Review of Casino (1995) by Cameron J — 10 Aug 2012

And so, Martin Scorsese presents his most daringly unique film since "The Last Temptation of Christ": a lengthy crime drama that chronicles an extended period in the life of a gangster, stars Robert De Niro, as well as Joe Pesci as a murderous maniac. No, come on, this is Scorsese, a director known for his tastes in experimentation, so you know that this film has its fair share of unique touches, though it still doesn't drift too far from the classic Scorsese-De Niro stereotypes. Hey, quite frankly, I say thank goodness for that, because I want something to evoke reminiscence if this is truly the end of the Scorsese-De Niro dream team, or at least for just now. Sure, Scorsese and De Niro haven't worked together in over a decade, and De Niro's good tastes have been slipping in recent years, but they worked on eight films together (They out-Burton-Depped Burton and Depp; but just wait, the Burton and Depp dream team doesn't seem to be showing any signs of slowing down any time soon), and it's hard to break off something after that much committment, no matter how much this Leonardo DiCaprio fella comes in and... help Scorsese in continuing to craft some of the best films of his career. Okay, maybe the big Scorsese-De Niro reunion isn't in the nearest future, but hey, I wouldn't "gamble" on it, because Joe Pesci bailed out of acting a couple of years after this film, and yet, lo and behold, he hits the scene again in his buddy De Niro's own "The Good Shepherd". Well, in all fairness, people kind of forgot about Pesci's music career, and yet, De Niro seems to be getting money just fine without Scorsese, which is unfortunate, because these people seriously need to stop condoning De Niro's bad decisions so that he will get out of this real raging bull and back into stuff like this, because this is the good stuff where he belongs. Still, this film isn't quite the booming farewell to Scorsese-De Niro that it should be, for although it is a worthy end to an era, you can only gamble so much before you turn up a faulty hand, and let me tell you, this film is exactly on the biggest winning streak.

Quite honestly, the film opens up pretty embarassingly, not just because of a pretty poorly done car explosion sequence (The dummy is so startlingly obvious, partially because Robert De Niro had his arm extended right when we cut to the dummy, sitting up straight with its arms at rest), followed by opening credits set to generic and unfitting-feeling operatic chanting, but because the film's narrated development segment stretches on way too long, running for an unreasonable [b][u]"one, whole, near-paceless hour"[/u][/b], and pretty messily, switching the narrator position between De Niro and Joe Pesci with extreme awkwardness, perhaps topped only by the awkwardness in the opening's sloppy dives into cliches, excessive soundtrack and, yes, even clumsy editing. It all gets worse at about the twenty-minute mark, at which point, overbearingly extensive narrated development takes breaks, giving you some faint hope that the development segment is finally over, until they crowbar the narration right back in, until by the time we inorganically enter the body of the film, we'll have face development so excessive and bloated that it actually distances you from the characters and story that the film spent way too much time discussing. Three hours or not, a sloppy development segment can go a long way, and a sloppy first hour can go even further, and based on the sloppy development segment being that whole first hour, alone, the film all but collapses as underwhelming. After that, the film picks up, and just enough to secure a position over underwhelming, yet even then, it continues to be considerably flawed, boasting occasions of violence that are disturbing to the point of being gratuitous and detrimental to the film's substance, as well as a few dives back into narrated sum-ups of certain scenarios that feel rather inorganic. Still, when you come down to it, the real problem with the film is that it is an all-out mess of structure, going bloated to a decidedly unnecessary three-hour runtime through filler and repetition, yet still not taking enough time to genuinely meditate on its substance, or even remember certain subplots that go shoved either right out the door or in a corner, thus rendering the film uneven. As much as I have considerable respect and appreciation for Martin Scorsese, he knows how to make a colossal mess, and this film is a colossal mess if there ever was one. However, Scorsese also knows how to compensate for his messes, and while this film makes it to genuinely good by a thin hair, it makes it genuinely good at the end of the day, keeping you engaged more often than not, partially because it has the attractive style that's not always easy to turn away from.

This film marked the beginning of a beautiful friendship between Martin Scorsese and Robert Richardson, and I do literally mean, "beautiful", for although this film predates Richardson's getting a fully firm grasp on his now-stunning style, the cinematography is still quite striking, with a handsomely hazy color and lighting that leaves the film to bounce out gracefully and catch your eye most every time. Another thing that holds your attention is the soundtrack, though not always for the right reasons, because, as I said, it gets to be excessively used to an overbearing state, yet more often than not, the imperfect (I felt like screaming when they kicked on Devo's unbearably obnoxious cover of "I Can't Get No Satisfaction") yet strong and packed soundtrack really sparks up energy in this film and keeps it consistently entertaining, as you would expect a Robbie Robertson-produced Scorsese soundtrack to do. Speaking of Scorsese, as faulty as his storytelling is, and as much as his friends in the style departments pull this film out of plenty of jams, he's still a very skilled director, and provides a reminder of that for every mistake, drawing from this story - messy and familiar though, it may be - considerable entertainment value and intrigue, keeping the film lively and engaging through all of its missteps by sustaining your investment in the story and characters more often than not. Scorsese crafts an immensely messy product that borders on plummeting to no more than decent, yet holds its balance, being supported by Scorsese's winning inspiration that keeps this film going through thick and thin, though perhaps not as much as our leads, with the exception of Sharon Stone, who's Ginger McKenna Rothstein character is disgustingly unpaltable and death-worthy enough without Stone's overwhelming overacting. As Scorsese taught us with "Goodfellas", Joe Pesci plays a really good crazy dude, and does that here, yet not just that, as Nicholas "Nicky" Santoro character is a smooth criminal who stands dangerous, but also extremely unpredictable, having good sides, bad sides and ugly sides, all of which could come out of the left wing at any time and are played up sharply with Pesci's trademark slick yet sparky charisma and heavy layers that leave Pesci to all but disappear into Santoro and make Santoro himself a thoroughly compelling co-lead. As for Robert De Niro, well, like Pesci, he doesn't drift too far from a familiar role, yet also like Pesci, he plays such a role extremely well, boasting a smoother yet more human charisma that, when combined with layers, defines him an also compelling lead, as well as his Sam "Ace" Rothstein character as, in many ways, the opposite of the Nicky Santoro character. De Niro and Pesci are both forces to be reckoned with, and their firecracker chemistry with each other and many of the other colorful cast members (Sharon Stone notwithstanding, of course) makes our leads all the more engrossing, which of course ameliorates this film, definately not to the point of drowning the final product's flaws, but to the point of leaving the final product to battle back its faults just enough to stand as just barely genuinely good, but genuinely good all the same.

Overall, the film's momentum takes considerable damage from a bloated, often awkwardly messy development segment, followed by excessive padding through repetition and filler throughout the film, yet not at the expense of a substance meditation limiting that renders the film neither as fleshed out as it should be, nor as even as it should be, thus leaving the final product to dance close to the edge to underwhelmingness, yet never go over, being pulled to a level of genuinely good through entertainment value and intrigue, complimented by Robert Richardson's handsome cinematography and Robbie Robertson's generally lively soundtrack - often overbearingly overused though, it may be -, and brought to life by Martin Scorsese more-hit-than-miss direction, as well as by the sharp performances and sparkling chemistry between leads Robert De Niro and Joe Pesci, who help in making "Casino" an ultimately rewarding watch that's worth shooting for, even if the cards don't always fall in its favor.

3/5 - Good.