer? OK, we get it. Rolling Stones music is cool, but do you have to use it in every movie and have it play under scenes.
2. The steady cam shot into a place of business that the mob guy has dominion over: Although the steady cam shot in this film was relatively short, it still reeked of the same type of shot into the Copacabana club in "Good Fellas"
3. The Iris wipe. This, to me was never a good idea and in fact seems like a frustration of the "limitations" of film by Scorcese: Basically, the director can't find a way to focus our attention on a particular piece of business in the shot, so he narrows our field of view to exclude everything else except what he wants us to see.
4. Lots of graphic violence. Again, OK, we get it. Organized crime kills people and chops them up and puts their heads in vices and beats them with baseball bats: Hey, Scorcese has an excellent special effects team headed by Robert Legato that make those head splatter shots realistic, but really, there is more violence in a Scorcese picture than most Friday the 13th flicks. Can you tell the story with less on screen violence? It seems that Scorcese forgot that the audience has an imagination and that their imagination is more powerful than his special effects and stunt crew.
5. The "chop sound with picture" edit. Again, a cool and effective device for switching scenes, but again more of a crutch device. Can't you just find a clever way to edit from one scene to the next without chopping the music from the previous scene?
6. Stupid women. Aren't you ladies a little angry at how women are portrayed in Scorcese's films? Let's see, Jodie Foster is an under-age hooker in Taxi, Sharon Stone is a drugged-out gold-digger in Casino, and Vera Farmiga plays a Psychiatrist, but is basically pushed around and lied to the whole picture. I am guessing that this is reflecting Scorcese's Heritage's view of women as subservient, second-hand citizens. Imagine how much richer his films could be if he had the ability to portray a strong female character?
In summary, I really enjoy Scorcese's directing and his visual style. I am just disappointed that the little Italian man gets stuck in his bag of cinematic tricks. Imagine Hitchcock using a shower scene in several movies or Kubrick using a steady cam shot behind a big wheel more than once and you get the idea I am trying to get at.