Heh. I think it was perfectly appropriate there Robert.
@Robert
Then he meets Eddie and he does the most stupid thing he can do: he trusts Eddie with information.
By today’s standards that is a very clunky transition – but it is there for a reason, it tells us what the film is about.
Which would be? No honor among thieves?
No honor among thieves or no trust. These people are deemed untrustworthy by society and
spend most of their time trying prove they are trustworthy to each other.
But it is a more psychological than sociological film.
Dave Foley: The only one fuckin’ Eddie Coyle is Eddie Coyle.
The book by George V. Higgins was great. I read the book first, then saw the movie, first on TV and then on the big screen at a museum showing. I thought the movie did the book justice. Mitchum’s great in it. Plus, you’ve got Richard Jordan, who would later team up with Mitchum in THE YAKUZA and a few eps. of the old “Equalizer” TV show.
How are things going Vic?
Yes, Jordan was perfectly cast – that smirk.
One of the film’s strengths is the chemistry between the characters.
@Robert
I don’t know if Eddie is screwing himself. I felt more like he’s just the little man that gets crushed by the people on top. That’s why I thought of the film as a kind of “reverse Capra” film. The whole point of the film is to show that everybody is out to screw the little guy—even people who are supposed to be on his side. It’s very bleak, and of it’s time.
Oh okay, that is very different read, sort of Mike Leigh-ish?
@Robert
Hmm, I don’t of the film as comparable to Mike Leigh’s films—which are more social commentary coming from the left. There is the working class element, though. Then again, I can understand bringing him up based on what I said. The tone and filmmaking seems like a more Hollywood-ish for Leigh, which may be the reason I didn’t see the connection you made.
:But it is a more psychological than sociological film.
I guess to say the little guy is getting a raw deal doesn’t imply a problem with society. but in this case it is Eddie screwing himself. Where in the film does he make any attempt to get out from his situation, other than another crime? or asking to be sent to Arizona in the witness protection program?
I only gave this an 8 1/2, but it gets better the more I think about it.
@Robert
but in this case it is Eddie screwing himself. Where in the film does he make any attempt to get out from his situation, other than another crime? or asking to be sent to Arizona in the witness protection program?
Was the witness protection program really a serious option? I don’t know I just feel like Coyle was stuck and used every available recourse to get out of the problem.
But here’s the thing. Boyle’s character creating the impression that Coyle snitched on those bank robber is not Coyle’s fault. He was just getting screwed. Ditto with the law enforcement officer. He was getting it the guys on his side, too. I don’t see how you can call that “Eddie screwing himself.”
I haven’t seen it but I heard it’s good
He was deep into things he shouldn’t have been & he didn’t see his “friends” like Dillon as any different than he was. Foley was trying to breathe some awareness into him with that line.
Wait, remind me who Foley and Dillon were.
Yes he was deep into things that he shouldn’t have been, but so were all his friends.
I produced a tribute to the Friends of Eddie Coyle that we shot in Dec. 2009 and released in March, 2010. I also shot a one-on-one interview with Alex Rocco (Jimmy Scalise) that I will be posting as soon as I gain his permission.
Please check out the 5 pieces (2 re-created scenes, a trailer, behind the scenes photos and an interview the composer who gives a nod to David Grusin ) that comprise this play list: http://www.youtube.com/playlist?p=PL8171861DD8577ACA
Robert W Peabody III
@Greg – I used your term ‘clunky’, if that was an appropriate usage.