MUBI

This isn’t a film that shows the hip and luxury of gangster-dom nor does it get too graphic with the violence nor does it allow us to pick and choose a protagonist or an antagonist. Gomorrah is all about the drawbacks and consequences of adapting to the lifestyle of the Italian underworld of the Camorra in a very raw and realistic picture. Most of the actors involved were not real actors, even some of them had ties to the gang world, yet their raw subdued performances make all the characters equally human and flawed. It works like a documentary in the way the camera moves around and stays behind the characters’ heads in most of the tracking shots as they’re walking, giving an idea of what it’s like to accompany them on an exploration of the gritty uncivilized life as a documentary filmmaker would. The difference this film takes from popular gangster epics like The Godfather and Goodfellas is that it doesn’t focus primarily on the gangsters who run the business and live the luxurious charming lifestyles that are very seductive to the outsiders.

Instead, the point of view is shown through the eyes of people, young and old, who are at the low end of the ladder, who are just entering the life, or who would rather live their own independent life of crime. In a way, they’re outsiders to some degree and their involvement is risky to how it damages their consciences and their safety. They are not made to look and behave idealistically in the way a gangster would, although the two rogue teenagers, Sweet Peas and Marco aspire to the idealism of gangsters through their references to Scarface and their rogue sporty shoot-outs on the lake. Their biggest fallback in this idealism is that they are immaturely blinded by the excitement of the movies and their sporty uses of guns, yet they don’t comprehend the dangerous ground they’re treading on with the guys who are the real deal and won’t tolerate their reckless defiant behavior on their turf. This tragic downturn is relevant in the other storylines as well, such as the loss of innocence that the young boy Toto goes through in his initiation into one gang and the realization of the ambitious grad student Roberto to the corruption of his boss’ deals in waste management and the hazardous impact they could leave on innocent lives. In regards to the older characters’ storylines, the tailor Pasquale finds his garment work for a Chinese factory under threat from Camorra rivals and the nervous Don Ciro is stuck delivering money to the families of imprisoned gang members while being intimidated by the local gangsters of the neighborhood over his services to one side over another.

In the end, no side is more righteous or safe for any of the characters to get involved in because any side is all apart of the cold-blooded system that lurks beneath the law and refuses to make any compromises. This film could be dismissed as just another moral lecture on the evils of organized crime, but it’s opening our eyes to how heavily influential it is in some societies, especially in areas of low privilege and class. The shots of the connected walkways in the apartment complexes shows how closely-knitted the neighborhood of the crime-run society is and how easily locals can mix in with the gangs and be forced to choose a side. In a society so corrupt and violent, it’s hard to escape and live a decent life, which allows the underworld to have a corrupting influence on the naive, the vulnerable, and the reckless. Some attempt to turn their back on it, some are given no choice, and some are so indulged in it that the fragmented storylines help see what a broken society the characters live in. The violence that they witness happens about anywhere at anytime without warning that it can make the heart jump at a gunshot out of nowhere, such as in drive-by shootings in an otherwise comfortable setting, which doesn’t lead to anything exploitatively gory.

It’s all just very real and shocking to observe and prevents the film from moving into a hip and stylish exploration of the underworld that could look enticing to the underprivileged who find it charismatic and successful. The real-life locations, the use of non-actors, the lack of music, and the handheld camera makes Gomorrah an altogether gritty and believable mosaic that pays tribute to what we’ve seen in Italian neo-realist films. It doesn’t leave us on any high idealistic notes or offer us showy character types, but it keep us entrapped and provoked by what occurs in front of our eyes as though we’re exploring the social problem as it happens, a problem that may never get solved for the thousands of years it’s existed in the world.

This is an essay I wrote for my boyfriend to turn in and pull of as his own-
Plagiarism whaaddup

Gomorrah (2008), a film directed by Matteo Garrone, is an adaptation of the novel of the same name, written by Roberto Saviano in 2006. The film is drastically different from most other mobster films that have been made, like Scarface, Casino, The Godfather, etc. Those films glorify men in the mafia, breathe life into them and asign them personalities and heroic qualities that young men viewing the films may look up to, and try to emmulate. Gomorrah, however, is a frightening portrait of the Camorra at its most brutal, holding nothing back. Anyone that views this film in their right mind wouldn’t dare emmulate the heartless characters of the film, but instead feel sadness and sympathy for the men and women stuck in the unforgiving lifestyle of the Camorra. This being said, the film is entirely different from the novel, Gomorrah, which it’s based on, as well. The style, the level of detail and the general plotline of the film are not what a reader would normally envision after finishing the novel, but each greatly contribute to why I prefer Garrone’s adaptation to Saviano’s written work.

The style in which Garrone directed his film is very different from the feel that the novel gives readers. The novel is much slower, narrated in detail by Saviano himself, whereas the film has a fast paced feeling very similar to the popular film, Pulp Fiction. At times, the film even begins to feel like documentary footage; nothing is held back, there is no cushioning- it appears to entirely represent the grittiness of the Camorra in Italy. The film is edgy and raw, exciting to viewers, leaving them to their own devices in attempting to keep up with everything that unfolds. The novel slowly draws readers in with an emotional attachment to the narrator and main character of the story, Roberto Saviano. His narration allows for him to make an intimate connection with readers, helping them feel as if they know him on a personal level, while the film is detatched, making most of the characters feel like faceless victims who will, no doubt, meet a fatal end by the time the two hours are up.
The detailing of the film is also very different from the novel. Saviano clearly poured all of his knowledge and personal experience with the Camorra into his writing, and although some of that did translate to the silver screen, much of it was left behind. Garrone’s account of Saviano’s stories is much more brief, but that’s only to be expected when a novel can run hundreds of pages, and a film has a limit to how much information can be packed in to a matter of hours. The novel is written in vivid detail and a reader can walk away from it having absorbed a good amount of truth and useful information about the behind-the-scenes of the Camorra and the hardships that come with living in it, being that most of the author’s experiences were first hand. The film barely gives details or names and the degree of truth it carries may be far lighter than that of the novel. In that sense, the novel would be the better choice if a reader or a viewer was looking for an educational experience rather than an entertaining minimized version of things.
The most major difference between the film and the novel is the general plotlines that they individually follow. The novel is narrated by Saviano, therefor he’s with readers every moment along the way, sharing his experiences as he interprets them. He stays very focused, following a more direct timeline, whereas the film is very scattered and follows five interwoven narrative threads. There’s Don Ciro, the timid middleman who distributes money to families of imprisoned clan members, Toto, a pre-pubescent boy who gets caught up in the warfare between families, and of course, there’s Roberto, a graduate working in waste management. There’s also Pasquale, a haute couture tailor who betrays his own company for extra money on the side, and Marco and Sweet Pea, two cocky young men looking to operate their own independent clan. Roberto Saviano is barely featured in the film, in fact he’s the least featured out of any character. Removing his character almost entirely really makes room for the viewers, and puts them in the midst of everything, feeling as if they’ve experienced it first hand, just as Saviano did in the novel.
With the differences between the film and the novel being the style in which they were written and directed, the level of detail and truth they each have to offer and the characters and stories they present to viewers and readers, I prefer the film to the novel. Garrone’s adaptation is much darker, more heartpounding and resonating, leaving viewers feeling as if they never even stood a chance in getting to know the heroes or the villains before they met such foul ends. Saviano’s novel is much more fact based, and at times it begins to drone on and feel like a news broadcast. Altough I would recommend both the novel and the film, the film is much more exciting and entertaining.

Réussi mais déçu – 16/03/2009

Voilà un film que j’avais très envie de voir. Il est juste qu’il nous offre une superbe plongée dans l’Italie des petits et gros trafics, d’une manière assez ethnographique d’ailleurs, renouvelant le néoréalisme italien… La réalisation se construit comme un puzzle de personnages et de situations, un peu à la manière d’un documentaire. On est très loin du Parrain et du film mafieux traditionnel, et c’est en cela que cette réalité des cités italiennes est un choc. Reste que le film est ardu, sans histoire, sans rien où nous raccrocher. Bien sûr, on y trouve une portée politique et esthétique… Mais cela manque parfois de contexte, de perspective et l’on fini par s’ennuyer un peu à se perdre avec tout ces personnages, à sauter du coq à l’âne, à essayer de comprendre. Où est le film ? Voilà qui donne encore plus envie de lire le livre, des fois qu’on y trouve les explications qui nous manquaient…

A seminal gangster movie. Matteo Garrone rejects Hollywood genre conventions in favor of a more Italian neo-realist approach, knocking gangster glamor on its ass, depicting mob life in Naples as a greasy, sweaty, chain-wearing, bad tattoo-sporting, trash existence. And yet, this organization is far-reaching and powerful, swimming in the blood streams of nations beyond Italian borders. GOMORRAH doesn’t lay out structure for you the way films like GOODFELLAS or THE ROARING TWENTIES do. The structure is there, you just have to look for it. What is immediately apparent are the effects of mob life on the streets and in personal lives, as told through various semi-related plot threads. Garrone is smart enough not to ignore gangsters in pop-culture altogether, as two of the characters are dumbass gangster wanna-be’s, their introduction being them quoting lines from the Brian De Palma version of SCARFACE. We see something similar here in America, as a life of crime is something we see glamorized in films and pop music (although anyone intelligent enough can see the commentary in something like SCARFACE or THE GODFATHER, it only washes over the heads of the mentally deficient). GOMORRAH is a real genre-buster, go see it immediately.

To me, Gomorrah feels like an honest and fully detailed inside look at the life of the Italian mafia. I don’t think that they’re exaggerating anything except for the reality about what goes on in today’s crime-indused underworld. The people behind the movie were putting an emphasis on what is happening; maybe on what we might not know about the mafia. Although I don’t think I’ve seen enough mafia movies I think that it’s as powerful and controversial as any mafia movie can get.

I commend Mr. Saviano for helping to illuminate the problem with the Camorra. However, for a documentary style film, Gomorrah felt contrived in parts. Firstly, the idea of a tailor going behind the backs of the Camorra and helping some Asians is questionable since this would essentially be his death sentence. The individual was sparred in the film, but in real life I doubt it. Maybe it happened, but it seemed foolish. Then there was the idealistic kid that didn’t want to get involved, which is great. But, he mouths off in front of his mafioso superior about it. Again, no way in real life. Unfortunately, it is impossible to feel sympathy for the two young and stupid punks that stole the weapons from the their bosses. They were killed in the end, but I didn’t care because they were repulsive characters.

Gomorrah also eschews an overriding narrative for snippets of invividuals involved in the Neapoloitan Camorra. As a result, there is no strong characther development or understanding of how the organization functions. It is essentially a bunch on short newsreels pasted together. There was no real story to tell, about the Camorra or any of the individuals in the film or, especially, how really innocent people are hurt by the mafioso problem.

The film suggests that the Camorra is indirectly involved in the rebuilding of the WTC. While our government, Wall Street and corporate America can be corrupt at times, even many times, there is no proof of this involvement. In Roger Ebert’s review he states “No doubt New York and federal officials sat down to cordial meals with Camorra members while deciding the World Trade contracts, and were none the wiser.” This is a ridiculous, unsubstantiated statement.

Thanks Matteo Garrone,you make the impossible things happen:making gangster movie so goddamn boring !!
many said that this is italian answer for city of god.but after seen it myself,well,this is nowhere near it.,it share the same gritty looks of the slump,the ugly side of the world.but unlike the highly energetic city of god,this is just ‘empty’. and what’s with the 5 multiple storylines?? it makes the already convoluted story become much more confusing,.

Thought provoking, intense, sad yet human. It shows how each of us in a way are part of a corrupt system. The plots are divergent at the same time connected in an organised chaos. I was very into the story of the kids that got shot at the end. As they were following the ‘mafia guys’ in the motorbike, I thought they somehow will escape their fate, that in their naivety, they would find redemption but reality hit again. The strong beat the weak in this ‘law of the jungle’ tale. A well crafted film ****

The new, highly touted, yet Oscar foreign film shortlist snubbed, Italian gangster epic Gomorra has a laundry list of credited screenwriters. When one of them is the author of the novel it’s based on, you have to enter with a little trepidation, because if rewrites and collaboration are needed to fix “problems” from the originator, Roberto Saviano, the only thing that can result are more problems. Now, this is a speculation on my part, I don’t know the reasoning for all the writers; what I do know is what I thought of the film, though. It is a definite success at showing the lifestyle, violence, and lack of remorse in this world, but more often than not becomes a bit jumbled for my tastes. We are following five very specific storylines that all have common characters and/or intertwine at some point and, while each comes to a satisfactory conclusion, the editing of all together can be confusing. Maybe that is because it’s in Italian and you very rarely get a handle on people’s names, (I still have no idea whether the two punks trying to become their own bosses even had names); either way I’ll admit to some disorientation.

Gangster films are not necessarily my cup of tea as far as cinematic genres go. True I love Scorsese like the next guy, but I also didn’t think City of God was as brilliant as most—great, but not a perfect film. I believe Gomorra shares a lot of similarities with that Brazilian depiction of crime, cinematically and thematically. It is a gritty, grimy world, civil war between rival drug gangs breaking out in the neighborhoods and extending their reach even further. You have families being financially supported by one side seeing their children defect to the other, an unforgivable move that sees the monetary boost cut off immediately. Kids turn against people that trust them in order to fit into the gang and stake claim on the huge cash flow moving in and out of hands. One of my favorite scenes is concerning the boy Toto; as he waits for his fee, dropping off groceries to a local women, he sees the money being exchanged for doses of drugs. The look on his face, seeing the stacks of cash in their hands and the lone coin in his, tells the tale succinctly.

Toto’s, an honest portrayal from Salvatore Abruzzese, evolution from local kid to uneasily willing gang participant is just one of the five plot threads we become privy to on this harrowing journey. The other puzzle pieces include the before-mentioned “tough guy” duo, (I use quotes, and you’ll see why around the midpoint of the film), just causing trouble and getting themselves in the bad graces of people much more influential than they could ever be; my favorite character Pasquale, played by Salvatore Cantalupo, who has been used in the counterfeit clothing trade since he was a boy, trying to make a little extra cash by selling his skill and trade to the Chinese; Franco and his new assistant Roberto, (an interesting turn from Carmine Paternoster that always shows him contemplative and worried about what he is doing), finding land and dumping drug manufacturing waste, facilitating all who need it; and Gianfelice Imparato’s Don Ciro, the money collector for the old regime that is rapidly being replaced by its competitors, putting him in mortal danger as he just tries to hand out money to the families in “retirement”. Each thread could make their own very interesting film, so putting them all together may be too much, but kudos to the director Matteo Garrone for allowing each to breathe free and conclude their respective arcs.

The unflinching look into this underbelly of the drug trade, hitting home at the end when you find that the crime world here actually invests in US projects including the new Twin Tower site, is tough to watch at times. Everyone is out for himself and allegiances change when one’s wellbeing is threatened. It really comes down to who can protect you more, the men you’ve worked with your entire life, or the enemy they are fighting a war with. No one can ever really win this war; it is a civil unrest as though the city’s very existence relies on drugs—its main staple and source of money. Each person’s life needs the illegal trade to survive, even those trying to stay out of it, (a nice moment with an elderly gentlemen telling Don Ciro he needs more money to support the son that he’s shielded from the life and is now unemployed at 40 shows this … hadn’t he done enough himself for them to deserve more?). Even a life seemingly on the straight and narrow is backed by dirty money, laundered into legal businesses, the filth not quite cleaned off.

Watching a kid like Toto fall prey to the neighborhood boys and peer pressure to join them, or very literally die if not, is eye-opening. These kids don’t really have a choice. When skilled crafts, such as wardrobe and fashion work, utilized by Pasquale, are owned by the mob, where else can you go? I look at Roberto and see how all the death, cheating, and stealing finally begins to eat away at him. He grows lethargic and unfocused, wondering if what he is doing is right. His father was so happy that Franco allowed him to join up with such a lucrative business. It becomes a question of whether even he knew what that business did, or if everyone is that naïve to the horrible things going on. Sometimes you do just need to quit and walk away, never to return, or else slowly watch your life degenerate into an empty shell devoid of compassion for humanity.