|
Banned
|
Scorsese's "The Departed" Cops & Priests Without Moral Compass?
Quote:
http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t...%3D80108&cid=0
Scorsese's new film a return to his gangster roots
Katherine Monk
The Ottawa Citizen
Thursday, October 05, 2006
NEW YORK - Martin Scorsese says the American psyche is still reeling from the events of 9/11, and while his latest film would seem to mark a return to the gangster genre, the fast-talking director says The Departed is really an examination of the moral wasteland left in the wake of a human and political tragedy.
"As we were making (The Departed), I was realizing we're in a moral ground zero in a way, that almost none of the characters ... behaves with morality," says Scorsese, speaking to reporters recently in New York.
"In a way, it's a place where morality no longer exists."
Geographically speaking, Scorsese is referring to a particular part of Boston -- South Boston -- that provides the backdrop for the characters in The Departed. The movie features Jack Nicholson as a psychotic mobster and father figure, and Leonardo DiCaprio and Matt Damon as a symbolic pair of Cain and Abel-style proteges: One is a cop working for the mob, and the other is a mobster working for the cops.
Based on an Asian gangster movie, Scorsese's version of The Departed is a decidedly American take on organized crime. For the man who made some of the most recognized and iconic mob reels in the genre, including Mean Streets, Goodfellas and Gangs of New York, the central American characteristic is the film's sense of loss.
"At the end ... there's just a sadness and sense of despair," Scorsese says. "I felt a certain kind of despair that's reflected in the story, and the way people relate to each other, and particularly, the ending. ... there's just this sadness to it, and since we've been in this situation of September 11th, we've been in this moral ground zero ...
"And that's what kept me going, that's what really interested me about this script and why I wanted to do the picture."
Originally, Scorsese says he was apprehensive about returning to the genre he helped define for modern times.
"I don't know what it is. It's like an obsessive behavioural pattern on my part dealing with material (like this)," says Scorsese.
Though the Raging Bull director hasn't made a contemporary gangster movie since Casino, more than a decade ago, Scorsese is readily identified as a master of violence and bloody suspense, thanks to credits such as Cape Fear.
He has clearly tried to put that image behind him in recent efforts, choosing such subject matter as golden age Hollywood in The Aviator and Bob Dylan's oeuvre in No Direction Home: Bob Dylan. But Scorsese says he's drawn to the violent material because it gives him an angle to explore the American condition.
"I don't know what to say about the violence in my own movies. I can't defend it," he says.
Scorsese says he was "very affected" by the emotional and physical violence around his as a kid. "Some people block it from their minds, but for me, it's part of who and what I am. And it channels itself into my films. But I see the violence almost as absurd, and when I say that, it's the absurdity of just being alive.
"I think if you're going to experience violence, you better experience violence powerfully, and (realistically).
"It should upset you."
For Damon and DiCaprio, entering the darker side of the Scorsese universe presented some exciting challenges -- but ones that were carefully considered before the cameras started rolling.
Damon says he thought hard about participating in a movie about the mob, but finally, it was the script and the talent behind and in front of the camera that convinced him it was a good idea.
"I wasn't someone who fought a lot growing up," says Damon. "I saw a lot of violent things happen, but probably not more than most kids who grew up in the city.
"I hear about the portrayal of violence in cinema all the time, particularly gratuitous violence, but I'm careful not to do any of that. I'm serious. As violent as this film is, none of that violence is gratuitous, and the characters all paid a price for the violence they inflict on each other," says Damon.
"I think that's a good message to get out there, to people. So they know there's a price to be paid."
DiCaprio agrees, and says the movie started with a great script that explored character as much as narrative structure. That's why he likes working with Scorsese, says DiCaprio: "He not only gives as much appreciation to the entire film and the construct of the film, but he really lets the audience engage -- every character is fulfilling, no matter how small they are."
Scorsese says despite his years of experience, he's constantly facing new challenges as a filmmaker. The central one at the moment is maintaining motivation.
"I'm still trying to find a way to still be interested in being on a set ... and it's not easy. What I mean by that is finding a way to keep the energy going and the interest going ... the curiosity going to continue to make films. They have to mean something to me. And that's always been a struggle because of the nature of the system ... and that sort of thing. I find I still have to find my way."
|
As the film progressed, the "good guys" did not seem to exhibit enough "goodness", to set them apart, in a positive way, from their adversaries. They ended up being corrupted by what they said and did, vs. what they are expected to "stand" for.
Watching this film, really impressed me with the idea that, if your methods and your reputation are not firmly on one side of a "line" that you refuse to cross, you become too much like your criminal adversaries to be worthy of respect or of the authority vested in you by society.....or to even be readily identified as superior to the "evil" ones.
Each character, on the "side of right", loses his moral compass, because of passion, or just lack of self-control, and you watch it happen to cops, priests, and nuns. The lesson seems to be that, when you confront evil, your adversary and your own potential for immoral acts can combine to cause the loss of your soul, and your purpose and authority vanish, leaving you indistinguishable from your evil enemies.
Is "winning", really winning, if you compromise your moral integrity to achieve victory? Doesn't the risk seem to be that, if you use the methods and tactics of your criminal adversaries, you lose your own sense of purpose and direction, and then your identity? |