I watched this film right after watching 'Stalker'. So, back to back slow movies, with legendary directors. The difference in the two films for me juts boils down to interest and style preferences. I hold Scorsese as the reigning champion, and in a huge way, a fading champion. With boxing on topic, I think of Scorsese as an aging boxing champion with old timers on his side, and who has arguably the best career ever. On the other side, you see the risen stars in the Coens and Nolan as a couple. They are taking their game further and further with every project, moving at a pace that would put Scorsese 9 feet under if they ever went head to head.
In Scorsese's outing of 'Raging Bull', I think I agree with a critic named Joseph McBride, who writes for Variety, in that he thinks the film is overrated. Even further he makes an observation about the characters Scorsese gives us, in being they are never people we would want to know, or have exist around us. They are all darker twisted characters, and maybe that is a huge reason for the fascination in Scorsese's films.
Most of the time, I like Scorsese's work, and find his characters very interesting. This time I don't. I am bored out of my mind. Watching a group of people, who I never cared about, be... boring. When I watched the film I failed to notice the film was written based on a true story. The true story status is really the only solid legs the film has in my interest department. Performances are good, cinematography may be fine if it fits your style of film making, but its not mine.
There are several time I wish I could just fast forward through the film to get to the "good parts", like I'm watching 'Commando' or something. Not that 'Commando' gets a single star out of 10, but there are some fireworks in the action scenes, even if they are just sparklers... 'Raging Bull' was the equivalent to spending $100 on a single firework, and when lit, it just melts, ruining everything. It looked cool before lit, it cost a lot, and was even highly recommended... but unfortunately, duds will always exist... even on the highest quality.
The action in 'Raging Bull' isn't trying to appeal to the normal action fans, instead takes a more poetic style to it. Portraying its action with flashing lights and frontal positioned shots, with more over drama is just screaming Broadway play. I respect the writing from a true story perspective, but respect is where it stops. I cannot enjoy myself watching this film. When I look at the glory this films receives on all the film critic lists, it really sickens me, and it makes me feel like I did with the Bush vs. Kerry Presidential ballots, it felt like a recount was needed then, like I feel like one is needed now. There just is no way my mind can wrap itself around the idea that this film is in a top 50 films ever discussion unless dead people are voting.
So, my emphasis in the end is on it's boring story. The film is shot well, not spectacularly, but well. The adaptation by assumption seems well enough, acting is well... but I just don't see anything great in the film, instead mediocre or well at best.
'Raging Bull'
6.5 / 10
