...was Martin Scorsese's first movie. Shot in handheld black & white, it's very rough around the edges, experimentally edited, with lo-fi sound, and hence often feels not much more than a student film.
On the other hand, even if it is, it's MARTIN SCORSESE's student film, and hence full of little identifiable touches, refined, polished up and put to better use later on: the Catholicism, the unforgiving examinations of masculinity, the loving, detailed chronicling of post-war Italian-American life, the ubiquitous Harvey Keitel, dynamic camera movements, the pioneering integral use of rock & roll - they're all here. On that last point, I was very surprised to hear 'The End' by The Doors being used in one scene - surely the first use of it in a film, since both came out in 1967 - and I would otherwise have sworn it had its big screen debut in Coppola's 'Apocalypse Now', a good dozen years later.
Another big surprise for me was the dialogue, which is still sharp, snappy and youthful, and especially early on reminded me of nothing so much as Tarantino's 'Reservoir Dogs', with its long monologues filled with pop culture observations. I found myself wondering if this one was a favourite of young Quentin Tarantino.
The scene where the two New Yorkers take a reluctant hike up a mountain put me in mind of the 'Pine Barrens' episode of The Sopranos, and also of Scorsese once saying his primary memory of the Woodstock festival was losing a cufflink: these characters look just as out-of-water as can be, anywhere further out into nature than a bagel shop.
So this is clearly a film by the same guy who made Mean Streets and Goodfellas, and yet it looks and feels like a contemporary of À bout de souffle or Jules et Jim. Which is an odd mix. In some ways, it works best to see it as a sort of American take on the French Nouvelle Vague, with an easier set of references for an english-language audience to follow.
As a fully-fledged motion picture, it's a little hard to recommend simply as an entertaining story, since it does feel a little on the cheap side, and has a good few flaws. But as an early example of Scorsese's art, it's very interesting indeed, and I'm sure any student of film would find a lot to enjoy.
On the other hand, even if it is, it's MARTIN SCORSESE's student film, and hence full of little identifiable touches, refined, polished up and put to better use later on: the Catholicism, the unforgiving examinations of masculinity, the loving, detailed chronicling of post-war Italian-American life, the ubiquitous Harvey Keitel, dynamic camera movements, the pioneering integral use of rock & roll - they're all here. On that last point, I was very surprised to hear 'The End' by The Doors being used in one scene - surely the first use of it in a film, since both came out in 1967 - and I would otherwise have sworn it had its big screen debut in Coppola's 'Apocalypse Now', a good dozen years later.
Another big surprise for me was the dialogue, which is still sharp, snappy and youthful, and especially early on reminded me of nothing so much as Tarantino's 'Reservoir Dogs', with its long monologues filled with pop culture observations. I found myself wondering if this one was a favourite of young Quentin Tarantino.
The scene where the two New Yorkers take a reluctant hike up a mountain put me in mind of the 'Pine Barrens' episode of The Sopranos, and also of Scorsese once saying his primary memory of the Woodstock festival was losing a cufflink: these characters look just as out-of-water as can be, anywhere further out into nature than a bagel shop.
So this is clearly a film by the same guy who made Mean Streets and Goodfellas, and yet it looks and feels like a contemporary of À bout de souffle or Jules et Jim. Which is an odd mix. In some ways, it works best to see it as a sort of American take on the French Nouvelle Vague, with an easier set of references for an english-language audience to follow.
As a fully-fledged motion picture, it's a little hard to recommend simply as an entertaining story, since it does feel a little on the cheap side, and has a good few flaws. But as an early example of Scorsese's art, it's very interesting indeed, and I'm sure any student of film would find a lot to enjoy.