I started watching
GoodFellas (maybe [noembed]
the opening scene[/noembed] is not fresh with you) but the three guys – Jimmy (DeNiro), Henry (Liotta), and Tommy (Pesci) - are in the car wondering what the noise is is just pathetic. They know there is a guy in the trunk, sure he is supposed to be dead, but they start hypothesizing “the timing belt”, “a flat” – ‘I guess we better pull over and see’ says Tommy. If you hear a noise in the car, are you not going to be able to tell it is in the trunk – especially when you know there is a guy there? I wouldn’t expect such a poor treatment from a high school video-maker, but Scorsese? In one of his more highly revered films? Come on! That completely wrong set-up along with a very staged-feeling interior of the car started to worry me for how bad I was apparently going to think the film was, flying in the face of most every Scorsese-worshipping Filmspotter. Fortunately, with the quick turn to Henry’s statement “As far back as I can remember, I always wanted to be a gangster” and the scenes of his childhood, Scorsese solidly takes control of the story. (And before I stray too far, what is up with those “car-like” opening credits? Very unimpressive.)
Present-day Henry provides voice-over for scenes from his childhood. We are told that he enjoyed the power and “respect” from being associated with the mob and that the mob was really looking out for their own when the police and other institutions would not. So I am getting swept up with young Henry, the idea of parallel institutions, community, chosen family, all that good stuff – thematically it seems the film is hitting its stride and meshing with ideas I tend to value. Then, it begins, the excessive violence and clever bits start creeping in and taking over. The film feels as if it is trying to stay true to the story it is based upon, thus the matter-of-fact killings are not held up for judgment, instead included just as ornamental plot points. The killings are not portrayed as ethically problematic, instead it is the deviations from expected behavior, seen most clearly with Tommy, that are ethically troublesome in this world. Not to harp on the issue, but the film, while technically well crafted, just doesn’t do it for me in the story or meanings departments.
Safe, while also technically well crafted (and without some of the transparent set pieces that
GoodFellas suffers), raises interesting issues – mainly (mental) health and environment(al illness) with strong suggestions that Carol’s condition is aggravated by gender relations– while maintaining compelling plot trajectory and character development. In fact, the sound design of
Safe, consisting primarily of white noise, perfectly suits both the psychological state of the protagonist Carol White (in Julianne Moore’s best performance) as well as the social status of the environment as “background noise” and the booming industry of Syndromes. Further, place is rarely such a consistently compelling aspect of a film, here Haynes has imbued White’s home and car, highways, hospitals, parking garages, as well as the retreat center as characters and characteristic of Carol’s illness. The haunting finish is one of the finest in film.
I can't believe I haven't alienated everyone with my choices thus far, but if I had anyone left on my side, I reckon this has put an end to that. Going in, I actually suspected I would go with
GoodFellas - what can I say, I much prefer
Safe