Tag Archives: Leo Burmester

Cruising-1980

Cruising-1980

Director William Friedkin

Starring Al Pacino, Paul Sorvino, Karen Allen

Scott’s Review #1,469

Reviewed March 9, 2025

Grade: B+

Cruising is a 1980 effort that brought the LGBTQ+ community into mainstream cinema at least for a brief moment shortly before HIV/AIDS changed its image and trajectory.

The film was derided by critics and gay rights protesters who believed it stigmatized them.

Decades later, Cruising has become more accepted and even admired by some, especially in the LGBTQ+ community. It’s a film most community members have heard of, which has made its mark in cinema history.

William Friedkin, famous for directing The French Connection (1971) and The Exorcist (1973), writes and directs the film, loosely adapting it from a novel by The New York Times reporter Gerald Walker.

The story is about a serial killer targeting gay men, particularly the men associated with the leather scene in the late 1970s. A psychopath is scouring New York City gay clubs and viciously torturing and stabbing gay men to death.

Resembling the victims physically, Detective Steve Burns (Al Pacino) is asked to wear leather attire and frequent the city’s hardcore clubs to lure the killer.

As Steve becomes immersed in club hopping, he begins to identify with the subculture more than expected. Meanwhile, he behaves distantly around his girlfriend, Nancy (Karen Allen), the police force’s homophobia becomes apparent, and the killer remains at large throughout one hot summer.

Initially, Richard Gere was slated to star, but Pacino ended up with the role.

Pacino, being Pacino, gives it his all in an uneven script and unclear character motivations. The ending is exceptionally muddled and peculiar, leaving an unsatisfying feeling, while I also somewhat admire its ambiguity.

Dusting off this relic was an absolute pleasure. It gave me a glimpse into the LGBTQ+ leather scene of long ago, with authentic New York City gay clubs and clubgoers.

Cruising also features a variety of exterior NYC locales, such as Columbia University, the Meatpacking District, and an opening view of the Manhattan skyline.

Though too young to remember the scene being showcased, I do remember traveling into Manhattan to go to work with my father as a very young boy, and the dangerous city I was always warned about.

Friedkin and cinematographer James Contner exceptionally depict New York City in the late 1970s/early 1980s. The gritty, crime-ridden streets capture the time, as in similar films Taxi Driver (1976) and Gloria (1980).

I also adore seeing the clubs and bars from an LGBTQ+ perspective, though I’m unsure if non-LGBTQ community members would appreciate this aspect of the film.

Nonetheless, fans of Pacino should add this to their list. While not on par with his most tremendous role as Michael Corleone in The Godfather series (1972-1995), he was in his prime before he started overacting and taking on inferior roles.

It’s also a damned good crime thriller!

Cruising reminds me of a Dirty Harry (1971) film, only set in NYC, particularly the killer. With a low and taunting voice and a fondness for teasing his victims before killing them, the similarities are apparent and work well.

The killer’s motivation is weakly explained in a flashback with his father.

Since we more or less see the killer’s identity early on, the film is not so much a whodunit until the final scene, when another character is found dead after the killer is apprehended.

Is the new killer Steve or the victim’s jealous boyfriend? Is Steve closeted? These questions are left unanswered.

The production is superior, and the glowing park scenes, with their shadows and insect sounds, only heighten the thrills and perils for the characters.

The film shows plenty of bare male asses, unusual for this time in American cinema, and dares to show plenty of simulated and apparent complete sex. Forty minutes of X-rated male-on-male action footage needed to be cut, in which Pacino may or may not have participated.

While the screenplay has gaping holes and the conclusion is less than satisfying, Cruising (1980) is a win in my book for showcasing an underrepresented group and taking me back to a fascinating time.

Gangs of New York-2002

Gangs of New York-2002

Director Martin Scorsese

Starring Leonardo Dicaprio, Daniel Day-Lewis, Cameron Diaz

Scott’s Review #1,327

Reviewed December 26, 2022

Grade: A-

Gangs of New York (2002) is an extremely violent and bloody epic by director Martin Scorsese that is an exquisite piece of filmmaking nearly flawless in every way except maybe its length and story.

On the one hand, it’s a beautifully choreographed and filmed crime drama with perfect costumes, art direction, and cinematography. Still, on the other, it’s tedious and lengthy, especially during the final hour, with choppy storytelling and seemingly one long continuous battle.

Scorsese being Scorsese and knowing his way around crafting an excellent film or two left me ruminating over the cinema and pondering whether I’d ever need to see it again.

Usually, I’m all in when it comes to repeated viewings of his films,  especially Raging Bull (1980) or Goodfellas (1990) but with Gangs of New York, the sobering almost three hours running time and the non-stop bloodshed gives me pause.

It’s not a mafia film but it is an Irish-centered crime drama harkening back to the mid-1800s so there are historical lessons to be exposed to. Familiar with most of his films there are good guys, bad guys, and a criminal, feuding overtone, and lots of grit and grime to plow through.

I can’t say it’s one of Scorsese’s top 10 but it’s a grandiose, epic-length behemoth that features a host of top-name talent but there are nonetheless aspects that leave it slightly beneath his most famous works.

But that’s nearly akin to comparing the works of Beethoven, Rembrandt, or other geniuses of one art form or another. Anyone respecting Scorsese or appreciating good cinema should see Gangs of New York.

Amsterdam Vallon (Leonardo DiCaprio) is a young Irish immigrant released from prison. He returns to the Five Points seeking revenge against his father’s killer, William Cutting (Daniel Day-Lewis) also known as ‘The Butcher’, a brutal and powerful anti-immigrant gang leader.

He knows that revenge can only be attained by infiltrating Cutting’s inner circle. Amsterdam’s journey became a fight for personal survival and to find a place for the Irish people in 1860’s New York.

The most delicious part of the film is the rivalry between Amsterdam and ‘The Butcher’. DiCaprio and Day-Lewis make powerful sparring partners and as much as Amsterdam’s motivations are admirable it’s Day-Lewis who has the more interesting character.

To no one’s surprise, the actor channels his inner dictator as he method acts throughout the film. To no one’s additional surprise, he steals the show away from other tremendous actors like DiCaprio, Jim Broadbent, and John C. Reilly in supporting roles.

However, I need to ask why Day-Lewis was selected for the Lead Actor Oscar category when he is a supporting one.

Worthy of mention is Cameron Diaz who, for once, plays the dramatic role of a pickpocket. Typically cast in comedic roles she shows she has acting chops.

The story gets a bit wayward about halfway through and I stopped giving the story much credence about three-quarters of the way through. It’s as if Scorsese had frenetic schizophrenia moments with tons of good ideas but none of them formulating a cohesive plot.

The New York City setting is a favorite of mine especially pre-civil war and well before the NYC of modern times even existed. The prevalence of Canal Street and various others make this northeasterner heavily invested in geography.

Finally, to bring it all full circle, Gangs of New York powerfully reminds the audience of the age-old topic of immigration and how those who have citizenship too often oppose those who desire to enter a country they once also did.

‘The Butcher’s’ brutal opposition is a sad reminder of how the United States of America was never united and the senseless violence towards immigrants is never-ending.

Gangs of New York (2002) may not be Scorsese’s best work but even on his worst day, he creates a film worth watching. Mixing toxic masculinity, and revenge with a crazy story he succeeds where other directors might fail by providing compelling filmmaking with all the fixings.

Just don’t get too hung up on the story points.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Director-Martin Scorsese, Best Actor-Daniel Day-Lewis, Best Original Screenplay, Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design, Best Film Editing, Best Original Song-“The Hands That Built America”, Best Sound

The Abyss-1989

The Abyss-1989

Director James Cameron

Starring Ed Harris, Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio

Scott’s Review #1,210

Reviewed December 19, 2021

Grade: B+

Well before he created Titanic (1997) and Avatar (2009) and became a household name, director James Cameron made the gorgeous, special effects-laden film The Abyss (1989).

The film followed hits like Terminator (1984) and Aliens (1986).

These films undoubtedly allowed him to make a film that he wanted to make with the necessary freedoms.

The Abyss is completely visual, and the interesting cast of characters, with potential for development, is never allowed to shine through, instead feeling stale.

They are usurped by the constant flow of underwater, lush, worldly spectacles that utterly encompass the film.

Even when the central characters get a moment to dig deeper into their backstories, Cameron never goes for the emotional jugular, instead encouraging viewers to focus on the extraterrestrial and science-fiction elements rather than on his characters.

That’s the type of director Cameron is, and I recommend watching The Abyss on the big screen, or the biggest screen possible.

I did not recognize the sheer bombast that a cinema watching would render.

I missed out.

The film, and specifically Cameron, must be heralded for the vast loveliness of the art direction, visual effects, and cinematography.

Forget the convoluted plot entirely and sit back and enjoy the spectacle.

Ed Harris and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio portray Bud and Dr. Lindsey Brigman, formerly married petroleum engineers who still have some issues to work out.

When an American submarine sinks in the Caribbean, a US search and recovery team works with an oil platform crew, racing against Soviet vessels to recover the boat.

Deep in the ocean, they encounter something unexpected, and the American team is determined to find out what it is. Is it the Russians or a deadly and intelligent extraterrestrial force?

The story is overly complicated and riddled with stereotypical plot points.

As the team becomes submerged in their submarine, they encounter the usual troubles: a hurricane, a rogue team leader, a flooded rig, and freezing temperatures.

Harris and Mastrantonio have pretty good chemistry here, but we never fully grasp their marital problems or why there is a distance between them. Thrown together on this mission, they predictably face peril and come close to losing each other.

When they embrace in the final scene, it is a wrapped up as a tight bow sort of ending that underwhelms.

But, man, the visuals are amazing. When the team drops at the alien city in the deepest trenches of the ocean floor, the beautiful underwater camera shots take center stage.

The technical consistency is simply breathtaking and becomes the focal point of the film.

I daresay The Abyss (1989) features the greatest underwater sequences ever seen on film to date, but somehow, decades later, the film feels forgotten or overshadowed by Cameron’s other works.

Perhaps the dated Cold War plotline and the traditional romance have not served the film well in the long run.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography, Best Visual Effects (won), Best Sound

Broadcast News-1987

Broadcast News-1987

Director James L. Brooks

Starring William Hurt, Albert Brooks, Holly Hunter

Scott’s Review #602

Reviewed January 11, 2017

Grade: B

Broadcast News is a 1987 feature film that is admittedly an intelligently written romantic comedy.

It was rewarded with several Academy Award nominations, in what has been a bleak year for the film industry.

That said, I found the film’s overall result to be a decent experience, but certainly nothing fantastic. I was left with the feeling that it was “okay”.

I do not think it was good enough to warrant Oscar nominations, but it was enjoyable all the same.

The principal characters are interesting enough, albeit safe.

The film centers around three television news people- a neurotic news producer (Holly Hunter), a reporter (Albert Brooks), and his rival (William Hurt).

All of them are ambitious and determined to climb the ladder of success in their Washington, D.C., base.

The film explores the relationships between the characters.

As stated, there is nothing wrong with the film. I would have expected a bit more- perhaps a deeper or darker story- instead, despite some witty dialogue, the film is largely a safe, predictable journey.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Actor-William Hurt, Best Actress-Holly Hunter, Best Supporting Actor-Albert Brooks, Best Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen, Best Cinematography, Best Film Editing