I saw Scorsese's "Bringing Out the Dead"
Visually stunning, but ultimately empty, it is the story of the weekend of an EMS technician in New York City (Nicolas Cage) who has been on a streak of losing patients, and is particularly haunted by the death of a young girl. We accompany Cage from call to call with his three partners (John Goodman, Ving Rhames, and Tom Sizemore) to the hell that is bleeding and in-need-of-medical-attention New York. One stop takes Cage to a young woman whose father has suffered a heart attack. The man is revived by Cage, and in bonding with Arquette, he begins a reconciliation with his guilt. The movie has its moments, but Scorsese's best work is when his visual ingenuity acts seamlessly with the narrative. For example, in "Casino" his outstanding shot of Sharon Stone throwing the chips into the air suggests her allure and you can see through that act, and his camera, why Deniro is immediately entranced.
In "Dead", many of Scorsese's shots do work for the narrative, especially his hyper-drives through the city, which illustrate Cage's sense of dread and adrenaline rush. But others become showy and gimmicky, mainly because the narrative has died half-way through. yes, we know about Cage's guilt. Can we move on? Because we don't, the film becomes about nothing more than Scorsese's skills as a director.
Cage is very good. I was surprised that he was not talked up as a nominee. I thought his performance was smartly played, and he connected on the manic, the gentle and the guilt-ridden at the right times, without overplaying his hand. Arquette, on the other hand, is quite awful as the concerned daughter of the comatose father. She simply lacks the stones for the role of recovering and embittered drug addict.
