SCORSESE AND TARANTINO AT THE OSCARS
This year's upcoming Oscar on February
9 for BEST PICTURE is an especially intriguing one, particularly since two
old-time respected directors, Martin Scorsese and Quentin Tarantino, are in
competition with each other. An absence of decades has preceded this
"stand-off." Yet what difference does that make anyway? Maybe only to
yours truly who always thought both filmmakers shared common traits, some
obvious, some not. Scorsese's "The Irishmen" and Tarantino's "Once
Upon a Time in Hollywood" ( "Hollywood") help prove the point.
While I was writing my book on Scorsese
several years ago, I kept searching for a consistent theme in the body of his
works. True, I found recurring motifs and subjects, but not one similar
main idea emerged. However, that changed when New York Times critic A.O.
Scott pinpointed the essential meaning in "The Irishmen"
as the inevitability of loss.
I'll go with that, yet there's more to it. How
about the ambiguous nature of loss? In "Mean Streets," that
ambiguity extends to its open ending: who died and who didn't? In
"The Irishmen," Robert De Niro's character, Frank Sheeran, was
obviously uncertain about his own losses as he reached the end of his life, but
did he feel remorse or guilt or neither? The movie's beginning and ending shots
identify the opposing ebb and flow of this loss, the opening images showing
vibrant movement through a hospital's hallway, the ending providing a still
shot of De Niro, sitting static in his room, suggesting a box- within- a - box
configuration.
There are other pervasive themes in
"The Irishmen" as well, just like most other Scorsese films,
especially the importance of the family in all its dimensions: the strength of
ethnic male bondage; loyalty to the nuclear family. And we must not
forget another kind of family which has endured throughout the director's
professional life: ensemble actors, like De Niro and Harvey Keitel as
well as creative partners, including editor Thelma Schoonmaker. These people
represent a family in every sense of the word, even extending sometimes to
their role as Scorsese's alter-ego, an idea that is not usually
considered.
If you've been a Scorsese fan and or have a
connection with his life and times in any way, you as an audience member become
part of this same family, which isn't difficult when many of us are the same
age ( late 70s to early 80s) as the actors. Which means, you have, in fact,
watched these characters grow up.
Continuing with the idea of themes, common
characteristics also bond Scorsese's "The Irishmen" and Tarantino's
"Hollywood." No doubt, loss plays a part in
"Hollywood" as Leonardo DiCaprio and Brad Pitt experience ups
and downs with their popularity, and fame take a large toll. Yet loss is not
limited to these two iconic characters. There's also the loss of
Hollywood B films, literally, and the various deaths of important members of
this movie culture.
Family is similarly salient:
participants of the movie scene are close as any family could be,
including DiCaprio and Pitt. Certainly, potent presence of the Manson family is
another obvious example concerning the essential nature of the family.
There are structural similarities, too.
Consider the amount of violence that often erupts without warning, the
dialogue between characters that often becomes surrealistic. The fish
conversation in the back of the car in "The Irishmen" reminds one
perhaps of John Travolta's and Samuel Jackson's talking in "Pulp
Fiction" ( this example is admittedly not from "Hollywood.")
Yet we also can't forget the narrative concept
of the past haunting the present in "The Irishmen" with the saga of
Jimmy Hoffa nor the story of the Manson Murders in "Hollywood. "
Together, the films provide a context, both historic and iconic. We are held
captive by the characters in both movies as well, and this is laudable. But
this critic can't help but perceive DiCaprio and Pitt as basically losers. So,
too, are the protagonists of "The Irishmen." But we somehow like them
anyway.
Comments
Post a Comment