Mean Streets

Stylish, well acted and classic Scorsese. There's a sense that the characters have lived in this world for a long time.

Scorsese's equations for raunchy narrow minded brother is an awe inspiring formula that works magically as a family drama rather than your usual street boys feud. Mean Streets Scorsese's equations for raunchy narrow minded brother is an awe inspiring formula that works magically as a family drama rather than your usual street boys feud. He has created a dysfunctional family drama that is explored in an ironic tone that leans towards intense life changing dram as it ages on screen. In here, the money making business, the mob mentality, cutthroat politics and guns blazing all over the street is mere distraction. And boy what a distraction it is, his well placed and edited antics leaves your eyes popped and jaws dropped. Prepare to be amazed to this ultimate grounded tale of friends and foes. Especially all these long sequences that Scorsese creates, like a petty fight sequence in a pool hub or couple of hot heads fighting over a moot point, such genre has always been his forte and it is at its peak in here. Amongst these huge melodrama fiction, lies an honest and moving brotherhood relationship between De Niro and Keitel, where they play with heavy machinery as a joke or bicker over nonsense topics or negotiate finance as a ten years old. These are the moments that steals the show. Keitel as the arguably responsible and mature guy trying to hold this scattered surrounding of his with one direction is both funny and impressive. But of course the show stealer is De Niro in his mischievous cloak where he defies to take any situation seriously and as a storyteller Scorsese makes it the most essential bit; he is the trickster after all. Set over the course of multiple characters and different episodes, the narration has the heart in its right place with fair justifying trial where everyone is put on a stand. Mean Streets is not that mean, as in it's not the darkest tale to come out of Scorsese's basket although it is one of the best.

Almost dull. 'Mean Streets' doesn’t spark immediate enthusiasm in me. There’s something in its approach —in both the story and many of the characters— that creates a strong initial sense of detachment. It’s not outright rejection, but rather a distance that, at first, prevents me from connecting. And when a viewer doesn’t connect with a film… Harvey Keitel feels familiar and, strangely, comforting. He had already left a strong impression on me in 'Who’s That Knocking at My Door', and here he once again embodies almost the exact same man: the same gaze toward women, the same Catholic weight, the same guilt. The Bible remains his moral compass. I find myself enjoying his character again. It’s engaging to watch him struggle between faith, desire, and loyalty. With Robert De Niro, things feel ambiguous at first. He doesn’t quite click for me. But once I begin to understand his character and recognize his acting tricks, everything shifts. He doesn’t disappoint. He knows how to lead a scene, tighten it, load it with charisma. His character practically becomes the gravitational center of the film. The rest of the characters function more as tools for the plot than as ends in themselves — existing almost solely to serve the dynamic between Keitel and De Niro. The story borders on being bland. There are moments when I have to remind myself what the film is actually about, just to avoid feeling like I’m merely watching disconnected images. Romance, sex, and violence remain Scorsese’s dramatic pillars. The fights are about honor, territory, and pride. It’s a much more masculine landscape — more physical, more ruled by unspoken codes between men. It’s from the halfway point on that everything truly clicks. The pieces start to fall into place, the tone becomes clearer, and my interest grows. The final sequences fascinate me; they linger with me — or perhaps I linger with them. They don’t redeem everything that came before, but they give it far greater meaning.

Me da la sensación que es de estas películas que acaban gustando porque fueron un precedente, porque fueron de las primeras obras de un gran director, o simplemente porque el final es "impactante". Iba a decir que estaba bien la construcción de personajes, pero es que solo te construyen a uno, ese, está bien construido, los demás no puedo opinar. Hay algo que me falta, sí que es verdad que tiene fallos graves de racord y de montaje, pero no es en eso en lo que me centro, si no como que la película es un costumbrismo de sucesión de cosas, esperar a que pase algo en vez de conducir al espectador a algo que va a pasar, falta el conductor. · Cosas buenas: las actuaciones, son bastante buenas, el final gana mucho, y le hace ganar a la película, y queramos o no, es una de las precursoras en las películas de mafiosos. · Cosas malas: falta un punto al que apuntar, errores de guion, cosas que omitiría, técnicamente no es de lo mejor que he visto para la época. · Conclusión: seguramente sea de esas películas clásicas que te vendan como buena, pero seguramente se te haga aburrida, aún así, el desarrollo del final hace que valga la pena y en conjunto no acaba siendo tan mala como la estoy pintando.

This is an enjoyable gangster movie by Scorsese even if I'm not neither a fan of the genre nor of this movie in itself. It didn't take me too much. When we talk about organized criminality movies i still prefer Coen's Miller's Crossing or Bellocchio' "The Traitor".