American Gangster tells the story of two men. Frank Lucas (Denzel Washington), a Harlem drug dealer, who revolutinized the heroin business from 1968 to 1973, and Richie Roberts (Russell Crowe) the honest cop who brought him down. The movie moves back and forth between the two characthers, each of them are equally interesting. Frank Lucas is an exemplary businessman, smart serious and humble. Roberts is the kind of man whos only good at his job. Between divorce proceedings he turns in one million dollars in unmarked bills at a time when that sort of thing was looked down upon with suspicion. The movie, which is based on a true story, looks and acts authentic (I don't know what it is about the 70s, but it always appears as grungy and dirty. Did they not have barbers or showers then?) This is an incredibly solid movie and it is as good as it is on paper as it is on the screen. It's two hours forty-five minutes long and never boring. It's not a great Ridley Scott film like Alien, Blade Runner, Thelma and Louise, or Gladiator. It's more like a Black Hawk Down or Matchstick Men. There's a good reason for this.
This may be a great film if it weren't for the fact that it is the little brother in a genre that is filled with classics. Compare this movie to Goodfellas, Scarface, The Departed, or The Godfather and it falters. It doesn't stand up to them. So while it may be the best gangster movie this year it certainly isn't one of the best.
Another slight problem is that these roles don't seem made for the main actors. I take a look at the Richie Roberts charachter and it doesn't say 'only Russell Crowe should play me.' Neither does the Frank Lucas charachter say 'Denzel Washington was born for this role.' I got the feeling that these guys could be played by anyone. They are too cut and dry for one person. There isn't the complexity or emotion that gives the audience a 'Tony Montana' who could only be played by Al Pacino or a 'Tommy' who Joe Pesci was born to play. The charachters aren't memorable to be burned in one's mind for too long. Not saying this isn't a good film, just saying it pales in comparison to earlier works in the genre.
Probably the most memorable charachters in the film belonged to the supporting roles. Josh Brolin plays an unrepentant sleazy cop in the first role I've bothered to recognize him in. (He seems to be old enough to have been in a bunch of movies by now.) I find it amusing that he would have a late 80s style slicked back corporate haircut. I think it just goes to show how much the cut has become a metaphor for slimy corruption. It was popularized a good decade after this film took place, and it still works to perfection.
The second supporting role is a complete surprise. Cuba Gooding Jr. in a role that doesn't completely suck in a decent movie! Wow! I don't care if its only for five minutes, this is the first acting gig he's done in ten years that isn't shameless and embarrassing. The academy, I bet, still wants to take back his oscar, but now with slightly less bitter rage.
No comments:
Post a Comment