ecl@ahuta.UUCP (ecl) (12/16/84)
THE COTTON CLUB
A film review by Mark R. Leeper
Francis Ford Coppola's career has had its ups and downs. The biggest
ups were the two GODFATHER films; the biggest down is probably the more
recent tone experiment ONE FROM THE HEART. Coppola films come with big
price tags and some win big at the boxoffice, but more recently they have
been losing big. Coppola needs a box office winner so he is returning to a
subject that has worked for him in the past. He has made another lavish
gangster film.
THE COTTON CLUB takes place in the late Twenties and early Thirties
when gangsters and celebrities would slum in Harlem. The number one
slumming spot was the Cotton Club, a posh night spot where blacks
entertained, where legends like Cab Calloway and Duke Ellington were born,
but where the audience was white only. THE COTTON CLUB is the story of two
pairs of brothers, the Irish Dwyers and the black Williamses. The Dwyers
get involved with the psychopathic hood Dutch Schultz (played by James
Remar) and the pugnacious Owney Madden (Bob Hoskins), owner of the Cotton
Club, racketeer, and self-appointed peacemaker among the bootleggers.
THE COTTON CLUB is structured much like Ragtime with many intertwined
stories being developed at the same time. As much as this film has a main
character, it is Dixie Dwyer (Richard Gere), a cornet player who saves Dutch
Schultz's life and, with his brother, is sucked into the world of
bootleggers and numbers runners. The story also follows Sandman Williams
(Gregory Hines), who is chasing stardom and one Lila Rose Oliver (Lonette
McKee). Lila Rose wants to make it as a star too, but her skin is light
enough that she wants to make it as a white star. The story for THE COTTON
CLUB is by William Kennedy, Coppola, and Mario Puzo. What makes the film
most watchable is the same sort of racketeer politics that Coppola and Puzo
put into the GODFATHER films. The "who is doing what to whom and why" and
the backdrop of the Twenties fascinates the viewer and make 127 minutes go
by quickly.
Though Gere plays the main character of a memorable film, his will not
be the most memorable part of the film. Somehow his character is never
developed to the point that we really care much about him. And the
authenticity of his story is destroyed by some miscalculated scenes at the
end that could have been from a Thirties musical. Curiously, the film's
most memorable scene is between Madden and his lumbering bodyguard Frenchie
(Fred Gwynne). These minor characters--and a third, Sol Weinstein (Julien
Beck)--do more to make the film with far less screen time than any of the
major characters. The musical numbers also make the film work and give a
Twenties feel to the story, but by the end of the film we have seen just two
or three two many of them.
So did returning to gangsters and period pieces pay off for Coppola?
THE COTTON CLUB is flawed, but it joins THE NATURAL and AMADEUS as one of
the best of the year. Watch for it at Oscar time.
(Evelyn C. Leeper for)
Mark R. Leeper
...ihnp4!lznv!mrlmoriarty@fluke.UUCP (Jeff Meyer) (01/18/85)
The nickle review:
You may not know why you're at The Cotton Club during the start
of the picture...
...but you sure do by the end of it. And you're happy you
stayed.
The dime review:
For those of you looking for just a good time, you might ask:
is it entertaining? Well, I found it to be very entertaining... in
fact, if you ever wanted to know what a full-scale thirties movie
would look like, no holds barred, this is it... this must be noted to
be Coppola's most *entertaining* picture. If you have ever enjoyed
jazz, gangster pictures or just plain entertaining dialogue and
characters, you'll enjoy this.
Next... do I think this is a *great* picture? Well, I give
great only to a very few pictures I see -- afraid not. But this *is*
one of the best pictures that came out this year. It will not win any
Oscars for acting (possibly justifiably) or screenwriting (others have
done better) or directing (close competition (David Lean will get it
for coming out of retirement to make what advance word says is a very
good picture for someone who just came out of retirement)). But it
should have, more than any other film out this year, the Best Picture
award. Because while no single part of it is infused with genius, the
entire picture is made with EXCELLENCE -- it has to be the most bloody
balanced thing to come out since the autogyro. I expect that FFC
deserves most of the credit for this, but the technical people, the
actors (yes, Richard Gere plays the role who should right down the
white line with no straying), and everyone else (I never thought I'd
see the day John Barry came out with something that didn't sound like
it had been written for just the brass section of the orchestra). Go
see it... I give this probably the highest rating of any film seen
this Christmas (unless Brother from Another Planet is in your
neighborhood, in which case, see it first (I saw it last May)).
And, finally, the two-bits notebook:
I KNOW a lot of people are going to say that this is not a
great picture? Why? Because every time the Oscars come out, the
picture that wins has to have Something To Say. It has to have A
Message. It has to Underline A Situation. It has to Emote. So the
only movies that ever win Best Pictures cannot be about something
frivolous about gangsters and dancers (unless it shows that gangsters
are a product of society, or that dancers have it particularly tough
as a section of society), because
it's
not
*RELEVANT*!!
So, I am sure that FFC will get ignored for this movie come
awards time. What is particularly ironic (and sad) is that many
people see Coppola as an "art" director, i.e. "Apocalypse Now", and
will have nothing to do with "The Cotton Club", which seems to have no
other purpose than to entertain (another reason it won't get an Oscar).
Actually, I think it's entertaining enough to pay for its
much-ballyhoed self, but not if somebody doesn't get off their butts
quick and say that this is a film which you don't look at your watch
during the first half of the movie, and you don't remember if you had
a watch by the end.
I keep coming back to the technical points. This is a film
which uses so many cinematic methods that have been discovered over
the last 55 years, that only a film historian could catch them all.
But she or he would have a difficult time of it, as they are used in a
bewildering number of combinations, that actually makes many of them
look brand new. There are cinematic sequences here that should (and
probably will) be used in film classes, where they say, "Here is a
classic example of juxtapostion" (Gregory Hines dancing sequence as the
actor playing Dutch Schultz is gunned down). If no other award goes
to this movie, Best Editing is a must... there is no question that this
aspect of Cotton Club will be remember for many years to come.
The actors are all up to what they should be, with Bob Hoskins
and Fred Gwynne as two gangster *every* mother would love... they are
the only real characters that really catch your attention by
themselves... the others are work to match the symmetry of the movie
(as mentioned above, not a bad thing -- at least, it is unusual, and
too uncommon).
Anyway, probably one of the few big movies this year to be a
big excellent move (notice that most of the other excellent movies are
all "small pictures"?).
And I am now certain that I cannot look at Charlie Chaplin
without thinking of IBM. I hope they're happy....
"There *are* standards. If you can't see one, you *make* one and
stick to it come Hell or high water -- until you see a BETTER one."
-John Gaunt
Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer
John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc.
UUCP:
{cornell,decvax,ihnp4,sdcsvax,tektronix,utcsrgv}!uw-beaver \
{allegra,gatech!sb1,hplabs!lbl-csam,decwrl!sun,ssc-vax} -- !fluke!moriarty
ARPA:
fluke!moriarty@uw-beaver.ARPAjackh@zehntel.UUCP (jack hagerty) (01/22/85)
> > Actually, I think it's entertaining enough to pay for its > much-ballyhoed self, but not if somebody doesn't get off their butts > quick and say that this is a film which you don't look at your watch > during the first half of the movie, and you don't remember if you had > a watch by the end. > > Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer > John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc. I, too, gauge my interest level in a movie by "watch time." In the case of the Cotton Club, it seemed like the film had been on a very long time when I first looked...it was 35 minutes. After another eternity I looked again. 45 minutes (i.e. 10 min later). I agree that the film is technically excellent: acting, costumes, lighting, sets, music, coreography, etc, all first rate. There seemed to be only one thing missing: a story. I spent the first hour waiting for the movie to begin. Where (or who) is the main character? Richard Gere seemed to be, but he was on screen less than half the time. True, once you survive the first half, the realization dawns on you that *everyone* is the main character, so to speak. But for me, that doesn't make up for a flaccid first half. I'm glad I only paid $2 to see it. Speaking of money, I really couldn't see where the $40M went on this film. The production values were good, but uless they did some massive urban renewal on the real Harlem for location shots, it looked like your basic $15M-$20M high quality film. -- Jack Hagerty, Zehntel Automation Systems ...!ihnp4!zehntel!jackh
wmartin@brl-tgr.ARPA (Will Martin ) (01/31/85)
In regard to a review of The Cotton Club I saw: In one of the TV movie-review programs (Sneak Previews or Siskel & Ebert's At The Movies), a reviewer remarked that Francis Ford Coppola was now to be known only as "Francis Coppola". The way this was said, as an aside, led me to believe that this is something that must be well-known amongst the film community, or those who read the film press. I know nothing about it, myself. Can anyone provide some details about this? Will Martin USENET: seismo!brl-bmd!wmartin or ARPA/MILNET: wmartin@almsa-1.ARPA