So, my son likes crime and gangster films and has been keen to watch Scorsese content on Netflix over the last year or so. I can be cooler on the genre and Scorsese in particular, considering him over-rated and always feeling that his commercially successful movies have a very limited range of thematic interests.
Which leads us to The Departed, viewed last night.
As it happens, I had watched (with my son) the original Hong Kong movie it was based on - Infernal Affairs - sometime probably last year. I did so on the basis of its very good reviews, but as it turned out, I didn't think much of the film at all. Little of it has stuck in my mind, and I think I didn't even bother giving it a mention here. I didn't understand why it was so well regarded.
Well, I have to say - The Departed struck me as a terrible adaptation of the same story - although, truth be told, I had decided that after 20 minutes and only half watched bits of the rest of it.
Nothing about the movie, transplanted to Boston, felt realistic to me. Everything felt hyped up to the point of incredulity - it is chock full of top notch actors with hyped up dialogue that didn't feel credible; acting that felt hammy, and (of course) much more violence than the original movie.
The direction and/or editing was deliberately different to, and much worse than, his best films. It has some very short takes and fast editing that seemed pretty pointless. I don't know what he was trying for, but it did occur to me (and I see now that there was some commentary to this effect) that he was perhaps trying to emulate the style of Tarantino - who you may remember I regard as a trash director of B or C material that remains so despite the added gloss.
And - I am happy to say - that although my son derided me for my early dismissal of its quality, by the end of the movie he actually said "unfortunately, it kept all of the bad qualities of the original movie." He wasn't prepared to say that this meant it was a bad movie - that would be going too far to agreeing with my early assessment - but close enough.
I had completely forgotten how well regarded this film was when it came out in 2006, and that it had won best picture at the Oscars. The Wikipedia article notes that some have said it was a bit of a consolation prize for Marty for having lost so many previous nominations for better movies, and apparently even he said he won because: "This is the first movie I've done with a plot". (An exaggeration, of course, but I didn't realise he acknowledged the relative plotlessness of the likes of Good Fellas and - in particular, I say - Casino.)
Anyway, a terrible movie all around.