well for started there is alot more humour in The Departed than in Infernal Affairs. I also thought since I was wowed by Infernal Affairs the effect was lost for the American remake.

Haven't seen "The Departed" yet but I'm certainly interested in doing so (and "yes" I'm a big fan of the original "Infernal Affairs" trilogy). One thing I'm not too pleased about......some of the more knowledgeable reviewers have pointed out that the film also incorporates elements from parts 2 and 3 of "Infernal Affairs". Currently on the homepage of KFCCinema.com (scroll down a bit on that site), Andy Lau (one star of "Infernal Affairs") also is mentioned as confirming that "The Departed" has incorporated elements of the last two films in the original trilogy. My concern is that he also mentions that the film makers did not pay for the rights to the last two films (they only bought rights to the first one). If that's true (and there isn't any more to the deal that I'm not aware of), then that is very weak (and very Bollywood) on the part of those involved on the U.S. side of things. I realize film makers borrow from each other all the time - and that Asian film makers often "borrow" from Hollywood - but given the high-profile players involved in the U.S. version, I'd be disappointed if they did resort to what is essentially theft.

While he definitely praises "Infernal Affairs", film reviewer James Berardinelli (his review is linked earlier in this discussion) does label it as a B-grade entry in comparison to the "American epic tragedy" that is "The Departed". I'm curious if he has seen the latter two films in the "Infernal Affairs" trilogy. Given that "The Departed" has a much longer runtime than the original "Infernal Affairs" and that it apparently incorporates elements from parts 2 and 3, I'm a little disappointed to see the original film somewhat slighted in the sense that "The Departed" is being given praise as a great epic as compared to the original. In my opinion, so was the original trilogy. Maybe this is "apples to oranges", but those are some thoughts that came to mind.

Saw it last night by pure chance. We just showed up at a random time looking for a movie to see. My friend said we should go see 'The Department'... We bought the tickets and had to walk outside to see what it actually was.

It has a very good story, although at the end most people were laughing at the turn of events. I found it interesting that the movie, while it has less violent scenes than most action flicks you see these days, was still by far the most violent movie I have seen in years. It was much more realistic than most of the shit Hollywood producers are spewing at us these days in the hopes of getting ratings/awards.

My audience last night (Friday 10pm) was laughing at a lot of the more extreme violence as well.

Saw it last night, and like most, I totally dug it.

As a LONG-time Scorsese fan, it was interesting to see his distilation of style - what I mean is that it didn't have the usual tricks and stylistic flourishes that Scorsese usually employs, but it was still Scorsese through and through. Almost like he doesn't need to be flashy anymore, because he's perfected his technique so well. Instead of putting some "autour" stamp on it, he just made tight little genre-film like the ones he grew up on, and nailed it out of the park.

Though the use of Gimme Shelter is getting to be a bit much...

As far as the unanswered question:

I haven't seen the film yet, but I do think there's a difference between feeling brutal and being just plain sick. The fact that it was disturbing to you (without I suspect, every gory detail being shown) shows the talent of the filmmaker.

Showing brutal scenes as punctuation has more of an impact than letting the blood flow non stop.. imo. Take this wknds other new release Texas Chainsaw Massacre... two different presentations of violence.

I'm assuming there aren't any vice scenes in The Departed?

Just got back from seeing this and was completely floored. Up there with Scorsese's finest work, IMO. Fired on all cylinders and the cast was great (Wahlberg stands out). I have not yet seen Infernal Affairs so am unable to do a comparison.

About the ending...

I love how it's almost a unanimous trend to call them "Leo" and "Marky-mark" haha...

On subject though, saw it, loved it, but I disagree with some people saying it's open ended. I think its resolution wraps everything up nicely, and sensibly. Speculation as to what certain things meant seems like a stretch.

just got back from this a few minutes ago. loved it. thought it was great. liked every minute of it. jack's character was crazy and he made that much better. can't say any but great things about this movie.

i agree with other peoples thoughts on the end. <spoiler> that the enevlope had the information that wahlberg would need to put damon as the rat. once he got that info, he took out damon instead of taking him in to get arrested.</spoiler>

sorry spoiler tag didn't work and it won't let me edit for some reason...

Nerd alert:

In the flash-back, the Wolverine comic books Nicholson gives kid-Damon are actually from about 12 years back, when for the time they were trying to convey, they should've been closer to 20 years back (Wolverine didn't even have his own solo book back then - not counting a couple minis) - took me right out of the movie - Scorsese shoulda known better - what a hack! ;)

caught the matinee. what an excellent film. definitly in my top 3 of the year (including Little Miss Sunshine & The Descent). All the leads in this film were so perfect.

EW gave it an "A-", i say give it a solid "A"

Saw it. Liked it. Scorsese definitely returns to his strengths with this flick. Very gritty and unrelenting. I thought the story with the shrink was rather superfluous, but otherwise a great film. I just hope it doesn't flop and disqualify Scorsese from the Oscar race.

Also,

While I thought it was a good film, I don't think it hit the "great" level for me. The film is one of the more well-lit "daylight" films I've seen from Scorsese, as I was anticipating more darkness and shadows for such a tale of 2 moles. In addition, the story was almost too contemporary at times (making information dissemination between the moles on either side far too easily in terms of screenplay consideration).

For once Leonardo finally seems like an adult in this film, rather than a tall skinny kid wearing his dad's clothes in previous film roles. Damon was on his game throughout the film, Wahlberg brought the comic relief, Sheen was good for what he represented in the film, and Nicholson was entertaining as always as the big bad kahuna.

The runtime seems about right for all the twists and turns, but there's maybe about 5-10 minutes that could have been trimmed and not lose much of the dramatic narrative.

I give it 3.5 stars, or a grade of B+.

http://cbg.nohomers.net/images/cbgcomputer.gif
Yeah, I noticed that too. But was just glad they had a wolverine comic in the movie. Anyone remember what issue number it was?

Patriot Act... Patriot Act!!!!

Everything that came out of Baldwind's or Whalberg's mouth was pure gold.

Another postive review from me. Best movie that I've seen this year. 4 out of 4 stars and I'll probably see it again this week.

This is in my top 5 of the year (top spot still held by Little Miss Sunshine). I agree with Patman, Leo came off as a man. He's definately a good actor, but I've never felt that he's projected a certain authority when on screen until now.

I don't have many nitpicks, mostly stuff I think IA did slightly better (yes, I've seen and loved IA) but the movie rocks. The audience was really into the movie and gasped and laughed in all the right places. The only stumbled (IMO) was the end - the violence almost became comical. You shouldn't be laughing when the emotional and physical confrontations are coming to a head (there's a place for funny violence, but I don't think this was it).

Who the hell did Anthony Anderson blow to get a part written specifically for him? There wasn't anyone analogous to him in IA. Although the same could be said (to a point) for Wahlberg and Baldwin's characters, at least they were fleshed out enough.

I loved this movie too. Eventhough I have seen IA (and its sequels), this one definitely holds up on its own.

I do wish to raise to question previously raised by another member:



Thanks!!!

#11

http://www.milehighcomics.com/cgi-bi...477059734%2011

I'mnotanerdI'mnotanerdI'mnotanerd... ok, so I'm a nerd.

I went to see it yesterday afternoon and loved every second of it. Scorsese deserves an Oscar!

The Departed: missing scene found (tongue in cheek)
 

*screen fades to white - flashback*

drill sergeant: Those who break the rules will be like them. They will be expelled!

*close-up of Alan Mak and Andrew Lau*

drill sergeant: Who wants to trade places with them?!

*close-up of Martin Scorsese*

Scorsese: I do. *looks up at Alan and Andrew, face full of remorse*

*screen fades to black*

"Says the Buddha: 'He who makes films in Continuous Hell (i.e., Hollywood) is seldom original. The needless creation of uninspired remakes is a big hardship in Continuous Hell.'"

Next up: Hollywood's reworking of Béla Tarr's Sátántangó. An 83 minute Technicolor feature with Jack Nicholson playing an eccentric Oklahoma farmer wallowing in desperation and passivity...that is until he hooks up with a robot and a talking pie destined for a California video game championship tournament! Any and all cats in this film are CGI. Rated R for graphic violence and lack of character development.

P.S. I love Scorsese's work, but this particular film did nothing for me. Nevertheless, I am going to see it again so that I can better understand my reasons for disliking it. I am truly envious of everyone who has fallen in love with the film. I am saddened (and surprised) by the fact that I was disappointed with it. Perhaps my love of Infernal Affairs kept me from enjoying Scorsese's version.

I'm not even that much of a fan of Infernal Affairs and I thought Scorsese's version is meh. Where's the religion that was so prominent in the original? Where's the depth? Especially since it's Scorsese and it's about the Irish, I'm baffled that NONE of the religion is featured in this remake.

I'm baffled that some people can't judge a movie on its own merits without looking at the source material or the director's previous films.

If I didn't even think Infernal Affairs was that incredibly amazing, what makes you think I'll go gaga over Departed, even discounting the fact that I saw the source film?

And if this is your first ever Scorsese film and you think it's the best film ever, then it's no one else's fault that you are ignorant of cinema.

If this is directed at my comment, it's misplaced. My original comment was inspired by reading numerous reviews and other comments that almost always compare The Departed to Infernal Affairs and Goodfellas. That's what I don't understand - why someone can't just view Scorsese's film on its own without trying to make useless comparisons.

As for whether you enjoyed Infernal Affairs, I don't think it matters in regards to your opinion of The Departed. Has there never been a film in the history of cinema that had been based on another film that you didn't enjoy more than its source?

I don't think I'll even respond to your last sentence because it's mean-spirited and irrelevant.

People will always compare, it's just the way it works.

Though for the most part, save for a few die hards, people have tended to comment on The Departed standing on its own, and then mentioned it in relation to IA.

I guess I'm lucky in that I haven't seen Internal Affairs yet, so I was able to judge The Departed on its own merits.

It's a general "you", not directed at any poster in particular.

Patman You think Your lucky because you haven't seen one of the best Hk movies of the last few years? But that was the problem with the depated for me, since I have seen IA, the movie just didn't have the WOW effect since I have seen this movie b4, but it was still good.anyone who liked this should really see IA, and see how much credit is due to that movie.(that it will never get)

And why does every movie have to have depth?

I think Scorsese was really just going for a straight genre filck, not unlile Cape Fear, but this one was a more successful attempt at one. Does it rank among his best films? Of course not - but it doesn't need to be counted among his best films in order to be good and entertaining.

It'll get more credit now out of curiosity than it would have sitting on the shelf at Blockbuster with it's uber-generic cover (thanks Weinsteins) and, let's face it, lame translated title, which many still probably think is a misspelling.

No, I just expect more from Scorsese. But then I skipped his last two films exactly because I just couldn't be bothered.

Very good movie, I give it a B. Much funnier than Infernal Affairs (A-) but less depth. I felt the Damon character wasn't developed well at all. No struggle between good and evil like Andy Lau had.

Why compare it to Infernal Affairs? Because that's what we do. When a re-make comes out, its invariably compared to the original. Should we forgo that just because its Scorcese?

I loved IA - and going in I thought that perhaps my love of IA would hinder my enjoyment of this movie. I certainly didn't have the shock that most of the audience did when certain things happened - but I was drawn into the story, situation, and characters and enjoyed the movie.

After I finished watching the movies, yes I compared, just like when I saw The Ring, or City of Angels, or Vanilla Sky. There were things I liked better in IA, so what, it doesn't make The Departed worse, just different.

Nice to see the movie opened decent ($27 million, about the same as Inside Man, another well reviewed rated R drama from Spring, though my theater was barely as full as Inside Man, but then again with so many screens showing it finding any full theater is a challenge nowadays, unless it's Pirates of the Caribbean.), I hope it can keep its momentum, though I am sure not many people want to see a big emotional downer film for the most part.

Also, what is up with Scorsese's use of Gimme Shelter? It seems like if it's a movie of his set in modern times he has to use it at some point. Getting a bit old.

I really enjoyed the movie, but I would rate it closer to really good than great. I am not a huge Scorcese fan, but I really like Goodfellas and Casino, and this doesn't rank quite as high as those. It feels like the ol' maestro is just playing ball for modern movie audiences with this one (which The Aviator and maybe even Casino would be guilty of), while flicks like Goodfellas and Taxi Driver were just him doing his thang.

A few comments and nitpicks ...

I loved this movie, thought it was great...I do not think its quite as good as IA just because I dont like the fact that The Departed had to spell out everything that is inferred in IA and I thought IA did a better job with the early police academy footage. I thought Alec Baldwin was great and actually dug Leo's performance. Easily my fav film of the year so far and so glad this is a WB film so I can pick it up on HD day and date hopefully.