Qt3 Movie Club 2.0 #15 - Gangster No 1

Movies
1

Sorry a bit late chums, I missed Kareem’s initial message -

I decided to pick something a little more recent and something with lower barrier to entry (i.e. no subtitles).

I decided against a couple of foreign language films for the same reason. But I’d love to talk about any of them if anyone is interested.
Shinya Tsukamoto’s Tokyo Fist or Snake in June.

or Takashi Miike’s Fudoh (for the raw crazy)

In spite of the Spanish language of it, I almost picked Almodovar’s Bad Education. I’m not his biggest fan, but this is a great film. He weaves a true Hitchcockian plot of deception and multiple identities. Stories woven within stories, a bit bewildering at times, but facinating watching the layers reveal themselves. One of Almodovar’s best. Its also super gay. Not Lolfags gay, but mature (and uncomfortably immature at times) and unblinkingly gay. It has an Evil Catholic priest in it for Chrissakes. Its also in Spanish…and ultimately I was hoping to get as many folks to watch as possible. Its also a little longish 2:35 so I decided against it. But its a great film and I look forward to what Almodovar can achieve.

I decided on -

Gangster No 1

Paul Bettany, Malcom McDowell and David Thewlis Directed by Paul McGuigan.

A protrait of the sociopath as an English gangster. Bettany’s best acting (IMO)helped along by McDowell’s menacing voice over.

Gorgeous 70’s London and dark black violence. Sweet english colloquialisms. Great music and Saffron Barrows before she got freaky looking. I loved the look and the style of the movie, very cool, classy, and stylized, sometimes jarring.

Bettany carries the film with authentically scary menace and Thewlis is great as his muse/patron. Having McDowell as the older Gangster gave me the impression that had Clockwork Orange’s Alex lived in 70’s London, he might have turned out like Gangster.

I won’t go into it too much to let people form their own opinions. I hope everyone enjoys.

2

Netflix link.

3

I don’t think this movie is entirely successful, mostly because I don’t think the last part with McDowell is as good as the previous bits with Bettany. But I was absolutely convinced that Paul Bettany was going to become a humongous star after watching it when it came out on DVD, just like I did about Clive Owen after watching Croupier. That didn’t seem to pan out for Bettany, though.

On the other hand, he’s married to Jennifer Connelly, so he still comes out ahead.

4

I would agree with this. Its not that McDowell was bad at all, its that Bettany is so strong that the last act is a bit of a let down. By the time he is McDowell, the character has changed, he doesn’t feel like he needs to hide who he is, and he is less compelling for that.

McDowell’s VO’s are perfect throughout though - the soliloquy he has while watching Karen sing for instance.

I also thought Bettany would be gigantic, he works a lot - Master and Commander and Da Vinci Code come to mind. But he should be huge.

He does some showy acting, but I’d like to see 3 other actors who could carry off Bettany’s reaction to Karen spitting in his face (which btw from listening to the Director’s commentary - was unexpected). He also has to soldier through what could be some land mines of dialog - imagine Tom Cruise doing the “look into my eyes” lines…

On the other hand, he’s married to Jennifer Connelly, so he still comes out ahead.
This is giant news. Good for him.

5

Related thought: How come David Thewlis was so fucking great in Naked, but has never been that great in anything else?

6

I just looked at his IMBD, he is one working mofo, but with few exceptions (Big Lebowski) he’s been in like, nothing I want to see. So material maybe?

He has a nice chance to play quiet and cool in G.No.1 though, and pulls it off nicely.

7

Good film, but too stylised/ nostalgic for me. Prefer “A Long Good Friday” - its a film about 1970’s English gangsters filmed in the 70’s…

8

The stylized / nostalgic aspect is affected by the fact that it is Gangster telling the story. That explains why the older Gangster looks nothing like the young Gangster. The younger Gangster is the idealized version of Gangster’s memory.

As for stylized, it certainly is. There are moments where Gangster even breaks the 4th wall, but again, this is his story, and he is telling it directly to the audience. I thought those moments stood out and were quite effective - the silent screams, the very weird dance by the rival Ganglord (which I was hoping McGuigan would explain in the commentary section…he does not) and the VO.

I actually considered Long Good Friday, but its been awhile since I’ve seen it. I remember Helen Mirren and Bob Hoskins both being good, but little else. I have the impression that I didn’t like the end. I could be wrong.

I felt a leettle under the gun to make a pick, so I gave myself some limitations (see above) to help make my decision. LFG is a little older than what I was looking for.

And you don’t like it, you and me can have a Strainer out on the Cobbles.

9

Oh, I do like Gangster 1 - don’t get me wrong! Just not as much as “LGF”. I’ll rewatch it (gangster 1) though.

ISTR the ending is Hoskins finding himself in a car with an IRA hitman.

10

I need to rewatch LGF (which could be the best named movie of all time), its been awhile.

And I was trying to work “lets have a strainer out on the cobbles” into all my conversations these days. I have a job interview today, its going to be great.

I’ll write a bit more on G.#1 this w/e. I’ve tried not to be too spoilery so far.

11

Speaking of awesome British gangster pics, Criterion is doing a blu-ray of Stephen Frears’ first movie, The Hit. Tim Roth, John Hurt and Terence Stamp. Fantastic flick.

12

Never seen it that, I’ll have to check it out. Seems like there is a good amount of British Gangster movies out there -

The Limey
The Krays
Lock Stock ect (the one good Guy Ritchie film)
LGF
G#1
Sexy Beast
Michael Caine version of The Italian Job
Get Carter - an amazingly good and depressing movie.
Layer Cake

Hey look a list - which has a couple - Villain (Richard Burton!), Face, Brighton Rock - I’ve never seen or heard of - sweet.

There is also a documentary out called “A Very British Gangster” that is okay. Just okay.

13

I may come back and try to post something thoughtful later, but the shortage of posts so far in this thread compells me to say that I really enjoyed this movie, I’ve seen it at least four times. Bettany is incredible in this movie, I loved the flash scenes of him stretching his mouth open in that horrific way in the middle of an otherwise normal conversation. When the character grew older and McDowell took over the role, it lost a lot to me. McDowell is a great actor, of course, but Bettany brought such a chilling malice to the role, McDowell played him as more of a straight up tough guy. I note that BlueJackalope and Madkevin made the observation that Bettany was stronger in the role before my post.

14

The single most memorable scene, to my mind, is when he very slowly and methodically strips (making sure his suit’s nice and neatly folded, etc) just before horribly butchering Lenny Taylor.

15

It is a movie with a lot memorable scenes - that scene in particular is horrifying. I’m not sure if Gangster takes off his clothes so he doesn’t get blood on them, or if he is stripping off his veneer of humanity. The clothes are what makes him like Freddy Mayes, out of them he is just Gangster.

The point of view is insidious in that scene - the camera traps you in Lenny’s body. You never see what it is Gangster is doing (the only violence your really see is when Lenny is shot) to Lenny, but you know it is horrific. You want Lenny to give up and die so it will end. You feel bad every time he opens his eyes again.

16

Meh. Too much of a character study for my tastes, with essentially no plot.

To be honest I didn’t even finish it; it didn’t help that British English is hard for my wife to understand, and the English subtitles were actually in Spanish. :-/ How exactly does that level of fuck up happen?

17

Huh, don’t know about the subtitles thing, I found it easier to understand than say Trainspotting, but whatever. Here’s a clue - when Freddie says “fink” he is actually saying “think” crazy Brits replacing their “th” sounds with “f”. If you want a belly laugh ask them to say margarine. Or Aluminum.

It is very straightforward plot and character study. But it is so well acted and stylishly shot I would have thought more people would enjoy it. Ah Well.

18

I understood it, but English is not my wife’s native language. English subtitles would no doubt have helped.

It is very straightforward, which for my taste is rather the problem. There is no significant plot, and the character study consists merely of, yes, the main character is an ambitious thug! I can only take so much of that being pounded into my skull.

Plus whole segments just struck me as silly. Right off the bat for example, in the opening scene when he goes to take a leak. Eh? Why the fuck can’t he avoid pissing on his shoes? I mean, it’s cute and all to “break the 4th wall”, but there’s got to be a better point to such a gimmick for it to work. Or the tediously predictable scene where he butchers his buddy with his “favorite axe” – or so I presume, because that’s when I couldn’t take it any longer.

Anyway, contrast this with something like The Godfather or Once Upon a Time in America, where interesting shit actually happens, or practically any other movie about criminals for that matter. One can make an interesting and well acted character study, yet still leave room for a plot.

19

I appreciate that you spent more time on your post than you did actually watching the movie, and I can dig that its not your thing, but I have a hard time getting around the fact that you are capping on a movie you haven’t actually watched.

It is very straightforward, which for my taste is rather the problem. There is no significant plot, and the character study consists merely of, yes, the main character is an ambitious thug! I can only take so much of that being pounded into my skull.

Let me spare you being forced to watch a couple other “straightforward” movies.
Leaving Las Vegas - Guy drinks himself to death
Scarface - Guy does a lot of coke. A lot of it.
Lawrence of Arabia - Guy really likes the desert. Then maybe or maybe not enjoys buggery.
Master and Commander - Sailing
PI - Guy gets headaches
Bad Lieutenant - Guy is seriously a bad Lieutenant.

Gangster’s actions may not be nuanced, but how he goes about them most certainly are. Watch the scene with Saffron Barrows, where she tells him she is marrying Freddie for instance. I appreciated the how the movie does not insult the audience by throwing in “suprise” plot twists and is able to show Gangster’s infatuation with Freddie without making it overtly sexual.

Plus whole segments just struck me as silly. Right off the bat for example, in the opening scene when he goes to take a leak. Eh? Why the fuck can’t he avoid pissing on his shoes? I mean, it’s cute and all to “break the 4th wall”, but there’s got to be a better point to such a gimmick for it to work.

To be fair - he pissed in his champaign glass - not his shoes.
Maybe you missed the point. He can deny it all day long, but he is a Tapir. He’s mean to the attendent, his “friends” don’t like him. And then he starts fucking with the viewer by pretending to drink piss. Silly maybe, but effective.

Or the tediously predictable scene where he butchers his buddy with his “favorite axe” – or so I presume, because that’s when I couldn’t take it any longer.

Really? To anybody who has actually seen the movie, the moment he is actually making the decision to kill Roland (though its hard to know who you mean - he doesn’t kill Eddie for instance - that’s the guy he showed his “favorite axe” to - nor does he kill Freddie Mays, but, again, since you didn’t watch the movie and are critiqeing a movie you made up, its hard to know who you mean) is one of the most striking moments of the movie. As is the lead up to him actually killing Lennie Taylor.

Anyway, contrast this with something like The Godfather or Once Upon a Time in America, where interesting shit actually happens, or practically any other movie about criminals for that matter. One can make an interesting and well acted character study, yet still leave room for a plot.

I would offer any Guy Ritchie movie (Lox Stock maybe excepted, I liked it at the time) as counter. A whole bunch of stuff happens in those movies. They are terrible to the point of unwatchable. I double butt hanging hippy dog dare you to watch Revolver.

And Once Upon a Time and *Godfather(s) are muther humping Epics. G#1 is much smaller in scope, budget and more focused. The story is simple, but not simplistic.

What it is, is a very watchable movie with more than a few unique moments. Bettany’s performance, McDowell’s VO, the swinging London setting, great music (I now own an Englebert Humperdink’s Greatest Hits so I can listen to 10 Guitars anytime I want…and Quando Quando Quando of course…a Sweet song that isn’t Bar Room Blitz), and McGugian’s interesting (and sometimes daring) directing choices. Not for nothing, but the clothes, cars and apartments are a lot of fun.

Its not a total sucess, McDowell’s portion in particular, and the ending feels unsatisfying. Its also got some pretty disturbing violence (though, as I mentioned you don’t actually see a lot of it, but are a victim of it). But I’d still recommend this movie to anyone who is interested in film, and in particular crime films. Bettany’s performance in particular is amazing. It looks like Hollywood has yet to see him as the lead in a film, instead putting him in supporting roles (Master and Commander, Da Vinci Code ect) so this might be the best vehicle to really appreciate his talent.

*Vito’s rag to riches story in Godfather II is also very straightforward.

20

I’m inclined to agree with Jasper about the lack of plot. And I finished the whole thing. Like Emma Thompson’s Wit and Clive Owen’s Croupier, Gangster struck me as a great character performance by the lead (Paul Bettany, anyway–Malcom McDowell was just himself) embedded in a story that couldn’t figure out anything interesting to do with the character.

The fact the director kept Saffron Burrows and David Thewlis when the movie switched to the present day, but replaced Bettany with McDowell leaves me with the impression that he wished McDowell could have played the whole thing. But Bettany created so much more compelling a character that the movie lost all interest for me when it switched away from him.

On the other hand, I watched it with English subtitles on, and they were in English, so I don’t know what the problem was there.