Miller's Crossing (1990)

Overrated and overhyped

Overrated

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

I've seen several Cohen brothers films and I know they have a habit of making complex films, more or less between the commercial movie and the intellectual movie. The Cohen have the ability to go from one end to the other of this spectrum. The script runs during the Prohibition and in the context of an impending gangster war. Tom, the main character, is trying to avoid it, but ends up getting entangled in a web of crossed loyalties.Gabriel Byrne gave life to the lead role and was excellent. I loved his performance in a character who looks like an anti-hero. He has everything to be bad (he has no character or scruple and doesn't mind betraying friends) but he is pragmatic and seems to regard the bloodshed as something that should be avoided or minimized. That makes Tom a character we like. He is not a good guy, but he seems to be the most human person in the whole movie. Velma, on the other hand, looks like a cold, calculating, treacherous girl. The way Marcia Gay Harden acted also helped. The actress is good and performed well. John Turturro also shone in the role of Bernie, an opportunist little crook who gets in trouble by fooling a big fish. Albert Finney brought to life Leo, the powerful Irish boss with a good heart and full of kindness. He is a good actor, but his character seems too good to be a mobster. Much closer to the ruthless and cynical picture which we use to make of mob bosses is Jon Polito. He's the most dominant actor in the film, along with Byrne. I loved his work here. His cruelty, the easy way he kills or orders to kill gave me goose bumps. The rest of the cast also did a good job, but I think these actors deserve prominence, not so much for having the main characters but for the quality of their work.Another good thing are the technical details. Cinematography is very good and contributes decisively to the chilling environment that we like to feel in a true gangster movie. Some scenes are clearly homage to other films of the past, as well as the relevance given to fedora hats. In fact, if there is anything that we immediately link with the gangster world it's this particular type of hat (although it's also one of the most classic male hat models, still fashionable nowadays... I even have one). We can also see other iconic elements of the mob world, like Thompson sub-machine guns. It has excellent firefight scenes also, and the dry and ironic humor that is the Cohen Brothers trademark. The only thing I didn't like was the soundtrack because I felt it cut through the pleasant tension I felt throughout the movie."Miller's Crossing" is a good movie. It's not too complex or unintelligible, tells a good story, has a nice irony, a good cast doing a great job, good production values and positive technical details. It's worth watching.

Why was I disappointed?1.) The Cohen brothers always develop unique and entertaining products. But this one in my view was a dud.2.) I am a fan of Gabriel Byrne so I was intrigued to see him in a starring role as an Irish gangster. Unfortunately he did not come across as a realistic gangster. I think he got beat up on at least three (3) occasions and he just seemed to cower in the corner and take his beating like a scared school boy with no retaliation.3.) I am also a fan of Albert Finney and the one scene where he gets attacked at his home and his mansion is set on fire, he jumps out of his bedroom window to escape the attack. Before he jumps out of his bedroom window he throws one of his assassins tommy gun's out of the bedroom window, which he turns on the assassins getaway car as he walks calmly down the road in his pajamas and slippers. After he sees the car run into a tree noting to the audience he killed all of his assassins I asked myself one question? In an earlier scene we see that mobster boss Leo (Albert Finney) has at least 50 of his hoods protecting him just in his hallway alone, but yet at his mansion it appears he had only one (1) bodyguard protecting him during the evening? 4.) Besides the above points it was hard for me to imagine Marcia Gay Harden as the only love interest of both Leo (Albert Finney) and Tom Reagan (Gabriel Byrne). She certainly did not come across the screen as a vixen, nor seductress.5.) Lastly, I got the feeling that the film came across more as a stage play, than as a major motion picture release. There was so much emphasis on Gabriel Reagan's tough Irish portrayal of mobster Tommy Reagan, but yet his character came across to me as shallow and scared, and not as the smart thinking hard drinking/smoking Irish mobster made man that he was portrayed as.Overall I was disappointed in Miller's Crossing, and I am not trying to be overly critical but I find it hard to understand how over 110,000 IMDb users have an average rating of 7.8 for what I deem is a lackluster crime film release. I can only assume I need to watch the film again to see what I may have missed which places it in a near 8.0 IMDb rating?I can only give Miller's Crossing a 5 out of 10 rating. No more, no less....well maybe less, but I like the Cohen brothers body of work so a "5" rating it will stay.

This is a very well written Coen brothers's gangster film. It has sharp dialogues and has depth and soul to it without going into the mindless Tommy Gun shootouts. The main lead is a character named Tom Reagan who starts out as the right hand man for his boss Leo. Now Leo O'Bannon is one of the coolest mob boss in film history. Sure he gets his hands dirty but he treats the people that work for him right and he does have a heart. Well at least a heart when it comes to gangster bosses anyways. Anyways Tom is a smart, cunning skimmer that is a bit over his head. But also has this charisma and pretentious loyalty which leads him to be liked highly by whoever hires him. He is also has this bad boy persona that women find irresistible and keeps his cool for the most part. He is also very good at manipulation. He is a gambler that takes huge risks with his life and act cool continuously like he doesn't give a crap (which is another reason why some women find him irresistible). In another words he is a good bluffer, which is few of the reasons why you would want him to be on your team while also not wanting him on your team. The reason why I go about Tom's personality is because his personality plays a pivotal role in the plot. And when he sleeps with his boss's twist which leads things to intertwine and sets off in a very different path than what could of been. That acting for the most part is done quite well in this, but that also has to do with the well written dialogue and direction. The ending is pretty gritty, bleak and stays far away from the warm heartfelt wrap up. "Nobody knows anybody, not that well".9/10

It took me three views to figure out the entire plot. It is a terrific story about the incorruptible at the bottom of the heart that can't be told but can't be beat. Dashiell Hammet, wherever he is, must be applauding. The first time I was caught by the style. The second time by the acting. The third time by the craftsmanship of the plot. The nice thing about the 30's is that corruption was so simple then. To the people who lived in it, personal loyalty was the only thing to hold onto, or not. This incredibly elaborate movie is simply about one man with that one motive. The plot, of course, is something else. A violent war between gangs gets won by wits after so many twists and turns that you wonder how someone can be so smart... oh, and there is lots of black humor. If you like film noir, and if you think nothing new could be done with it, watch this movie.