Skip to main content

The Drop - REVIEW


A drop is a term used to connote a location designated by - usually - the mob as a place where illicit money is temporarily held until it can be picked up by the powers that be. Betting money, drug money, money of all kinds, it appears. In this case, the drop happens to be the bar run by Gandolfini and Hardy, cousins with a somewhat murky past and a even murkier future. The Drop is based on a short story by Boston-based Dennis LeHane who also penned the screenplay, now set in Brooklyn, (as the film's poster alludes to) because the film's producers felt there were too many Boston-based crime movies (and I suppose that's a good thing). 

The film is a fairly straight ahead crime-based character study - mostly of Hardy and Gandolfini. It's not quite The Friends of Eddie Coyle or Mean Streets or On The Waterfront, but it shares ingredients from each of these films. 

There's no doubt Hardy, Gandolfini, and Rapace can act. Hardy, in particular, disappears into this role, his delivery reminiscent at  times of Brando's beautiful loser in Waterfront. If Brando liked pigeons, Hardy likes pit bull puppies here, a classic script maxim being that, if you want to make your hero sympathetic, have him save the cat (title of scriptwriting manual) or, in this case, a puppy. And Gandolfini's last major screen role is a hell of a curtain call.

The film takes its time getting up to speed. There's a welcome introductory explanation of what a drop is (see above) and then we move chronologically through the tale of betrayal, possible love, vigilante justice, and perhaps - eventually - redemption. 

Like most character studies with sub-narratives lurking in the background, eventually story must take over and The Drop's final 20 minutes are all story. No spoilers here, you'll have to see the film, but suffice it to say that The Drop works on you slowly, at times a little ham handedly, even awkwardly, but it manages to uh...redeem itself in it's final moments. 









Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Alejandro Jodorowsky

From El Topo (1970). Alejandro Jodorowsky (right). The idea of a western as something more than a good guy (white hat) / bad guy (black hat) showdown had been pioneered by John Ford as far back as Stagecoach (1939), but few if any - filmmakers can turn a genre piece into a quest for spiritual enlightenment. Infused with iconic and surreal imagery, El Topo is considered the grandaddy of midnight cult movies, and deservedly so. Jodorowsky has said his goal with regard to cinema is to re-create the experience of taking LSD, without taking the hallucinogenic. He wants to re-write the book on how humans perceive life and themselves. Highly ambitious, his films shatter every preconceived notion we have about what cinema is supposed to be.  Imagine Luis Bunuel, Quentin Tarantino, and Gabriel Garcia Marquez rolled into one and you'd probably get Alejandro Jodorowsky. He has called himself the "father of the midnight movie" and he's probably right. Throughout his c...

Art and Craft documents forger's fictions

A while back a story appeared about an art forger who'd pulled the proverbial wool over hundreds of art curator's eyes over a time period spanning several decades. The forger, Mark Landis, had been exposed, was still at it, and no legal body could jail him or force him to cease and desist because no transaction took place; Landis donated his forgeries, dressing up the con with a superbly crafted narrative about family inheritance, blue blooded ancestors wishing to give charitably to museums, and in many cases disguising himself as a (freakin!) priest to sell the lie. A fabulous moment in Art and Craft shows Landis blessing a passerby. We laugh and laugh some more. Anyway........cut to Brooklyn and a group (Sam Cullman ,  Mark Becker ,  Jennifer Grausman) of indie doc makers. There begins the longitudinal filmmaking process spanning - I believe - nearly three years. The resulting film, Art and Craft, is a must see. Mark Landis, as we learn, ha...

The Wolf of Wall St. Comparing film, book, screenplay.

To compare the three products, movie, book, screenplay... When Teresa, Belfort's first wife, points out a want ad in a paper for a stockbroker, Scorsese visualizes it through a series of close up of the want ads; our eyes are led from ad to ad until we're glued to an extreme close up of the ad Teresa's seen. In the screenplay the phrase is: Sequence is also reinterpreted.  While the book tends to move - more or less - linearly, things aren't nearly as chronological in the screenplay and book.  And yet the leaps in time appear to - paradoxically - make the film feel more like the book's sequencing.  Example: Very early on, in chapter 2 in the book, shows the Duchess hurling water at Belfort for womanizing. In the screenplay, however, it's scene 116 located on page 58 (about an hour into the action), and in the film it's situated even later.  Absent from the screenplay and the film is the ensuing, more involved Steve Madden chapter. ...