Movie Review: "Black Mass"

Black Mass (2014)

R

4 Stars out of 5

Director                                Scott Cooper
Writer                                   Mark Mallouk and Jez Butterworth (screenplay)
                                               Dick Lehr and Gerard O’Neill (book)

Johnny Depp                       James “Whitey” Bulger 
Joel Edgerton                      John Connolly, FBI
Benedict Cumberbatch     Billy Bulger
Kevin Bacon                        Charles McGuire, FBI
Dakota Johnson                  Lindsey Cyr
David Harbour                    John Morris, FBI
Julianne Nicholson            Marianne Connolly
Corey Stoll                          Fred Wyshak, U.S. Attorney

 

It is so nice to see Johnny Depp play a real person again, and to play the character so well that it is his performance that is the primary reason to see the movie in which he plays that character, James “Whitey” Bulger. This is the second time Depp has had an outing as a gangster; the last time was in 2009’s “Public Enemies” where he played John Dillinger. In each movie, he disappears into the role, not a trace of Depp is to be seen. This is in stark contrast to his “comic” portrayals as the fey Captain Jack Sparrow; a role that was amusing in the first version of the series, but quickly degenerated into little more than a cash machine for Depp and Disney. Depp had a distinguished career in the 90’s but once the new millennium began and with the exception of his two gangster movies and 2007’s “Sweeny Todd…” there is precious little to praise about his roles or performances. This time in “Black Mass” he has redeemed himself and given substantial heft to the movie’s overall effect on the viewer.

In 1975 rising FBI star John Connolly (Joel Edgerton) returns to his South Boston hometown in order to bring down the regional Italian mob locally led by the Angiulo Brothers. Connolly goes to great lengths to convince his highly skeptical boss, Charles McGuire (Kevin Bacon) and contemporary, John Morris (David Harbour) that he, Connolly can get Whitey Bulger to act as an informant to the FBI and thus bring the Angiulos to justice. Meanwhile, the film depicts Whitey as a part-time father and husband to Linda Cyr (Dakota Johnson) and their young son. Bulger’s real life is that of a small time mobster, one who is losing ground to the far more successful Italian mobsters, the Angiulos. Whitey’s politician brother, Billy (Benedict Cumberbatch) sets up a meeting between the former childhood friends Connolly and Whitey where Connolly presents his plan to Whitey. Whitey initially refuses in typical gangster fashion, but as the Angiulos increase their pressure on him, he eventually changes his mind.

The movie then begins a multi-year examination of the manipulation by Whitey over Connolly, not the intended contrary. Connolly infatuated with his “success” via the Whitey Bulger connection gains prestige within the FBI but slowly and sickeningly in fact becomes one of Whitey’s pawns. Connolly starts to dress in a more flashy style, ignores the worried advice of his wife, Marianne (Julianne Nicholson), and even drags fellow FBI agent, John Morris into Whitey’s web. Connolly’s subornation by Whitey goes so far that not only does Connolly dismiss information linking Whitey to the murder of two competitors, but he also feeds Whitey information regarding a betrayal of Whitey by one of his own men; that man losing his life in the process at Whitey’s hands. The height of irony is revealed later in the movie when it is shown that almost all of the “intel” supplied by Whitey to Connolly was information already supplied to the FBI by other informants. Thus, the only real “intel” being exchanged was from Connolly to Whitey, and not the other way around.

The story is an excellent one beyond the powers of Depp to become Bulger. We see with increasing dismay as the once moral and capable Connolly ignores the worries and concerns of his non-South Boston wife and the continued reluctance of his boss McGuire, and is instead slowly seduced by the power of Whitey’s personality. He tells his wife and co-workers because of their shared childhood history he knows Whitey and trusts him. And he continues to trusts him even as more and more evidence of Whitey’s criminal brutality slowly comes to light. A good but flawed man is taken down the road of corruption. Equally insightful is the portrayal of Whitey’s brother, Billy by Cumberbatch. Billy a very successful and influential Boston politician would like so many that knew the true nature of Whitey, greatly prefer to merely turn his gaze away from what he did not want to see. Billy was in many cases as much an enabler of Whitey’s crimes as the confused Connolly. Connolly’s wife Marianne could see the truth about Whitey; she would in time leave Connolly in an emotional stew of fear and frustration over Connolly’s behavior. Whitey’s common law wife, Lindsey would also clearly see the truth. But she like Billy would turn away her gaze. She would eventually leave as well, but only after the death of their son left her with nothing. When it was convenient to avoid the truth as both Connolly and Billy did, Lindsey would ride the gravy train just as surely as Connolly. The lack of any moral compunction is rampant in the people surrounding Whitey Bulger.

This rosy set-up for Whitey comes to a crashing halt when a new US attorney comes to Boston, Fred Wyshak (Corey Stoll). This one comes with a backbone. Here is a man that would not be coerced, diverted or controlled. He could see clearly the incongruity of Whitey’s crimes and the failure by the FBI to follow up on them. He would not stop digging until the whole sordid affair was brought into the light. This kind of the story is not told for the first time by this movie, but it was refreshing nonetheless to witness. This film’s depiction of how Whitey raised himself and his gang through the misguided, but active participation of the FBI is a clear lesson in how fuzzy the lines can become between the criminals and the undercover means used to bring those felons to justice. This movie also emphasizes how childhood connections can create stronger alliances, stronger even than the marital, legal or moral equivalents in the later adults. A man might very well as Connolly does in this story throw away his wife, job and reputation as he almost blindly falls into patterns of dominance and submission that were set up in childhood. It is interesting to note the ones that seem to see the problem most clearly do not have an intimate connection to South Boston: FBI agent McGuire, wife Marianne, and US Attorney Wyshak.

 The individual childhood cases from South Boston aside, this movie’s story of corruption is primarily significant because it tells the story of how power corrupts. For their corruption and their resulting crimes of cover up and worse, Connolly will go to jail, as will Whitey’s brother, Billy. Not surprisingly, many of Whitey’s criminal crew will go to prison as well. What is surprising is that even several of the crew will be so repulsed by the moral depths that Whitey will go to and require his crew to go to, they will be self-driven to become State Witnesses. All of these friends, cohorts, and allies would eventually be caught up in the web enclosing about them set by Wyshak; all but Whitey himself. He would escape and remain in hiding for over two decades before he too would be finally caught and sentenced to life in prison.

This is an excellent movie in terms of acting, directing, and story content. It carries a truly meaningful message about the corrupting influence of Power. It is not an easy movie to watch, and should certainly only be seen by mature adults. But it is both entertaining and informative; a movie well worth seeing.

Movie Review: "The Imitation Game"

The Imitation Game (2014)

Four and half Stars out of Five

PG-13

Alan Turing: Benedict Cumberbatch

Joan Clarke: Keira Knightly

Hugh Alexander: Matthew Goode

John Cairncross: Allen Leech

Commander Denniston: Charles Dance

Stewart Menzies: Mark Strong

Young Alan Turing: Alex Lawther

Director: Morten Tyldum

Writer: Graham Moore

Book (Alan Turing: The Enigma): Andrew Hodges

Music: Alexandre Desplat

When one talks of Artificial Intelligence, one always hears the name of Alan Turing. Prior to the 2014 movie, “The Imitation Game” and its portrayal of Turing’s contribution during WWII and his later suicide (that may have come from his public exposure as a homosexual), Turing’s question about whether we could tell the difference between machine and human intelligence is a question that has appeared in the contemporary news on multiple occasions. The issue referred to as the “imitation game” by the movie is whether or not a series of questions could be devised by a human that when applied to a machine or human intelligence would reveal their actual identity based on their answers. To date, this has not happened without some extraordinary assistance lent to the machine intelligence being tested. The movie, “The Imitation Game” uses this question of true identity as a clever metaphor for the life and mind of Alan Turing: a gay man hiding in a straight world, or as the movie would also have us believe, as a man with Asperger’s Syndrome (or something similar) trying to live in a world run people not on the Autism spectrum.

The movie as written by Graham Moore (2015 Oscar winner for best adapted screenplay) is told in three interweaving story arcs: 1927 at Turing’s public school, Sherborne; Turing’s years during the war at Bletchley Park as he worked within a cryptographic group for the English; and during a course of several months starting in 1951 as the local police investigate Turing and a robbery at his home. The writer and director (Norwegian director, Morten Tyldum in his first English-language movie) deftly interweave these three separate but linked story lines to build dramatic tension in each. Each arc is brought to its individual climax at similar points in the movie in a manner where each climax heightens and adds to the overall effect: for example, Turing’s homosexual love for his classmate, Christopher is closely followed by a scene during WWII where Turing is shown experiencing difficulties in his adult life as a gay man trying to conceal a sexual orientation that was expressly forbidden by law in the UK.

Turing’s life at Sherborne is shown by the movie to be especially harrowing. That most boys at English public schools have stories of harassment to tell has become a staple of modern fiction, but the life led by young Alan Turing (Alex Lawther) is shown in the movie to be particularly so. Fortunately for young Alan, he has a friend, Christopher. Christopher is shown to be Alan’s only friend and that Alan is especially fond of Christopher, in love with him actually. A key moment in the movie’s progress and in the evolution of young Turing is portrayed when he learns of Christopher’s death from Bovine Tuberculosis (a disease that had as many as 50,000 cases a year in 1930s England). Young Turing expertly played by Lawther struggles to contain his remorse in front of the Headmaster delivering the awful news, but also begins Turing’s lifelong struggle to not only hide his homosexuality but to hide from his membership within the human race. That is humans have feelings and relationships, but “higher beings”, the smartest boy in the class that the other boys only resent for his intelligence, that smart young boy is superior to such feelings; he has no need for them. Turing has pulled himself out of the human race. He justifies his actions at a later point in life by saying; he only works alone, because anyone else would just slow him down.

 The adult Turing is played to extreme perfection by Benedict Cumberbatch. Cumberbatch is one of those rare actors that do not seem to being wearing the clothes of their character, but rather seem to inhabit that character. That the adult Turing is a character is something of an understatement. He is first shown entering the offices of Commander Denniston (played by Game of Thrones alumnus, Charles Dance). In a great scene of clashing egos, Dance channels his best Tywin Lannister haughtiness and Cumberbatch begins to show the arrogance and disconnect from normal human interactions that will plague him throughout his adult life (at least as indicated in the movie). In the scene, Denniston initially rejects Turing’s offer to work for the commander, but Turing then drops the fact that he has deduced Denniston is working on Enigma. Since Engima, the German cryptographic coding machine is a great secret, Turing’s logic in deducing that Denniston and the facility at Bletchley Park are working on it is sufficient evidence of Turing's abilities to convince Denniston to hire Turing.

Turing is introduced to the cryptographic group working on Enigma and he then proceeds to alienate everyone on the team, and to add to the already extant displeasure Denniston feels toward Turing. These poor political/human interactions on Turing’s part ultimately lead to his complete isolation within the group. He has chosen to create from scratch (or so the movie would have us believe) a computer that will resolve the issues the group is having at solving their problems with Enigma. The problem is that each day the Germans change the cipher needed to make the Enigma machine work (the German coding machine for their telecommunications). The rest of the group is trying to manually pound their way through each day to find that cipher; Turing wants his computer to figure it out as he believes the computer will be far faster. However, the computer will be expensive as well as a significant paradigm shift, and Turing is quite incapable of using any political skills in order to build a team or to convince Denniston.  Turing finds an ally in the MI6 agent assigned to Bletchley Park, Stewart Menzies (Mark Strong). The Menzies character is a human Deus Ex Machina for the Turing character. Turing is boxed in and cannot solve the problems of his situation. But the Menzies character sees something in Turing that he likes and he does have the political skill and the actual power to get things done.  The funding is found and Denniston is told to get off Turing’s back.

Turing still needs to add to his team; one of these additions is Joan Clarke (Keira Knightly). The Clarke character is shown to be better at some of the intellectual skills so prized by the Turing character, but also quite capable as functioning as a human. Her introduction as a character is shown on the surface as one more person needing to use subterfuge in order to get through life, but also she is used as a foil to help humanize and explain Turing’s personality disorder. Her problem is one faced by women to this day: in a world run by men, how can a capable woman be allowed to participate, let alone excel at her job. Through Turing’s intervention such a subterfuge is found, and through her influence, he is shown the necessity of at least pretending to be human. Of course, it works for both in the movie: she gets to help solve the Enigma riddle, and he learns a pathway back to humanity; one where he builds the team and the machine he needs to solve Enigma.

The third story arc is the weakest from a dramatic point of view, but excellent at exploring the movie’s best theme: identity. Two policemen investigate a robbery at Turing’s home. Turing won’t cooperate and one of the policemen concludes that Turing is hiding something. This secret turns out to be that Turing is a homosexual. This is illegal in 1950’s England (indeed some 49,000 men and women were convicted of this “crime” over a fifty year period). Turing is sentenced to chemical castration. The effects on his mind and body are shown to be severe. The movies’ final scenes reveal that Turing commits suicide and strongly implies that his act of desperation came as a result of the chemical castration. While there are several historical and medical flaws with this story line, it allows a fictional opportunity for Turing to explain his history and life to the investigating policeman. This was a very clever way to show how Turing, a man described as a monster for his arrogance and indifference to conventional human behavior was a perfect analog for the machine intelligence he was so keen to test with his imitation game. That the historical Turing’s personality was not anything like the disturbed and disassociated genius played by Cumberbatch is not the point. Graham Moore’s screenplay is making an artful metaphor for humankind, and our own perhaps less distinctive personalities, and our own behavior; behavior that too often seems very unhuman.

“The Imitation Game” was nominated for eight Oscar nominations including Best Picture, Director, Actor, Supporting Actor, and Adapted Screenplay. That it won only Best Adapted Screenplay is something of a shame; I could easily see this movie winning Best Picture. It is the rare picture that won the hearts and minds of both the public and the critics. That the movie has many departures from historical fact is not or should not be an issue. Biopics are not documentaries; they often contain significant amounts of fiction, but also significant amounts of art. “The Imitation Game” may well have completely altered the personalities of Turing and Denniston, the physical attractiveness of Clarke, even the chronology of events and the significance of Turing’s contribution to the Enigma project. The real point of movies such as “The Imitation Game” is not to document Alan Turing’s life, but to draw some deeper meaning from it. And in the case of the persecution of homosexuals, of the behavior of all people (elitists and the average person alike), of the real nature of intelligence in humans, quasi-humans, and machines there is plenty in “The Imitation Game” for every interested mind. This is an excellent movie, easy to watch, and wonderful to experience.