Ad Libitum
I was just checking one of the sites I use to host my music. Confession of the Whole School songs have been listened to over 14,000 times. That’s not bad is it? And that’s just the number of ‘streamed’ plays from a single site! Anyway… ha ha! … if only I could translate that success into 14,000 album sales! That would make me a very happy man! Ha ha! Anyway… I’m glad people continue to enjoy my music.
The independent release of my music has been quite liberating. For you see… there was a time when the holy grail was getting signed to a “major label” – that was all you could really strive for. 99.9% of bands would fail. Now… 100% of bands can get their music to the masses. And for all the downsides… (a trillion crap bands!), there is now the chance to be true to yourself as a songwriter and just do what you want. I have only ever done what I want… and in the past that has sometimes got me into trouble. People would often think I was a control freak. But I’m not sure that being a control freak is necessarily a bad thing… in fact it’s an attribute that is positively sought after these days! Anyway… having my own studio has enabled me to be the master – in control of songwriting, performance, production and art direction. I love it.
The main aim for me is to make sure my music always has something interesting to communicate. My latest album, ‘The Galton Detail’, was the quickest album I’ve ever recorded. I abandoned my usual quest for ‘detail’, and just tried to let the songs ‘flow’ out of me. That sounds sexual… but it isn’t meant in that way. I just realised that sometimes people don’t necessarily care how long I have taken to write a song. I can layer all the detail in the world into a song and yet people will only really assess it in one way. Is it good or bad? So… I thought, “what the hell?, why not just bang an album out without dwelling on it?”. And that’s what I did.
… and just to piss on my own fireworks, my most played song at the moment is apparently ‘Dorian Gray’ from my ‘All Monsters and Dust’ album… a song that took years to complete! Ha ha! Always good when a monologue is destroyed in the final paragraph. Ha ha! Anyway… there was no real point to this post. I just wanted to say thank you all for being involved with my quest to keep thrusting music into the atmosphere. I feel swamped by the sheer amount of music that is out there and I’m sure some of you do too. The internet has changed the music industry and the by-product is an awful lot more crap to have to wade through. I’m just trying to keep the standards up. And I’m still on a break (WE WERE ON A BREAK!!!… oh, I watch too much Friends! Ha ha!). No, I’m still on a break. Watching films and listening to music. I’m trying to write a few more reviews too. I just know that a lot of people out there need to have an opinion from someone as opinionated and as amazingly knowledgeable (and humble) as me. Speak again soon.
Album Review: Maybeshewill – ‘I was here for a moment, then I was gone’
I am devouring new music. I have spent a few years avoiding too many new sounds so that my own albums exist in their own bubble, unaffected by outside interests. But now, I unwrap new music. CDs! I still buy a few CDs! Stick that in your pipe and smoke it!
I have mentioned in past reviews how I prefer to critique from afar. From across the span of a decade. To eat and drink an album to the point where you know it intimately.. to be able to truly see its value and place in history. Well… going against all that, I review this album from a position of no prior knowledge. I know nothing about this band. Nothing at all. I don’t know how this differs or betters anything else they’ve done. I don’t know what else they’ve done! This is therefore a blind test. This is my reasoning and justification for ignoring my previous sentiments. I like the idea of either reviewing with ALL knowledge… or reviewing with NO knowledge. For a little bit of knowledge can be a bad thing! So… Maybeshewill. Hmmm.
From the very opening seconds of “I was here for a moment, then I was gone” I knew I was going to like this album. It’s as if I’ve never been away from music. I’m picking up right from where I left off. The album opens with an immediate punch of epicness, and you know how much I adore epicness!!! Tinkling pianos, swelling strings and a choir of “ahhhhs”. I can indeed imagine filling the punch bowl for this creation. A healthy dash of Explosions in the Sky and a half bottle of Hope of the States. This is music that sits well in my frame of reference. The beautiful opening segues into first track proper “Take This to Heart”. A really cool stomping song that could be the theme for a Zombie film – I suggest 28 Days Later… or has that already been done? 😉 . It has that post rock feel. The sound of physical oxygen and carbon dioxide around the instruments. Air being moved. This is another quietLOUDquiet band and to a certain extent I’ve heard it all before. But that doesn’t stop the individual tracks pricking my ears and “Take This to Heart” for instance is smooth. It’s hard to put some of these sounds into words… but Maybeshewill‘s sound would make a good ‘spread’ for a sandwich. I don’t know how much of this album is sequenced and how much is played live but it sounds very, very real. This is an album after my heart… tugging at my hamstrings. Fragments of the album sound like the theme to Dexter, which I love. “Words For Arabella” has hand-claps and “Red Paper Lanterns” even has chimes! Yay! This is exquisitely crafted sound. However, like Three Trapped Tigers before it, this is well trodden ground. The post rock landscape is a dirty, desolate, solitary place with countless square miles of ground sodden with oil and the carcasses of all the ‘noise’ bands who came before. So… do Maybeshewill do enough to get my blood flowing?
This is a different beast to the feline antics of Three Trapped Tigers. Maybeshewill are not so heavily reliant on the extreme skills of one member of the band (Tiger‘s drummer). This band has an all round pretty sheen. For a post rock noise album “I was here for a moment, then I was gone” is actually quite gentle. And my does it flow. Like Chateauneuf du Pape down a greased, angled piece of glass. I suppose that’s the ‘smoothness’ coming in to play again! We are not going to escape the fast downward strummed electric guitar here. This is no place for alternate picking! Ha ha! Saying that, “Red Paper Lanterns” features a beautiful guitar melody which reminds me of some of the techniques of Joe Satriani. Strange that I’ve mentioned Satriani two reviews in a row now, for I bet he isn’t an influence on this band. They will probably deny his existence! Ha ha!
This album fizzes in places. Literally fizzes… like a can of freshly opened Coke (not Pepsi). Hmmmm… is that chugging power chords I hear on “Relative Minors”? Ha ha! Yes! More! Another very important point: the songs are short, most being around the 4 minute mark. This means the band are compressing ideas… getting straight to the point. There is no meandering here. If anything, this is as close to ‘pop singles’ as you’re going to get in the world of post rock! I appreciate it. Although I love long songs too it is nice for a band in this genre to be making a concerted effort to be concise.
Negatives… well, I hate to harp on and I realise I’m like a broken record… but it is a little clichéd to have no vocals. Yes, I know, I know… this is supposed to be instrumental music. I know that post rock doesn’t have vocals. I know it’s the antithesis of commercial rock. I know it is an attempt to bring to rock what electronic brought to pop. I know that Aphex Twin is a closer comparison to this music than the Rolling Stones. However, I would like these bands to keep pushing forward. And for me, well, I would love to hear what Maybeshewill could do with another weapon in their repertoire. The human voice is the most versatile of all instruments… come on someone on the scene… bring it into play!!!
An exquisite album. Well played, well thought out, well-intentioned. I’m not sure it truthfully offers much above and beyond what we’ve already been given by the likes of Explosions in the Sky. However, there is an increased sense of urgency on display here. This band has the ability to rock out balls-to-the-wall and still maintain the melody. This isn’t ‘clever’ music… this sound-scape retains emotion. And for that reason I give Maybeshewill an awful lot of credit. It’s hard to give a score to an album like this. I feel I have to fit it into the huge swathe of post rock bands in some way… like its achievement can’t make up for the fact that there are a thousand similar sounding bands at the moment. However… I shall give it a score based on how I feel. Take it or leave it. Great album. Fantastic album. I just don’t know whether it’s game changing. Simple as that.
Maybeshewill – I was here for a moment, then I was gone: 7/10
Album Review: Three Trapped Tigers – ‘Route One or Die’
Context… context is important to a review. To set the scene. I am ironing. Not just any ironing. This is ironing on the scale of the conquest of Everest. If and when I finish I will be honoured to the highest level. I expect a telegram from the Queen!!!
I choose to listen to an album by Three Trapped Tigers called “Route One or Die”. First things first. These guys can play their instruments. They are serious cats dude! Trapped cats! Ha ha! But do these cats emit the sound of a trapped cat? Or, more importantly, three trapped cats? For that would be a bad, bad sound!!!
There are times during this album when it sounds like the band are just about to fall off the stage. A cacophonous riot of avant-garde destruction almost on par with Explosions in the Sky at their noisiest. I expect the aforementioned band is an influence, for this is fundamentally a ‘post-rock project’. Post rock as a tag often puts fear into my heart. It is a style of music which appears to have no boundaries… and yet has given itself a very tightly fenced garden in the process. Crashing drums – check. ’70s prog rock keyboards – check. Manic guitar strums – check. No vocals – check. “Route One or Die” dwells within this garden… very safely in this garden. The three tigers are caged in this garden.
So… as I iron another t-shirt (how may t-shirts should a man have?)… I listen intently. I am not au fait with post rock really. I have tinkered on its outskirts… I have driven the car by, wound down the window and breathed in the stale post-apocalyptic air. But I have only stayed momentarily. I enjoy the extreme drumming, almost thrash drumming in fact. This album is at times as heavy as Metallica, sometimes even hitting Napalm Death levels of explosive noise. The final track, Reset, is one of these moments… after it is done emulating the melody of Spinal Tap‘s Stonehenge it spanks us hard with absolutely astonishing drumming. Adam Betts (I believe) hits those drums as if his pants depend on it. Incredible.
Throughout the album I am reminded of other bands. Sometimes hints… sometimes slaps in the face. I hear Yes in the arpeggios of the keyboards. I hear Joe Satriani in the melodies. I hear Explosions in the Sky in the quietLOUDquietness of it all. I hear War of the Worlds, Tubular Bells, DJ Shadow … I hear the 80’s TV programme Tripods. I hear fantastic musicianship. The drums are indeed the standout. Sheer power. This album is bringing my walls down. Manic, threatening, belligerent racket!
The album opens with a ‘song’ called Cramm. This track sums the band up perfectly adequately. If you like it then sit back and enjoy the rest. If you think it sounds like a noisy baby, trapped in a metal dustbin being rolled down the steps of a lighthouse then feel free to chuck the album straight in the nearest canal! Ha ha!
I like the scope… I like the interest brought about by the timing changes. This band has finesse, coupled with the ability to switch gears in an instant. When this band hits the ‘heavy’ switch you honestly feel like Chicken Licken waiting for the sky to fall on your head. Again… I think the drums are incredible. This is noise rock… but it could almost be categorised as a new era heavy metal rather than the electronic tag it’s usually filed under. These are real people playing real instruments and they absolutely slay! Massive. I would like vocals, more than just a few ahhs on the final track. I appreciate this style of music exists only without a vocalist, but I think it would be interesting to break a section of that garden fence. Or at least let one of the three tigers dig a small tunnel beneath it.
This is heavy, demanding, intelligent music that drives home a good ironing session. I am ironing faster than ever before! Music for ironing? Yes.
A score. Hmmm. This is a post rock noise album. And it does what it says on the tin. So… probably a straight 5/10. But I like the drums. I like the stutters. And most importantly… my kitten is loving it!!! Extra point! If the tigers had given me a couple of lyrical themes they might have got another point. But hey… 6 is bloody good! As I keep saying ad nauseum, I’m fed up with the 7-10 point scale. Use all ten bloody numbers people!
Three Trapped Tigers – Route One or Die: 6/10
The Conversation – A Study of Ambiguity
A Tuesday morning… I sit here again with the kitten in my lap. The flow of films which I have been casting my net over continues with, perhaps, an obvious choice. The Conversation. This is a mid ’70s film starring Gene Hackman and directed by Francis Ford Coppola. Actually, just saying “directed by” is doing Coppola a disservice. He actually wrote, produced and directed this film. For that reason this is a very personal film. Now… you could google the film title and find out all you need to know about the workings and the worth of this film. So I’ll just issue swathes of my own colour on the subject.
I’m taking a break from music at the moment. I completed a couple of albums recently and I feel the need to recharge my batteries. What better than to just discuss art that has influenced, or is influencing, my life? You’ll get a vibe of where I’m coming from… and I may just find a nuance for my next mojo-period.
The Conversation is a very interesting film. It has a pace that only ’70’s cinema seemed to allow. A slow, dripping, rhythmical time frame. The film’s plot concerns the intricacies of sound. Therefore… this film could be viewed as a piece of music that happens to have been filmed. Music as visual. Sound as sight. For me, this is the most important aspect of The Conversation.
Harry Caul is a professional eavesdropper. He uses the most modern methods of the time to record people’s conversations. He inhabits the background of life. He is a shadowy figure who is dedicated to his work at the expense of everything else. Gene Hackman pulls off the performance of his career here, and you can again draw a line through the likes of Taxi Driver and Raging Bull. The ‘actor’ portraying reality rather than ‘acting’.
Harry Caul is given an assignment to record a conversation between two people in a busy city centre. He does so, and then listens to the tape. He believes he’s stumbled upon a murder plot and goes about trying to save the people concerned. A very simple premise… made very complicated by the layers of impenetrable sound. This film is the audio equivalent of the ’60s film, Blow-Up (which is a classic film in its own right!).
This film has rhythm… almost pulsating. Not pulsating with ‘excitement’! This is a film that washes over you like ambient music. It’s not until the ending that the true ‘thriller’ nature becomes apparent. For the most part this film is a character study. In fact it seems I’ve been basking in ‘character study’ films recently.
The nature of the sound recording is fascinating to me. Remember that I am a music producer. The nostalgia, the clunkiness of the analogue tape reels. The wires, the buttons, the dust… Harry Caul lives the life that I hanker for – but a life that no longer exists. For we live in a different age. Honestly, any of you could download software from the internet right now that would put all the equipment in The Conversation to shame. But nevertheless… it still takes talent and dedication to derive meaningful sound from sub-par field recordings… and it is this time-consuming slog upon which The Conversation concentrates. I love this film. I remember seeing it when I was a teenager. I was hooked by it. Hooked in a way that the general public wouldn’t be. For, like the films I have reviewed before… this is no blockbuster. This is a heartfelt, personal trip. Coppola had just made The Godfather. When asked by the studio if he would make The Godfather Part II, Coppola replied “Only if I can make The Conversation“. He realised his personal flight of fancy on the back of a blockbuster. For this I tip my hat in his direction. This is a man who has made some of the greatest films of all time. And The Conversation might just be the best of them. I’m probably alone in that opinion… but as I say… this film has particular relevance to anyone who is interested in sound design.
A mention must be made to Harrison Ford’s performance. He plays the ‘baddie’ to a very sophisticated level considering how little he is actually required to do. A mesmerising performance and you can see how he rose through the ranks to be an international superstar.
So… I don’t necessarily feel I need to go any further. I just wanted to give you a flavour of a film that has resonance with me and my life. Only watch it if you enjoy slow, smouldering film. Otherwise you will cry “BORING!”. Ha ha!
Positives then? Gene Hackman, Harrison Ford. The study of personal freedom and loneliness. The camera work which feels like surveillance. At times you feel like you are a peeping tom looking into a man’s life where you have no place being. The technology is fantastic. The grime, the dedication, the obsession. The drip, drip of plot. The layering of detail. Detail upon detail until a picture begins to emerge. The sublime piano soundtrack (referenced years later in Zodiac – see the links? 🙂 ). This film is a study in ambiguity. There is a key line which Harry coaxes from his taped conversation, and depending on the way you hear the words – the inflections – depends on how you understand the plot.
The Negatives? Harry plays Saxophone to relax. I’m not a fan of the sax… reminds me of people at school who didn’t really like or understand music. When asked what their favourite instrument was they would always say “saxophone”. I wish Harry had played a bit of blues/jazz guitar.
There is a scene in the middle of the film where Harry brings a load of ‘friends’ back to his ‘secret’ sound studio. They hang out and party. This does not seem fitting for a character who has been established so strongly as a man dedicated to personal secrecy… to being unnoticed, to being a person with no ID. The scene is necessary for plot development… so I understand its inclusion… and I don’t feel it is a huge negative. I can kind of understand that Harry has been out for the evening with people who also work in surveillance and therefore people who he considers ‘friends’.. or at least ‘acquaintances’. Perhaps it’s a reveal that Harry is perhaps a little human after all.
So… a beautiful, intriguing personal film made by a great director at the very top of his game.
The Conversation – 9/10
Zodiac – A Study of Obsession
A review of another film that I love. Just me and my new kitten sitting here on a dreary Friday morning. It’s either write a review… or write a song. I’m not in the mood to write a song… so, I’ll try to convince you to watch another film that I think is worthy of your time. That pretty much explains my consistent high scores. I’m only reviewing films that I like. If I was reviewing the latest releases you would see a whole different world of scoring pain.
Zodiac is based on the true events concerning a 60s/70s America based serial killer. The distinguishing fact about this particular killer was that he chose to write letters to the papers, ‘Jack the Ripper’ stylee. He also used coded messages that required deciphering. He named himself ‘Zodiac’.
The film opens with a shock first kill before the opening credits. The first thing you notice is the gorgeous pastel shades and the beautiful lighting. Make no mistake, this is a pretty film – a very stylistic film, almost fake looking in the way that Edward Scissor Hands was. I’m watching on BluRay and the whole experience is stunning! Zodiac is directed by David Fincher, a favourite of mine, and his hallmarks are all over every scene. The opening credits warp you through a psychedelic 60’s drug induced haze into the film proper. And the film proper is a piece of 1970’s American cinema. The tone, aspects of the look, and especially the pacing are bang on 1970s modern American Cinema. This film is a kind of companion piece to movies such as All The President’s Men and The Conversation.
The film centres around the San Francisco Chronicle. The office of the paper actually reminds me of the office in All The President’s Men… you kind of know the path this film is going to take immediately. We are introduced to Paul Avery, the Chronicle’s crime reporter, played by Robert Downey Jr. Avery is a troubled individual and Downey Jr plays him with downtrodden style. I think this is a tour de force by Downey Jr. He nails the role.
We are also introduced to cartoonist, Robert Graysmith, played by Jake Gyllenhaal. Graysmith is an oddly introverted character and in this respect Gyllenhaal is an example of perfect casting. Graysmith becomes obsessed during the course of the film with identifying the Zodiac killer. In fact the book he eventually writes is the source of inspiration for this film.
I just have to hark back to the visuals again. This is a stunningly shot film. The effects work is superb throughout and is so subtly done that a lot of the audience would probably be unaware of its existence! 25 minutes into the film we are subjected to an awesome ‘original Grand Theft Auto-esque’ top down shot of a taxi ride. This plan view tracking shot is like a living video game… absolutely phenomenal. You can probably pick up on the fact that I like the look of this film!
Let’s mention the music. Fantastic choices of rock music to indicate the passing of time and beautiful interconnecting piano pieces. The soundtrack is consistent with the film’s 70’s leanings.
I mentioned the passing of time. This film is very much about time. The film spans decades and Fincher’s use of visual and audio techniques to show the passage of time is incredible. Of course, with the passing of time comes the progression of character. Avery disintegrates, Graysmith disintegrates and integrates … not sure that reads right! Ha ha! Graysmith’s life crumbles and yet his personal resolve builds.
On the police side of things we have Dave Toschi (played by Dave Ruffalo) and Bill Armstrong (played by Anthony Edwards). At one point Toschi is wearing a Columbo style mac. This film is just my kind of film!!! The obsession with the Zodiac killer drives both men to despair. You can see similarities between Avery and Toschi. Personal destruction brought about by obsessive behaviour. In fact you can almost think of this film as a study of obsession.
So… the Zodiac killer. This film is similar to All The President’s Men in its depiction of the progress of a story based on fact. There are also hints of Stone’s JFK in that Fincher seems to point us towards a suspect. A suspect that is made out by the film to be the true suspect. This reminds me of all those ‘Jack the Ripper’ documentaries that each purport to have finally identified the killer. What, for me lifts this film above other ‘crime’ thrillers is the showing of the forensic detail. This may be as a result of a decade of CSI on the television… but I believe that it’s really just Fincher wanting to present the case as is. For me, this film presents the minutiae of the forensic case brilliantly. Footwear mark evidence, so often to this day the ugly, neglected sibling of the fingerprint, is brought to the fore. Fingerprints, ballistics, similarities in modus operandi and thorough research are shown in all their dry, drawn out glory.
What interests me the most is the weight of ‘truth’ and ‘value’ placed purely upon questioned document evidence in the Zodiac case. The film shows suspects being ruled out purely because their handwriting does not match the letters attributed to the Zodiac killer. Even when a whole wealth of other circumstantial evidence would appear to make someone a prime suspect, the opinion of the handwriting expert is the be all and end all. Okay, I accept that the police at the time only really had the letters as a solid link between the crimes. The surviving witnesses all described different looking people as being the killer. Also, there was no DNA evidence back then. All the killer really had to do was wear a pair of gloves, be careful, and he would have had very few problems with evading capture. But the killer chose to write those letters. Therefore I do understand how those letters became so important in establishing a case against any suspect. However, there are so many flaws with using handwriting evidence as a bedrock for an investigation. I really found this aspect of the film rather good. I was impressed by the fact that so much time was given to the discussion of this evidence – evidence that may have in fact hindered rather than helped all concerned.
In the end the film can be viewed in two ways: One, as the accurate-ish depiction of behind the scenes work on a serial killer case. Two, as the destruction of people’s lives as the result of an obsession.
So, I feel like I should trot out my usual positive/negative paragraphs as I work towards a score.
Positives: Robert Downey Jr is superb. I’m a fan of his anyway, but he does excel here! The acting in general is just outstanding. Brian Cox gives a mountain of a performance and all the leads act their hearts out! I think I need to single out the actor who plays the ‘main suspect’. He is terrifying. Great job! I love the visuals of the film and the marvellous representation of the passing of time. I love the ruthless intelligence and the trust of the director that the audience will be ‘fit for purpose’ regarding the forensic detail.
Negatives: Hmmmm. If I’m going to be picky I’d rather Robert Downey Jr had actually talked during the film rather than mumbled. On a 10th watch I have no problems with it… but recalling my first viewing I do remember shouting “What? .. WHAT?!?” at the screen a few times! 😉
I am not a fan of Jake Gyllenhaal, so that should be enough to knock a point off right there. However, I am man enough to admit that he’s good in this film… so… I’ll put that complaint on the back burner.
Also, a lot of the actors in the film have now cropped up on TV shows. They are all excellent… and it’s not the film’s fault. This is my problem! I see the handwriting expert and think “Hey, it’s Larry David’s doctor!!!”. This is my problem. For example, in this specific case, the actor who plays the handwriting expert is an excellent old guy. He is brilliant in this and Curb. He improves the film. Therefore this negative is my problem! For me to live with and get over!!!
The end. It’s kind of unsatisfying… but again, not really a fault of the film. More a fault of reality!!! I’ll also call a negative at a great scare towards the end which turns out to be a cinematic, story-telling trick. The kind of scare a horror film throws at you when it just SUDDENLY SCREAMS REALLY LOUDLY in a quiet bit! Ha ha! But the scare in this film is at least carried out with some panache. And if I was gonna re-cut the film I’d leave the section in… so, really, how much of a negative do I consider it?
So… who was the Zodiac killer? The film puts enough circumstantial evidence forward for their prime suspect – enough for me to buy into it. However, having read around the case the whole thing is a bit of a minefield. DNA evidence here, fingerprints there. I think, to be honest, it’s all too long ago to ever get a handle on now… unless some new evidence is one day uncovered.
Hmmmm. So, a score, a score…
Zodiac – 9/10
Raging Bull – A Study of Jealousy
Another day another review. Another Martin Scorcese film. Perhaps THE Martin Scorcese film.
Raging Bull opened the 1980s. Filmed in gritty black and white and shot in an authentic documentary style, this film is an artistic marvel. Scorcese is at his best here, filling every frame with total, uncompromising power.
This is a truly brutal film. Physically and emotionally brutal. There are devastating scenes of emotional and physical abuse… make no mistake, this is not a popcorn flick. This film is no Shutter Island. In fact it shares more with a film I have reviewed previously, Taxi Driver. For this film too is like an essay on relationships and violence. This film is, more specifically, a study of jealousy.
Raging Bull is, at face value, a film about boxing. However, it is actually nothing of the sort. Let me explain. Raging Bull tells the story of middleweight boxer Jake LaMotta and his battles with the people around him, and most importantly the war with himself. You see, Jake LaMotta is a jealous guy. He is also an intensely unlike-able character. Whereas, for all his faults, I could relate in many ways to Travis Bickle in Taxi Driver and find a modicum of ‘goodness’ deep within, Jake LaMotta is a more detestable prospect. There are parallels between Taxi Driver and Raging Bull and perhaps we are viewing portrayals of men with mental health issues. These films are studies. And for my money, Raging Bull is the ultimate character study. Boxing takes a back seat. Boxing is the vehicle used to forward the story, but this is not a boxing film.
I love the Rocky films. I regard the first film in the series extremely highly. And in some ways, Rocky wasn’t actually a film about boxing either. Rocky was the story of a loveable loser who overcame the odds to make something of his personal life. Raging Bull is the story of an unlovable loser who overcomes the odds stacked very much in his favour, to destroy himself. I try to give nothing away in my reviews. I want you to be able to watch the film and experience it for the ‘first time’. Safe to say though that you can expect a rough ride with the story of Jake LaMotta. The film is based on the memoir ‘written’ by LaMotta himself. It has been adapted by Paul Schrader who also wrote Taxi Driver. Between the recollections of LaMotta, the known facts, and the filter of Schrader’s very much opinionated mind we get one of the bleakest portrayals of a jealous man ever committed to celluloid.
The film’s opening titles are an amazing sequence combining classical music with a boxer in the ring. The story itself is bookended by an older LaMotta, a cabaret LaMotta, going through the motions backstage at a comedy club. This allows the flashback for the main film. Robert De Niro plays LaMotta and this is probably De Niro’s best performance. He is gripping, scary, brutal and awe-inspiring. It is one of those ‘movie clichés’ that in preparing for the role, De Niro became so good at boxing that people suggested he could have won the middleweight title for real. I don’t know about that… but I do know that I wouldn’t have wanted to have met Di Niro in a back alley in 1980! (besides which, I would only have been 5 or something!!!). This is truly De Niro’s film, his tour de force. LaMotta’s intense violence is shocking. De Niro’s playing of that violence is magnificent. Who the hell could play a supporting role to this majesty of acting? Step forward one Joe Pesci.
Joe Pesci is absolutely outstanding in the role of LaMotta’s brother. Anyone who has seen him in action in Casino or Goodfellas perhaps knows what to expect. I think this is the first time Robert De Niro and Joe Pesci had worked together. Joe Pesci is a frightening presence. Even cowering in the huge shadow of LaMotta, Pesci’s character Joey is a scarily violent, knife-edge presence. De Niro and Pesci are like a double act… a shocking double act. In fact, for the two lead performances alone this film should be a 10 out of 10. Hmmmm… 10 out of 10. This film could be a 10 out of 10!
Brutal boxing scenes. I haven’t even really mentioned the brutal boxing scenes. These scenes of carnage litter the movie to advance the story – to show the onward march of LaMotta’s career. They are filmed with so much trickery, so much magic. Scorcese is at the very top of his game. The boxing is so real it hurts to watch. The documentary style of cinematography is absolutely fitting for this film. I have been watching the Blu-ray disc and I’ve got to say it looks superb. The film grain and the searing black and white makes the film leap from the screen.
The scene where LaMotta asks his brother to punch him in the face is one of those classic moments of cinema. 10 out of 10 written all over it. This film is a complete study of dysfunctional relationships, jealousy and violence.
So far so good… any negatives? Hmmmm. Well, I have to mention Cathy Moriarty as LaMotta’s abused wife Vicky. I’ve just never been sure about her performance. She’s stunning to look at… but, well… I just don’t know. At the start of the film I think she’s supposed to be about 15. I just don’t buy it. Her acting seems out of sorts too. I could draw comparisons to Cybil Shepherd in Taxi Driver – a similar kind of detached playing of a role. But whereas I buy into Cybil Shepherd, I just remain unconvinced by Moriarty. This is not a huge negative for there are points in the film where she excels. I just don’t think she quite competes with De Niro and Pesci…. but then, realistically, who could?
Some of the make-up worn by De Niro throughout the film, the prosthetics perhaps rather than the make-up, to give him a beat up look do not always totally convince. Don’t get me wrong, this isn’t gonna knock a mark off the score, and most of the time it looks excellent… it’s just that ‘sometimes’ it looks to me a little odd.
And… what is up with Joe Pesci’s hair?!? Again, not enough to knock a mark off… but his hair is just mad!!!
I think my main concern with the film would be the pacing. This is a slow film. I like it. I love it. But I can imagine others finding it really tough going. I would compare it to Bladerunner, a similarly slow film. I love the building of layers in film. I love the intensity created by having the freedom to linger on a subject. The kind of lingering that was tolerated in 70s cinema. But others won’t love the linger… they will just turn off. Consider the type of films that you like. If you like Transformers you will HATE Raging Bull!!! I am not joking. One of the best films of all time or not… you will HATE it! For me, I would have liked the pace to have been tightened a little… but this is not a film you watch for fun. This film is an educational experience!
Overall… this is a monumental film. A work of art. As I said with Taxi Driver… if you want to read the score as a 10 out of 10 then go ahead. It really is that good. However, due to Cathy Moriarty and the issues with pacing I have to knock two marks off. Remember though… I use the whole scale. I have no issue with giving a film 5 if it’s average. I don’t know where the idea of only using the 7 – 10 range of a ten point scale came from?!?
Raging Bull – 8/10
confessionofthewholeschool.com 