The Departed (Martin Scorsese, 2006)

Message

Oedipax · #151 Post by **Oedipax** » Wed Oct 11, 2006 11:54 pm

I don't remember this happening, and I've seen it twice now - do either of you remember what scene this was? I'm usually pretty attentive to these things, bad audio is a pet peeve of mine as well in theatrical projection...

Cinesimilitude · #152 Post by **Cinesimilitude** » Wed Oct 11, 2006 11:58 pm

I'm almost positive it happened when queenan and dignan confront costello, right before he goes to the pageant or something. It seemed to only effect Nicholsons dialogue, everything else sounded ok, but Nicholsons voice was jumping channels and the shot stayed put.

I did have one other comment, when Jack makes a crazy teeth baring grin at one point, I swear he turned into Leo Dicaprio at 65 yrs old. I think the two could make an epic father-son duo.

Faux Hulot · #153 Post by **Faux Hulot** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 12:28 am

SncDthMnky wrote:It might have been a faulty audio track on the print, so I think what I'm going to do is reserve judgement and discussion on this until I can see the dvd, which will surely be exactly what Scorsese intended.

The print I saw was faulty as well, with the audio dropping out a few times altogether during an early scene. But I also noticed some self-conscious touches, like using quick freeze frames (2-4 frame freezes) at the end of shots during gunfight scenes. Quick enough to pass under the radar of viewers not paying close attention, but deliberate nonetheless.

Cinesimilitude · #154 Post by **Cinesimilitude** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 1:17 am

I distincty remember that the only time the shrink says "Fuck" the audio was missing completely. anyone else notice that?

jorencain · #155 Post by **jorencain** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:31 am

Faux Hulot wrote:But I also noticed some self-conscious touches, like using quick freeze frames (2-4 frame freezes) at the end of shots during gunfight scenes. Quick enough to pass under the radar of viewers not paying close attention, but deliberate nonetheless.

I definitely noticed this as well. I wasn't sure if that was some kind of editing mistake, or if it was intentional.

ecschmidt · #156 Post by **ecschmidt** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 9:11 am

SncDthMnky wrote:I distincty remember that the only time the shrink says "Fuck" the audio was missing completely. anyone else notice that?

I'm pretty sure she just mouthed the word.

Andre Jurieu · #157 Post by **Andre Jurieu** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 11:27 am

ecschmidt wrote:
SncDthMnky wrote:I distincty remember that the only time the shrink says "Fuck" the audio was missing completely. anyone else notice that?
I'm pretty sure she just mouthed the word.

Does that happen after Leo visits her at her office and guilts her into giving him medication? If so, I thought she said "Fuck" out loud.

justeleblanc wrote:I'm not sure I buy his calling attention to that for which he's been criticized.

Well, he's pretty unapologetic about his techniques in this one and I'm doubting he thought it would go unnoticed. It's fairly brash in terms of performance, editing, and use of sound, and somewhat visually playful. Perhaps he's not purposely drawing attention to his methods in response to his critics, but it feels as if he's not restraining himself to the same degree as some of his more recent films. At the very least he seems to be attracting attention to the illusion of cinema, much like he did in Goodfellas.

portnoy · #158 Post by **portnoy** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 4:47 pm

jorencain wrote:I definitely noticed this as well. I wasn't sure if that was some kind of editing mistake, or if it was intentional.

It's obviously intentional - it's by no means the first time Thelma and Marty have done it (cf. the flashbulbs in Raging Bull)

marty · #159 Post by **marty** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:45 pm

SncDthMnky wrote:I distincty remember that the only time the shrink says "Fuck" the audio was missing completely. anyone else notice that?

Yes, I did. I saw the film yesterday and noticed it as well. Was it deliberate?

Oedipax · #160 Post by **Oedipax** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 8:02 pm

portnoy wrote:It's obviously intentional - it's by no means the first time Thelma and Marty have done it (cf. the flashbulbs in Raging Bull)

And also quite disturbingly at the end of Casino, when Pesci and his brother are beaten to death. There's a brief freeze frame right after one of them takes a bat to the face, with no cutaway until after the impact. These freezes also sometimes are accompanied by disruptions in the sound. This is the case with the shootout sequence in The Departed where Costello and many others are killed.

Cinesimilitude · #161 Post by **Cinesimilitude** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 11:31 pm

marty wrote:Was it deliberate?

I have no idea, But I'd like to hear it straight from Scorsese on whether it was or not.

I'm going to wait for the dvd, if the words missing, I can analyze the audio stream to see if there is no sound at all, or background noise and no f-word to determine if she mouthed it or not.

flyonthewall2983 · #162 Post by **flyonthewall2983** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 2:54 pm

Does anyone know the info on the release date (or if it's been released already) for the score and/or soundtrack? I thought Howard Shore did a good job, although not quite what I was expecting. I was expecting something more along the lines of the score he did for Copland which I remember being very brass-heavy, and this one has no brass at all I think.

dadaistnun · #163 Post by **dadaistnun** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 3:46 pm

The last I heard, the score album doesn't have a release date yet. It is currently available on iTunes, though.

I was surprised by the score, too - pleasantly so. Very guitar heavy (Marc Ribot!), but totally different from Crash.

#164 Post by **Jeff** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 4:12 pm

The soundtrack will be released November 7.

Barmy · #165 Post by **Barmy** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 12:28 am

What a silly nothing movie. A good popcorn flick and nothing more. The audience I saw it with found nothing funny other than the ludicrous last few minutes. And only a 60-something could think Jack's endless anal "witticisms" are "edgy". I enjoyed this film a lot, but could not get past the self-importance and the ridiculously implausible plot. Oh, who ever could the mole in Jack's gang be? It's everso hard to tell! The fact that the crix think this is one of Marty's best films is the most offensive thing one could say about his oeuvre. "The Island" was more meaningful, beautiful and fun.

franco · #166 Post by **franco** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 3:10 am

Barmy, I actually agree with you! The only difference is that I didn't enjoy any minute of this movie at all. I felt like walking out after half an hour, but I stayed, just wanting to find out how it would end.

The exceptional silliness of the whole cell phone thing is only matched by the incredible stupidity of the cops and gangs. Why doesn't anyone check phone records? Why doesn't anyone spy on others' phone calls? I don't usually mind logic, but this movie really offers nothing in the other departments.

marty · #167 Post by **marty** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 3:30 am

Since The Departed is based on the Asian flick, Infernal Affairs, and since the screenwriter, William Monaghan, adapted the film from the Chinese script, are all of these implausible plot points and character behaviour also in the Asian film or is it just we are more forgiving in Asian films as it stands out like dogsballs when translated to American gangsters.

Travis · #168 Post by **Travis** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 3:42 am

I'm glad you didn't like it, Barmy. That just validates it for me even more.

franco · #169 Post by **franco** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 3:47 am

Marty, as I've read somewhere, the communication in Infernal Affairs is much more sophisticated. No text messaging nonsense that everyone can pull off.

Andre Jurieu · #170 Post by **Andre Jurieu** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 10:45 am

From what I recall of the two films, the communication in Infernal Affairs isn't all that much more sophisticated.

The cell phones that the two moles are using are their own separate lines unknown to the authorities, so the cops can't actually specify which phones numbers to monitor or which phone records to check since they don't know specific cell-phone numbers. As shown in the scene in DiCaprio's apartment, he has two cell phones - one from each outfit - and one would assume the same for Damon. When they monitor all calls in the area, as they did in the sting-operation, the moles just resorted to text-messages. If all you have is text messages, you can't really nail the people exchanging messages if all you have is a phone number to a cell phone whose owner is unknown. Also, monitoring all cell-phone calls and keeping records of the tapes isn't cheap when such a wide and massive scale is required (or exactly wise, especially for a police department), which is probably why it's being done on a federal level in the US.

I can't believe we are still using our perceptions of audience reactions to evaluate a movie. That's just another example of consumer purchase reinforcement. I didn't laugh hysterically or even chuckle out loud while I was watching the film, but I thought it was hilarious at times - particularly Wahlberg and Baldwin. However, I do agree that the final image is ridiculously blunt.

montgomery · #171 Post by **montgomery** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 10:59 am

SncDthMnky wrote: I can analyze the audio stream to see if there is no sound at all, or background noise and no f-word to determine if she mouthed it or not.

Leave it to this board to create a debate over absolutely nothing. I saw the film again last night, and what seemed obvious the first time was made even more clear: she mouths the word "fuck" to herself (she says it quietly). Why would anybody think anything different? It looks totally natural, and makes perfect sense.

I think The Departed is a pretty good cop movie, but yes, it's also completely implausible, and the fact that they can't finger DiCaprio as the mole is pretty outrageous. Also, the stuff with the shrink was totally convoluted, and her character was pretty ridiculous. But films aren't allowed to not have love stories anymore, it seems.

Barmy · #172 Post by **Barmy** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 1:00 pm

Audience reaction is relevant when the audience doesn't laugh at any of Jack's lines (which try way to hard to be funny/outrageous), but then laughs at the series of "shock" events at the end of the film.

The inability to finger Leo is so absurd it's almost avant garde. You don't need sophisticated cellphone tracer thingys. You just need to look around the room and think: which of these 4 dudes is most likely to be The Mole.

As I said, I enjoyed the movie. It is well crafted. I liked Leo, Sheen and Baldwin even though I usually hate them. I liked the chick a lot. But it is a "check your brain at the door" film. NTTAWWT.

Doctor Sunshine · #173 Post by **Doctor Sunshine** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 1:53 pm

If you folks would watch The Wire like you should you wouldn't need Andre Jurieu to explain all the cell phone stuff to you. From my recollections there's not much difference between this and the original film--the biggest difference I noticed was the morphing of the two mole's girls into one character, which I liked--and I was a little surprised they didn't clean up any of the logic gaffs but, really, Scorsese's not doing anything Hitchcock didn't get away with. I had fun, my audience laughed. (I actually took my family out to see this--who are mainstream folk--and they all loved it.) My only criticisms are that while he kept the pace up fairly well it did drag at times and, while normally Scorsese's a rock, his music selection wasn't up to his usual level (but I'm probably biased, I'm an oldies whore). Also, I'll say the sudden music stops were effective, done at dramatic moments in a very natural, non-Godardian way to enhance intensity. I liked it very much.

Eclisse · #174 Post by **Eclisse** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 2:13 pm

Actually, the only thing I didn't like in the movie was the little affair between "Leo" and Vera Farmiga. Nothing against her at all... WONDERFUL and underrated actress,and she's very good in the movie,but I didn't buy it. They met, they had a big fight, Leo storms out of her office, and while I was watching that I was thinking: "Oh,no. Don't make her run after him... Don't make her run after him..." She did. And then I go: "Oh, no.Please don't make him ask her if she wants to get a drink." He did. Such a silly cinematic cliche. The little blonde-clean doctor with (for her) the dirty troubled bum. Yeah, that happens in real life. Even on Martin Scorsese's mean streets. Now, this was probably on the original too, since everyone is saying that Scorsese didn't changed much. Well,that's one thing he could have changed. A waste of screen time. (IMO)

Overall a great movie, but this is no Goodfellas. I think if anyone will win an Oscar will be Leo. Because in any other year he would have won for "The Aviator." And we all know how the academy works.

#175 Post by **Matt** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 2:40 pm

Eclisse wrote:Such a silly cinematic cliche. The little blonde-clean doctor with (for her) the dirty troubled bum. Yeah, that happens in real life. Even on Martin Scorsese's mean streets.

You're right. Never in the history of psychology or psychiatry has a doctor overstepped his or her professional boundaries to dally with a client of differing personal hygiene.