Genres

Visitors Review

mavjop 2012-05-25 01:19:22

A psychological roller coaster ride!

A most unusual movie, I can't think of a single character who wasn't onor,moreso, over the edge. Intelligent ideas lurk beneath the insanity andthat,along with an impressive cast list (particularly notable are Nicolas Cage,John Goodman, Patricia Arquette and Ving Rhames) and a lot of very funnydark humour, succeeds in making this a really good movie, worthwhileseeing.Definitely a thumbs up for Scorsese.

FlickJunkie-2 2012-05-24 12:09:58

A forceful and disquieting film

This is a disturbing and realistic character study of Frank Pierce (NicholasCage) a burned out paramedic, who is slowly succumbing to the depressingreality of his job and the city he lives in. He is tortured by the futilityof his efforts and haunted by self blame about a young woman named Rosewhose life he was unable to save. We witness about a week of his life,mostly at work handling medical emergencies. There really isn't much of aplot here. It is mostly a succession of events in the life of an EMT and apsychological study of a man losing his grip under the crushing stress ofhis vain attempts at saving the dregs of humanity.Martin Scorsese brings his trademark stark realism to the film, withauthentic images of the sleazy underbelly of New York City. As always, hiscamerawork, lighting, sets and locations were delivered with raw power andgreat dramatic impact. Having grown up in NYC, I was amazed at his abilityto capture so perfectly the essence of the city's streetlife.Unfortunately, the story diverged too often into the bizarre antics of someof the surrounding characters like Noel (Marc Anthony), and fellowparamedics like Larry (John Goodman) and Marcus (Ving Rhames). In heavyhanded stories like this one, it is often necessary to have some comicrelief, but Scorsese takes this concept around the bend far toooften.Nicholas Cage was superb as the self doubting paramedic at the end of hisrope. His sense of torment and bipolar mood swings were compelling andpotent. Patricia Arquette played a pathetic young woman, the daughter ofone of Frank's rescue victims to whom he takes a shine. Makeup did a greatjob of making her look unbelievably plain and mousy and her portrayal wasextremely effective, playing the part with a good deal of angst anddespondency.I rated this film a 7/10. It is a disquieting film that is manic depressivein its presentation and very downbeat and pessimistic in its general tone. Its greatest assets are Cage's performance, and its realistic presentationof raw emotion and the feel of the New York streets. Its flaw is itsmeandering flow and its excessive and often bizarre digression from thecentral character study. If you can appreciate a very dark and gloomy filmwith forceful and poignant portrayals, it's definitely worth a look.

Clever Jones 2012-05-20 18:52:02

Bringing out what?

Man, oh man. The other day I was flipping through my movie stubs and I fellupon this one. The truth is, I don't remember one frame from this film. Notonly was it rather forgetful and pretty out there (even for Scorsese), itjust seemed like a waste of everyone's time.Take a look: You got Cage, Arquette, Rhames, Sizemore and Goodman. These aregreat actors. I mean, their really just pitch perfect. Then you got thescreenwriter: Paul Shrader. This guy is amazing. He just writes sobeautifully. And then, you got Martin Scorsese, who is the king of grittyfilmaking. So I ask, what the hell happened???How did these great actors get together with this great writer and thisgreat director and only come up with this film? It wasn't alright, it wasterrible. The film just goes on and on and you always feel...well, you don'twhat your feeling. The film doesn't have a real plot, it just kind ofmeanders all over the place. My film teacher just keeps on telling me aboutthe main character having a dramatic need. What the heck was this guy'sdramatic need? Wear a frown for two hours?This movie could have been revolutionary, instead, it was a waste oftime...Sorry to be so blunt.

2012-05-19 21:32:21

Scorsese at his best

Well this is no Goodfellas or Taxi Driver, but Scorsese put on a great piece of film here. Nicolas Cage is amazing as a paranoic-insomniac EMT working during the night. Film in Ney York City, this movie was one of the best movies last year. Personally I think this movie is better than Casino which in my opinion is the worst film by Scorsese, a Goodfellas ripoff. Scorsese pursues human character and emotions in his films like he did in Taxi Driver, Bringin Out The Dead is no exeption. Amazing film, well cast, good acting especially by Cage and Marc Anthony as a junkie. Highly recommend this film.

2012-05-18 17:30:55

Personally, I needed more.

Scorsese's had a bad decade; with *Bringing Out the Dead*, he ends it on a somewhat better note. He really goes back to his *Taxi Driver* roots with this one. The results are mixed, but you can't say that this movie isn't interesting to look at: the cinematographer leached (or bleached) out all colors except red, which does indeed create a hellish-looking Manhattan. The soundtrack, per usual with Scorsese, is excellent.Wish I could say the same about the story, which is an episodic affair that manically hustles you forward much like the ambulances it portrays. It's about an exhausted paramedic (Nicolas Cage, looking very, very pale -- a case of Marty overdoing it again) who's consumed with guilt because he hasn't saved everyone he's tried to help. I must say there was potential for greatness here, but the narrative is just too randomly limned to encourage much emotional investment. For example, he's relentlessly haunted by a scary-looking young woman (dead, of course -- a spirit, if you will), but the flashback of Cage trying to save her doesn't explain the haunting: he wasn't particularly negligent, or anything. In other words, why her? Or, why not everyone he's lost? Or no one? (There ARE other ghosts, but they don't attempt to make a personal connection with our hero.)In my opinion, less hyperkinetics and more attention to old-fashioned storytelling would have served this movie very well, but instead we get the (by now tiresome) same old Scorsese boldness, the Scorsese broad strokes, the Scorsese fascination with the lowest common demoninator of humankind, the Scorsese concern with mind-blowing visuals. Too much magic, not enough realism. The subject of this film DEMANDS the latter.

2012-05-17 20:09:01

The Worst Movie ... Ever

The title (of this review) tells it all I want my money back

D'MORPH 2012-05-16 03:55:38

BORED... TO DEATH

Most of the reviews I read loved this movie! However, I didnot!Too long. Boring. Wild plot line spinning in all directions. No direction inwhere it was going. Utterly depressing. And the ending was... uh... wasthere an ending???City shown as a dirty, horrible, sleazy hole. Makes you wish you lived in alittle, picturesque, country town. During the day the city looked worse,even more dirty, horrible and sleazy. Overworked, underpaid E.R. departmentfilled with urban crime victims, junkies and drunks covered in gore.Ambulance officers driving around town not wanting to do 'jobs', or goingballistic on various patients for unbelievable reasons. Hey, would anambulance officer get away with bashing a patient virtually to death (with abaseball bat) just because he was breaking car windows?CONCLUSION: Boy, am I glad I'm not a Med for an urban public facility.

2012-05-16 02:46:41

WHAT WAS SCORSESE ON TO MAKE SOMETHING LIKE THIS?

I could not watch this film and take it seriously. There seemed to have been no script. No point. Nicolas Cage is a burned out ambulance driver. He is tired, fed up, and starts to see ghosts. His fellow ambulance drivers are a strange bunch of people. Cage meets a strung out character played by Patricia Arquette when he tries to save her father's life. But there is no plot really tying him to any of the other characters. There is no story, and this is the least compelling film I have seen in years. The soundtrack was probably the most interesting part.

dae5 2012-05-15 12:30:11

Another cinematic powerhouse from Scorsese.

Prior to its release, Bringing Out the Dead was hyped as Taxi DriverRedux;but it received mostly lukewarm reviews and was a commercial failure.Tragically, few people may be able to appreciate this movie for thenear-masterpiece it tries to be. Critics complained that Cage, formerlyregarded as an "edgy" actor, wasn't in top shape for the lead here, butatsome moments his performance is unforgettable. (The drug-inducedmeltdownis as intense as movies get.) Credit should also go to Tom Sizemore,besting Goodman and Rhames as best supporting player. And highest kudosaredue to the cinematography team, whose splicing gives every scene arazor-sharp energy.

darkneox119 2012-05-15 01:45:19

haunting drama that works

Half of everybody I know who has seen Bringing out the Dead doesn't likeit. I compare it to Taxi Driver and After Hours. Nicolas Cage plays a strungout ambulance driver who desperately needs to save someone. His job hastaken a toll on his mind and health. After receiving a call to help ajunkie's dying father, Cage gets involved in her life. Most of the actioncomes from Frank interacting with with the hospital doctors and nurses anddealing with deranged patients. The film had great acting aside fromPatricia Arquette. She is extremely beautiful it just so happens she hasnthad a great role since True Romance. John Goodman, Ving Rhames and TomSizemore brilliantly play Cage's co-workers. This film portrayed the streetslike it should, tough, gritty and mean. One of the best scenes of the filmis when Ving Rhames gets a group of neo-goth weirdos to hold hands and prayto God to awaken their overdosed pal. Haunting and in some waystouching.***1/2 ****

2012-05-12 12:13:28

a hell of a book made into a hell of a movie

Scorsese takes Connelly's work and makes perhaps the best EMS movie ever. Nicolas Cage's performance as a burned-out medic gave me chills, having seen that look in the mirror more than once over the years.

JuliaCO 2012-05-11 16:39:55

Not what people might think !!

Okay to start, I think this film is about Cage's acceptance of death andhisacceptance that he can't save everyone. I think in the end he realizesthateven though he can't save everyone, the ones he does save will mean a lot.The filming of this movie was fabulous, the shots and changing from normalto fast speed kept my eyes on the screen at all times. This movie has alotof different things going on and at times people may be confused but iftheystick it out and watch the whole movie they might find they take somethingaway from this movie other than a headache.

Andrew Marshall 2012-05-11 13:31:53

You couldn't imagine anyone else playing Frank but Cage.

Now this isn't going to be everybody's cup of tea, but it's probably afairly accurate representation of working as a paramedic in New York.Nicholas Cage plays Frank who seems to have a few mental problems like thevast majority of Cage's roles. Frank is haunted by the ghost of someone hecouldn't save - Rose. The supporting cast are very good with Tom Sizemoreoutstanding as per usual.

evildeadjunkie21 2012-05-11 00:30:26

Scorsese's Most Underrated film

... And the way Gangs Of New York is treated that's saying something.There may be some flaws with Cage's performance or The strangeEuthinesia subplot but the movie really isn't about that. More then anyother Scorsese movie this one is all about style over substance, andsometimes that's OK. The movie is just so damned good looking. Thelenghty drugged out Dream Sequence with Cage pulling the people out ofthe pavement, The death of the homeless girl with the snow flying upinto the sky, so many images that just stick with you for weeks afterseeing the film.Plus the soundtrack is one of the best I own.Now say it with me "Rise Up I B Banging!!!"

fiteclub 2012-05-09 21:20:50

a total thrill...a 120 minute rush of adrenaline, surely one of the year's best

this movie is outstanding. it blows you away with it's originality andexcitement. surprisingly though, this film is more of a comedy thananything else. yes, it's a very very dark comedy, but you often findyourself laughing at things you wouldn't normally laugh at, much like thisyear's unexpected satire riot Fight Club. i cut studying for a spanish testand ending up getting a 76% on it just so i could go see this movie. andyou know what? it was worth it. rush and see Bringing Out The Dead...letit surprise you as well.

Murphy-2 2012-05-09 03:42:48

Forgetaboutit !!!

Let the Dead Bury the Dead on this one. Martin S's attempt to portrayparamedics as Angels of Mercy / Angels of Death came across as lacklusteratbest (auras around the New York City Paramedic patches and the glowinglightemitting from Nicolas Cage). By the slow demise of Cage's performance, onewould think the Angel of Death had visited his portion of the script onmorethan one occasion. Cage displayed more emotion and personality in City ofAngels playing - you guessed it - a deadpan angel.As for Marty S, he should stick to his old tried-and-true standby, gangsterflicks, and let those with a sense of the morbid and gothic undertake suchprojects.

movieguy76 2012-05-05 16:10:00

Greatness is Close at Hand

There is no doubt in my mind that Martin Scorsese is the single greatestfilmmaker to come out the "Movie Brat" Generation. His films are farsuperior to most and he has a consistent quality lacking in mostdirectors.In this film he is in great form and continues to be the guiding light ofAmerican cinema. This new film finds him reteamed with Paul Schrader,thisthe best writer/director team in modern movies. The film has a veryCatholic outlook and is a seemingly endless display of the Christianbeliefs. Nicolas Cage is very good, his best performance since LeavingLasVegas. The belongs to Scorsese though no one could take this away fromhim.The film is a modern day Taxi Driver. It lacks that films brilliancethough. Bring Out the Dead is the best film I have seen all year. It isfar superior on an intellectual level than American Beauty the only otherreal rival so far.

2012-05-05 06:20:21

Martin Scorsese reaches into his past.

Bringing Out the Dead is like Mean Streets all over again -- film-school-style humour (with emphasis on sight gags), breathless pacing, nervous energy, show-offy techniques. The bloodshot-eyed tone of the film is especially reminiscent of Scorsese's 1973 breakthrough, with a dash of his '90s narrative approaches thrown in.Granted, it makes for a weaker mix than in most Scorsese films. In terms of script and character Taxi Driver is the film that's inevitably evoked, thanks to a Paul Schrader script, an alienated night creature of a protagonist, and the very specific setting. But the voice-over this time around is like pure exposition, trying to imitate a novel, without the fascinating multi-leveled psychologies of Taxi Driver (where the voice-over is often direct quotations from Travis' life, such as the eerie anniversary card to his parents) or the humorous commentary of GoodFellas.It's still a mini-masterpiece just based on shots, composition, editing, and conceptualization. Scorsese seemed unable to top the artistic peaks he'd reached in his career such as Taxi Driver, Raging Bull or GoodFellas, but he's certainly able to make Bringing Out the Dead a vivacious artistic statement, a film with guts which is head and shoulders above the norm.

mentalcritic 2012-05-02 09:33:11

A narrative in search of a moral?

One could put Nicolas Cage in a commercial for fertiliser made from dogdroppings, and he will deliver a memorable performance. While BringingOut The Dead isn't so vapid one could compare it to a fertilisercommercial, it does seem to struggle for a good half hour to find apoint. Had it been carried by a lesser actor, Bringing Out The Deadwould have been a colossal failure. Thankfully, Cage's performance addslife to what could have been quite the uninteresting character.At its heart, Bringing Out The Dead is the story of a few days in thelife of a paramedic who is starting to feel the strain of hisoccupation. At the start of the film, we are given no reason why Frankis drinking constantly and unable to get through an evening's work. Ashe goes through partners almost as quickly as he goes through patients,we are slowly filled in on what is eating the man up.In the meantime, we follow Frank around as he deals with the family ofa heart attack victim and the victims of a new designer drug. Thelatter subplot could have used some development, but the former is thecornerstone of what this film eventually becomes - a tale of redemptionin a world that seems to have precious little of it. The dialogue makesone reference to a doctor who keeps mumbling and poking himself in theeye whenever he talks to a patient's daughter. If you haven't lived inone of the largest cities your country has to offer, even the city inquestion is one as relatively tiny as Sydney, you'd have a hard timebelieving it.As a piece of entertainment, Bringing Out The Dead is only recommendedto masochists or people who enjoy the misfortune of others. Someaspects of the film, such as the Sister Fetus character, are not onlyplain unnecessary, they are just plain cruel. The religious invocationsare often insulting. I half wanted to grab Marcus by the neck, throwhim in front of one of the many speeding cars, and ask him where hisimaginary friend is now. There are far better ways to deliver a storypoint.In all, I gave Bringing Out The Dead an eight out of ten. It is verymuch an acquired taste, but it works as a solid, life-affirming pieceof entertainment. Give it a couple of viewings before you make up yourmind. You'll be glad you did.

Chester T. Mouser 2012-05-02 02:44:39

Intellectually gratifying; emotionally, not quite so. Ultimately worth seeing.

What I found fascinating about BRINGING OUT THE DEAD is its edginess, itsability to keep me off-balance, and the contradictory aspects of the film,including my own thoughts and feelings throughout.Ambulances and emergency rooms are the ultimate vehicles and settings forlife or death situations. Appropriate for this film. BOTD's characters areconstantly crossing back and forth over the line of mortality. Some simplyexist in both worlds simultaneously: We see the living dead, figurativelyand, in the mind of Frank the ambulance driver, literally.What about the characters' own desires? Frank nearly begs every day to befired from his job, but his captain apologizes that he can't fire him. Noelthe junkie begs for water even though it may kill him. Indeed, he begs tobe killed, but nobody, not even his disease, seems to be able to help himout. He's brought into the emergency room every night, yet he's theliveliest character in the whole film.Throughout the film, we're jarred between fantasy and reality. Thefrenetic, out of control "fantasy" sequences are easier to take than whatwould be considered real. Even the ghost that haunts and horrifies Franklooks charming. In the realm of reality, I found myself actually relievedby a traffic accident.The black comedy is, well, black comedy. The humor sometimes seemed cheap,but it made sense in a situation where life is cheap. The cinematographyand editing were expert, though seemingly over-the-top, unless oneappreciates their contrast to the gritty, ugly reality that inspires it.I had conflicting reactions to practically every character, wanted them tolive and die. And even then, when I wanted them to die, it was often fortheir own good. For my own good as well? So I can stop the suffering…whose suffering? If you've seen the film, you'll know why this isparticularly appropriate.I have to say, though, that I have mixed feelings about the film itself. Iappreciate the film because of its ability to make me aware of my feelingsthroughout, how complex emotions are, and how confounding the world can be.On the other hand, I realize that there were some emotions missing for me:love, for instance. I felt fear a lot. Anger, too. I felt tense,relieved. I laughed, I cringed, and I screamed at points. Occasionally Ihad time to feel sorry for some of the characters. But those moments wereso fleeting. The film moved so fast that there was no time to settle intothe sympathies that really engross me and tear me apart when watching afilm. The intellectual engagement trumps the emotional engagement. And Ican tell because that's what's stayed with me after leaving the theatre.Is this what Scorsese intended? Was he saying that what was happening to mewas happening to Frank the ambulance driver? If so, I would think the endwould be more effective, that I would be affected as Frank was. Sadly, Iwasn't. If that had been the case, I would call this a truly powerful film. Not that I want to see a three-hanky picture, but I do want to experienceall the emotions, so that I may examine them in myself, as well as on thescreen.Unless you're fragile when it comes to seeing violence and suffering, seethis film.