The Departed: Movie Review, Analysis, and Mistakes

Last night I saw "The Departed", directed by Martin Scorsese (known for directing a bunch of famous movies throughout the last 25 years, including "taxi driver" and "Gangs of New York")

It was absolutely outstanding and if you check out the movie review site Rotten Tomatoes it scored a rating of 92% positive. This is an almost unheard of high rating for a new film. Usually for a film to rate this high, it has to be in retrospection, meaning the reviews are done after the social and popular impact of the movie has already been seen.

Quick Summary
The movie is violent crime drama about a local mafia crime boss, and an undercover agent trying to bring him down, and a dirty detective. It was the fun "double identity" theme where each character has to struggle with concealing his hidden identity and coming to terms with the stress and drama the situation creates. Although the material is all stuff we've seen before, the "hero" undercover agent who wants his identity back, the dirty detective, and the over-the-top hedonistic crime boss ala soprano style and there are numerous continuity problems (listed below), this movie still comes off as outstanding.

What makes this film so good is its absolute superb delivery of its material.

Scorsese proves his ability as an amazingly talented director. Although you've seen these characters and actors before, you've heard lines similar and you've seen many attempts at the same dramatic tension, it's extremely rare that a director is able to pull it all together and keep the story interesting and actively paced from minute 1 to the ending credits. The dramatic tension builds, then releases, and then builds then releases, and there really is never a slow moment. You're always anticipating the final release, but Scorsese never gives it to you, the movie seamlessly flows from one confrontation to another, one suspense building scene to another.

This movie is ingenious in the way it avoids the pitfall of creating one dimensional characters with an attempt to make these characters appear multi-dimensional by forcing the audience to watch bland back stories trying to provide motivation for their actions. I'd rather see the crime boss doing what he does best and later on watch the collapse of his empire. I love that this movie avoids the typical flashback into his unpleasant childhood. Scorsese never focuses on one character for too long, instead he keeps the dramatic tension high and passes from character to character in brilliant transitions which focus on the plot and purposely leaves most of the characters as puppets playing their minor roles in a larger production far beyond their individual control or perception.

The humor is also excitingly dark and fast flowing. The movie is set in south Boston complete with strong accents and is thoroughly engrossing.

The only part of this film that is a bit disapointing is at the very end.

Without giving it away, (see continuity problems below for the spoiler) it forcefully steps over the "probability" threshold and although it is meant to be very climatic and intense, it comes off as a bit of a weak point and may leave you wanting more. Even with the ending the movie is top notch.

Continuity problemsand unrealistic events -
Note: films are fake worlds; unless it's a documentary, it's almost impossible to create a film without a single hole, or a single mistake in continuity. I am mentioning these for two reasons

1. I think its fun to analyze movies and since my mind does it automatically anyways, I might as well enjoy picking up on all the mistakes or unrealistic improbabilities.

2. Analyzing the holes and mistakes exercises my rational, logical thinking skills and I believe that is what makes it enjoyable (1) and hopefully will encourage writers like myself to avoid those logical mistakes in the future.

Unrealistic elements in the movie: (WARNING: PLOT SPOILER. These may reveal the plot so if you haven't seen the movie yet you may not want to spoil it for yourself).

1. In one crucial scene one of the characters sends a text message by typing it while it's in his pockets. How the hell did he navigate the menus and then type the numbers and message without looking at his phone even once? Not that it isn't possible, but I have trouble believing he would do that, why not have him take a piss and text the message while looking at his phone? Would that be so hard?

2. It's revealed after the death of the crime boss that he was "recording" all his phone conversations (including cell phone conversations) and has them all perfectly setup on burned CDs for delivery to his lawyer upon his death. What the heck? In the movie they show him just answering his cell phone by flipping it open and saying hello. Cell-phones don't automatically record your conversations in crystal clarity and have them ready to be transferred anywhere. I don't buy that he hired a programmer to re-program his cell phone and if that was suppose to have happened, they should have showed that, cause it rings like BS to me. Plus wouldn't that be as stupid thing to do anyways? Create all that evidence against yourself that if it was seized for whatever reason could convict you of a whole number of crimes? This was a weak attempt at making the ending un-predictable and I didn't buy it.

3. For the final twist, when the undercover agent (played by Leonardo Dicaprio) is arresting the dirty detective (played by Matt Dameon) he is shot and killed along with another cop by a agent who reveals himself to have been corrupt. With the main head boss killed and the crime syndicate in shambles, why would this agent kill two cops to save another dirty detective who didn't know about his identity? You would think he'd be quiet and never let anyone know about his true identity, now that the crime lord he was originally tipping of was dead and so were his henchmen. Yet another attempt at making the ending up-predictable. This one was completely absurd.

If you caught anymore, please leave a comment below.

About Leonardo DiCaprio, although I believe he is a highly accomplished actor, every movie I see him in, he always has the same serious expression on his face. He always looks like he's trying to take a crap. Anyone else feel this way?

Humorous final comment:

When I was leaving the theater, an older man in front of me made an a amusing comment on the ending of the movie.

"Everyone dies... I wanted at least someone to live. Heck even the bad guy, maybe he could have run for city mayor or something"